The Rule of First Use

This rule is one of many taught, but long forgotten in terms of correct Bible study. Much like the term Study is long gone many just spiritualise the NT and OT verses for some sort of esoterical meaning and application rather than any due diligence in study that Studies as God commands and gives as an example.

God gives us by example to compare spiritual things to spiritual.

1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

That is compare scripture with scripture. Now many say it is archaic to do so but you will allow it to be done in today’s sciences, They allow for the comparison of the age of rock to determine the age of a fossil in it, and the age of the fossil to determine the age of the rock that encases the fossil. While calling it being done in the Bible as circular logic but calling it science when they do the same in dating rocks and fossils.

But I digress. There are several other tools which should be used when studying any literature, especially historical literature like the AKJV Holy Bible. I know many of you would disagree, however for the sake of argument let’s just say it is historically accurate. Then you will want to discover context. To do so you need to ask questions of each verse, phrase, section, chapter, book an Volumes (NT and OT) by observation (I tried to give a lesson in observation and it backfired because some people are just not willing to learn. And I failed to include certain details ahead of time do define the rules of the observation.).

To get the context you would ask WHO it is speaking too, WHAT is it speaking to them, WHERE is it speaking to them, WHEN did it speak to them (historical) , WHY is it speaking too them, WHICH men or to what people is it speaking too, and HOW is it speaking to them. The how is a difficult one because it would include over 200 different figures of speech see the OP at www.abovetopsecret.com... .

Just looking at those few examples and rules is complex and takes time, it takes more than a casual reading over the bible but hard work. Remember Labor Omnia Divicint one of the loose translation of this Latin phrase is “hard work pays off”

An example of asking the questions would run like this. Question: Why are these certain words Italicized in the AKJV. Answer: The translators had to had English words tot he text when translating them from foreign language copies they had to make it be understandable and read correctly in English Grammar. Also, it was their way of being held accountable to God and men as to what they added tot he word of God, so as not to fall under the three fold curse for adding the word pronounced in Duet, in Psalms and in Revelation.

Alright no let’s move on to the rule of first mention.

This rule means that when something is first mentioned than it is important to note it and seek out its meaning. So for a quick understanding of first mention let’s first use a phrase found in Gen 1:2 “. . . Without form and void” It is not clear in that verse why it is that way, which doesn’t make sense seeing God in his character of perfection would never create something incomplete or imperfect. If he did then he is not a God to follow.

However I will use the rule of comparing spiritual things to spiritual, that is scripture with scripture and this is what we learn. We will have to take the only other quote of “without form and void” and use it to see what the phrase may mean that is to get a meaning for without form and void. That is correct I identified the figure of speech as a phrase. It is not a metaphor it is an actual fact of a state therefore a phrase about that thing in Gen :2 it is the earth.

Now to understand the cross reference in Jeremiah 4:23 we will need to look not just at the verse but the whole section, chapter and book. The book is about the casting out of Judah from the Jerusalem via Nebuchadnezzar, the chapter is both a plea for all of Israel to return to the LORD. Verse 3 and 5 both narrow the location to Jerusalem. Verse 20 speaks of God’s tents and curtains, that is the temple in Jerusalem. Please note when Samuel in the wilderness he called the tent/tabernacle a temple which was located in Shiloh

Jos 18:1 ¶ And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
1Sam 1:3 And this man went up out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice unto the LORD of hosts in Shiloh.

Notice the use of the English not need to got to the Greek or Hebrew, just study the English and you will see truths.

Sorry I got off track a little just o show some things that will pop up when you study. So the first use of “Without form and void” can be defined by the context of Jeremiah 4, the city of Jerusalem which had been built by the Jews and inhabited had a temple built by Solomon, and was being prophesied as being “without form and void:. So now we have our meaning in Genesis 1:2 the earth had been inhabited before Genesis 1:2 but by whom and for how long.

You see I asked questions and the Bible does not speak much about it but the supposition is Lucifer was given a crown and a throne which he built on the earth , known as Eden, prior to Genesis 1:2 and it was when iniquity was found in him he and his angels were charged and convicted of sin against God. God’s judgement went forth and he flooded the earth with and by a fountain of water located in space and that is where Genesis 1:2 comes in and we see the spirit of God moving over a dark (remember God is light) face of the waters ( flood). It is the only answer the Cherub that covereth was found guilty of pride and trying to usurp the throne of God with his own throne,

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

So using the law of first mention of a spiritual thing (scriptures) and comparing it to spiritual (scriptures) we were able to define what it meant by :without form and void. The original was destroyed but only on the surface the earth was still there and God decided in six days to do a new work on the earth.

