It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

People Who Pronounce and Spell the Name of Jesus In Weird Old Testament Variants are Going to Hell

page: 20
2
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Well, of course I have opinions. But you deleted part of your post, where you said that most everyone is going to hell, and now my post looks a tad off the wall.

My opinions are based on what I've been shown. I read and study just like the rest of you do, so anytime, I do have a dream or vision, I need to make sense of it. I've had similar experiences to that of Zechariah. By no means, am I saying that I am even in the same league as someone like him, just that I see the commonality because of some of the same words that were used. I bring it up now - because it's root is found in the OT and not in the NT.

A few years ago, I was doing a bible study on the catch of 153 fish. I studied it from as many angles as I could and meditated on it for days. There had been a plane wreck around the same time, I had started somewhere in the ME, and everyone on board died except a child. There had been conflicting reports of the sex of this child. At first it was reported it was a little boy, then later changed to that of a little girl.

Two or so nights after that plane went down, I was sleeping and suddenly became aware that my conscience was not with my physical body. It was dark and a voice said "What do you see?" I looked and I was maybe 30 feet above the water and I could see that a plane was broke apart in the ocean. There was no large pieces just small pieces and the area was a bit lit by small fuel fires. I said, "I see a plane wreck." The voice said, "But what do you see?" I could see a young girl hanging onto a piece of the plane that wasn't submerged. I said, "I see a child."

I took it as a teaching lesson, the Holy Spirit was giving me, because the desire of my heart was to learn. There had actually been 153 people die in this crash, only the young girl lived. I was not told what to infer, from what I had seen, but obviously Jesus' teaching on us becoming children or we won't receive the kingdom pretty much patterned my thought process.

The voice itself was soft, kind and very monotone..... Whaaaaat doooo youuuuu seeeee? Like that. My older sister has heard this same voice but in a waking state. She had been in deep prayer for a couple days because she was in a lot of pain from a back injury and was having to take pain medicine. She was getting ready for work, and she went to light a cigarette and the monotone gentle voice said, 'You don't need that. It's a crutch." She said she was frightened and then asked him to take away her craving and pain. He said, "Don't pray to me, pray through him."

In Zechariah it says the word of God came to Zechariah. It also says, there was a man on a red horse stading in the Myrtle trees. In the OT, when it says the word of God comes, I associate that with Jesus because we are taught in the NT he is the Word of God. Different commentaries have the Angel of the LORD as being God and I tend to think that is Father God, whose name is YHVH.

Several times, I've told how I heard a male voice say the name YHVH. This voice was nothing like the other. This one was stern and gravelly. Because I've heard the correct pronounciation, I cringe when people call him YHWH.

Actually, I don't think there is a "W" in hebrew. Just as there isn't a "J".

So, twice I've heard the monotone voice, and once the gravelly stern voice. There is yet another voice and I've heard it only once. I don't care to share anymore about that though.


edit on 20-9-2011 by Myrtales Instinct because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct
 
I did edit that part out at the end because it was redundant, since I said what was the essence of it already.
It said, "everyone else is going to hell anyway." Which was already implied, making this addition unnecessary and I also felt it would seem a bit harsh. Well I hope this fixes your problem of having your post seem off and I did not do that just to wreck your post or anything. I don't have any sort of negative feeling towards you to motivate any sort of action designed to cause you harm.
The "everyone" is people who take no warnings, so the redundancy.


edit on 20-9-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct
 
The V instead of the W is probably right and I think Bogomil writes it that way.
That scene in Zechariah is very odd and I think it is trance inducing just to think about it.
I'm not into that sort of thing as self hypnoses.
Kind of recently I had some serious hypnotics given to me by an oral surgeon when he removed some wisdom teeth and since then have found I can go into a trance state too easily.
Having natural out of body experiences that are spontaneous are of course by definition not self induced and could be God giving you a message. Times I have been told things were in circumstances where everything seemed normal then, like a switch, instantly this really out of place thing was happening, and I could be mid stride, while walking and just freeze on the spot. So, all sorts of ways for things to happen and apparently out of the blue.
Stuff happens. I was talking about a car accident I witnessed, on a thread here not too long ago where four people died. I left part of the story out because it did not fit the topic but there were survivors who were small children. I remember thinking about them and how their life was going to be with their parents dead.
Not sure if there is a message to be learned from it but sometimes small people can get stuck in places and not thrown out or whatever. I was just reading Romans 3:25 where it is saying something about the former things being overlooked. The Greek word is only used that one time. You walk past something and you don't notice it. The small ones stuck in the cracks and corners.

edit on 20-9-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   
All the apostles must be in hell!

