Why i love Jesus. Why Jesus is love.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Pointing out that Hebrew has no "J" sound or letter has noting to do with the old covenant. Yahshua means = YAH saves.
That burns you up doesn't it? That's pretty sad, you hate the given name of our Savior.

The given name of Jesus, is Jesus. You can't say it. It is because your demon refuses it but has no problem with the Old Testament name you substitute in its place.

Explain how Mary and Joseph gave Him the name of "Jesus" when the letter J wasn't even invented, and wouldn't be for some 1,500 more years. Explain how they gave Him the name "Jesus" when there isn't a "J" sound in Hebrew.

The 1611 KJB doesn't even use the name "Jesus".

The 1611 edition was flawed, so that is why there was a republication. I don't know what was going on in the first edition and I don't see how that has anything to do with anything.
The sound thing is only a theory. There was no tape recorders or cell phones to record the way words sounded back then. People don't know how words were pronounced back in ancient times and can only come up with theories.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Pointing out that Hebrew has no "J" sound or letter has noting to do with the old covenant. Yahshua means = YAH saves.
That burns you up doesn't it? That's pretty sad, you hate the given name of our Savior.

The given name of Jesus, is Jesus. You can't say it. It is because your demon refuses it but has no problem with the Old Testament name you substitute in its place.

Explain how Mary and Joseph gave Him the name of "Jesus" when the letter J wasn't even invented, and wouldn't be for some 1,500 more years. Explain how they gave Him the name "Jesus" when there isn't a "J" sound in Hebrew.

The 1611 KJB doesn't even use the name "Jesus".

The 1611 edition was flawed, so that is why there was a republication. I don't know what was going on in the first edition and I don't see how that has anything to do with anything.
The sound thing is only a theory. There was no tape recorders or cell phones to record the way words sounded back then. People don't know how words were pronounced back in ancient times and can only come up with theories.

Have you even studied Hebrew? lol

The form of J was unknown in any alphabet until the 14th century. Either symbol (J,I) used initially generally had the consonantal sound of Y as in year. Gradually, the two symbols (J,l) were differentiated, the J usually acquiring consonantal force and thus becoming regarded as a consonant, and the I becoming a vowel. It was not until 1630 that the differentiation became general in England...

It is one of the few permanent additions to those alphabets, made in medieval or modern times. More exactly, it was not an addition, but a differentiation from an existing letter, i, which in Latin, besides being a vowel (as in index), had also the consonantal value of "Y" (as in maior, pronounced "mayor"). At a later stage, the symbol "J" was used for distinctive purposes, particularly when the "I" had to be written initially (or in conjunction with another "I"). Either symbol used initially generally had the consonantal sound of "Y" (as in year) so that the Latin pronunciation of either Ianuarius or Januarius was as though the spelling was "Yanuarius." While in some words of Hebrew and other origin (such as Hallelujah or Junker), "J" has the phonetic value of "Y."

Encyclopedia Americana

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Have you even studied Hebrew? lol

If you ever went to my profile page you would know the answer to that.

The form of J was unknown in any alphabet until the 14th century.

Obviously they just used other letters or somehow put it into a classification which also included vowels.

jesus is love?
your cross has killed more people than the swastika and crack coc aine put together.. who's the monster again?

articles.exchristian.net...

even your symbol is violent +, when i see someone wearing a cross i think of things like the salem witch trials and the destruction of the maya and their written history.... not love

maybe you should change your logo from a crucifix to a native burning at the stake.. thats more appropriate




see all the rest of you in hell ... lolz

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Have you even studied Hebrew? lol

If you ever went to my profile page you would know the answer to that.

Irrelevant. I can put "I'm a billionaire" on my profile, doesn't mean my bank account grows at the same time. You're demonstrating your gross ignorance to the phonetics of Hebrew in this thread. Jesus's Hebrew name is Yahshua.

I know you're pissed, because Yahshua means "YAH saves", with "YAH" being the shortened form of YAHweh.

Be mad.

Obviously they just used other letters or somehow put it into a classification which also included vowels.

Arbitrary conjecture.

Show us a link to the phonetics of Hebrew that show that they utilize either a "J" letter or a "J" sound.

Take your time, no "24 hour" rush here. lol

Apparently you quoted this line but don't comprehend it:

The form of J was unknown in any alphabet until the 14th century.

reply to post by NOTurTypical
I have the Bible and you have the devil.

Originally posted by spaceg0at

jesus is love?
your cross has killed more people than the swastika and crack coc aine put together.. who's the monster again?

Erm, no. Except for when people have been crucified on it, the cross itself hasn't killed anyone. Neither has the swastika, for that matter.

People have killed people; and they've done so primarily by abdicating their own responsibility to those symbols. That is a very important distinction.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I have the Bible and you have the devil.

No, you're ignorant of Hebrew.

There is no "J" in Hebrew

Yahshua is His name

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by spaceg0at

jesus is love?
your cross has killed more people than the swastika and crack coc aine put together.. who's the monster again?

Erm, no. Except for when people have been crucified on it, the cross itself hasn't killed anyone. Neither has the swastika, for that matter.

People have killed people; and they've done so primarily by abdicating their own responsibility to those symbols. That is a very important distinction.

i call em as i see em...




as far as the "cross" not "killing" anyone.. ill draw u a parallel.. Charles Manson never "killed" anyone either

reply to post by NOTurTypical

You guys... c'mon, this is absurd.

I think his issue, if I might clarify, is the idea of Jesus being either Yaweh or the son of Yaweh, who appears to him in the OT to be an agent, and actor, or a demiurge involved in a power struggle and not the most high tranacendant God as the Absolute, who is absolute love. The problem I think he's having is with the idea of God as a separate entity.

