Mike
-
Posts
6,834 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by Mike
-
I mentioned that I am very much into logic, but I recognize it has limitations. One big limitation is the set of Postulates that underlay any logical discussion. We differ on Postulates. If I were to adopt your Postulates, I'd probably be rapidly agreeing with all your logic. Postulate selection can, and usually does lean on emotional commitments, like who do you love, Bo Diddly. Who do you hate is another. We all have complicated and differing priorities as to what we love and what we hate. Hence we select differing Postulate sets, and then we have differing logical conclusions.
-
So_crates Sez: Where the Aramaic word come from if you don't know it was written in Aramaic? It came from very old Aramaic manuscripts. I don't know if 2 Timothy was ORIGINALLY written in Aramaic or not. I have zero information on what language the original was written in. I do know there ARE old Aramaic versions of 2 Timothy. HOW old? I don't know. Old enough to matter, because they may be copies of the originals in Aramaic, but more on this later. */*/*/* So_crates Sez: What does the Greek word translate to? How do we get from "cloak" to "book house"? I think the best Greek says “cloak” with no controversy. VPW accepted it in the Corps teachings. He commented that it emphasized the humanity of Paul. I am disagreeing with VPW here, I think. Please remember, outside rare, short conferences with Walter, and once with Bernita, I operated in a scholarly vacuum on this project. It was just me and my KJV. At the beginning, when I found the mother load in 2 Timothy, I was just months from my first PFAL class. The word “bookhouse” came out of the blue to me. Both Walter and Bernita were eager to tell me about it. I have NO IDEA where they got it. But it fit so well, I took it in and pondered it deeply. */*/*/*/*/* So_crates Sez: Why did you fill the slot with an Aramaic word? Why not Hebrew? That was all that I was given. I know nothing about languages. In fact I failed French constantly. I hated it. I am not saying this is the absolute truth; just that it is eye-opening-ly good data to consider. This is not in the collaterals anywhere, not on any tapes I ever heard, and I worked in the Tape Duplicating Dept. It fits in perfectly with the many other KJV verses I had found prior to that. It wasn’t until I worked at HQ, 1976-78, that I was shown “bookhouse,” and I had been collecting verses for 4 to 5 years by then. I never met Bernita until I worked there. My discovery of the mother load on the NT canon, and first corresponding with Walter, was early in my research, like 1972. */*/*/*/* So_crates Sez: How do you know that was the right word to fit the slot? I don’t know for sure. I just like it, as I indicated above. */*/*/*/* In red fonts above, I indicated that this word “bookhouse” is merely in some very old Aramaic texts, and those very old Aramaic texts may have been copied from the originals, or something older than what the OLDEST texts of any language were copied from. This situation comes up in other research areas we were taught. I am going to wing it from memory here. It will be an interesting (to me) test of my memory. Please let me know if I err. The oldest known manuscripts had words like “…baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit…” in several places in Acts. But looking at the profane writings of Justin Martyr, which are even older than the oldest existing manuscripts, he had to be quoting from EVEN EARLIER manuscripts when he wrote about and quoted from Acts of the Apostles. His quoting the same verses had the baptismal formula “…in the name of Jesus Christ…” I am pretty sure this is in JCNG. See, even I need to review the collaterals regularly. So it matters not if the Aramaic that contains “bookhouse” is not the oldest known text of 2 Timothy. It is just old, and MAY have been copied from the originals or something extremely early, earlier than the oldest known manuscripts. Now the reason I gave you all the latest little quiz on the anomaly in Llamsa’s Matt 27 “Eli, Eli” verse is because the answer to that anomaly figures into this little discussion on “bookhouse” and early Aramaic and late Aramaic, and early and late Greek and Hebrew. It is all a jumble what early texts we have and which texts are more authoritative. Earlier does not necessarily mean more authority, when you realize there was a lot of copying being done back then, as well as a lot of translating. Has anyone seen the anomaly in the Lamsa text for Matt 27? Parr of this little mystery is why the KJV from the Greek does NOT have the same anomaly. This anomaly identification may be an IQ test, as well as a Biblical research test. I know all this is pretty complicated.
-
I was ASKED to drop a name bigger than me.
-
I've been reading Bullinger's booklet on the Book of Job. According to his chronology Job should come right after the Pentateuch, even though it looks like it was written before Moses' writing. This is new to me THIS WEEK. See, I am still learning.
