+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

  1. Link to Post #1
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    PS: I put this under myth and legend because, as you will see, one group is living a legend and the other, well, the word myth is what we have left, right?

    Whenever you see one of my posts without any images, a great many of you are saying, "Oh crap, weíre going to be asked to think today". But actually I have made this fairly simple to follow along with, and you owe it to yourself to consider what I am about to say. It cuts right to the heart of a much bigger situation concerning the war that is currently being waged between denominations Ė at the expense of followers.

    Sometimes you just have to scratch your head, and thank the Lord that you do not need to explain the following verse in Sunday School, because if you did you would really face a quandary.

    If you are of the section of faith that believe The Bible is infallible, and that it makes no false or misleading statements on any matter of faith and practice, or a believer in biblical inerrancy; that the Holy Scripture is the Word of God, and carries the full authority of God, and that every single statement of the Bible calls for instant and unqualified acceptance, you might have difficulty with my report for today. Because that belief seems to hinge upon which version of Bible translation that you use in your Worship services. Conflicting translations do exist.

    If you grab your own personal favorite translation version of the Old Testament, and take a glance at Genesis 27:39, all might seem well. Until, that is, you compare that version with any of the other versions, as I have done below.

    I wasn't actually focusing on this Chapter at all, but a Youtube headline caught my attention. After LOL'ing for a good bit of time, I thought I would look into the verse that this Minister was providing as the basis for his sermon.

    The title to that Video is "To Those Whom God Hates He Often Gives Plenty", and the sermon is by a Puritan named Jonathan Edwards, who wrote in the early 1700s. I noted that he was born in East Windsor, Connecticut, as was my Mom (it's a suburb of Hartford now), and so I looked further into the verse.

    Please understand, I was not laughing because I disagree with the title or his idea, in fact, I most firmly support it - based on clear evidence I think that, especially in modern times, most of us will agree that it appears that the most Godless and hateful people sure end up with buckets of money.

    We only have to recall the pedophiles, many of whom are respected associates of Presidents and Kings, and stars or directors of fabulously popular films to affirm his title suggestion.

    And even some of those who pervert the words of God by preaching things that are not even remotely included in the Old or New Testaments end up wealthy as sin, if you will pardon the metaphor. So if money is your sole criteria towards the value of life, then likely you are firmly on the other side of the equation and laughing at my ignorance as I write this. So be it.

    Jonathan's grandfather, Solomon Stoddard, died on February 11th, 1729, leaving to his grandson Jonathan the difficult task of the sole ministerial charge of one of the largest and wealthiest congregations in the colony. And on top of that Jonathan had married the daughter of one of the founders of Yale University. You might call him well connected for his timeline.

    But then he began to have disagreements over the way he ran his Church. Jonathan felt that he could not and would not continue his grandfather's practice of open communion. Stoddard, his grandfather, believed that communion was a "converting ordinance."

    Open communion is the practice of some Protestant Churches of allowing members and non-members to receive the Eucharist (also called Holy Communion or the Lord's Supper). Many but not all churches that practice open communion require that the person receiving communion be a baptized Christian, and other requirements may apply as well. In Methodism, open communion is referred to as the open table. Jonathan felt that those receiving Communion should be Baptized in the Church, and his grandfather and many of the others believed that providing Communion was an act that converted the receiver on the spot, so to speak.

    Jonathan then moved to Stockbridge, Massachusetts, which was at the time a crude frontier settlement, where he ministered to a small congregation and served as missionary to the Housatonic Indians. There, having more time for study and writing, he completed his celebrated work, The Freedom of the Will (1754). What we have here is an early dissenter; and one who was willing to give up all of his status and wealth rather than to compromise his values and beliefs.

    Later we find that Jonathan was elected president of the College of New Jersey (later called Princeton University) in early 1758. He was a popular choice, for he had been a friend of the College since its inception and was the most eminent American philosopher-theologian of his time. He left the protection and support of his wealthy Church, and earned the confused ire of his father in law of Yale fame, and yet brought himself back to become president of another top University.

    And his end is relevant to our current situation as well, because we find that he died of fever at the age of fifty-four following experimental inoculation for smallpox. This was equivalent to 'The Jab' of our day.
    Not that I am noting any connection between those that disagree with the status quo, take the Jab and then end up dead. Anything but that. Are you paying attention Google? No need to shadow ban me today.

