Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,649 Year: 4,906/9,624 Month: 254/427 Week: 0/64 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   GENESIS 22:17 / NOT A PROMISE GIVEN TO THE JEWS
jar
Member
Posts: 34064
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 271 of 337 (144233)
09-23-2004 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by MangyTiger
09-23-2004 6:48 PM


Re: Book Publishing First (rest later)
you are caught red handed.
How lucky for you. That is sufficient proof that you are directly descended from Zarah and the rightly King of England and a natural born Hebrew.
Don't bother with the stuborn fact that there is no evidence for anything called the Red Hand of Zarah (it was a cord), just tell Lizzy to move over. LOL

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by MangyTiger, posted 09-23-2004 6:48 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by MangyTiger, posted 09-24-2004 9:56 PM jar has not replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7099 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 272 of 337 (144234)
09-23-2004 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 6:59 PM


quote:
I was talking about human transitionals, which by volume in existence amount to a food locker full.
Go ahead - fit the remains of over 500 neanderthals alone into a shoebox. Certainly *some species* only have a few known fossils, but about half of the 2-3 dozen species have quite a few fossils.
quote:
If evolution was true every house would have dozens laying around.
Ah. So let me get your view of the evolution of hominids straight: Hominids are expected to have evolved everywhere on the earth?
Seriously... are you kidding?
quote:
The point is that this paucity is no problem but Israel in Sinai is not given the same benefit = pure hypocrisy.
There are thousands of hominid fossils, which survived millions of years, for which we just happened to guess the right place to look (educated guesses, mind you). Where is the evidence for *anything*, from a minimum of *a half million people*, in a *known area*, from *a couple millenia ago*?

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 6:59 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 7:34 PM Rei has replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 273 of 337 (144237)
09-23-2004 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Amlodhi
09-23-2004 6:49 PM


"Common Backround of Greek and Hebrew Civilizations" by Dr. Cyrus Gordon.
It doesn't matter what you assert Amlodhi, I have the book and Dr. Scott has taught extensively from it.
The sequence of evidence exegesis within the book is Greek THEN its origin from the Bible which is accounted for by Shemitic pioneers who migrated from Egypt.
Of course if you all just want to assert that Greek culture predates Genesis then Gordon has proven you wrong.
Message 64 According to Professor Cyrus H. Gordon ["Common Backround Greek and Hebrew Civilizations" 1962; Norton Company, New York] and Dr. Gene Scott, Greek culture originated from Hebrew via the first exodus of Zarahites and Danites.
"Some historians say that the Egyptians left no contemporary surviving accounts of the presence of Hebrews and the exodus. The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (iv:7) reports, however, that as early as the 15th century [B.C.], Egyptian texts mention a foreign people called ‘Apuriu?residing in Egypt and perform?ing the service of slaves.?The encyclopedia further states that these people are identified by many scholars as the Habiru or Hebrews. Ancient records also report that a Semitic people called Danaan were expelled from Egypt, and sailed to Greece to establish the early Greek civilization. Could the fabled Danaan be a reference to the Biblical Hebrew tribe of Dan? William Ridgeway’s Early Age of Greece (p. 220) dated the Danaan exodus from Egypt as 1450 B.C. This is virtually identical to the date of the Hebrew exodus, which is dated to 1447 B.C. by Dr. Stephen E. Jones and 1453 B.C. in Dr. Adam Rutherford’s Bible Chronology (p. 120).
The dating above is 100 years contrary to what I have argued.
Numbers 26:20 confirms missing Zarahites in the Mosaic Exodus.
"Whether it was their original intention or not, the Danaan sailed their ships north to the secluded bay of Argos in the Greek Peloponnesus. The Encyclopedia Judaica (5:1257) quotes a leading Israeli archaeologist, Y. Yadin, who states, ? . . there is a close relationship between the tribe of Dan and the tribe of Danaoi whose members were clearly seafarers.?Also, the name Dan should be regarded as a short form of Dan(ann)iel or the like?(5:1255). Again the connection with the Greek Danaan is unmistakable."
"Archaeologist Dr. Cyrus Gordon states that they later sailed from Greece to other European coastlands, including Ireland and Denmark. In his book, Before Columbus, Gordon relates, A group of Sea People bore the name of ‘Dan.?The Bible tells how a segment of the seafaring (Judges 5:17) Danites [were part of] the tribal system of ancient Israel. . . . The Danites were widespread. Cyprus was called Ia-Dnan ‘The Island of Dan(an).?The same people were called Danuna, and under this name they appear as rulers of the Plain of Adana in Cilicia. Greek tradition has their eponymous ancestor, Danaos (Dan), migrating from the Nile delta to Greece . . .?(p. 108). Note that the Israelites did in fact emigrate from Egypt. Cyrus Gordon added, Virgil also designated the Greeks as ‘Danai.?Bold scholars see the influence of the Danites in Irish folk lore . . . and in the name of Danmark (‘Denmark?: the land of Dan . . .?(p. 111).
The quotes above are from links citing Gordon.
The Net is loaded with said evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Amlodhi, posted 09-23-2004 6:49 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by jar, posted 09-23-2004 7:41 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 277 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 7:47 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 274 of 337 (144238)
09-23-2004 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by Rei
09-23-2004 7:20 PM