Next we’ll look at another first mention which is very important in understanding one of the greatest things in the Bible as to what the Bible speaks about more than any other subject, even salvation by grace through faith.

I carry a trilobite fossil in my pocket for luck.

a reply to: skunkape23

Nice, but what does tat have to do with the OP?

ATS T&C clearly say we are not to give one sentence replies that have nothing to do with the subject matter of the OP
T&C
so have you found any words of first use in the AKJV Bible you would like to share with us?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Salvation from what? Burning in the hell that you think your version of god made to punish those who don’t believe in him? But only after hiding or removing anything that a rational thinker could deem as a reasonable piece of evidence of his existence? Does god hide his existence from some people?

a reply to: ChesterJohn
Yes, looking into the context of passages is vitally important. We need to avoid the bad habit of taking verses in isolation and applying the most familiar meanings to the words we find there.

But if we rely on the English translation alone, the project of comparing other references may hit a snag.
It is frequently the case that the same English word is used in different places to translate different words in the original language. One classic example is the word "love", which covers two distinct New Testament words.
And also the same word in the original language may get translated in different ways in different passages.
So following the English language alone may not always give you an accurate set of "other uses".

I may not know much Hebrew, but if I'm expounding an OT book (as I'm looking at Ezekiel now), I will make a point of double-checking my remarks against the comments of people who do, just to be on the safe side.

On the example you've chosen, a commentary tells me that the original is TOHU and BOHU; that TOHU means a wasteland, and BOHU carries the idea of emptiness.

a reply to: Woodcarver

he doesn't punish on the basis of believing on him. You really need to read the Bible more to understand what it is that you believe on and why there is punishment at all. see thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: DISRAELI

I read a very horrifying story of a pastor lady who got 99 years for killing a boy by making the boy to fast. In the manuscript of the court case she stated that "these type of demons don't go except by prayer and fasting. The problem was multi-fold. 1) it was a teaching to Israel by Christ preparing them for the kingdom, because one signs are for the Jews,

1Co 1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

(look at the first uses of the word sign and sign and you will see it is all connected to Israel. 2) it was the person doing the casting out that was to be fasting and prayer not the victim of demon possession.

Mr 9:28 And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, Why could not we cast him out?
29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.

and 3) The verse is not for the church today which means this lady and her followers privately interpreted the scriptures which it is said that some do to their own destruction.

2Pe 1:19 ¶ We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

So studying not just context but meaning and answering the questions asked above. While it is tempting to go to commentaries ad to other resources I encourage my student not to use anything out side the Bible unless needed. Like in another thread I was asked about god being benevolent. The word is not found in the Bible so I resorted to Webter's 1828 dictionary once we found the sub-meanings was kind and loving we were able to find lots of verses that showed God is kind and loving (a lot more that i could actually list out int he reply).

It has always been as I seen it once you go down to the Greek and Hebrew you will end up in a bear trap that snaps shut on you so tight many never get out of its grip and false teachings are awash today in the church because of making changes to the meaning without considering the immediate meaning at hand in the verse in context.

I am currently working on the next pages to post here on a first use of a word that n=many never have seen in scripture, mainly because they are stuck in Greek and Hebrew privately interpreting things.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
I agree that a good translation is normally good enough for private study.
I was thinking in terms of expounding to other people, where there's an extra responsibility to get it right.
The advantage of the original language is that it is expressing the meaning of the person who wrote the text, which is an important starting-point.
In the horror-story you mention, the misinterpretion seems to have been based on the English wording, so sticking to the English wording would not have prevented it.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Woodcarver

he doesn't punish on the basis of believing on him. You really need to read the Bible more to understand what it is that you believe on and why there is punishment at all. see thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

So when is it OK for God to punish people?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Alright no let’s move on to the rule of first mention.

This rule means that when something is first mentioned than it is important to note it and seek out its meaning. So for a quick understanding of first mention let’s first use a phrase found in Gen 1:2 “. . . Without form and void” It is not clear in that verse why it is that way, which doesn’t make sense seeing God in his character of perfection would never create something incomplete or imperfect. If he did then he is not a God to follow.