    Now, as to my title, which I will prove is not click bait after all. There does indeed seem to be a Biblical Tie as to what that verse in Genesis actually says. Depending upon which version you read, you have a fifty-fifty chance of getting it wrong. But don't worry, we will be examining the original text in its Hebrew version below, so this mystery will end up solved on one side of the other, today.

    If you read the King James, New King James, 1890 Darby Bible, American Standard Version, or New American Standard Version (and there are others too numerous to mention here), you will be told that Isaac assured his son that his dwelling would thenceforth be from the fatness and fertility of the Earth, and his water would come from the dew of heaven above itself. Here are those actual verses to prove this idea:


    New King James Version:
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him:
    Behold, your dwelling shall be of the fatness (or fertility) of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above.

    King James Version (KJV 1900)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said unto him,
    Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above;

    1890 Darby Bible (DARBY)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said to him,
    Behold, thy dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above;

    American Standard Version (ASV 1901)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said unto him,
    Behold, of the fatness of the earth shall be thy dwelling,
    And of the dew of heaven from above.

    New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him,
    Behold, away from the fertility of the earth shall be your dwelling,
    And away from the dew of heaven from above.

    Conversely, if you read the New International Version, the New Living Translation, The New Century Version, The Holman Christian Standard Bible, The New Revised Standard Version, you will be told that you will be missing the Earth's richness, you will not have any dew from heaven, and generally you will live in thirst and poverty, far from the lands of fatness. And perhaps this indicates a spiritual thirst as well as the physical version. And, strangely, in this case even the English Standard Version expresses this, whereas normally they are very close in agreement to the American Standard Version in all things spiritual. That's odd. Here is that evidence as well:


    The New International Version (NIV)
    39 His father Isaac answered him,
    Your dwelling will be away from the earthís richness,
    away from the dew of heaven above.

    English Standard Version (ESV)
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him:
    Behold, away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be,
    and away from the dew of heaven on high.

    New Living Translation (NLT)
    39 Finally, his father, Isaac, said to him,
    You will live away from the richness of the earth,
    and away from the dew of the heaven above.

    New Century Version (NCV)
    39 Isaac said to him,
    You will live far away from the best land,
    far from the rain.

    The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
    39 Then his father Isaac answered him:
    Look, your dwelling place will be
    away from the richness of the land,
    away from the dew of the sky above.

    The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
    39 Then his father Isaac answered him:
    See, away from the fatness of the earth shall your home be,
    and away from the dew of heaven on high.

    So, perhaps now we see the problem. No matter how we try to sugar-coat it, no matter what forms of denial or misdirection, or honest explanations we try to template these results with, the honest truth is that at least half of the people are going to be wrong. Not dead wrong, but spiritually in error. There's simply no other way to express it. Both points are well supported in various translations, and both speak of exactly opposite meanings and circumstances. You could probably even start a new Holy War or Crusade if you asked one side to defend their version against the version used in other Churches.

    In situations like this, I go back to the Bible. I examine the original version of the text, and see just where the wheels started going off the cart, so to speak. So let's do that.

    Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen. Show me your money - pick your winners- you can't win if you don't wager so place your dollars down. Oh, excuse me, this is supposed to be a report and here I am running off into the gambling world and heading completely off topic. Back to business. But really, which one would you have bet on, if you had to?

    We all need a bit of background to the verse to help us understand the context, so here we are.
    Rebekah (mother of Jacob and Esau) instructed Jacob to obtain the blessing and inheritance of all the wealth and the leadership of the people of the tribe from his father Isaac. To steal it away from his brother, since his father was getting long in the tooth and could not see very well. And so
    Jacob disguised himself as Esau and obtained the inheritance from his near-blind father. Isaac had planned on making Esau the head of the family and his heir up to that time of trickery.

    Esau naturally complained about this fraud, and then the text tells us that he obtained a minor blessing from Isaac. Later Esau threatened Jacob, and Rebekah was disappointed at his anger, but actually to me it seems that he was very much in the right to complain about the fraud concocted by his mother and brother. Actually, first-degree murder seems to have been on the table.

    So this is the verse that speaks of that period in Genesis. Would we not expect to see that he was indeed "blessed" by his father, Isaac? Right away that would put us on the side of the KJV and supporting versions, but let's wait until we hear it from the horse's mouth.

    Here is the Massoretic (or Masoretic) Hebrew text for that verse in Genesis. It represents what the Hebrew people originally wrote down when they finally decided to put into writing some of their well-respected and guarded truths; those that had previously been kept in song. Yes, they sang or chanted the verses as a form of memory device, before they had it reduced to writing. And it proved enormously successful.