Even if this new rule for spelling and pronunciation applied only after King James published his version of the bible, quite a few non-English speaking Christians must be going to hell and I am afraid it applies to the Pope as well (although many non-Catholics think he is going to hell anyway).

In many European languages using the latin alphabet the letter 'J' is pronounced as English speakers pronounce 'Y' and in some like Spanish it is pronounced like 'H'. I haven't heard how Germans pronounce this word 'Jesus', but if they spell it exactly like that, they are bound to pronounce it 'Yesus', no getting away from it. The Spanish spell it 'Jesus' and pronounce it 'Heysoos', the correct spanish pronunciation for a word spelt that way.

But none of that matters anyway since everyone is going to someone else's hell.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observor
All the apostles must be in hell!

Even if this new rule for spelling and pronunciation applied only after King James published his version of the bible, quite a few non-English speaking Christians must be going to hell and I am afraid it applies to the Pope as well (although many non-Catholics think he is going to hell anyway).

In many European languages using the latin alphabet the letter 'J' is pronounced as English speakers pronounce 'Y' and in some like Spanish it is pronounced like 'H'. I haven't heard how Germans pronounce this word 'Jesus', but if they spell it exactly like that, they are bound to pronounce it 'Yesus', no getting away from it. The Spanish spell it 'Jesus' and pronounce it 'Heysoos', the correct spanish pronunciation for a word spelt that way.

But none of that matters anyway since everyone is going to someone else's hell.


the J is the Y sound in German. (Ich spreche Deutshce)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by WarminIndy
 

Let's say for a moment that He is what I say He is, then that makes Him literal and what He is going to do is very literal. If you say that all of that is metaphorical, then you could also say Jesus Himself is metaphorical. You would not do that, so you must believe there is something so real in what He will do that you are deeply afraid of it.
Jesus is not even in Revelation so it doesn't matter if every tiny bit of Revelation is metaphorical because it does not affect Jesus in the slightest.


The title of the book is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ"

If you don't think Jesus is anywhere in Revelation you're grossly mistaken, the entire book is about the revealing of Him.


Thank you for answering this one for me. I went to sleep last night and just came back now to read this and you answered so I did not have to.

Amen.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy
the J is the Y sound in German. (Ich spreche Deutshce)

I know that and that is what I said too. Since you speak German can you confirm how you spell and pronounce 'Jesus' in German? I have almost no knowledge of German other than a few interesting facts (like the different sounds associated with 'J' and 'V' than English speakers are used to) mentioned to me by a friend who took an introductory course in German language. I met quite a few Spanish speakers and even a 'Heysoos' or two. 'Jesus' is not an uncommon name amongst Mexican Christians



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

The title of the book is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ"

If you don't think Jesus is anywhere in Revelation you're grossly mistaken, the entire book is about the revealing of Him.
No, I am not mistaken, Jesus is not a character in Revelation.
It is the revelation that came from Jesus giving directions to angels to tell John things which would happen.


Really? Then what is this? Revelation 21

1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
7He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
8But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

The Tabernacle of God with men is Immanuel, God with us. Who else in the Bible does it describe as being God with us? Jesus Christ.

So what you want to believe in is a hypothetical hell but a literal heaven?

I think you should walk very carefully when you say people are going to hell, considering what the Bible says about the unbelieving. This Bible passage lays out exactly who Jesus is, and Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. There is no angel on the throne, there is no angel who gives us to drink the water of life, and it is no angel who can call himself the Tabernacle of God.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observor

Originally posted by WarminIndy
the J is the Y sound in German. (Ich spreche Deutshce)

I know that and that is what I said too. Since you speak German can you confirm how you spell and pronounce 'Jesus' in German? I have almost no knowledge of German other than a few interesting facts (like the different sounds associated with 'J' and 'V' than English speakers are used to) mentioned to me by a friend who took an introductory course in German language. I met quite a few Spanish speakers and even a 'Heysoos' or two. 'Jesus' is not an uncommon name amongst Mexican Christians


Jesu, pronounced "Yayzo"



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

I used the word, witchcraft, in a general way to cover all esoteric and occult practices. My understanding is that Taro is based on the Hebrew alphabet. My thinking on Hebrew is that it is essentially Babylonian and so you have things like Revelation saying, Mystery Babylon.
Jesus and the people in his region and time did not conversationally speak Hebrew. It was a Babylonian science.

