[Propianotuner1]

Originally Posted by Elmer G. White

Isaiah 12:2
God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.

’êl
אֵ֧ל
...this is a noun in st abs. No suffixes.

yə·šū·‘ā·ṯî
יְשׁוּעָתִ֛י
...this is a verb form, fem pass participle with the grammatical possessive suffix 'my'. This is standard Hebrew, not Aramaic. The verb root that this is based on is Strong's #3467 - יָשַׁע - check it in your dictionary.

But. Seriously. Where do you get you 'data' from? Aramaic can be found in Ezra (official documents), Daniel (the rousing adventures of him and his friends), Jeremiah (one sentence) and Genesis (one word) and in some semitic words in the NT. All other occurrences are disputed and none of these disputed ones are in Isaiah.



Does this matter? In terms of Salvation, it is insignificant as the KJV tells us what is important in this verse. From the viewpoint of your claims, it is less favorable. Please, study Hebrew if you wish but do it properly. In your case, I suggest you study the Bible in your own vernacular.



Yours in Christ,

Elmer

That's all perfectly true, and there are only eight instances of whole sections written in Aramaic within the Tanakh. However, there are numerous targumim, several of which occur in Isaiah. Regardless, we are already in agreement that the popular vernacular in Israel during the NT was Aramaic. And what's more, it has already been agreed that the name of the Lord Himself is not an English name. Is He to offended, according to your logic, every time someone even calls Him by His name?

[Elmer G. White]

Originally Posted by Propianotuner1

That's all perfectly true, and there are only eight instances of whole sections written in Aramaic within the Tanakh. However, there are numerous targumim, several of which occur in Isaiah. Regardless, we are already in agreement that the popular vernacular in Israel during the NT was Aramaic. And what's more, it has already been agreed that the name of the Lord Himself is not an English name. Is He to offended, according to your logic, every time someone even calls Him by His name?

I am sorry, but this is not useful. First you make an assertion. It is not based on data. Then you just ignore the actual information by dismissing it with acknowledging your mistake but not learning. Then you raise another issue that has no connection to the previous one. Why on Earth should we consider the spoken paraphrases aka targumim of the OT as relevant regarding the issue that you mix up Hebrew and Aramaic? The written Bible is more than enough, certainly more than any Jewish ADDITIONS to the actual Bible (Revelation 22:18).

1 Timothy 3:6
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

What is 'an English name'? Anglo-Saxon before the Norman conquest? Beowulf!? Or a name that has been assimilated into the Americal ortography and pronunciation? The people of the NT times used the spoken form they were familiar with, we use the form that is suitable for the original design of Jesus.

שָׁלוֹם לְךָ


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[Mary Etheldreda]

Originally Posted by Elmer G. White

I am sorry, but this is not useful. First you make an assertion. It is not based on data. Then you just ignore the actual information by dismissing it with acknowledging your mistake but not learning. Then you raise another issue that has no connection to the previous one.

Your patience with this sinner is truly inspiring, Professor.

I've been praying for him, but he simply will not give up the hold Sin has over him. It brings me to tears to think that Jesus died even for the likes of him. Jesus died a Sinner's Death so people like this piano person could be invited into Heaven where no unclean thing can go (Revelation 21:27). And yet, knowing this, he still spits on the face of Jesus by refusing to acknowledge His Sovereignty, by refusing to acknowledge His Word!

I'm literally sobbing as I write this! So tender is my heart for the sinner! And yet so hardened is his own heart against the Redeemer of mankind!

[Propianotuner1]

Originally Posted by Elmer G. White

I am sorry, but this is not useful. First you make an assertion. It is not based on data. Then you just ignore the actual information by dismissing it with acknowledging your mistake but not learning. Then you raise another issue that has no connection to the previous one. Why on Earth should we consider the spoken paraphrases aka targumim of the OT as relevant regarding the issue that you mix up Hebrew and Aramaic? The written Bible is more than enough, certainly more than any Jewish ADDITIONS to the actual Bible (Revelation 22:18).

1 Timothy 3:6
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

What is 'an English name'? Anglo-Saxon before the Norman conquest? Beowulf!? Or a name that has been assimilated into the Americal ortography and pronunciation? The people of the NT times used the spoken form they were familiar with, we use the form that is suitable for the original design of Jesus.

שָׁלוֹם לְךָ


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

1. Being shown information that you are already aware of does not constitute learning or not learning.
2. "What is 'an English name'"? Well, take your pick. Whatever period you look at, there is no English Yeshua.
3. Seeing as the KJV translators relied on Masoretic texts, so "Jewish additions" certainly do come into play.

Regardless of any of that, I doubt that Landover folks accept the Apocrypha, which is included in the 1611 KJV. Nor has there been any explanation yet, as to any inherent qualities of English that might make it God's "chosen language".

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Originally Posted by Propianotuner1

And what's more, it has already been agreed that the name of the Lord Himself is not an English name. Is He to offended, according to your logic, every time someone even calls Him by His name?

That is just silly. Anything can be an "English" name if people choose to use it as a name. Look at the crazy names that people give their children these days! It is just that (unlike the Hispanic catholics, for example) we have more respect for our Lord than call our children Jesus. Likewise, we do not name our children God. Those names are venerated and therefore out of bounds to serious Christians.