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet
    to answer, respond, testify, speak, shout
    Yitschaq = Isaac
    father of an individual
    + suffix indicating "his"

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet
    to say, speak, utter
    to, toward, unto but the word actually used is EL
    + suffix indicating "his"

    behold, lo, see, if

    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    to be or become fat, grow fat
    the, this,
    land, country, tribal territory, Earth, land of Canaan, Israel

    to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen, fall out, to take place
    seat, assembly, dwelling-place, dwelling, dwellers, situation, location
    + suffix indicating "your"

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet.
    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    dew, night mist
    the, this,
    heaven, heavens, the sky, atmosphere, etc

    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    upon, on the ground of, according to, on account of, on behalf of,
    concerning, beside, in addition to, together with, beyond, above,
    over, by, on to, towards, to, against

    We should now put these into the Verb Subject Object sentence order that was used by the early Hebrews, (modern Hebrew sentence structure is more similar to English), and see what we have.


    Verb Subject Object
    responded now Isaac, his father
    and spoke (Isaac) to his (son Esau)
    Behold!
    to be fat on account of this Land (you)
    to be your dwelling place
    and from the dews of the heavens
    from upon the ground of (it) .

    So we have something like this, in modern English:

    And now his father Isaac responded,
    Isaac spoke to his son Esau;
    Behold! You shall become fat on account of this land,
    It shall be your dwelling place,
    And the dews of heaven shall fall upon the ground of it.

    Basically Isaac was telling Esau that by breaking his back upon the grounds of the land of Canann, he would become fat, or prosperous, and fertile; much like the crops or domestic animals that fed upon it. It is sort of like the "God Bless You" blessing in thanks that one might receive after helping someone by changing their tire for them while it is raining. You appreciate the sentiment, and good will, but some coins or better yet hard cash works much better than an off-handed blessing when you go to the store to purchase something. I'm just saying.

    I know that it is difficult to believe that the King James Version is more right than others in this example (except for the American Standard people who also got it right), since they are generally alone in their translations, and tend to differ from all of the others. But that's the way it is, for once.

    Did you win? And if not, if you are one of the Churches that happens to use one of the versions of the Bible from our losers column, please don't send me any hate email. But you might want to inquire at your next Sunday gathering, for someone to explain to you just what is going on with your version of this verse.

    I was once the angry man, much like Jonathan. I re-translated much more than six hundred verses in the Old Testament. I still have my worksheets to prove it. My idea was to come up with a Bible version that was directly in line with what the original authors were inspired to write down - good or bad - and whether or not it accorded with modern belief. The truth, in other words.

    I stopped when I realized that nobody actually wanted this done. Well, only a very few did. Perhaps the same two percent that today do not believe most of what the Government or most scientists tell us, ever, about anything.

    Most are the other ninety-eight percent are content to believe what we are being told, just like we do when our scientists tell us things that we are to believe, even when they make no sense and do not conform to what the evidence is telling us. It's simply a part of the life we live now. Someday the general acceptance of those convenient truths may spell our doom.

    If you are among the group that would break up your family, leave your Church, quit your Pastorate, abandon your inheritance and anger your in-laws, and all for the sake of a differing belief in one or more of the tenants that you hold dear to your heart, please remember the above.

    Perhaps it's past time for us to simply sit down and discuss what we have, rather than allowing the bad work of an ignorant or unknowing translator to spoil our ideas about worship. Because down that long road goes the next step - with people abandoning the Church in angry disgust.

    We don't need divisions. We need inclusions. If you liked this, and would like to see more, drop me a comment or tell a friend. Thanks for your time. And have a blessed day as Isaac would say.

  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    amor (12th July 2021), Ankle Biter (13th July 2021), Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), ExomatrixTV (13th July 2021), Journeyman (12th July 2021), Karen (Geophyz) (12th July 2021), Matthew (12th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021), Peace in Oz (12th July 2021), Watching from Cyprus (14th July 2021)

  3. Link to Post #2
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    24th June 2013
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,770
    Thanks
    1,482
    Thanked 5,715 times in 1,480 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to amor For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Malisa (12th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Avalon Member Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th September 2019
    Language
    None
    Posts
    1,808
    Thanks
    4,690
    Thanked 11,544 times in 1,736 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???
    Yes, i have a few, but i would get my account retired if i said what i think of that lol

    I believe, we, the ones here on Avalon, are "the others", and by that i mean we are not Abraham linked, we came from the other side
    I bet you're naked under those clothes, how indecent of you...
    Whatever happens, happens next.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Malisa For This Post:

    ExomatrixTV (13th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), Vicus (14th July 2021)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Member East Sun's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th May 2010
    Location
    USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,825
    Thanks
    5,126
    Thanked 6,366 times in 1,432 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???
    Sounds like good and evil as twins of the same parents. Sounds very familiar, does it not.
    Question Everything, always speak truth...