I was talking about human transitionals, which by volume in existence amount to a food locker full.
I hate to nitpick but I said FOOT locker not fooD locker.
If you cut and pasted this how did the error occurr ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 7:20 PM Rei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 7:40 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7099 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 275 of 337 (144240)
09-23-2004 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 7:34 PM


You know, that's a good question... I'm not sure how that happened.
Regardless, is your only response to my post about "foot locker" vs "food locker"?

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 7:34 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 8:35 PM Rei has not replied

jar
Member
Posts: 34064
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 276 of 337 (144241)
09-23-2004 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 7:26 PM


Actually, there is no evidence there that the Greek civilization came from the Hebrews.
Your cite says:
Could the fabled Danaan be a reference to the Biblical Hebrew tribe of Dan?
so that is not even an assertion, not even a claim, but only a question.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 7:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7099 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 277 of 337 (144242)
09-23-2004 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 7:26 PM


You know, I'm not going to get too much into you and Amlodhi's conversation (unless he chooses not to respond), but didn't the fact that Greeks aren't semitic, nor do they speak a semitic language, nor have any semitic-origin words, kinda clue you in that what you've been reading is BS?
This message has been edited by Rei, 09-23-2004 06:48 PM

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 7:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 8:01 PM Rei has replied
 Message 286 by Amlodhi, posted 09-23-2004 8:49 PM Rei has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 278 of 337 (144246)
09-23-2004 7:54 PM


Linguistic Evidence Supports Heraldry
Message 54
The following evidence accompanies the above link:
The ancient name of York was Eboracum.
In Wales we have places that are derived from Eber (Genesis 10 :21), which said father Eber is the where the word Hebrew comes from.
Wales: Eber: Aber/Aberystwyth/Aberdare etc. etc.
Scotland: Eber: Aberdeen/Aberfoyle/Aberfeldy/Aberdour/Aberargie/Aberuthven.
Of course we know linguistic evidence is summarily rejected by opponents only because there is nothing to gain for their view. But obscure fossil connections seem to be easy for evos to make. This descrepancy in connecting evidence can only be attributed to unwillingness to admit the obvious because Bible veracity is involved.
Remember:
Hebrew is derived from Eber - nobody disputes that. But when Eber is the origin of said locations in G.B. then for reasons stated above it is not recognized.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 09-23-2004 07:02 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by MangyTiger, posted 09-23-2004 9:37 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 279 of 337 (144248)
09-23-2004 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Rei
09-23-2004 7:47 PM


kinda clue you in that what you've been reading is BS?
IOW, anything that evidences against your view is b.s.
You have become just like the medieval friars that you swore you would never be like.
Romans is proven true: When God removes God-sense nothing can override. Crick's space aliens are embraced rather than God = proof of penalty.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 09-23-2004 07:05 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 7:47 PM Rei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 8:24 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 280 of 337 (144249)
09-23-2004 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Cold Foreign Object
09-21-2004 11:51 PM