[Propianotuner1]

Originally Posted by Joanna Lytton-Vasey

That is just silly. Anything can be an "English" name if people choose to use it as a name. Look at the crazy names that people give their children these days! It is just that (unlike the Hispanic catholics, for example) we have more respect for our Lord than call our children Jesus. Likewise, we do not name our children God. Those names are venerated and therefore out of bounds to serious Christians.

Facepalm... just like any other word (e.g. "bureau" from French) can become English if English people choose to use it? It appears that the English language itself expresses the opposite of it's own superiority when it borrows from numerous other languages. Clearly other languages have something to offer it.

As if our God were so primitive that He had a preference for certain mouth-sounds over other mouth-sounds, lol. Language is merely a tool for communicating thoughts. Like Shakespeare said, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Jesus is concerned with the inside of the cup, not the outside. Hence, assuming that God cares for any particular language, or that He must have had the earliest people use it before the tower of Babel, makes our God seem pretty primitive.

So I'm sorry folks, my God isn't a knuckle dragger who dwells in a cave. Contentions over which set of mouth-sounds is better, are rather silly when we are talking about the same God that explodes stars and creates life. He is no respecter of persons.

[Elmer G. White]

I find it hard to accept that Jesus would have the anything-goes attitude when it comes to appearances.

1 Timothy 2:9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.

In contrast, He cares for the soul but also for its external projections, as evidenced by the wise and unchanging words above. What we need is clarity, not ambiguousness. The prudent order of things is i) to repent, accept Jesus, get Baptized and be Saved and ii) if necessary, study exegetics and systematics only thereafter to understand false Christians and to avoid the things you exemplify.

Unless one keeps some simple but inevitable Truths™ in mind, chaos ensues. As our friend Piano Tuner has demonstrated, this leads to different types of commentaries and explanations that bury the actual Word of God beneath centuries of imperfect human wisdom. Look at Luther's commentary book to the Galatians, for instance - almost one thousand pages to tell what God mediated via Paul in a few chapters. Luther's attitude was the same: the Word is complicated and can lead to contradictory interpretations, thus it must be interpreted via study and my interpretation is better than yours. An omnipotent being could surely make a transmission that is readily approachable to the sinner. And He has. If we believe in inspiration, we must accept God's authorship as absolute and if we object that He could have been intentionally ambiguous, we not only lose the attribute of absolute goodness but also start to doubt every word. We know that God can be deceiving when it comes to sinners and scientific observation, He tells us that much.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

Only by leaving the study of the Bible to those who have already accepted Jesus in their hearts in all His fearsome love, wrath and magnificence, can we avoid the delusion that God prepares for unbelievers. no more deception. The exegetics have fallen into this trap and endorsed insecurity. It will never end. I can see the answer of this new person on the Forum. "That is all true but..." There is no but.

Ezekiel 14:9
And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

If you open your heart, you can see that there is no way you can distinguish deception by God while not believing in the total manner that we teach here. By discarding the commentaries you can see the reality of this world and there are no more contradictions. Not in the Bible in need of commentaries, not between science and Faith as the observations that oppose the Bible fade away. You repent, accept Jesus, get Baptized, follow His commandments, gain His conditional Love and ultimately spend the Eternity with Him. During that Infinite Joy the apparently difficult questions of mindless torture and suffering, innocent deaths, inadequacy of good deeds and malice will be answered and they will only add to the Heaven Experience.


Yours in Christ,

Elmer

[Pastor Ezekiel]

God wants us to be richly rewarded for our faith.

2 Samuel 22:21
The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness: according to the cleanness of my hands hath he recompensed me.

2 Chronicles 15:7
Be ye strong therefore, and let not your hands be weak: for your work shall be rewarded.

Psalm 31:23
O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.

The United States is the single most powerful and wealthy nation in the world.

[Impala 67]

Originally Posted by Pastor Ezekiel

God wants us to be richly rewarded for our faith.



The United States is the single most powerful and wealthy nation in the world.

Just like Job?

JHL.
jesus is our LORD.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Originally Posted by Impala 67

Just like Job?

I'm pretty sure that Job was a joo, not an American.

[WickedWitch]

Originally Posted by Propianotuner1

Facepalm... just like any other word (e.g. "bureau" from French) can become English if English people choose to use it? It appears that the English language itself expresses the opposite of it's own superiority when it borrows from numerous other languages. Clearly other languages have something to offer it.

As if our God were so primitive that He had a preference for certain mouth-sounds over other mouth-sounds, lol. Language is merely a tool for communicating thoughts. Like Shakespeare said, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Jesus is concerned with the inside of the cup, not the outside. Hence, assuming that God cares for any particular language, or that He must have had the earliest people use it before the tower of Babel, makes our God seem pretty primitive.

So I'm sorry folks, my God isn't a knuckle dragger who dwells in a cave. Contentions over which set of mouth-sounds is better, are rather silly when we are talking about the same God that explodes stars and creates life. He is no respecter of persons.

I like this one, you guys! It's smart and it's funny. Can we keep it?