-
You guessed wrong. I said I came up with this on my own and I am not lying or joking, or trolling, or using a figure of speech. Walter told me in 1972 that my structure analysis was one the best handling he had seen by that date, 50 years ago. I still have not seen what Bullinger says about this very simple structure that I noticed in 2 Timothy, and then again in 2 Peter. My impression was that I was glossing over the kinds of structure I see Bullinger come up with. My structure is seen only if you put on a filter, and only look at what Timothy was told to do, and interleaving with Paul mentioning the various attacks of the adversary. I'll bet that Bullinger's structure is far more complicated and detailed. Not that I am going to disagree with Bullinger if that is the case. I think I was looking at the structure from one special angle, and that's where the structure greatly simplifies.
-
My point has nothing to do with the original language for Timothy. BTW, which languages did Paul speak? Hint: check Acts, not academia. My point is that in the Greek, the word "cloak" is kinda out of context. I heard VPW opine on this word in the Timothy teachings, and I disagree with his liking that word there. The Aramaic word in that slot, according to Walter and Bernita J, is "bookhouse." Now that fits exactly with the context. What is a bookhouse? It is a large box with holes in the top that scrolls fit neatly in, for storage and travel. There are labels on the scroll holes that constitute a table of contents…. or possibly a canon listing??? That, above, is just the tip of the iceberg. As I was searching my KJV thru the 1970s my growing canon collection put the thaw on that ice, and things started flowing nicely in my understanding; a wonderful sunesis of sorts. */*/*/* I want to say something about the Aramaic and the issue of earliest copies and original languages. It is a much more murky subject than we perceived way back when. Maybe more murky than academia knows. I’m wondering if anyone here took the Llamsa Bible seriously enough to thoroughly think through the ONE VERSE in there that we were taught: Eli, Eli ! In that one verse is an interestingly odd anomaly. See if you can spot it. Matthew 27:46 Llamsa “And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice and said, Eli, Eli, lamna shabachthani! Which means, My God, My God, for this I was kept?” Matthew 27:46 KJV “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Has anyone seen this before in the olden golden days? I did, because I was serious about thinking these things through as much a possible. If you hadn’t thought this verse through with Llamsa open in front of you, NOW IS YOUR CHANCE! I spotted this problem in the mid-70s, as soon as I got my first Llamsa Bible. I never had an answer until about 10 years ago. I asked a former TWI Aramaic person about this anomaly and was STUNNED at the answer. But as I thought it through it made sense. This is one of the reasons I don’t bother to think highly of academic retro-historians who think they are able to scientifically analyzing everything with great precision. Things were a great big jumble in the late 1st Century, after many in the Church rejected Paul, and got sloppy with ALL his Epistles, as Peter testifies with his last written words. I am going to let this Matthew 27 verse sit for a while. I’d like to see if ANYONE thought this through before. I’d like to see if anyone CAN think this through now. What is the anomaly in Llamsa’s verse? There is no anomaly in the KJV verse! Yes, this is another quiz to see who has the ability to think things through on their own. I was not guided by anyone to see this anomaly. By anomaly, I mean an unexplained (so far) mystery. See if you can find it yourselves. See if T-Bone’s links help you find the anomaly.
-
It doesn't say, so I don't know. It's what it DOES say that interests me. Did you notice the abababababa structure in 2 Timothy, and the aba structure in 2 Peter? Where a = the believer's job to uphold the integrity of the Word b = the adversary's attacks on the integrity of the Word Late edit: Did it occur to you that these Epistles are Peter's and Paul's DYING LAST WORDS ? Even later edit: ...Peter's and Paul's DYING LAST WRITTEN WORDS...
-
But HEY! You didn't read the book.... carefully enough to see it. Ditto for me. I saw it once plain as day about 15 years ago. A couple years later I noticed that it was 3 times, because I didn't read enough of the context. Then about 4 years ago I noticed that within that context were some hidden or alluded to statements to the same. It shocked me! I guess it is IMPORTANT for us to know.... eventually. I keep studying the collaterals for deep things I missed in my youth, and that I missed in recent years. It is a rich arena to study in.
-
You may be confusing the devil with Satan here. Also, it was in his academic life and early ministry with churchianity leaders that he got a lot of whispers that confused him.
-
I think you got the tense of your verb wrong there. Try this: "I have been moving onto the topic all along without addressing his....." I'd fill in the blanks with "...Mike's findings in the KJV that he collected for 10 years."