Re: Evidencing the Royal Family lineage claim
quote:
Originally posted by WT
The voluminous evidence that these persons were indeed who the Bible frames them to be via the effects of their presence/Hebrew evidence in the British Isles.
Whether there is evidence, (voluminous or otherwise), is the question under investigation. Not, as you would have it, an axiomatic starting point; regardless of the number of self-serving descriptive adjectives you choose to employ.
As such, your statement above simply assumes facts not in evidence.
quote:
WT
Search | United Church of God
Concerning the names Tea, Tephi and Tamar, while they may refer to the same person at the time of Jeremiah, it is also possible that they do not. In favor is the fact that these names are sometimes linked together in old Irish poems.
http://asis.com/~stag/jerrytea.html
(M.R. Munro Faure) give quotations from old Irish verse
How many times do you intend to beat this dead horse? Yet again, this verse from the "Forward" - Watchman What of the Dawn" states that Tea is the daughter of Lughaidh.
But, since you don't want to hear that, you (and your websites) must surmise that it really says something else. Thus the parenthetical, "(equivalent in Erse of Bethel)".
Yet the authors of the annals themselves say that Lughaidh means "Lug, who was less than his father" (83).
These authors of the source material also say that Lughaidh was a son of Ith, and that Ith was a "hard valorous warrior with the strength of an hundred" (72).
These same authors also say that a plot was laid to kill Ith - Ith fell - and his body was carried to back to Spain (71).
(Lebor Gabla renn: Book of the Taking of Ireland Part 1-5. ed. and tr. by R. A. S. Macalister. Dublin: Irish Texts Society, 1941.)
quote:
WT:
Thus, "Tea, daughter of Lughaidh (Bethel), son of Itha, son of Breoghan" could conceivably be read as "Tea, daughter of the House of God (or oath), child of the crown, child of Brigantium (or child of royalty).
Search | United Church of God
So, your argument here is that you want to use the annals as a source provided that it's understood that everything in the annals is wrong except for those parts that you either add or rewrite?
Did your "Bethel" have a father named Ith who was a mighty warrior in Spain/Ireland? And whose body was carried back to Spain after he was killed by his enemies in Ireland? And whose genealogy the annals trace back to Japeth?
How can you claim something as a source when the only words that agree with you are the words that your website has added to the text? Answer: you can't (not honestly). IOW, you cannot honestly use the annals as a source; the annals disagree with you. The only "source" you have presented here is your website's interpolated "(equivalent in Erse of Bethel)".
The same applies to "Tephi". Your poem (as per M. Faure) states only that Tephi was a daughter of Pharaoh. But, since you don't want Tephi to be Egyptian, Pharaoh magically becomes king Zedekiah.
quote:
WT
Surely by the above inclusion you are not claiming the "daughter of Pharoah" to be a dark skinned North African/Hamite ?
I am telling you only what the annals say. But it surprises me that you would make this objection. After all, your original assertion was that it was Ephraim & Manasseh that received the promise of Abraham and thus became the Caucasian race of Britain and the U.S.; and their Egyptian mother didn't seem to be a problem for you then.
quote:
WT
The above is also better evidenced by the link below: I urge you to compare the cut and pasted poem with the latter link and its more thorough explanation of the stanzas and their sources.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/idr/idr30.htm
There is little to nothing of relevance in that link. Although there is a reference to Temhuir:
quote:
TARA, Temor, Temhuir, or Temoria, is intimately connected with the early religion of Ireland, and has been associated with singular theories. As Tea-mur, it was the mount or home of Queen Tea, wife of the Milesian King Heremon. The centre of Druidical song and power . . . while bards record a great assembly being held there 921 B.C., Dr. Petrie, the eminent antiquary, is disposed to regard the place as existing only between 200 and 300 years after Christ.
Here your link states that the annals record an assembly at Tea-mur in 921 B.C., which would be long before Tea's time if she were a daughter of Zedekiah. IOW, your own link says that the annals disagree with you.
quote:
The Rev. F. R. A. Glover, M.A.: "In Ireland, in the royal precincts of Tara, cir. B.C. 582-3, there was a Hebrew system and transplanted Jerusalem . . .
The Rev. F. R. A. Glover, M.A. states that there was a transplanted Jerusalem in Tara c. 582-3 B.C., but it doesn't mention how the good Rev. came by that opinion.
Thus, here again, you can say that Rev. Glover's opinion supports you, but you can't (honestly) say that the annals support you.
quote:
WT
Pat Gerber, the University of Glasgow lecturer . . . remains unconvinced of any links at all between Ireland and the line of David. But notice what she says: "No serious historian would dare to suggest that Zedekiah’s daughter Tea could have married the Irish King Eochaid the Heremon. And yetit is not impossible.
She goes on to say: "Dare we link Simon Brech with Jeremiah’s scribe Baruch, connect Tara with the Princess Tea who had passed through Egypt as the guest of Pharaoh on her flight from Nebuchadnezzar, the sole survivor of David’s line? Could she have been given the eponymous name ‘Scota’ by later writers because she wed Eochaid the Heremon, became Queen of the ‘Scots’ as the Irish were then known, and mother to a royal Irish-Scottish dynasty? Probably notbut because none of this is either provable or disprovable as yet, we are free to dream.
Search | United Church of God
Sounds to me like Pat Gerber has it about right. As I stated in a previous post, "What you say could be true". But the ultimate question is not "could it be true" but, rather, "is it true". And based on the evidence I have seen thus far, my current answer to this question must echo Pat Gerber; "Is it true?" - probably not, but you are free to dream.
quote:
WT