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to East Sun For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???
    Thank you for your comments. I guess it balances out. This time he did not favor the hunter, but in the case of Cain and Abel he did.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021)

  11. Link to Post #6
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by Mashika (here)
    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???
    Yes, i have a few, but i would get my account retired if i said what i think of that lol

    I believe, we, the ones here on Avalon, are "the others", and by that i mean we are not Abraham linked, we came from the other side
    Thank you for your comment. Interesting idea - that we come from the other. The Genesis story is all about the arising of the Hebrews. It is completely non-Gentile centered.

    §=[Post Update]=§

    Quote Posted by East Sun (here)
    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I applaud you for your tenacity at translating. A question arises about the Father who gives his entire blessing to only one son, leaving out the other, and that son being a hunter and not a farmer. What kind of person does that to his children? Did he hate one son and love the other? It would appear he did and that angered his wife who had the opposite sentiment. Thoughts anyone???
    Sounds like good and evil as twins of the same parents. Sounds very familiar, does it not.
    Yes, it does sound familiar. I wonder if humanity has some deeply seated memories, passed on through the generations until it has become a part of us, that speaks of the time when good fought evil. If you read
    the Gods of Eden by Bramley, and other authors as well, it tells us that the good side lost and that we are
    mostly cattle on Earth. But some cattle raise their heads, and others use their horns.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Journeyman (12th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021)

  13. Link to Post #7
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    24th June 2013
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,770
    Thanks
    1,482
    Thanked 5,715 times in 1,480 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    I either read or heard a sermon about Cain and Abel concluding that Cain murdered Abel in rage and jealousy and ate him and his blood cried out from the Earth. Put that in the mix and see what conclusions can be made.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to amor For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021)

  15. Link to Post #8
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by amor (here)
    I either read or heard a sermon about Cain and Abel concluding that Cain murdered Abel in rage and jealousy and ate him and his blood cried out from the Earth. Put that in the mix and see what conclusions can be made.
    Yes the blood crying out from the Earth is a very important clue - good catch.

    Several years ago I discovered that by using a Template of my own design, based upon science and the existence of the Phoenician and Hebrew alphabets, I could change Hebrew words (in their original form, without any vowels or notations) into Sumerian words, cleanly and easily. I will be sharing it soon. Using this I was able to solve a great many mysteries - such as the wood that Noah was told to use on his ark - the GPHR, is actually "dry". As in use dry wood so it does not crack. One of the other tidbits that I discovered was that Cain was actually Cayane, and a Female. So if we add that to the mix several things become clear. Such as why no towns were named after her, and why we see no inheritable wealth on her side of the families of Adam.

  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (13th July 2021), Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), East Sun (13th July 2021), Journeyman (12th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021), Peace in Oz (13th July 2021)

  17. Link to Post #9
    United States Avalon Member Denise/Dizi's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd July 2017
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,224
    Thanks
    17,583
    Thanked 8,711 times in 1,199 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Much like the Bible suggests, in many forms, there was a deliberately mixing of languages so that we the following people, would not be able to truly figure out what it all meant. Sad indeed. But interesting when someone tries to figure out the truth! I wish you well in your ventures and would be curious to learn what you find!

    More More

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Denise/Dizi For This Post:

    Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021), Peace in Oz (13th July 2021)

  19. Link to Post #10
    Avalon Member Star Mariner's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,930
    Thanks
    17,964
    Thanked 23,070 times in 2,849 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Thank you for this again, Jim. I find your research and conclusions fascinating and very relevant. Not that I'm a Bible bashing Christian, my guide is spirituality not theology, so I'm not in the least perturbed by variance in Biblical theory and interpretation - the Bible is stuffed with contradiction from start to finish anyway.

    I'm only interested in what is true, original, and correct as literature, as history, and particularly the Bible, around which our western civilization was founded, and from which so many are conditioned. To be frank, it doesn't really matter to me what the subject is when it comes to history, mystery, myth or legend. I want to know the truth.