However I will use the rule of comparing spiritual things to spiritual, that is scripture with scripture and this is what we learn. We will have to take the only other quote of “without form and void” and use it to see what the phrase may mean that is to get a meaning for without form and void. That is correct I identified the figure of speech as a phrase. It is not a metaphor it is an actual fact of a state therefore a phrase about that thing in Gen :2 it is the earth.

Now to understand the cross reference in Jeremiah 4:23 we will need to look not just at the verse but the whole section, chapter and book. The book is about the casting out of Judah from the Jerusalem via Nebuchadnezzar, the chapter is both a plea for all of Israel to return to the LORD. Verse 3 and 5 both narrow the location to Jerusalem. Verse 20 speaks of God’s tents and curtains, that is the temple in Jerusalem. Please note when Samuel in the wilderness he called the tent/tabernacle a temple which was located in Shiloh

Jos 18:1 ¶ And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
1Sam 1:3 And this man went up out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice unto the LORD of hosts in Shiloh.

Notice the use of the English not need to got to the Greek or Hebrew, just study the English and you will see truths.

Sorry I got off track a little just o show some things that will pop up when you study. So the first use of “Without form and void” can be defined by the context of Jeremiah 4, the city of Jerusalem which had been built by the Jews and inhabited had a temple built by Solomon, and was being prophesied as being “without form and void:. So now we have our meaning in Genesis 1:2 the earth had been inhabited before Genesis 1:2 but by whom and for how long.

Sorry. You explain what is Jeremiah 4:23 and 1 Sam 1:3. But you do not explain the WHY and HOW are they supposed to define Gen 1:2 phrase, "without form and void.."

I'm still scratching my head, trying to find out their relevant.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
You see I asked questions and the Bible does not speak much about it

Your example question is about the meaning of Gen 1:2, "without form and void,"

You ask the What Question.

You point out Jeremiah 4:3 and 1 Sam 1:3. So you answer the Where Question.

But Why do you think Jeremiah 4:3 and 1 Sam 1:3 answer the meaning of Gen 1:2 "without form and void"?

and How? What are their connection?

You just concluded Earth as the answer, without satisfying reason.

When you ask a question, you need to prepare What, When, Where, Why and How questions as well. You can't simply answer the What question but ignore the rest. That is a very weak way to study literature through questioning.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
but the supposition is Lucifer was given a crown and a throne which he built on the earth

Supposition is dangerous tool play with, especially when it regards to god's word.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
So using the law of first mention of a spiritual thing (scriptures) and comparing it to spiritual (scriptures) we were able to define what it meant by :without form and void.

No, We are not able to define what it meant by, "without form and void," simply because you do not follow the law of questioning.
You do not answer Why and How.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
The original was destroyed but only on the surface the earth was still there and God decided in six days to do a new work on the earth.

According to you supposition or you opinion.

EasternShadow

Are you a Christian or a Jew if you don't mind my asking.

You seem to misunderstood I point out there are questions to be asked and I lay out what types of Quesions. Also please understand this is not a complete lesson in how to study the Bible using those questions. So the seven W's and the H are really up to you to find out. and there are also others ways to study right Division, which many have negated to rightly handling but who is to say who is handling rightly or not? right division is dividing the Book/AKJV Bible up into who, what, why, when, where , which and how, consider the context. amnd cmparing scripture with scriptures especially to get meaning of words and phrases.

1Sam was only an example of where the temple was located in Shiloh at that time, and that it was a tent but it is called a temple, which many automatically think or assume is a permanent building structure, and it wasn't. By the time of Jeremiah there was a permanent temple in Jerusalem. In Jeremiah 4 he says his tent and curtains are torn but the only curtain was between the people and the Holy of Holies where Items and the ark of the covenant were located. the building was utterly destroyed by the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar.

the What does "without form and void" mean is not actually found in Gen 1:2 and if that were the only meaning we could come up with all sorts of conclusions so the what is he meaning question is answered by going to the only other Bible reference available to understand it and that is in Jer 4 Then I just went through some of the context. If you wonder why Jeremiah is saying what he is saying then go back and start and Duet and read through to Jeremiah (you can skip the wisdom books of Psalms through Song of Solomon to save time.