-
Did you notice at the end of 2 Timothy that just before his execution, Paul wanted to have a big scripture party with Timothy, Mark, and Luke. Do you know what the Aramaic word is, where the KJV has the word "cloak." ??? Did you notice that at the end of 2 Peter he refers to ALL the Epistles of Paul, as if they were in an already collected set? Thanks for asking. I asked God to show me as I read many years ago. You might try that and see MUCH more. More in those 2 Epistles, and more in the rest of the Bible.
-
You seem to be under the allusion that the devil (not Satan) is like Dracula with crucifixes, and stays far away from Bible scholars. Just the opposite it true. He whispers into those open ears all the time. That is where he hobbles good Christians from finding the power in Christ that resides within. He blew it, not knowing the Mystery, so now he has all these believers with Christ-in and the potential to beat him at every turn like Jesus did. So what does he do? He steers the churches to become prisons. Did you know that the devil can whisper in YOUR ear, and make it sound like a good idea of your own, or a revelation from the True God? We were taught that, and taught that often. I wonder if you remember. There is one collateral where VPW teaches that TEN TIMES on just a few pages.
-
You are what you eat. The mentors you trust are aimed at unbelief, just like your posts to me are aimed at that.
-
How's your reading of those 2 short Epistles coming?
-
I would hazard a guess that Jesus never referred to it, or acted it out. Ditto for the NT writers in the KJV's canon.
-
What's new about that? You just want to talk AT me. Where did that song link go?
-
You got THAT right! Did you get it yet right yer, that I have had extensive experiences, some of which I detailed here, of when I actually DID un-turn your favored stone of stone-hearted theology, that rivals the Pharisees? Aren't you the slightest bit curious about what I saw in the Word, in the raw KJV, as I looked for ten solid years? Maybe someone is. I can wait.
-
Yes, I have more than once celebrated the benefits of a closed mind, when the conditions are right. It is not a popular idea in this day of opening up to all error. Trust me, I could "go off" on this topic a LOT more than I did with you a day or so ago. It looks to me that you really don't want to see what the Word says about the canon. It looks like you also forgot about the times and years when I experimented with my Postulates a lot. I don't think you have thought about this enough to tell me your fundamental Postulates are at this minute, except moan and grown about your anti-idol.
-
It would seem that way to me, if I was too lazy to read what my opponent was saying. I said I already checked that approach out, and I see the damage it did to you, plain as day, so why should I un-turn that stone again? Unless I wanted to damage myself like you seemed to have done. Hey! I feel for you. I'll be here to help you when that approach runs dry and leaves you stranded in unbelief.
-
Funny. I've never seen this in the Word. Does this mean you don't want to see it in the Word. BTW, did you see what I said in the other thread about the canon? I'm waiting for people to read 2 short Epistles so we can get this ball rolling. What does GOD say about this canon stuff? Does anyone want to know?
-
Sorry, I completely missed this post. It looks to me that you re-traced the pre-1942 promise steps of VPW with this post, and the one after it and the response by Nathan_Jr. Those posts all seem to say you discovered for yourselves the same reasons VPW was ready to quit in 1942. I have focused often on that stage in his life. It was pretty academic. Yucks!
-
I think it's you guys who keep bringing up VPW. I keep saying I got zero from him on the canon.
-
I keep on saying that it is NOT the wonderfully good material that VPW taught me that I am bringing up in this canon discussion. I found it on my own.
-
I did tell you folks. Did you not see me encouraging Nathan_Jr to read 2 Timothy and 2 Peter, and give him the structures? I found LOTS of verses throughout the whole Bible on the canon, but those 2 Epistles had the mother load of verses. Both are devoted to the canon. The canon is the overriding topic for both Epistles in their entirety. Again, I saw all this my little old self. Actually, I was young then, but now my little old self still sees it. Take some time to read those Epistles with the ababababab, and aba structures I tiped you folks off to a couple of times now.
-
Busted! You must be a big Columbo fan to have seen through my charade. Yes, I admit it. I did learn a lot of good things from VPW in the class, and I like it, and I stand on it. Do you think his sources were stinky also? Like Kenyon, Bullinger, Styles, Leonard? I'm really enjoying some Bullinger stuff this week. Oh yes, yes, yes, lots of things in the class I liked and still do. Make that all of the class. I would have thought you already knew this. But the canon details I did not learn from VPW, other than we had to memorize the books of the KJV right at the beginning of the class. I hope this is the canon thread. I've been bouncing back and forth, visiting the absent Christ.
