Deuteronomy 32:8 Yahweh a Son of God (The Most High)

a reply to: ChesterJohn

If you are so misinformed and a mere appearance makes an infallible impression on you, then your presence on this thread is detrimental. I would rather consider communicating with someone who seeks out the truth.

a reply to: ilstar

Or maybe someone you could get to follow your ideas of truth. Isn't that more like it?

Truth is both subjective and objective.

a reply to: Mryhh

Robert Wright does not believe in God. And I wouldn't be surprised if he used the codex Sinaiticus for the Septuagint.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: ilstar

Or maybe someone you could get to follow your ideas of truth. Isn't that more like it?

Truth is both subjective and objective.

"Truth is both subjective and objective" - that's actually what I believe in. Want to follow my ideas of truth?

a reply to: ilstar Only if you provide links to your ideas/opinions on truth.

a reply to: Mryhh

If you think I am deceived then what evidence do you have to counter the accurate translation of Deuteronomy 32:8 that in plain English states Yahweh is a son of El.

It does matter that you lie about this because not everybody verifies these types of claims.

Writing "accurate" does not make it so.

My last ever reply to you is a quote from Yeshua: "Seek until you find, when you find you will be disturbed, then, you will marvel, and reign, then rest." Gospel of Thomas

I appreciate the message both for its content and its final nature, thanks.

Singing lies on the cyber public squares isn't the best use of your time.

God is one, dividing believers with lies isn't noble, although your hidden goal may be that described in Matthew 13, 36-43

Lying isn't the way to achieve anything worthwhile, renounce it

a reply to: Mryhh

You can keep providing links from Catholic/Jesuit sponsored/instructed people, and it won't change that you are following anti-truetheists.

My suggestion, read something that didn't have a tinge of Catholic Paganism on it. For example, The Urantia Book, which clearly shows how Moses convinced the Israelites that there was The Most High (one Universal God for all), but since they couldn't understand the concept of God abstractly, he had to show to them a concrete natural phenomenon with which they could associate him with: Mount Sinai, which was a volcano. And they called it 216 names (or 216 letters for Name of God, or a 72-part Name). Yahweh is only 4 out of 216! Many names, one God. Why make such a big deal out of this simple fact?!

All that matters is that Deuteronomy clearly states Yahweh is a Son of El. Nothing else matters. No matter how much editing is done we have the correct translation that has the word inherit and we have proof of attempts to obscure the passage corrupting the text to read what amounts to a lie. We have the evidence, we know the Masoretes changed the word God to Israel to hide the truth.

Anybody who can't admit the truth is attached to what they believe and I get it, you have the right to believe what you want.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: ilstar Only if you provide links to your ideas/opinions on truth.

Well, here is one from my blog: beyondaynrand.wordpress.com...

a reply to: ilstar

I gave up on reading stuff From and about Ann Rand years ago.

a reply to: ilstar

Ah you are so wise. I am not. The Urantia book.

Get off my back. I don't need links, I know this story in and out, I did it as a courtesy and because the words were true. I don't care who said it because it was true. I know this subject well enough to know what he said is generally available information.

You can go back to your fantasy now. I don't need your advice because I know what I would like to learn in addition to being satisfied with my present knowledge. I also know the Urantia book deadens your credibility.

a reply to: Mryhh

You mean they couldn't conceive of El as Yahweh, even calling him his Son? Nowadays, people believe Jesus to be God, even though he was Son of God. I mean you can see how much more complex concepts of God are simplified for us mortals in order for us to grasp them. Another example: Jesus called God the Father. So why couldn't Israelites call El Yahweh as his Son? Or do you have a hate against Jews, inspired by Catholics&Nazis&Muslims?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: ilstar

I gave up on reading stuff From and about Ann Rand years ago.

First, the blog is called Beyond Ayn Rand. Beyond, as in "more than; in excess of; over and above" (dictionary.com).
Second, I wrote that blog, not Ayn Rand.
Third, I am not an Objectivist.
Fourth, you obviously haven't read anything on my blog.

a reply to: ilstar

originally posted by: Mryhh
a reply to: ilstar

Ah you are so wise. I am not. The Urantia book.