Supposition, also known as an idea based on Biblical references and then putting them into the correct divisional time period is a correct procedure of studying the word of Truth. So by being familiar with the word of Truth, there is not time period from Genesis 1:3 onward that allows for the fall of Lucifer/Satan/the serpent/the dragon/the Devil and his angels so the only conclusion is it happened before Genesis 1:2. but after Genesis 1:1. That is how I came to the correct understanding of when the Devil and his angles fell and as to why was something that was created was lying in darkness in a heaven that had no darkness for in God there is no darkness at all.

Once I have the two verses together compared then I can understand the meaning. i.e. means that something that was completed was destroyed. Why was the earth without form and void in between Gen1:1 and Gen 1:2 is that was because iniquity was found in Lucifer and he and his angles along with the throne which Lucifer was trying to exalt Isa 14:12-13. What was without form and void in Jeremiah 4 was the city of Jerusalem after it was destroyed

So you see even without using the 7W's and the H, I as able to define the meaning of the phrase "without form and void". I first identified the figure of speech by asking the question "what is the figure of speech?" Using the context of Genesis 1, I found it was not a metaphor, it was not a allegory, it was not one of the other 214 figures of Speech, it was a very simple form of speech known as a "descriptive phrase". Then I searched to see if the phrase was ever used again. When I found it I also identified it using the same question a "what is he figure of speech"? Studying the context of Jer 4 I found it to be the same as in Gen 1:2 a Descriptive Phrase. Taking both context of which the phrases are found, the one in Genesis did not give much details as to why it was without form and void. However the context of Jer 4 gave us a very good description of the phrase and why. Therefore we found out what it meant by the context in which it was found and it fits both situations. Only ins Genesis 1:2 we are not told why. But God left us enough brad crumbs to find it if we would study and rightly divide the word of Truth. I did not in this case of a very simple descriptive phrase need to ask all the questions to get the definition.

So no, a supposition can create a true teaching if it can be defined and support with Biblical facts. But I do agree with you that if done without rightly dividing and having proper context and answers to study questions, then yes it is dangerous.

For example if I join the verses or parts of Matt 27:3-5 and "Judas went and hanged himself" and joined it with Luke 10:37 "Go, and do thou likewise". So the conclusion of the wrongly Join parts of Scriptures is Judas hanged himself go and do likewise. You see, I could get answers to the questions but if I am asking them and answering them out of context without defining the words and the situation. i.e without right division, I have created a very dangerous false teaching, and it is all found in the AKJV Bible. The problem is the questions were not all answered correctly, in context and again without definition. And sometimes up will find there are no answers to some of them. So context becomes a very important guide to rightly divide and understanding God's word so as to put things in their right place.

The AKJV Bible has very little things to say about the Devil and his angels fall, what heaven is like, but but studying and searching out and asking questions we can place things in order and create a teaching that is correct to the context of the Whole Bible.

Now I did not answer all the questions for the rule of first mention to get to the understanding of what the phrase meant. sometimes I will have to sometimes I will find I can't. But this study is not how to use the tool box of the 7W's and an H but to follow the rule of first mention. If you can find the meaning then seek out where it is used again and from there you can gain the meaning and understanding. In that case some call the area between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2 a gap of information. There is a major gap in the Bible it is between 70Ad and 2018Ad, do you know what it is? The church AGE. Teh church age is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible. But if we are still under age of Mosaic law we would have to be going to Jerusalem to makes offerings in the temple, the only place God says, those sacrifices are accepted and that is Jerusalem. But here is not temple there and has not been one so we are ing hre church age also called the age of Grace.

Study out the Bible form Beginning to end and you will see my supposition is correct about God making the earth habitable again but this time for his crowning creation MAN.

I'll give you a fairly easy study using the questions and using only a AKJV Bible using mainly the first chapter of Genesis.
How did God contain the darkness that was upon the face of the deep?
What is the container he placed the darkness in called? Hint: the earth is in it also.
Why did is it not called good when it was made?
Where is that container today?
What do we call that container today in our modern English?
What else is located in the container?
What is located outside of that container?
What is the outside of the container called according to Paul?
When will that that container removed?
What happens to the earth and the stars when the container is removed?

the real problem is we don't know who these people are who translated the AKJV are. We never met them. Then we have to rely on sources sometimes not verified truthfully before publishing their books.