    So my deep respect and my humble thanks for your pursuit of that!
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Star Mariner For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (13th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021)

  21. Link to Post #11
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by Denise/Dizi (here)
    Much like the Bible suggests, in many forms, there was a deliberately mixing of languages so that we the following people, would not be able to truly figure out what it all meant. Sad indeed. But interesting when someone tries to figure out the truth! I wish you well in your ventures and would be curious to learn what you find!

    More More
    Thanks for the kind comment. More will most definitely follow.

  22. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (13th July 2021), Journeyman (14th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021)

  23. Link to Post #12
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by Star Mariner (here)
    Thank you for this again, Jim. I find your research and conclusions fascinating and very relevant. Not that I'm a Bible bashing Christian, my guide is spirituality not theology, so I'm not in the least perturbed by variance in Biblical theory and interpretation - the Bible is stuffed with contradiction from start to finish anyway.

    I'm only interested in what is true, original, and correct as literature, as history, and particularly the Bible, around which our western civilization was founded, and from which so many are conditioned. To be frank, it doesn't really matter to me what the subject is when it comes to history, mystery, myth or legend. I want to know the truth.

    So my deep respect and my humble thanks for your pursuit of that!
    Oh Lord (if I may say it that way) I do love people who yearn for the truth.
    I'll do my best to post a few for the eyes that see and the ears that hear.
    Based on re-translations of the saying of Jesus and the OT, I was able to determine
    where and when the supposed second coming was to occur. The Armageddon so to speak.
    There were key events that spoke of a certain Idol in Syria, and that it would be destroyed
    forever, and after that, within one generation of 44 years, the event would happen.
    That sign occurred when ISIS or ISIL destroyed a temple in Syria, so we have,
    according to the text of the Bible, less than 20 years (18 actually) remaining. Let's enjoy them!

  24. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Journeyman (14th July 2021), Olam (18th July 2021), pabranno (17th July 2021), palehorse (13th July 2021)

  25. Link to Post #13
    Denmark Avalon Member Watching from Cyprus's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    Limassol Cyprus
    Age
    55
    Posts
    367
    Thanks
    3,850
    Thanked 1,265 times in 291 posts

    Cool Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Quote Posted by Jim_Duyer (here)
    PS: I put this under myth and legend because, as you will see, one group is living a legend and the other, well, the word myth is what we have left, right?

    Whenever you see one of my posts without any images, a great many of you are saying, "Oh crap, weíre going to be asked to think today". But actually I have made this fairly simple to follow along with, and you owe it to yourself to consider what I am about to say. It cuts right to the heart of a much bigger situation concerning the war that is currently being waged between denominations Ė at the expense of followers.

    Sometimes you just have to scratch your head, and thank the Lord that you do not need to explain the following verse in Sunday School, because if you did you would really face a quandary.

    If you are of the section of faith that believe The Bible is infallible, and that it makes no false or misleading statements on any matter of faith and practice, or a believer in biblical inerrancy; that the Holy Scripture is the Word of God, and carries the full authority of God, and that every single statement of the Bible calls for instant and unqualified acceptance, you might have difficulty with my report for today. Because that belief seems to hinge upon which version of Bible translation that you use in your Worship services. Conflicting translations do exist.

    If you grab your own personal favorite translation version of the Old Testament, and take a glance at Genesis 27:39, all might seem well. Until, that is, you compare that version with any of the other versions, as I have done below.

    I wasn't actually focusing on this Chapter at all, but a Youtube headline caught my attention. After LOL'ing for a good bit of time, I thought I would look into the verse that this Minister was providing as the basis for his sermon.

    The title to that Video is "To Those Whom God Hates He Often Gives Plenty", and the sermon is by a Puritan named Jonathan Edwards, who wrote in the early 1700s. I noted that he was born in East Windsor, Connecticut, as was my Mom (it's a suburb of Hartford now), and so I looked further into the verse.

    Please understand, I was not laughing because I disagree with the title or his idea, in fact, I most firmly support it - based on clear evidence I think that, especially in modern times, most of us will agree that it appears that the most Godless and hateful people sure end up with buckets of money.

    We only have to recall the pedophiles, many of whom are respected associates of Presidents and Kings, and stars or directors of fabulously popular films to affirm his title suggestion.

    And even some of those who pervert the words of God by preaching things that are not even remotely included in the Old or New Testaments end up wealthy as sin, if you will pardon the metaphor. So if money is your sole criteria towards the value of life, then likely you are firmly on the other side of the equation and laughing at my ignorance as I write this. So be it.