Get off my back. I don't need links, I know this story in and out, I did it as a courtesy and because the words were true. I don't care who said it because it was true. I know this subject well enough to know what he said is generally available information.

You can go back to your fantasy now. I don't need your advice because I know what I would like to learn in addition to being satisfied with my present knowledge. I also know the Urantia book deadens your credibility.

How or why does The Urantia Book "deaden" my credibility? And why would you believe the lies spread by the Vatican all over the world about God, etc.? You know you will go to Nonexistence if you keep clinging to lies and keep calling them truth, right?

a reply to: Sassanid

Sassanid and your friend Mryhh, it may make both of you feel good that Pope Francis agrees with you concerning God. Here is what your favorite Pope had said:

So often [people ask]: 'But do you believe?': 'Yes! Yes! '; 'What do you believe in?'; 'In God!'; 'But what is God for you?'; 'God, God'. But God does not exist: Do not be shocked! So God does not exist! There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are persons, they are not some vague idea in the clouds ... This God spray does not exist! The three persons exist! (“Pope at Santa Marta: What we dare not hope for”, News.va, Oct. 9, 2014)

source

a reply to: ilstar
The Urantia book is garbage. I didn't get my info from any church or the Pope, I observed it while reading the Bible, and that led me on a search that included ancient cuneiform tablets that have the story of El and his 70 sons from ancient Canaan called the Ugaritic texts. Then I put two and two together like so many other people have also done.

So there are no lies here unless they are coming from you and your Urantia book.

Just because you aren't sharp enough to know what is happening in this case of El and his "son" Yahweh, does not in any way make it untrue. The fact that you assume I care about what the Pope thinks shows you are hyper-assumptive (if that's a word) and I also see clear delusions coming from you and your comments.

But trying to sound spiritually knowledgeable was your biggest crime in my opinion, you aren't, I deal with old scripture not stupid hoaxes like Urantia. Don't bother responding or it will be a waste of time, I will not be reading it.

a reply to: ilstar

and I wouldn't want to go beyond Ann Rand.

When you see the 3 D's being used regularly it is a trick of the disinformationist

originally posted by: Mryhh
a reply to: ilstar
The Urantia book is garbage. The first D Dismiss/Discredit I didn't get my info from any church or the Pope, I observed it while reading the Bible, and that led me on a search that included ancient cuneiform tablets that have the story of El and his 70 sons from ancient Canaan called the Ugaritic texts. Then I put two and two together like so many other people have also done.

So there are no lies here unless they are coming from you and your Urantia book. The Third D Demean

Just because you aren't sharp enough to know what is happening in this case of El and his "son" Yahweh, does not in any way make it untrue. The fact that you assume I care about what the Pope thinks shows you are hyper-assumptive (if that's a word) and I also see clear delusions coming from you and your comments. First and Third D Dismiss and Demean

But trying to sound spiritually knowledgeable was your biggest crime in my opinion, you aren't, I deal with old scripture not stupid hoaxes like Urantia. the Second and Third D Debunk and Demean Don't bother responding or it will be a waste of time, I will not be reading it.

When we see these types of people we should avoid feeding them. their purpose here is to disrupt the Forms with their Opinions with out any real facts. they cause disharmony by demeaning others and this in turn causes others not to want to follow the forum. I believe their is a deeper agenda here than meets the eye.

a reply to: Mryhh

It's easy to dismiss what you don't know, and it's also easy to base arguments on incorrect interpretations of ancient texts. Whether you've made such an interpretation is debatable, but lots of modern evidence contradict it. I will check out some of this Ugarit evidence you speak of, but I must warn you that not all ancient knowledge is accurate. In fact, mostly it's influenced by primitive thinking and spiritual rebellions of the past. Whether, as you think, our modern understanding has been based on lies and the ancient texts tell the truth is a difficult question. For example, would you trust what people thought they worshiped versus what is worshipped today by new religions, even the religion that the Pope is creating? I think, thanks for modern advancements in thought and knowledge, we are able to grasp a lot more than was possible back then.

@ChesterJohn it's easier to ignore a troll than to face him or her. I would like to follow the more difficult route.