We can find out truth about the modern NIV's first version was done by their beliefs and their personal practices.

We have no truth as to what the dead and gone meanings of Ancient Hebrew (pre Babylonian times), Chaldean, even the dead language of Aramaic, Koine Greek (most Koine Greek have either secular Koine ((not all the words of course and very few at that)) and Classical Greek meanings attached to them), even Latin there are two phases of Latin pre 235 AD and post 275 Ad there was a change in the common Latin, the Latin Vulgate (used by the AKJV translators) was not the Latin used at the time of Christ. . I would not want secular meanings to be used for God's Holy words ie. like where Ezk uses bruise the teat and crush the breast in the AKJV, the New Living Bible says Caress and Massage the breast. A bit to soft porn for me.

And most Bibles after 1880 use two main text for their study, even though they claim otherwise but examination of those translations with their documents, proves that the Two Main Documents used are Vaticanus and Sitacanus. Both found in a trash can at a monastery in Alexandria Egypt.

Not sure what you mean by the horror story. Unless where I said not everything in the Bible are for the church, whichis made of both Jews and Gentiles under the Gospel of the Grace of God.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Not sure what you mean by the horror story.

I was quoting your own expression;

I read a very horrifying story of a pastor lady ...

That's the story I was talking about, of a misinterpretation apparently based on the English translation.

Admitting all the difficulties of the translation process, the translators of the AV were not free from them. They, too, had to acquire understanding of the original languages from books. In the case of New Testament Greek, the knowledge was learned by the Renaissance scholars from the Greeks of the Byzantine empire, who still spoke a version of it.

a reply to: DISRAELI

oh ok my bad, because some say all the bible is for the church today and nothing could be more horrifying than that.

Yeah, it is not a good thing that pastor did.

I found an interesting word in the Bible, the word is Holy, it is used for the first time in

Ex 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.

Now while many feel that Mt Horeb and Mt Sinai are the same mountain. But in some older unedited maps show Mt Horeb to be at the edge of the original Israel, Edom and Egypt (which is the Arabian peninsula). They call it mount Hor today so many don't make the connection, But if you compare that directive phrase with the same one used in

Jos 5:15 And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

Again this is land that God is calling holy and it is the land of Israel.

Between those two verse are are 156 uses that call Israel a holy people, holy convocation, Holy Habitation (the land), holy Sabbath, Holy Nation (a twofold meaning of a people and a land), holy men, holy place, holy garments, holy things, holy gifts, holy crown, holy sacrifices for food, holy altar, holy anointing oil, holy for the LORD, holy days, holy vessels, holy offerings and a whole bunch more but the most important thing to understand is that it all has to do with Israel.

But the first verses I shared show the land that God said was holy is his land, a land he gave to Israel, a land the united nations will come against sometime in the next 15 years when Christ returns and destroys about 800,000 million armed forces trying to take the land from Israel.

Truly Israel is the Holy Land.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
And of course anyone who digs below the English translation may also notice and bring in the many references to "saints", which is the same word.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
EasternShadow

Are you a Christian or a Jew if you don't mind my asking.

This isn't about me. Forum rules dictate you to address the OP, and not the poster.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
You seem to misunderstood I point out there are questions to be asked and I lay out what types of Quesions. Also please understand this is not a complete lesson in how to study the Bible using those questions.

And you expect your students to understand incomplete lesson?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
the What does "without form and void" mean is not actually found in Gen 1:2 and if that were the only meaning we could come up with all sorts of conclusions so the what is he meaning question is answered by going to the only other Bible reference available to understand it and that is in Jer 4 Then I just went through some of the context. If you wonder why Jeremiah is saying what he is saying then go back and start and Duet and read through to Jeremiah (you can skip the wisdom books of Psalms through Song of Solomon to save time.

The temple had been destroyed more than 3 times, so how does that equal to being "without form and void" in Gen 1:2. By that logic, Earth had to be recreated more than 3 times. Did Genesis said that? No. Your supposition with Lucifer only refer to the time of king Nebuchadnezzar. You fail to take into context that the same temple was destroyed yet again by Romans in the year 70 AD and prior to Babylon invasion. Obviously you have missed a lot of scriptures context with regard to the temple of Jerusalem.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Supposition, also known as an idea based on Biblical references and then putting them into the correct divisional time period is a correct procedure of studying the word of Truth.