We may repeat the words of F.R.A. Glover, who wrote at length about this subject in the 19th century: "I have . . . no desire to encumber my hypothesis, with any argument, as to whether the Ollam Fodhla of Irish Tradition is, or is not a mistake for Jeremiah the Prophet. I feel that the case of the presence of the illustrious Seer in Ireland is made out on other grounds;
Search | United Church of God
And perhaps you would do well to follow Mr. Glover's lead and pursue your case on other grounds.
quote:
WT
You (there is no "tone") seem to seek an outright annal quote saying "Tea daughter of Zedekiah" or the claim fails.
At this point I would find it refreshing if you could just come up with an annals quote that didn't explicitly describe her as someone other than Zedekiah's daughter.
quote:
WT
The point is that the annals confirm the existence of the person in question. Who that person is the other sources identify to be a king's daughter.
The annals confirm that the personage of Tea was said to exist, but this person is not described as a daughter of Zedekiah. And I know of no other sources that mention any Tea.
quote:
WT
Surely you will not insinuate that the multiplicity of sources are in some type of conspiracy except of course for the truth/continuing substantiation of Tephi to be a royal tender twig perpetuating the bloodline of David as God promised.
Mulitplicity of sources? I've yet to see a single source that has supported you. You have other people on websites, talking the story, that support you, but they don't seem able to cite any supporting source material either.
quote:
WT
Brutus descended from Darda son of Zarah.
Then at the end of your post you ask for the Prince Brutus source cite:
Where Did the Roman Senate Meet?
Here is a reproduction of a portion of the text from your provided link:
quote:
The first man that dwelt in Europe was Alanus, with his three sons, Hisicion, Armenon, and Neugio. Hisicion had four sons, Francus, Romanus, Alamanus, and Brutus. Armenon had five sons, Gothus, Valagothus, Cibidus, Burgundus, and Longobardus. Neugio had three sons, Vandalus, Saxo, and Boganus. From Hisicion arose four nations--the Franks, the Latins, the Germans, and Britons: from Armenon, the Gothi, Balagothi, Cibidi, Burgundi, and Longobardi: from Neugio, the Bogari, Vandali, Saxones, and Tarinegi. The whole of Europe was subdivided into these tribes.
Alanus is said to have been the son of Fethuir; Fethuir, the son of Ogomuin, who was the son of Thoi; Thoi was the son of Boibus, Boibus of Semion, Semion of Mair, Mair of Ecthactus, Ecthactus of Aurthack, Aurthack of Ethec, Ethec of Ooth, Ooth of Aber, Aber of Ra, Ra of Esraa, Esraa of Hisrau, Hisrau of Bath, Bath of Jobath, Jobath of Joham, Joham of Japheth, Japheth of Noah.
The Britons were thus called from Brutus: Brutus was the son of Hisicion, Hisicion was the son of Alanus, Alanus was the son of Rhea Silvia, Fhea Silvia was the daughter of Numa Pompilius, Numa was the son of Ascanius, Ascanius of Eneas, Eneas of Anchises, Anchises of Troius, Troius of Dardanus, Dardanus of Flisa, Flisa of Juuin, Juuin of Japheth.
So the first man in Europe was Alanus. Alanus fathered Hisicion. Hisicion fathered Brutus.
I see no Zerah here. In fact, your own link states that Brutus is a descendant of Japeth. Do you even read these?
quote:
WT
The link below: "History of the British Kings" by Geoffrey of Monmouth
http://camelot.celtic-twilight.com/hrb/index.htm
Geoffrey claims to follow a reliable and ancient source given to him by a friend. I won't "argue the man", but given the nature of some of the claims in this book, I would have to see that esoteric source.
quote:
WT
"Who exactly were these people?" asks Pat Gerber, a lecturer at Glasgow University. "Is it merely the desire to make connections that suggests links where there is nothing more than coincidence?" (Stone of Destiny, 1997, p. 47).
Notice that Gerber admits "coincidence" which is a recognition and a dismissal. IOW, the evidence cannot mean what it implies/screams therefore it must be a coincidence.
Do you like coincidences?
The Mother Goddess Dana/Danu/Danann is one of the oldest recorded Celtic deities and is associated with Druidry. She is mentioned in the Lebor Gabla renn in a poem describing the adventures of the Tuatha de Danann:
quote:
64 Danann, mother of the gods.
(Lebor Gabla renn: Book of the Taking of Ireland Part 1-5. ed. and tr. by R. A. S. Macalister. Dublin: Irish Texts Society, 1941.)
Tuatha de Danann means tribe or children of Danann. The Lebor Gabla renn describes the druidic nature of the Tuatha de Danann:
quote:
58. Now Nuadu Airgetlam was king over the Tuatha de Danann for seven years before their coming into Ireland
64. Nuadu Airgetlam s. Echtach s. Etarlam s. Ordam s. Aldui s. Tat s. Tavarn s. Enda s. Baath s. Ebath s. Bethach s. Iarbonel s. Nemed s. Agnomain s. Pamp s. Tat s. Sera s. Sru s. Esru s. Braimend s. Rathacht s. Magoth s. Iafeth s. Noe.
54. Thereafter the progeny of Bethach s. Iarbonel the Soothsayer s. Nemed were in the northern islands of the world, learning druidry and knowledge and prophecy and magic, till they were expert in the arts of pagan cunning.
(ibid. Lebor Gabla renn)
For clarity: Noah begat Japeth > Magoth > . . . > Nemed > Iarbonel > Bethach > . . . > Nuadu Airgetlam.
Thus, the ancestors of the first king of the Tuatha De Danann in Ireland (Nuada Airgetlam) were studied disciples of druidry, knowledge, prophecy, magic and were experts in "pagan cunning". Just exactly what one would expect of the children of the Goddess Danann, i.e. the Tuatha de Danann.
How's that for coincidence? Does it "scream" anything at you? Or have you suddenly decided that you don't like coincidences anymore.
The annals do not support your conjecture.
Cyrus Gordon does not support your conjecure.
From MangyTiger's/Jar's posts, it appears that heraldry does not support your conjecture.
What source would you like to examine next?
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-21-2004 11:51 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 8:21 PM Amlodhi has replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 281 of 337 (144254)
09-23-2004 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by Amlodhi
09-23-2004 8:03 PM


Re: Evidencing the Royal Family lineage claim
From MangyTiger's/Jar's posts, it appears that heraldry does not support your conjecture.
Please do not consider this a response to your post.
But to invoke Jar is the best proof for any Biblical claim.
I also find your evasion of the origins of the Red Hand/Genesis 38 to be great evidence for its validity. Message 54.
I am going to take a little time off from this thread but when I return I will respond from your latest post/280.
WT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Amlodhi, posted 09-23-2004 8:03 PM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by jar, posted 09-23-2004 8:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 290 by Amlodhi, posted 09-23-2004 9:40 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7099 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 282 of 337 (144256)
09-23-2004 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 8:01 PM


Since you didn't answer (you didn't answer my earlier post either, just picking on instead a one-letter transcription error - but I'll ignore that for now ), I'll repeat:
"didn't the fact that Greeks aren't semitic, nor do they speak a semitic language, nor have any semitic-origin words, kinda clue you in that what you've been reading is BS?"
There are two points you need to address contained within this statement. You didn't address either:
1) The Greeks *are not semitic*. Their genetics are not semitic, they don't have semitic morphological features, etc.
2) The Greek language is not semitic. They don't even have imported semitic words.
So please, explain how semites founded Greece and greek culture, but didn't leave their genetics or even a smidgeon of their language around. Greek is an Indo-European language - it actually shares closer ties with Hindi than with Hebrew.

