Assyrian
Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Just because I disagree with you does not mean I am trying to 'disprove scripture' I am just pointing out the flaws in you interpretation. As for the scriptures being straightforward, whatever makes you think that?You go to great lengths to disprove the Scriptures, when the Scriptures themselves are so straightforward themselves.
2Pet 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand.
Heb 5:11 About this we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food.
John 16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
Mark 8:21 And he said to them, "Do you not yet understand?"
Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
That interpretation of sons of God, bene elohim as angels was controversial back then as it is now. I would say Jesus' statement about angels not marrying actually contradicts it. How could the bene elohim marry and have children if they are angels when Jesus tells us angels do not marry?In the Scriptures it is written that angels/ ben Elohym [sons of God] married, but they married bath Adam [daughters of Adam[ Genesis 6:2], and they left their habitation in heaven to marry them on earth [Enoch 6; Jude 6]; so where is it written that in heaven the angels do not marry? -Only in Enoch. Jesus called Enochs writings Scriptures.
Jesus said the Sadducees erred, not knowing the Scriptures which teach plainly that in heaven the angels do not marry, and that in the resurrection those who attain to the resurrection of life will be like/equal with the angels.
Angels did marry, but they left heaven to do so, but in heaven they do not marry.
I have to answer your posts one point at a time, as the posts are way-y-y too long otherwise.
I'm trying to catch up, one at a time.
No. You just talk of 'the ancient text' as if it said something different to the Hebrew texts we know today.Are you referencing a changed Hebrew Text?Are you saying the Hebrew text is wrong?
They may also have a better knowledge of Hebrew than you.I have a Hebrew-English JPS interlinear that is useless for the original Hebrew, as the translators messed with the texts to make it "easier to understand" -according to their own bias' of course, which makes the Hebrew and the English nonsense for any useful purpose as to what the doctrine of the Word is, in so many prophetic texts.
He has set his tabernacle in the the sun,
and
He has set a tabernacle for the sun,
are both equally easy to understand. Only the second is is an accurate translation.
Here is the Hebrew word for the sunThe ancient text states only "[He] set ]His] tabernacle [in the] sun. Thats why the Douay Rheims version Psalm 18:6 translates the words as "He hath set His tabernacle in the sun"
the ancient Hebrew says "set tabernacle sun"=[He] set [His] dwelling place [in the] sun.
suwm 1) to put, place, set, appoint, make
'ohel b) dwelling, home, habitation
shemesh a) sun
H8121
שׁמשׁ
shemesh
sheh'-mesh
From an unused root meaning to be brilliant; the sun; by implication the east; figuratively a ray, that is, (architecturally) a notched battlement: - + east side (-ward), sun ([rising]), + west (-ward), window. See also H1053.
Strong's with Tense Voice and Mood
Now look at Psalm 19:4 in Hebrew.שׁמשׁ
shemesh
sheh'-mesh
From an unused root meaning to be brilliant; the sun; by implication the east; figuratively a ray, that is, (architecturally) a notched battlement: - + east side (-ward), sun ([rising]), + west (-ward), window. See also H1053.
Strong's with Tense Voice and Mood
בכל־הארץ יצא קום ובקצה תבל מליהם לשׁמשׁ שׂם־אהל בהם׃ Ps 19:4
Can you find shemesh?
Do you see the difference between shemesh in the Strong's definition and in the psalm?
שׁמשׁ
לשׁמשׁ
ל is the Hebrew letter lamed and it is a preposition meaning to or for. 'In' is a completely different preposition ב the letter bet. The Hebrew says the tent is for the sun.