Not sure where you're coming up with what you got about Tarot here...tarot cards were originally just game cards (like our common decks) that people used to play with, and then the occultists latched onto them and changed them up as a means of divinitation. Hebrew doesn't really come into play as they're just cards and don't have much of anything to do with language?

And no, hebrew is hebrew, and is the language of the old testament and hebrews as we've already addressed. Probably has some loose affiliation with the languages of the region, but also with greek and our own (aleph and bet are the first two characters, you might see the similarity to alpha and beta, as well as our alphabet).

And it wasn't/isn't just a 'babylonian science' as it's the language of the scriptures Christ knew and taught from, as well as being spoken by the educated jews and priestly caste in Jerusalem both then and now, as well as my the Essenes and the ancestors of Christ for a couple thousand years at least.


Why did Jesus feel more kinship with the Romans (and they with him) than he did the leaders of his own country and why did they (the Jews) consider Jesus a foreigner himself? Being named Jesus would explain that.

I wasn't aware that he felt a kinship with the romans, and vice versa - can you provide some information clarifying this? He was generally opposed to the leaders of his time as they had forsaken mercy for legalism and control, and considered them blind leaders who weren't helping the people. And I'm not aware of them considering him a foreigner, as the scriptures of his teaching in Nazareth mention the people wondering why he was a prophet, when he had grown up there and they knew his family.

Reading through some of the other discussion on your thread, I'm very curious how you can effectively condemn the 'god' of the old testament and claim that Christ followed or taught something else, when he and his followers quite frequently referred to himself as the fulfillment of those prophecies and the promises of this deity, as well as foretold the judgement and condemnation of those around him who had failed in what god had set for him. You seem to be ignoring the grace reflected in the old testament, as well as the wrath and judgement promised in the new. Such picking and choosing of what bits of the bible you want to acknowledge is a perfect example of merely creating your own religion to believe in, and has nothing to do with what Christ himself actually taught.

As far as the bible using the name Jesus, again, this is only due to the language involved. Iesous in the original greek is MERELY the greek equivalent of Yahushua, both meaning "Jehovah/Yahweh is salvation" or "the LORD our righteousness, as foretold by the angel to Miriam, the old testament in general, and by name in teh book of Zechariah.

If you refer to the earliest non-cannonical gospels, some of which were written in hebrew, you'll likely find that he was called Yahushua (or some variant, due to the workings of hebrew), and Origen himself testifies that the gospel of Matthew was originally written in hebrew and then was translated into greek. A hebrew gospel would not contain the name Iesous (later translating to "Jesus") since Iesous is the greek version of the hebrew name Yahushua.

You're chasing smoke and mirrors here, as well as rebuilding christianity into something that was not originally handed down - it's a continuation and fulfillment of the old testament, not merely some strange replacement of it. "Jesus" worshipped the god you appear to have been condemning here, and preached his own judgement and condemnation of the world. Both testaments are a whole, not contradictory of one another.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Really? Then what is this? Revelation 21

1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
7He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
8But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

The Tabernacle of God with men is Immanuel, God with us. Who else in the Bible does it describe as being God with us? Jesus Christ.
Where in the Bible does Jesus say he will be our God and we will be his sons?
Obviously this is God saying He will be our God and we will be His sons.
You don't have much of an argument to be denying God His throne.
When Revelation is saying "The One on the Throne", that doesn't bring anything to mind? It does me, as in the rest of Revelation, the Ancient of Days, the one the Son of Man comes to (in Daniel) in order to receive his power.
I stand by what I said, that Jesus is not a character in Revelation and what is revealed is "things to come", and not a revealing of a murderous personality of Jesus. If you are in love with the murderous Jesus that you imagine Revelation is showing you, I suggested and will repeat, you should acknowledge what it is you are doing, which is willfully and knowingly rejecting the Jesus of love and life and accepting a counterfeit Jesus of hate and death. You choose an evil god while rejecting the loving God.
While pointing out my harshness by warning people of idolatry, you believe yourself perfectly justified in believing all those people being stuck down, personally and physically by a weapon wielding Jesus from horseback. A whole six billion, going from person to person striking them in the head with a rod of iron and watching the blood spray out, until the earth is filled with their blood. You really believe that. You need to check yourself before judging me for only giving warning.
edit on 20-9-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 