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 8:01 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6440 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 283 of 337 (144258)
09-23-2004 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 7:05 PM


Re: Book Publishing First (rest later)
Then are you going to distance yourself from asserting my book was published by Covenant or not ?
That is what you said.
I have posted the book's publisher and copyright, what more could be asked ?
Currently I stand by what I said. I was going to get a copy of the book from Amazon - which says it is a Covenant Publishing book - so we could debate the claims in it (as I can only currently refer to the bits you quote, which puts me at a bit of a disadvantage), but the delivery time is 1 to 2 weeks - by which time this thread will probably have died
Obviously I don't dispute your copy of the book is from someone else, but remember that books can be printed by more than one publisher over the years.
I cheerfully admit you are correct in terms of your copy - but that does not prove I am not right as well.
While trying to see if I could get a copy of the book quicker I found the following site. If you enter the title into their search facility it currently lists 9 nine copies for sale. Each entry lists the publisher :
  • one by Windsor, Ontario: Herald Press Limited (2nd. edition)
  • one by Canada: Canadian British Israel Association (2nd. printing)
  • seven by Covenant Books (5 1st. edition/printing, 2 unspecified)
I don't see that nine different people/stores offering the book for sale are all going to be wrong/lying. If you add in your printer that means we have at least four publishers for this book.
So we are both correct after all
Now all I have to do is try and get a copy in this country at a reasonable price and in a reasonable timeframe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 7:05 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3134 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 284 of 337 (144263)
09-23-2004 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by Rei
09-23-2004 7:40 PM


You know, that's a good question... I'm not sure how that happened.
Regardless, is your only response to my post about "foot locker" vs "food locker"?
Yes, because we are going in circles.
There are no transitionals from one species to another.
And we are off-topic.
I will look for you in a evolution topic.
WT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 7:40 PM Rei has not replied

jar
Member
Posts: 34064
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 285 of 337 (144267)
09-23-2004 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 8:21 PM


Re: Evidencing the Royal Family lineage claim
Well let's consider once again the claim about the "Red Hand of Zarah".
Genesis 38 says:
27: And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb.
28: And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first,
29: And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez.
30: And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah.
Now where does it say Red Hand?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 8:21 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024