I am reminded here, of Jesus at the moment of his greatest need being forsaken or abandoned on the cross and stripped of all power. This could mean one of only two things, either that in becoming the embodiment of sin, Jesus experienced separation from the Godhead due to the holiness and righteousness of God, or that the God as a separate entity, stripped him of his power, and departed. If the latter is the case, one can imagine here, how the devil (who thinks he's God) could be fooled, at the moment that the tranacendant God of love kicked back in, the thief himself caught in the act before the entire observing universe.

I can see his issue with the idea of a line of continuity from the OT to the thing that Jesus accomplished in the end, which was supposed to be to make the love of the one true God of love known.

The test I think is in a Christianity which preaches the liberation of love, or, some sort of morality teaching, to turn our attention from the tree of life in our midst, back to satan's control tree of duality.

reply to post by spaceg0at


If you really understood, you would be ashamed of yourself over your smug notion that this is the fault of Jesus and his cross, and you would weep over the ignorance of man, and the spirit of condemnation who kills and steals from mankind every precious thing God gives us, or which prevents us from seeing and thinking clearly.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I am reminded here, of Jesus at the moment of his greatest need being forsaken or abandoned on the cross and stripped of all power. This could mean one of only two things, either that in becoming the embodiment of sin, Jesus experienced separation from the Godhead due to the holiness and righteousness of God, or that the God as a separate entity, stripped him of his power, and departed. If the latter is the case, one can imagine here, how the devil (who thinks he's God) could be fooled, at the moment that the tranacendant God of love kicked back in, the thief himself caught in the act before the entire observing universe.

I can see his issue with the idea of a line of continuity from the OT to the thing that Jesus accomplished in the end, which was supposed to be to make the love of the one true God of love known.

The test I think is in a Christianity which preaches the liberation of love, or, some sort of morality teaching, to turn our attention from the tree of life in our midst, back to satan's control tree of duality.

Personally, I am very much inclined to suspect, if not utterly convinced, that Jesus' forsaken moment and subsequent accomplishment of his Great Work, represents the moment at which the "strong man" was bound, and Jesus granted the full power and authority to metaphysically "clean house" taking back for the one true God of love absolutely everything leaving behind nothing of any value whatsoever, and making all things new. The "swap" in other words, was not simply an exchange for our sins, but that of a universal kingdom and all of its treasure.

Understood in this way, we can see clearly that Jesus really is God.

How would I know this, or discern such a thing?

I have wrestled with "God" the demiurg, and then it dawned on me that God need not engage in power struggles with a mere person. I too was forsaken, I know what it's like first hand, and there is no love in it. When I came to this realization and the absurdity of such a struggle, there was epiphany, and that's when I turned my eye towards what Jesus experienced on the cross.

I believe that there are many in this world, leaders, like the Pope himself, who, unable to navigate this "sticky wicket" have concluded that God is Satan. Not me, I know better.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

No, you're ignorant of Hebrew.

There is no "J" in Hebrew

Yahshua is His name

You are like Eve and the serpent.
You have this authority in your husband who tells you God told him never to eat of that one particular tree.
Then you have the serpent who comes along and is so well spoken and knowledgeable and an expert in philosophy.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I hope you two are aware of how unloving you are being.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

No, you're ignorant of Hebrew.

There is no "J" in Hebrew

Yahshua is His name

You are like Eve and the serpent.
You have this authority in your husband who tells you God told him never to eat of that one particular tree.
Then you have the serpent who comes along and is so well spoken and knowledgeable and an expert in philosophy.

Out of fairness, it is not so easy in our world to turn away from that tree and switch focus to the tree of life re-presented in the Great Work of Jesus Christ or Yeshua Messiah.

Jesus is love, spirit of the universe, not Yahweh, not God as a separate entity. I just wanted to state that for the record. That said, the interaction between Yahweh and his people foreshadowed and prophesied Jesus, like an arrow pointing in one inexorable direction.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Jesus is love, spirit of the universe, not Yahweh, not God as a separate entity. I just wanted to state that for the record. That said, the interaction between Yahweh and his people foreshadowed and prophesied Jesus, like an arrow pointing in one inexorable direction.

Some people sure were upset when Pluto was no longer considered a planet. Others did not care. Still others saw that literally nothing had changed about Pluto itself, other than our perspective. Its exactly the same as it was and is, regardless of our classification.

Perhaps applicable in a large sense..

No one is interested in fishing. So, sitting idly by, we watch the garden eat itself alive.

reply to post by sinohptik


You are right of course that the spirit remains the same spirit of God from age to age, God being BOTH innerant AND transcendant.

There is confusion however, and I suspect, powers and principalities and spirits who sow in man the seeds of confusion I think because of hatred and jealousy towards man as the crown of God's eternal creation.

If such enmity towards man exists and could be summed up under the monitor of "satan" (small s), his point of control resides in the dualistic mind of separation, causing us to fall, while at the same time attempting to persecute and convict us based on the wrong standard of judgement, a trap that very many Christians fall victim to.

Even the creator God is but a role God the absolute assumed, not God the Absolute, God the transcendant.

"I was with you from BEFORE the very foundation of the world!" This is a statement by someone with real knowledge of the real God as the God of love, since for love to exist and be at cause, there must have always been a beloved and beloved other.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

No, you're ignorant of Hebrew.

There is no "J" in Hebrew

Yahshua is His name

You are like Eve and the serpent.
You have this authority in your husband who tells you God told him never to eat of that one particular tree.
Then you have the serpent who comes along and is so well spoken and knowledgeable and an expert in philosophy.

Can you provide a single instance of Hebrew using a "J" phonetic sound for anything?

If I'm wrong this should be easy for you.