    Jonathan's grandfather, Solomon Stoddard, died on February 11th, 1729, leaving to his grandson Jonathan the difficult task of the sole ministerial charge of one of the largest and wealthiest congregations in the colony. And on top of that Jonathan had married the daughter of one of the founders of Yale University. You might call him well connected for his timeline.

    But then he began to have disagreements over the way he ran his Church. Jonathan felt that he could not and would not continue his grandfather's practice of open communion. Stoddard, his grandfather, believed that communion was a "converting ordinance."

    Open communion is the practice of some Protestant Churches of allowing members and non-members to receive the Eucharist (also called Holy Communion or the Lord's Supper). Many but not all churches that practice open communion require that the person receiving communion be a baptized Christian, and other requirements may apply as well. In Methodism, open communion is referred to as the open table. Jonathan felt that those receiving Communion should be Baptized in the Church, and his grandfather and many of the others believed that providing Communion was an act that converted the receiver on the spot, so to speak.

    Jonathan then moved to Stockbridge, Massachusetts, which was at the time a crude frontier settlement, where he ministered to a small congregation and served as missionary to the Housatonic Indians. There, having more time for study and writing, he completed his celebrated work, The Freedom of the Will (1754). What we have here is an early dissenter; and one who was willing to give up all of his status and wealth rather than to compromise his values and beliefs.

    Later we find that Jonathan was elected president of the College of New Jersey (later called Princeton University) in early 1758. He was a popular choice, for he had been a friend of the College since its inception and was the most eminent American philosopher-theologian of his time. He left the protection and support of his wealthy Church, and earned the confused ire of his father in law of Yale fame, and yet brought himself back to become president of another top University.

    And his end is relevant to our current situation as well, because we find that he died of fever at the age of fifty-four following experimental inoculation for smallpox. This was equivalent to 'The Jab' of our day.
    Not that I am noting any connection between those that disagree with the status quo, take the Jab and then end up dead. Anything but that. Are you paying attention Google? No need to shadow ban me today.

    Now, as to my title, which I will prove is not click bait after all. There does indeed seem to be a Biblical Tie as to what that verse in Genesis actually says. Depending upon which version you read, you have a fifty-fifty chance of getting it wrong. But don't worry, we will be examining the original text in its Hebrew version below, so this mystery will end up solved on one side of the other, today.

    If you read the King James, New King James, 1890 Darby Bible, American Standard Version, or New American Standard Version (and there are others too numerous to mention here), you will be told that Isaac assured his son that his dwelling would thenceforth be from the fatness and fertility of the Earth, and his water would come from the dew of heaven above itself. Here are those actual verses to prove this idea:


    New King James Version:
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him:
    Behold, your dwelling shall be of the fatness (or fertility) of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above.

    King James Version (KJV 1900)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said unto him,
    Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above;

    1890 Darby Bible (DARBY)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said to him,
    Behold, thy dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth,
    And of the dew of heaven from above;

    American Standard Version (ASV 1901)
    39 And Isaac his father answered and said unto him,
    Behold, of the fatness of the earth shall be thy dwelling,
    And of the dew of heaven from above.

    New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him,
    Behold, away from the fertility of the earth shall be your dwelling,
    And away from the dew of heaven from above.

    Conversely, if you read the New International Version, the New Living Translation, The New Century Version, The Holman Christian Standard Bible, The New Revised Standard Version, you will be told that you will be missing the Earth's richness, you will not have any dew from heaven, and generally you will live in thirst and poverty, far from the lands of fatness. And perhaps this indicates a spiritual thirst as well as the physical version. And, strangely, in this case even the English Standard Version expresses this, whereas normally they are very close in agreement to the American Standard Version in all things spiritual. That's odd. Here is that evidence as well:


    The New International Version (NIV)
    39 His father Isaac answered him,
    Your dwelling will be away from the earthís richness,
    away from the dew of heaven above.

    English Standard Version (ESV)
    39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him:
    Behold, away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be,
    and away from the dew of heaven on high.

    New Living Translation (NLT)
    39 Finally, his father, Isaac, said to him,
    You will live away from the richness of the earth,
    and away from the dew of the heaven above.

    New Century Version (NCV)
    39 Isaac said to him,
    You will live far away from the best land,
    far from the rain.

    The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
    39 Then his father Isaac answered him:
    Look, your dwelling place will be
    away from the richness of the land,
    away from the dew of the sky above.