Again the is the Septuagint, it is as you say a translation of the Hebrew, but it is a translation that has a reputation for departing quite radically form the literal meaning of the Hebrew when it suited them. And as the Hebrew scholars that gave you the JPS show you, as well as all our modern English bible translation whose translators are highly qualified hebrew scholars too, the Hebrew says for the sun.In the Anti-Nicene Fathers volume 8, There is an ancient discussion of the passage in the Psalm translated as "in the sun He hath set His tabernacle" -taken from the Septuagint, probably. The author seeks a meaning other than that which is plain, but nevertheless, the Hebrew is translated as "in the sun He hath set His tabernacle". http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.iv.iii.html -Excerpts of Theodotus
The sun is fixed, as far as the solar system is concerned anyway. So either the bible is wrong, or you misunderstand the way God speaks to us.Your way is nonsense too, as you deny that the sun runs the circuit of the entire heaven and that nothing is hid from the heat of it, in the entire heaven.
You want a sitting still, fixed sun; but the Scriptures state that the sun races over its appointed pathway, covering the entire heaven, from one end to the other ,and returns to its place and does it again, daily.
The Douay is a translation of the Vulgate which is a translation of the LXX. Saying they all agree isn't much of an argument. Of course they agree. But the Hebrew is says the tent is for the sun.The only sense of the passage is that which the ancients translated it as, from the Hebrew: "in the sun He hath set His tabernacle" [as above referenced in the anti-nicene ]; and "He hath set His taberncalce in the sun"; Douay Rheims Psalm 18:6. http://www.newadvent.org/bible/psa018.htm
"Douay Rheims translated from the Latin Vulgate
Diligently Compared with the Hebrew, Greek,
and Other Editions in Divers Languages
First Published by the English College at Douay
A.D. 1609 & 1610";
So the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Douay Rheims, all state "HE set His taberncale in the sun"; and the ancient writings of Theodotus [a rambling gnostic] tries to make a different meaning of what He means when He states "In the sun He hath set His tabernacle". That proves that the Scripture was translated from the Hebrew of old times to "He hath set His tabernacle in the sun".
Of course as a literalist you cannot see how a translator might use the phrase 'spans the globe' unless he meant a literal sphere. And of course every bible translators is showing his bias because they don't agree with you interpetation. You bring up another phrase with globe in it "the circuit of the globe" and like the last time you do not tell us what the Hebrew is. However if it is the word tebel or erets, they do not mean sphere.That is a translator bias. The word can be translated globe instead of world. Obviously Martinez means globe because the word means globe -and when he also translates "the circuit of the globe" it also means the circumference or circle of the globe. Translators are not inspired - and they are biased, and they may pick one word when another would tell the true story because they don't believe the true story.
Is that the AV you are quoting? Because the AV says 'the world' not the globe.Here's a potion of Hannah's psalm of praise, in which she praised YHWH inteligently and with understanding because she was a student of Enoch's writings -practically her whole psalm of praise comes from the revelations of Enoch, and from nowhere else.
1Sa 2:8 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, [and] lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set [them] among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth [are] the LORD'S, and he hath set the globeupon them.
You need to understand how language works. How do you think the meaning of a word can develop from moist, through fertile and inhabited to spherical? Moist ground is fertile and fertile land is inhabited. That is straight forward, words develop that way, but spherical? How does the meaning of spherical come from fertile? You need to understand how Genesius is using the phrase 'habitable globe', to describe the inhabited area of the whole world, rather than saying tebel itself carries the meaning of spherical. tebel describes the fertile and inhabited character of the inhabited globe, not the shape.
You are getting a bit tedious there with your judgementalism. Just because the Prophets of ancient Israel did not understand the shape of the earth does not mean God's word is not for South American and Australian Aborigines.You have another problem in not believing God's Word in that when YHWH speaks of His judgements to come in the OT, for the inhabitants of the whole globe, you want it to not be for the dwellers of the entire earth after all, to accomodate your own bias against His declared Word.
You're letting the Olmecs and all the western continents' inhabitants and the inhabitants of all the islands of the seas off, from the judgments of God, because you don't believe God has spoken to all the inhabitants of the whole globe, by His prophets of old.
Upvote
0