Supposition is well known tool used by gnostic writers to claim the hidden knowledge. Be careful with what you assume to be true. Many had fall to this ploy simply because they are too ignorant to have their hypothesis be peer reviewed.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Once I have the two verses together compared then I can understand the meaning. i.e. means that something that was completed was destroyed. Why was the earth without form and void in between Gen1:1 and Gen 1:2 is that was because iniquity was found in Lucifer and he and his angles along with the throne which Lucifer was trying to exalt Isa 14:12-13. What was without form and void in Jeremiah 4 was the city of Jerusalem after it was destroyed.

COMPLETELY destroyed mean no longer exist. The city of Jerusalem was never COMPLETELY destroyed. It was rebuild time after time. Earth had never COMPLETELY "destroyed" either. The closest was during the formation of moon, when other planet collided with earth.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
So you see even without using the 7W's and the H, I as able to define the meaning of the phrase "without form and void". I first identified the figure of speech by asking the question "what is the figure of speech?"

That is why you miss the other context or spiritual comparison.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Using the context of Genesis 1, I found it was not a metaphor, it was not a allegory, it was not one of the other 214 figures of Speech, it was a very simple form of speech known as a "descriptive phrase". Then I searched to see if the phrase was ever used again.

Gen 1 and Gen 2 may not be metaphor. But you used the destruction of Jerusalem temple or city as a metaphor to Gen 1:2. So are you sure you're using the right technique?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
So no, a supposition can create a true teaching if it can be defined and support with Biblical facts. But I do agree with you that if done without rightly dividing and having proper context and answers to study questions, then yes it is dangerous.

It has been proven many times. Just read Dead Sea scrolls and the many various gnostics writings. The hidden knowledge they claimed are nothing more than lies meant to remove people from the teaching of Jesus.

I have many things I would like to address with regard to your reply, but I'm running out of space and I am not interested to comment for hours with wall of texts. So I just stop here.

There are more references to Jerusalem. Make sure you know Jerusalem actual history. Do not assume to know the truth unless your theology hypothesis is consensually been proven without doubt. None of us have perfect knowledge. That's why you need to publish and have as many people to review your works.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Not sure what you mean by the horror story.

I was quoting your own expression;

I read a very horrifying story of a pastor lady ...

That's the story I was talking about, of a misinterpretation apparently based on the English translation.

Admitting all the difficulties of the translation process, the translators of the AV were not free from them. They, too, had to acquire understanding of the original languages from books. In the case of New Testament Greek, the knowledge was learned by the Renaissance scholars from the Greeks of the Byzantine empire, who still spoke a version of it.

Yes I completely agree. Some people don't even know the word Lord in English translations is not the word for Hebrew's YHWH. Instead, it is Greek's Adonis. And this has cause a lot of confusion that some people even claimed god's revealed name YHWH, is Satan's name.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Yes I completely agree. Some people don't even know the word Lord in English translations is not the word for Hebrew's YHWH. Instead, it is Greek's Adonis. And this has cause a lot of confusion that some people even claimed god's revealed name YHWH, is Satan's name.

Apparently the letters were pronounced as ADONAI, which comes from ADON and means "my lord".
The name ADONIS probably also derives from ADON.
In the New Testament, "Lord" translates KURIOS, which is a broader version of "Lord", extending down to "master" (the unjust steward's employer is his KURIOS).

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Apparently the letters were pronounced as ADONAI, which comes from ADON and means "my lord".
The name ADONIS probably also derives from ADON.
In the New Testament, "Lord" translates KURIOS, which is a broader version of "Lord", extending down to "master" (the unjust steward's employer is his KURIOS).

You are correct. It is derived from "ADON".
"ADONAI" is in plural form
I was actually referring to a singular form "ADONI" as in:

adōnê ha-adōnîm

כִּי יְ ה וָ ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶם הוּא אֱלֹהֵי הָֽאֱלֹהִים וַאֲדֹנֵי הָאֲדֹנִים ‬;

KJV: "For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords"
Deuteronomy 10:17

וַאֲדֹנֵי and יהוה‬ are both different words in Hebrew. And can be confused by many contexts.

Thanks for correcting my spelling for ADONIS.