    The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
    39 Then his father Isaac answered him:
    See, away from the fatness of the earth shall your home be,
    and away from the dew of heaven on high.

    So, perhaps now we see the problem. No matter how we try to sugar-coat it, no matter what forms of denial or misdirection, or honest explanations we try to template these results with, the honest truth is that at least half of the people are going to be wrong. Not dead wrong, but spiritually in error. There's simply no other way to express it. Both points are well supported in various translations, and both speak of exactly opposite meanings and circumstances. You could probably even start a new Holy War or Crusade if you asked one side to defend their version against the version used in other Churches.

    In situations like this, I go back to the Bible. I examine the original version of the text, and see just where the wheels started going off the cart, so to speak. So let's do that.

    Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen. Show me your money - pick your winners- you can't win if you don't wager so place your dollars down. Oh, excuse me, this is supposed to be a report and here I am running off into the gambling world and heading completely off topic. Back to business. But really, which one would you have bet on, if you had to?

    We all need a bit of background to the verse to help us understand the context, so here we are.
    Rebekah (mother of Jacob and Esau) instructed Jacob to obtain the blessing and inheritance of all the wealth and the leadership of the people of the tribe from his father Isaac. To steal it away from his brother, since his father was getting long in the tooth and could not see very well. And so
    Jacob disguised himself as Esau and obtained the inheritance from his near-blind father. Isaac had planned on making Esau the head of the family and his heir up to that time of trickery.

    Esau naturally complained about this fraud, and then the text tells us that he obtained a minor blessing from Isaac. Later Esau threatened Jacob, and Rebekah was disappointed at his anger, but actually to me it seems that he was very much in the right to complain about the fraud concocted by his mother and brother. Actually, first-degree murder seems to have been on the table.

    So this is the verse that speaks of that period in Genesis. Would we not expect to see that he was indeed "blessed" by his father, Isaac? Right away that would put us on the side of the KJV and supporting versions, but let's wait until we hear it from the horse's mouth.

    Here is the Massoretic (or Masoretic) Hebrew text for that verse in Genesis. It represents what the Hebrew people originally wrote down when they finally decided to put into writing some of their well-respected and guarded truths; those that had previously been kept in song. Yes, they sang or chanted the verses as a form of memory device, before they had it reduced to writing. And it proved enormously successful.

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet
    to answer, respond, testify, speak, shout
    Yitschaq = Isaac
    father of an individual
    + suffix indicating "his"

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet
    to say, speak, utter
    to, toward, unto but the word actually used is EL
    + suffix indicating "his"

    behold, lo, see, if

    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    to be or become fat, grow fat
    the, this,
    land, country, tribal territory, Earth, land of Canaan, Israel

    to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen, fall out, to take place
    seat, assembly, dwelling-place, dwelling, dwellers, situation, location
    + suffix indicating "your"

    and, and therefore, also, then, yet.
    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    dew, night mist
    the, this,
    heaven, heavens, the sky, atmosphere, etc

    from, out of, on account of, off, on the side of,
    since, above,than, so that not, both...and, either...or
    upon, on the ground of, according to, on account of, on behalf of,
    concerning, beside, in addition to, together with, beyond, above,
    over, by, on to, towards, to, against

    We should now put these into the Verb Subject Object sentence order that was used by the early Hebrews, (modern Hebrew sentence structure is more similar to English), and see what we have.


    Verb Subject Object
    responded now Isaac, his father
    and spoke (Isaac) to his (son Esau)
    Behold!
    to be fat on account of this Land (you)
    to be your dwelling place
    and from the dews of the heavens
    from upon the ground of (it) .

    So we have something like this, in modern English:

    And now his father Isaac responded,
    Isaac spoke to his son Esau;
    Behold! You shall become fat on account of this land,
    It shall be your dwelling place,
    And the dews of heaven shall fall upon the ground of it.

    Basically Isaac was telling Esau that by breaking his back upon the grounds of the land of Canann, he would become fat, or prosperous, and fertile; much like the crops or domestic animals that fed upon it. It is sort of like the "God Bless You" blessing in thanks that one might receive after helping someone by changing their tire for them while it is raining. You appreciate the sentiment, and good will, but some coins or better yet hard cash works much better than an off-handed blessing when you go to the store to purchase something. I'm just saying.

    I know that it is difficult to believe that the King James Version is more right than others in this example (except for the American Standard people who also got it right), since they are generally alone in their translations, and tend to differ from all of the others. But that's the way it is, for once.