And no, hebrew is hebrew, and is the language of the old testament and hebrews as we've already addressed.
What sort of evidence do you have for this? You are making an assertion that this is true because you want it to be true because it reinforces what you already believe in.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
Please refer to the masoretic texts, the dead sea scrolls, and pretty much all acknowedged history by proven academics as well as modern linquists.

Unless you can offer up some evidence to the contrary, the burden of proof is upon you to disprove generally-accepted history itself.

edit on 9/20/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
Please refer to the masoretic texts, the dead sea scrolls, and pretty much all acknowedged history by proven academics as well as modern linquists.

Unless you can offer up some evidence to the contrary, the burden of proof is upon you to disprove generally-accepted history itself.
No, it is on you.
You are making the claim that there was a such thing as the Hebrews and what we have today is what those long, long ago people back in the mists of furthest history, had.
That is your assertion and you would need to produce evidence. All you have is a myth that says so.
The dead sea and Masoretic are things way later than Babylon. You need to produce evidence of Hebrews, since we are aware of a people calling themselves Jews, they are a product of Babylon.
edit on 20-9-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
Additionally, I'll offer up the testimony of the septuagint/LXX. This greek translation of the old testament and other books was done by a group of hebrew scholars, beginning a few centuries before Christ, and as you like greek, you should be able to confirm that it verifies the hebrew writings of the old testament as pretty much exactly what they are claimed to be.

On a side note, you can also use the septuagint to confirm that the old testament figure Joshua's name - Yahushua, etc., in hebrew - was transliterad as Iesous in greek. Iesous ("Jesus") and Yahushua are the same name, just in different languages - it's merely a case of what language the scripture at hand was written in - and there are hebrew gospels of Christ as well.

Take care.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
Incorrect.

My arguement is that accepted by effectively all of mainstream history, archeologists (per research on the area of Sodom and Gomorrah, the tel at Jericho, and a host of other factors), and academics.

You are the one claiming that all of these sources and accepted history is incorrect. The burden falls to you to disprove common knowledge, argue that point however you wish. If *your* view were in the mainstream, then yes, the burden would fall to me. But the weight of history is on my side, so the ball's in your court to disprove it.

EDIT:
For clarity, you are the one laying charges that commonly-accepted history and knowledge that is generally accepted to be true, is in fact not.

Thus:

The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation to shift the accepted conclusion away from an oppositional opinion to one's own position.

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."


edit on 9/20/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 
No because you are cherry picking from biased "Hebrew scholars" who are going to say things to support their reason for existence. Unbiased historians say there is no evidence that supports the Old Testament mythical version of history.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



Where in the Bible does Jesus say he will be our God and we will be his sons?
Obviously this is God saying He will be our God and we will be His sons.


Duh, Jesus IS God. He is God the Son, the image of God. Anytime someone "saw" God in the Bible they were looking at Christ. The Father is a Spirit, Christ is the physical embodiment of the Godhead.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Praetorius
 

And no, hebrew is hebrew, and is the language of the old testament and hebrews as we've already addressed.
What sort of evidence do you have for this? You are making an assertion that this is true because you want it to be true because it reinforces what you already believe in.


The evidence/sources for this historical information has already been presented.

You didn't click and read the links previously provided.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by jmdewey60
 
Please refer to the masoretic texts, the dead sea scrolls, and pretty much all acknowedged history by proven academics as well as modern linquists.

Unless you can offer up some evidence to the contrary, the burden of proof is upon you to disprove generally-accepted history itself.


JM always tries to shift the burden of proof. He's hardly versed in fallacies of logic.




top topics



 
2
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join