    Did you win? And if not, if you are one of the Churches that happens to use one of the versions of the Bible from our losers column, please don't send me any hate email. But you might want to inquire at your next Sunday gathering, for someone to explain to you just what is going on with your version of this verse.

    I was once the angry man, much like Jonathan. I re-translated much more than six hundred verses in the Old Testament. I still have my worksheets to prove it. My idea was to come up with a Bible version that was directly in line with what the original authors were inspired to write down - good or bad - and whether or not it accorded with modern belief. The truth, in other words.

    I stopped when I realized that nobody actually wanted this done. Well, only a very few did. Perhaps the same two percent that today do not believe most of what the Government or most scientists tell us, ever, about anything.

    Most are the other ninety-eight percent are content to believe what we are being told, just like we do when our scientists tell us things that we are to believe, even when they make no sense and do not conform to what the evidence is telling us. It's simply a part of the life we live now. Someday the general acceptance of those convenient truths may spell our doom.

    If you are among the group that would break up your family, leave your Church, quit your Pastorate, abandon your inheritance and anger your in-laws, and all for the sake of a differing belief in one or more of the tenants that you hold dear to your heart, please remember the above.

    Perhaps it's past time for us to simply sit down and discuss what we have, rather than allowing the bad work of an ignorant or unknowing translator to spoil our ideas about worship. Because down that long road goes the next step - with people abandoning the Church in angry disgust.

    We don't need divisions. We need inclusions. If you liked this, and would like to see more, drop me a comment or tell a friend. Thanks for your time. And have a blessed day as Isaac would say.
    It seems to me that it is in the interest of both the good and evil "gods", that the meek gets reduced significantly in numbers.

    The difference is that the Evil side have done this (yes it is too late for the vaccinated) through lies and deceit.

    Majority of humanity have been intellectually dumbed down by design and false indoctrination through centuries. No guys, Earth needs a cleanup, no offence.

    One of humanity's weaknesses that has been used against it by the Luceferians is Naivety. Naivety to me is beautiful and means Trust in the told, a big part of real Love. That is gone now when people start dying in masses.

    Sorry for writing so directly, but this is the quickening and we have no more time to chit chat.

    Time to hunt down Lucifer aka Marduk and the reptile Pindar. They run this show here on Earth.

    And last comment; Why do we need to search in old books that are cryptic and needs further studying to find out if the message means turn left or turn right even after thousands of years studying, when we have a living legend in David Icke who practically Alone is turning the tides. Learn to meditate as we are all one, and one with Zilla. GOD ZILLA of course ;-)
    Last edited by Watching from Cyprus; 14th July 2021 at 21:52.
    Short Term memory infected/defect. Watching, feeling and recording since i recall. Recording for some one/thing else !
    I care about the earth, and despise greed.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Watching from Cyprus For This Post:

    Jim_Duyer (14th July 2021), Journeyman (14th July 2021)

  27. Link to Post #14
    Costa Rica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th February 2021
    Location
    In a Log Cabin in the Mountains
    Language
    English
    Posts
    253
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 1,590 times in 231 posts

    Default Re: Itís All Or Nothing! CAN WE BREAK THIS BIBLICAL TIE?

    Watching from Cypress:
    Thanks for your comment. Just a question if I may.
    This part: Time to hunt down Lucifer aka Marduk and the reptile Pindar. They run this show here on Earth.
    I can sort of understand. I'm not sure that Marduk was Lucifer per se, but I am fairly certain that the people who put him on a pedestal are directly related to Lucifer. I'm unfamiliar with the Pindar reference.

    But this part:
    And last comment; Why do we need to search in old books that are cryptic and needs further studying to find out if the message means turn left or turn right even after thousands of years studying, when we have a living legend in David Icke who practically Alone is turning the tides. Learn to meditate as we are all one, and one with Zilla. GOD ZILLA of course ;-)
    I'm sorry to proclaim my ignorance, but are you jesting or being serious? I still remember Icke when he told everyone he was the return of the Son of God, Jesus. And ran with that idea for awhile, till nobody bought into it, and then he came up with the Reptiles gig. Which has done quite well since he called the Queen a Reptile.
    Know why she did not sue him or stop him? Because her ancestors in Germany did actually claim to be
    related to Dragons, and called themselves the Dragon Kings, and so there is a kernal of truth there, at least
    in the association. Although I have my doubts that they still follow that idea - I believe they are into
    Black Magic at the present time. Just my opinion.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Jim_Duyer For This Post:

    Olam (18th July 2021)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts