Why the Star of Bethlehem?

[S-word]

Yes and S-word is the liar, who charges the Holy Spirit with lying instead of realizing men can change the texts or some other reason, but he prefers to call God a liar.

LA

I have never said that God is a liar, I have said all along that it was Stephen and Stephen alone who spoke those untruths.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that Terah the Father of Abraham had died, before God made him move into the land of Canaan.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that the bodies of Jacob and all his sons were taken to Shechem and buried there.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that Abraham bought his family grave site from Hamor the father of Shechem.

Because I reveal the truth, all the mentally unstable and biblical ignoramuses attack me.

 

[S-word]

Poor double blind Bar-Timaeus son of Timaeus . . .
Get yourself some eyeslave from the Master so that you may see.

Hi ya there dagg, back for another bruising I see.

Dagg’s champion wrote.............He has no reading comprehension whatsoever, (just like his double blind Bar-Timaeus son of Timaeus Evil.Eye.<(I)> twin). Once you take the time to study and hopefully understand the context it becomes fairly clear that Haran was the firstborn, but died in the furnace of the Chaldees, for the other brother of Abram, Nahor, married the daughter of Haran their older brother, (the name of the daughter of Haran was Milcah). Abram and Nahor were probably the same age but the elder, Haran, begat Lot, Milcah, and Iscah, before he died. If Abram's brother Nahor married Milcah the daughter of Haran then Haran was no doubt older than Abram and Nahor; but because Haran died before his father, Terah, his name is listed last in the record. If you count back from the time when Terah died, at the age of two hundred and five years, you may plainly see that Abram was born when Terah was one hundred and thirty years old. So Haran the elder was born when Terah was seventy, but he died in Ur before his father Terah, and therefore his name is given last in the text, (how can you be the inheritor of your father if you die before your father dies?). Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty. One hundred and thirty plus seventy five is two hundred and five years: that is the age of Terah at his death, and the same is the year of the departure of Abram out of Charan into Canaan at the age of seventy five. Simple math, but first it is necessary to actually understand the text within its context; something the chronological wizard, S-word the word-sorcerer, apparently does not have and cannot grasp.

S-word..........Your champion wrote that Abraham and Nahor were probably the same age, thereby suggesting that they were twins, why did he not say Abraham, Nahor and Haran were triplets? The Septugint, the Book of Jubilees, and the Jerusalem bible, all state that “When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abraham, Nahor and Haran.” All three were born when Terah was 70 years old.

Your champion wrote. Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty.

I have read in the Holy Scriptures, which state that Abraham, Nahor and Haran were born when Terah was 70, I wonder from which scriptures your champion received HIS erroneous idea that Abraham was born when Terah was 130 years old? Methinks he must have just made that up.

If fact, anyone who has studied this subject, Knows that your champion doesn’t have a clue, and he is, as Peter says, “A mentally unstable person who is ignorant of the Holy Scriptures, and who twists and distorts them to his own destruction.

According to the Book of Jubilees, Abraham, Nahor and Haran, were born when their father Terah was 70, this was in the year 1876 A. M. and Abraham was married at the age of 49.

It was in the year 1925 A.M. that Abraham took to himself a wife and her name was Saria, the daughter of his Father ‘Terah.’ (Abraham’s Half sister) And three years later, in 1928 A.M. his brother Haran took to himself a wife, who bore to him, four years later in 1932 A.M. a son who he called Lot.

One would think that the eldest son would be the first to marry, don’t you agree?

Although the book of Jubilees, states that Nahor took to himself a wife, it reveals neither the name of his wife, nor the year in which he was married.

When Abraham was 60 years old, in the year 1936 A. M. he sneaked into the temple of Ur with all its wooden gods, of which, Terah was the High Priest, and set it ablaze with no one observing him, but when the people saw the flames coming out of the temple, Haran, the brother of Abraham, rushed into the temple in order to save his gods, but he was incinerated with them, and they buried him there in the city of Ur of the Chaldees.

Milcah the daughter of Haran, would have been born sometime between 1928 A. M. when Haran got married, and 1936 A. M, when her father Haran died, and the maximum age that we can accredit to her when the family left the city of Ur, is 7/8 years old.

As Abraham took Lot, who was born in 1932 A. M. with him to Canaan in 1951/52 A. M., which was 15 years after the death of Haran, in 1936 A. M. this means that Lot was then 19 years old.

It would appear that Iscah and Milcah, the other two children sired by Haran, who did not travel to Canaan with Abraham, remained with Nahor, and when Milcah became of age, Nahor united with her as husband and wife.

I would advise that you and your champion get yourself some eyeslave from the Master so that you may see. Fancy believing that Abraham was born when Terah was 130, what length will the hypocrites go too, and what lies will they spread in order to support the untruths told by Stephen?

BTW, while you are at it, get something for the bruising that you have received once again.

 

[daqq]

Hi ya there dagg, back for another bruising I see.

Dagg’s champion wrote.............He has no reading comprehension whatsoever, (just like his double blind Bar-Timaeus son of Timaeus Evil.Eye.<(I)> twin). Once you take the time to study and hopefully understand the context it becomes fairly clear that Haran was the firstborn, but died in the furnace of the Chaldees, for the other brother of Abram, Nahor, married the daughter of Haran their older brother, (the name of the daughter of Haran was Milcah). Abram and Nahor were probably the same age but the elder, Haran, begat Lot, Milcah, and Iscah, before he died. If Abram's brother Nahor married Milcah the daughter of Haran then Haran was no doubt older than Abram and Nahor; but because Haran died before his father, Terah, his name is listed last in the record. If you count back from the time when Terah died, at the age of two hundred and five years, you may plainly see that Abram was born when Terah was one hundred and thirty years old. So Haran the elder was born when Terah was seventy, but he died in Ur before his father Terah, and therefore his name is given last in the text, (how can you be the inheritor of your father if you die before your father dies?). Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty. One hundred and thirty plus seventy five is two hundred and five years: that is the age of Terah at his death, and the same is the year of the departure of Abram out of Charan into Canaan at the age of seventy five. Simple math, but first it is necessary to actually understand the text within its context; something the chronological wizard, S-word the word-sorcerer, apparently does not have and cannot grasp.

S-word..........Your champion wrote that Abraham and Nahor were probably the same age, thereby suggesting that they were twins, why did he not say Abraham, Nahor and Haran were triplets? The Septugint, the Book of Jubilees, and the Jerusalem bible, all state that “When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abraham, Nahor and Haran.” All three were born when Terah was 70 years old.

Your champion wrote. Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty.

I have read in the Holy Scriptures, which state that Abraham, Nahor and Haran were born when Terah was 70, I wonder from which scriptures your champion received HIS erroneous idea that Abraham was born when Terah was 130 years old? Methinks he must have just made that up.

If fact, anyone who has studied this subject, Knows that your champion doesn’t have a clue, and he is, as Peter says, “A mentally unstable person who is ignorant of the Holy Scriptures, and who twists and distorts them to his own destruction.

According to the Book of Jubilees, Abraham, Nahor and Haran, were born when their father Terah was 70, this was in the year 1876 A. M. and Abraham was married at the age of 49.

It was in the year 1925 A.M. that Abraham took to himself a wife and her name was Saria, the daughter of his Father ‘Terah.’ (Abraham’s Half sister) And three years later, in 1928 A.M. his brother Haran took to himself a wife, who bore to him, four years later in 1932 A.M. a son who he called Lot.

One would think that the eldest son would be the first to marry, don’t you agree?

Although the book of Jubilees, states that Nahor took to himself a wife, it reveals neither the name of his wife, nor the year in which he was married.

When Abraham was 60 years old, in the year 1936 A. M. he sneaked into the temple of Ur with all its wooden gods, of which, Terah was the High Priest, and set it ablaze with no one observing him, but when the people saw the flames coming out of the temple, Haran, the brother of Abraham, rushed into the temple in order to save his gods, but he was incinerated with them, and they buried him there in the city of Ur of the Chaldees.

Milcah the daughter of Haran, would have been born sometime between 1928 A. M. when Haran got married, and 1936 A. M, when her father Haran died, and the maximum age that we can accredit to her when the family left the city of Ur, is 7/8 years old.

As Abraham took Lot, who was born in 1932 A. M. with him to Canaan in 1951/52 A. M., which was 15 years after the death of Haran, in 1936 A. M. this means that Lot was then 19 years old.

It would appear that Iscah and Milcah, the other two children sired by Haran, who did not travel to Canaan with Abraham, remained with Nahor, and when Milcah became of age, Nahor united with her as husband and wife.

I would advise that you and your champion get yourself some eyeslave from the Master so that you may see. Fancy believing that Abraham was born when Terah was 130, what length will the hypocrites go too, and what lies will they spread in order to support the untruths told by Stephen?

BTW, while you are at it, get something for the bruising that you have received once again.

No body writes anything for me unless I quote their words and make it plain that such words are not my own. However, you are correct about one thing: the One who showed me those particular things which you quoted from my words is indeed my Champion.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

I have never said that God is a liar, I have said all along that it was Stephen and Stephen alone who spoke those untruths.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that Terah the Father of Abraham had died, before God made him move into the land of Canaan.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that the bodies of Jacob and all his sons were taken to Shechem and buried there.

It is you who have said that it was the angel of the lord who lied through Stephen by saying that Abraham bought his family grave site from Hamor the father of Shechem.

Because I reveal the truth, all the mentally unstable and biblical ignoramuses attack me.

You lied about what I have said.

You also lied by saying Steven lied.

I am right because I said you lied more than you said

LA

 

[daqq]

I hope everyone can see what just happened here: S-word finally understood what was being said in the last few pages. And when he went back through the clues that were given he found what I said to Patrick. Then it probably was that he took a day off to figure out how he was going to get around his pile of lies and garbage which he himself has produced in this thread based on his phony concocted chronology which also required him to call Stephen a liar. S-word never actually understood the context of the passage he has twisted for his own use. Abram was not the firstborn; however Haran the firstborn died before his father Terah, and thus, his name is written last in the text instead of first. There is also precedent for the names not always being in the correct order, (for example Shem, Ham, and Japheth). S-word has assumed that Abram, Nahor, and Haran were triplets, all the same age, all begotten when Terah was at the age of seventy. However the text does not actually plainly state what S-word has assumed. :chuckle:

 

[daqq]

Hi ya there dagg, back for another bruising I see.

Dagg’s champion wrote.............He has no reading comprehension whatsoever, (just like his double blind Bar-Timaeus son of Timaeus Evil.Eye.<(I)> twin). Once you take the time to study and hopefully understand the context it becomes fairly clear that Haran was the firstborn, but died in the furnace of the Chaldees, for the other brother of Abram, Nahor, married the daughter of Haran their older brother, (the name of the daughter of Haran was Milcah). Abram and Nahor were probably the same age but the elder, Haran, begat Lot, Milcah, and Iscah, before he died. If Abram's brother Nahor married Milcah the daughter of Haran then Haran was no doubt older than Abram and Nahor; but because Haran died before his father, Terah, his name is listed last in the record. If you count back from the time when Terah died, at the age of two hundred and five years, you may plainly see that Abram was born when Terah was one hundred and thirty years old. So Haran the elder was born when Terah was seventy, but he died in Ur before his father Terah, and therefore his name is given last in the text, (how can you be the inheritor of your father if you die before your father dies?). Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty. One hundred and thirty plus seventy five is two hundred and five years: that is the age of Terah at his death, and the same is the year of the departure of Abram out of Charan into Canaan at the age of seventy five. Simple math, but first it is necessary to actually understand the text within its context; something the chronological wizard, S-word the word-sorcerer, apparently does not have and cannot grasp.

S-word..........Your champion wrote that Abraham and Nahor were probably the same age, thereby suggesting that they were twins, why did he not say Abraham, Nahor and Haran were triplets? The Septugint, the Book of Jubilees, and the Jerusalem bible, all state that “When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abraham, Nahor and Haran.” All three were born when Terah was 70 years old.

Your champion wrote. Thus Haran was born when Terah was seventy years old but Abram was not born until Terah was one hundred and thirty.

I have read in the Holy Scriptures, which state that Abraham, Nahor and Haran were born when Terah was 70, I wonder from which scriptures your champion received HIS erroneous idea that Abraham was born when Terah was 130 years old? Methinks he must have just made that up.

If fact, anyone who has studied this subject, Knows that your champion doesn’t have a clue, and he is, as Peter says, “A mentally unstable person who is ignorant of the Holy Scriptures, and who twists and distorts them to his own destruction.

According to the Book of Jubilees, Abraham, Nahor and Haran, were born when their father Terah was 70, this was in the year 1876 A. M. and Abraham was married at the age of 49.

It was in the year 1925 A.M. that Abraham took to himself a wife and her name was Saria, the daughter of his Father ‘Terah.’ (Abraham’s Half sister) And three years later, in 1928 A.M. his brother Haran took to himself a wife, who bore to him, four years later in 1932 A.M. a son who he called Lot.

One would think that the eldest son would be the first to marry, don’t you agree?

Although the book of Jubilees, states that Nahor took to himself a wife, it reveals neither the name of his wife, nor the year in which he was married.

When Abraham was 60 years old, in the year 1936 A. M. he sneaked into the temple of Ur with all its wooden gods, of which, Terah was the High Priest, and set it ablaze with no one observing him, but when the people saw the flames coming out of the temple, Haran, the brother of Abraham, rushed into the temple in order to save his gods, but he was incinerated with them, and they buried him there in the city of Ur of the Chaldees.

Milcah the daughter of Haran, would have been born sometime between 1928 A. M. when Haran got married, and 1936 A. M, when her father Haran died, and the maximum age that we can accredit to her when the family left the city of Ur, is 7/8 years old.

As Abraham took Lot, who was born in 1932 A. M. with him to Canaan in 1951/52 A. M., which was 15 years after the death of Haran, in 1936 A. M. this means that Lot was then 19 years old.

It would appear that Iscah and Milcah, the other two children sired by Haran, who did not travel to Canaan with Abraham, remained with Nahor, and when Milcah became of age, Nahor united with her as husband and wife.

I would advise that you and your champion get yourself some eyeslave from the Master so that you may see. Fancy believing that Abraham was born when Terah was 130, what length will the hypocrites go too, and what lies will they spread in order to support the untruths told by Stephen?

BTW, while you are at it, get something for the bruising that you have received once again.

No body writes anything for me unless I quote their words and make it plain that such words are not my own. However, you are correct about one thing: the One who showed me those particular things which you quoted from my words is indeed my Champion.

I hope everyone can see what just happened here: S-word finally understood what was being said in the last few pages. And when he went back through the clues that were given he found what I said to Patrick. Then it probably was that he took a day off to figure out how he was going to get around his pile of lies and garbage which he himself has produced in this thread based on his phony concocted chronology which also required him to call Stephen a liar. S-word never actually understood the context of the passage he has twisted for his own use. Abram was not the firstborn; however Haran the firstborn died before his father Terah, and thus, his name is written last in the text instead of first. There is also precedent for the names not always being in the correct order, (for example Shem, Ham, and Japheth). S-word has assumed that Abram, Nahor, and Haran were triplets, all the same age, all begotten when Terah was at the age of seventy. However the text does not actually plainly state what S-word has assumed. :chuckle:

If you truly knew anything about chronology, and how such things must first and foremost be understood by way of reading comprehension, you would know the problems with some of the statements made about Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Shem was not the firstborn even though his name is always mentioned first in the genealogies when all three names are mentioned:

Genesis 5:32 KJV
32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 6:10 KJV
10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 10:21 KJV
21 Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, even to him were children born.

Genesis 11:10 KJV
10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:

If indeed Shem, Ham, and Japeth were all born in the exact year that Noah was five hundred years old then how is it that Shem is one hundred years old and begets Arphaxad TWO YEARS after the flood? The flood occurred in the sixth hundredth year of the life of Noah:

Genesis 7:11-13 KJV
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

It therefore means that not only was Shem not the firstborn; but the words for birthing or begetting are not fully communicated into English and rather mean that Noah began to produce children in the five hundredth year of his life, those offspring being Shem, Ham, and Japeth, but not necessarily in that order and not necessarily all in that same year or all at the very same time. Shem was one hundred years of age two years after the flood when he begat Arphaxad. If indeed you believe the scripture then you have no way around what I have presented here because that is what the scripture says. The only place where there is any wiggle room is to say, as I have said, that the words used for begetting are not fully communicated into English as to full meaning and usage in some of these critical passages. The passages, statements, and contexts quoted above herein must by default mean that Noah began to beget children in his five hundredth year, (not that all three were born in his five hundredth year).

The very same thing is therefore true of the three sons of Terah: Terah began to produce children in his seventieth year, and he produced Abram, Nahor, and Haran, but again not necessarily in that order because the text and context plainly tells us that Haran died before his father in Ur of the Chaldees. This therefore, if only you understood typology, is the same old typology of the firstborn son of perdition which runs throughout the entire scripture, which you clearly do not understand: for Ur also means FURNACE, and therefore Haran died in the FURNACE of the Chaldees because he is the typological firstborn son of perdition. The same runs through the seed which follows by way of Abram whose name was changed to Abraham, that is, "Ishmael -vs- Isaac", "Esau -vs- Jacob", "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated", "the flesh -vs- the Spirit", as even Paul speaks much about in symbolism and typology. It is allegory, symbolism, and typology, and all fits together perfectly; while your twofold double-blind Bar-Timaeus understanding forces the scripture into a lie and forces you to call Luke, Paul, Stephen, and the Holy Spirit, all liars. There is no more deceived person than yourself because you claim to "see" but do not understand what you claim you see from the scripture. Your champion who taught you what you claim to know is the liar, and that is plain as day for all to see because your champion told you that Stephen is a liar, because your champion is a liar; you are listening to the voice of your firstborn son of perdition, (testimony is spirit). :chuckle:

 

[daqq]

This therefore, if only you understood typology, is the same old typology of the firstborn son of perdition which runs throughout the entire scripture, which you clearly do not understand: for Ur also means FURNACE, and therefore Haran died in the FURNACE of the Chaldees because he is the typological firstborn son of perdition. The same runs through the seed which follows by way of Abram whose name was changed to Abraham, that is, "Ishmael -vs- Isaac", "Esau -vs- Jacob", "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated", and the typology begins with "Cain -vs- Abel", and concerns "the flesh -vs- the Spirit", as even Paul speaks much about in symbolism and typology. It is allegory, symbolism, and typology, and all fits together perfectly; while your twofold double-blind Bar-Timaeus understanding forces the scripture into a lie and forces you to call Luke, Paul, Stephen, and the Holy Spirit, all liars. There is no more deceived person than yourself because you claim to "see" but do not understand what you claim you see from the scripture. Your champion who taught you what you claim to know is the liar, and that is plain as day for all to see because your champion told you that Stephen is a liar, because your champion is a liar; you are listening to the voice of your firstborn son of perdition, (testimony is spirit).

Translate all that into modern day English and I might even read what you are trying to say.

It is astounding how many are willing to lie to themselves; telling themselves that the discussions which happen here are meaningless and having no impact on our doctrines or what we believe concerning the scripture.

Abraham had quite a history with furnaces, didn't he? In the Midrash, Nimrod threw him into one. And there's this story in Jubilees.

Also, speaking of alternate vowel pointings, UR (the proper name of Abram's birthplace) with a different vowel pointing means... furnace.

I was just looking at this again, and checked in the LXX, and noticed that in the LXX they rendered χωρα-χωρας in the place of Ur, which as you probably already know is typically understood in modern times as country, region, space, territory, land, and so on:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX Brenton Translation
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land in which he was born, in the country [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

The two places where we see "country", (χωρα), and "land", (χωρας), in the above passage are the same two places where Ur appears in the Hebrew text. What is going on here? It appears they are rendering Ur/Or with a word that may actually means both country and furnace at the same time, and thus, if this is so, then the rendering would be ingenious in that it might be read either way. If you look at the etymology of the name of the city Chorazin you will find that some lexicons state that the name of the city means "furnace of smoke", (G5523), which they get from one of the Hebrew words for furnace and the word for smoke, (Gen 15:17 - עשן).

כור - Deuteronomy 4:20 - 1 Kings 8:51 - Isaiah 48:10
כור - Kor - Kwr - Chor (χορ) - Chwra? (χωρα)?

χοραζιν = "furnace of smoke"
χορα (כור) + `ζιν (עשן) = עשן + כור
χοραζιν = כורעשן (silent `ayin = χορα-`ζιν)

So the following may also be an acceptable reading:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land [γη] in which he was born, in the furnace [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land-furnace [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land [γη] of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

Yeah, Haran the "son of perdition" died in the furnace, that is, Ur, of the Chaldees.

:sheep:

 

[Tambora]

l he died at the age of 205, which was some sixty years after God had moved his son Abraham into the Land of Canaan

Nope.
Abe was 75 years old when he left Haran for Canaan after his father died in Haran.


Genesis 11:31-32 through 12:1-4 KJV
(31) And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
(32) And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.
(1) Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
(2) And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
(3) And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
(4) So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

 

[daqq]

Nope.
Abe was 75 years old when he left Haran for Canaan after his father died in Haran.


Genesis 11:31-32 through 12:1-4 KJV
(31) And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
(32) And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.
(1) Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
(2) And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
(3) And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
(4) So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

Yep, and he refuses to see it because of his precious chronology. If you count back from the plain truth of what you have shown by the scripture then you have 205 years, (the age of Terah at his death), subtract 75 years, (the age of Abram when Terah died) which is 130 years, (the age of Terah when Abram was born). And therefore Abram was not the firstborn of Terah as already shown. It is fairly plain by the fact that Abram's brother Nahor married the daughter of their older brother Haran, who died before their father Terah: this fact taken straight from the passage implies that Haran was older than his brothers Abram and Nahor because Nahor married the daughter of Haran.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Yep, and he refuses to see it because of his precious chronology. If you count back from the plain truth of what you have shown by the scripture then you have 205 years, (the age of Terah at his death), subtract 75 years, (the age of Abram when Terah died) which is 130 years, (the age of Terah when Abram was born). And therefore Abram was not the firstborn of Terah as already shown. It is fairly plain by the fact that Abram's brother Nahor married the daughter of their older brother Haran, who died before their father Terah: this fact taken straight from the passage implies that Haran was older than his brothers Abram and Nahor because Nahor married the daughter of Haran.

One of these days I'll learn to stop putting my foot in my mouth. :shut: :chuckle:

 

[daqq]

One of these days I'll learn to stop putting my foot in my mouth. :shut: :chuckle:

Lol, well, if you mean the type-o it was my fault anyway, so I just figured it must have been the Will, and so I went with the flow since my will was clearly overridden. :shut:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Lol, well, if you mean the type-o it was my fault anyway, so I just figured it must have been the Will, and so I went with the flow since my will was clearly overridden. :shut:

No, I meant my post about the dead burying their dead.

While clever it didn't solve the dilemma.

Oh and thanks for going with the flow.

Best laid plans of mice and men.

I appreciate the answer you rendered.

 

[S-word]

If you truly knew anything about chronology, and how such things must first and foremost be understood by way of reading comprehension, you would know the problems with some of the statements made about Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Shem was not the firstborn even though his name is always mentioned first in the genealogies when all three names are mentioned:

Genesis 5:32 KJV
32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 6:10 KJV
10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 10:21 KJV
21 Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, even to him were children born.

Genesis 11:10 KJV
10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:

If indeed Shem, Ham, and Japeth were all born in the exact year that Noah was five hundred years old then how is it that Shem is one hundred years old and begets Arphaxad TWO YEARS after the flood? The flood occurred in the sixth hundredth year of the life of Noah:

Genesis 7:11-13 KJV
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

It therefore means that not only was Shem not the firstborn; but the words for birthing or begetting are not fully communicated into English and rather mean that Noah began to produce children in the five hundredth year of his life, those offspring being Shem, Ham, and Japeth, but not necessarily in that order and not necessarily all in that same year or all at the very same time. Shem was one hundred years of age two years after the flood when he begat Arphaxad. If indeed you believe the scripture then you have no way around what I have presented here because that is what the scripture says. The only place where there is any wiggle room is to say, as I have said, that the words used for begetting are not fully communicated into English as to full meaning and usage in some of these critical passages. The passages, statements, and contexts quoted above herein must by default mean that Noah began to beget children in his five hundredth year, (not that all three were born in his five hundredth year).

The very same thing is therefore true of the three sons of Terah: Terah began to produce children in his seventieth year, and he produced Abram, Nahor, and Haran, but again not necessarily in that order because the text and context plainly tells us that Haran died before his father in Ur of the Chaldees. This therefore, if only you understood typology, is the same old typology of the firstborn son of perdition which runs throughout the entire scripture, which you clearly do not understand: for Ur also means FURNACE, and therefore Haran died in the FURNACE of the Chaldees because he is the typological firstborn son of perdition. The same runs through the seed which follows by way of Abram whose name was changed to Abraham, that is, "Ishmael -vs- Isaac", "Esau -vs- Jacob", "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated", "the flesh -vs- the Spirit", as even Paul speaks much about in symbolism and typology. It is allegory, symbolism, and typology, and all fits together perfectly; while your twofold double-blind Bar-Timaeus understanding forces the scripture into a lie and forces you to call Luke, Paul, Stephen, and the Holy Spirit, all liars. There is no more deceived person than yourself because you claim to "see" but do not understand what you claim you see from the scripture. Your champion who taught you what you claim to know is the liar, and that is plain as day for all to see because your champion told you that Stephen is a liar, because your champion is a liar; you are listening to the voice of your firstborn son of perdition, (testimony is spirit). :chuckle:

Dagg wrote--------------No body writes anything for me unless I quote their words and make it plain that such words are not my own. However, you are correct about one thing: the One who showed me those particular things which you quoted from my words is indeed my Champion.

S-word------------Well, like yourself, your champion certainly didn’t know what he was talking about.

Dagg wrote------------I hope everyone can see what just happened here: S-word finally understood what was being said in the last few pages. And when he went back through the clues that were given he found what I said to Patrick. Then it probably was that he took a day off to figure out how he was going to get around his pile of lies and garbage which he himself has produced in this thread based on his phony concocted chronology which also required him to call Stephen a liar.

S-word------------Wrong again dagg. The reason I have taken so long to get back to you, is because I live on a twenty five acrea block right on the coast, and we were evacuated owing to a massive cyclone named Debbie and the tidal surges that she brought with her.

Even now we have no internet coverage, and I’m writting this in my documents and will post it when I am able to get on the net.

Dagg wrote-------------S-word never actually understood the context of the passage he has twisted for his own use. Abram was not the firstborn; however Haran the firstborn died before his father Terah, and thus, his name is written last in the text instead of first.

S-word------------From the book of Jubilees Chapter 11 verse 14; [1870 A.M.] Terah took to himself a wife, and her name was ’Edna, the daughter of ’Abram, the daughter of his father’s sister. And in the seventh year of this week [1876 A.M.] she bare him a son, and he called his name Abram, 15 by the name of the father of his mother; for he had died before his daughter had conceived a son.

According to the scriptures from which Jesus and the Apostles quoted, Abraham was the first born son of Terah and his wife Edna, who named her first born son after her dead father.

Please reveal the scriptures, which you claim, state that Haran was the first born of the 70 year old Terah and the riduculous statement that Abraham was not born until Terah was 135. You cannot, because no such scripture exists.

dagg wrote------------There is also precedent for the names not always being in the correct order, (for example Shem, Ham, and Japheth). S-word has assumed that Abram, Nahor, and Haran were triplets, all the same age, all begotten when Terah was at the age of seventy. However the text does not actually plainly state what S-word has assumed.

S-word------------It was your champion who believed that Abraham and Nahor were the same age, suggesting that they were twins. I simply asked the question, “if he believed that, why didn’t he take it one step further and claim that Abraham, Nahor and Haran were triplets.”

I then went one to show that Abraham was married four years before Haran was married, and suggested that surely the eldest son would be the first to marry.

Didn’t you read that, or as usual, were you simply incapable of comprehending that which you had read?

Dagg wrote------------If you truly knew anything about chronology, and how such things must first and foremost be understood by way of reading comprehension, you would know the problems with some of the statements made about Shem, Ham, and Japeth. Shem was not the firstborn even though his name is always mentioned first in the genealogies when all three names are mentioned:

I have already stated in one of my posts somewhere, that Ham, who was born when Noah was 500, was the first born, and that he lost the rights and the blessing of first born, when his son Canaan, the youngest descendant of Noah at that time, sodomised his grandfather as he lay naked in his tent in a drunken stupor. I also pointed out in the same post that Japheth was the younger brother of Shem, and that Shem was born when Noah was 502.

dagg wrote------------Genesis 5:32 KJV 32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

S-word-----------When the KJV was revised, that was changed to, “’AFTER’ Noah was 500, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth.

That will do for now. Having proved from scripture that Abraham was born when his father Terah was 70, and not 135, as you and your champion would have everyone believe, in your futile attempt to prove the book of Genesis wrong and the words of Stephen correct.

But as revealed in scripture, Abraham was born when Terah was 70, he moved into the land of Canaan when he was 75 and his father died in Haran at the age of 205, 60 years after his son Abraham had left him, and not after his father had died, as said by Stephen, who like yourself and your champion, was ignorant to the Holy scriptures, which state that Edna the wife of Terah gave birth to Abraham, when Terah was 70 years of age.

Because of the cyclone, there are fallen trees all over my block, and now that the wind is settling down, have to be cut up and carted away, especially one massive black butt ash, which has fallen over the road, so, I have not the time right now, to waste on biblical ignoramuses, who attempt to twist and distort the scriptures to their own destruction.

I will post this when we come back on line, and perhaps tonight I may be able, to return and sort out any other rubbish that you post in your attempt to save face, and thereby embarrass you even more than you have been embarrassed so far.

 

[Wick Stick]

WAS MARY REALLY A VIRGIN?"Yes! Right up until the act by which she conceived her firstborn son Jesus, who was sired by Joseph ben Heli."

Isaiah 7: 14; Jewish Translation: Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, "THE YOUNG WOMAN" is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel."

Isaiah 7: 14; ERRONEOUS King James Translation: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the "VIRGIN" shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel."

The Greek word Parthenos used in Matthew 1:23 ; is ambiguous but the Hebrew term "Almah" that is erroneously translated in some Christian bibles as "virgin" is absolute, and according to Young"s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, the Hebrew term "Almah," carries the meaning, (Concealment---unmarried female.)"

Go to "A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature," by David Jeffery."
There you will find written, "Many scholars consider the new Revised Standard Version of the King James translation, which is probably the most widely used version of the English bible today, and considered by most modern scholars to be to be the most accurate translation of the Old Testament. It follows the modern consensus in translating "Almah" as "Young Woman" in Isaiah 7: 14."

In 1973, an ecumenical edition of RSV was approved by both Protestant and Catholic hierarchies, called the common bible. As a matter of fact, I have in front of me, A New English Translation of the Bible, published in 1970 and approved by the council of churches in England, Scotland, Wales, the Irish council of churches, the London Society of Friends, and the Methodist and Presbyterian churches of England. And what do we read in Isaiah 7: 14; "A young Woman is with child, and she will bear a son." I also have before me The Good News Bible, catholic Study Edition, with imprimatur by Archbishop John Whealon: and on turning to Isaiah 7: 14; It says here, "A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc."" The catholic church now admit that Isaiah never did say that a "VIRGIN" would conceive and bear a son, etc.

In translating the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an "Almah" an "unmarried female" is with child and will bear a son," into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for "virgin," the authors of the Septuagint and Matthew correctly used the Greek word "Parthenos," which carries a basic meaning of "girl," or unmarried youth, and denotes "virgin" only by implication."

When Mary, the young "PARTHENOS=UNMARRIED FEMALE" said that she had never known a man, The implication was, that she was still a virgin at that particular time, until 3 to 4 months later when she became pregnant to her half Brother, Joseph the son Alexander Helios/Heli.

A more accurate rendering of the Greek "parthenos" is a person who does not have a regular sexual partner, a widow with a family of children, would be a "parthenos"."

In reference to Hanna/Anna the mother of Mary, who nursed the baby Jesus before Mary performed the ceremony of purification, it is said that Anna was a prophetess who earnestly hoped for the coming of the Messiah, she was an old woman of 84 and had been a widow for seven years, never remarrying, but remaining in her parthenia="Unmarried and sexually chaste state, ect." She was a parthenos, but no way in the world does that mean that she was a virgin."

To translate something from the Hebrew to the Greek, or from any language to another, one must not lose the essence of the original, and the original was, that "A young woman was with child. "Therefore, as the greater majority of churches now admit, that the words of Isaiah, were, "A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc." Matthew 1: 23; should now read, "Now all this happened to make come true "WHAT THE LORD HAD SAID THROUGH ISAIAH," "A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc." Because they all now admit that those were the words of Isaiah 7: 14."

The Septuagint was a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek, by Hebrews in Alexandria, LONG before the days of Jesus and they like Matthew, were forced to use the Greek term, "Parthenos" in translating the Hebrew "Almah" Because there was no other word in that Language that they could use for maiden, or young girl, etc."

"Parthenos," was often used in reference to non-virgins who had never been married. Homer uses it in reference to unmarried girls who were no longer virgins, and Homer was the standard textbook for learning Greek all throughout antiquity, so any writer of Greek, including Matthew, who translated Isaiah"s words, that (An unmarried woman would be with child etc) while being well aware of this words versatile and indefinite meaning; was in no way implying that Mary was a virgin."

For the Hebrew has a specific term for "virgin," "Bethulah" which word is used in every instance in the Old Testament where a woman who has never had sexual intercourse with a man is referred to, which word, 'BETHULAH' Isaiah would have used, if it was the Lords intention to convey the message that a bethulah/virgin would bear a child, which is obviously not the case with the unmarried woman/Almah, who is mentioned in Isaiah 7:14."

In Pergamos, as one of the final stages in the quest for enlightenment, the initiated adept would participate in sex with the Temple Virgin/Parthenos."

"Parthenos" did not mean possessing an intact hymen. A parthenos was simply an unmarried woman, a woman who claimed ownership of herself."

Both Alma and Parthenos refer to a veiled woman.

If you check historical usage of the words, you will find that they refer to (a) unmarried women who literally cover their faces, OR (b) women who attend temples.

From antiquity, women who attended temples were "married" to the god, and thus did not take husbands (as nuns, even to this day). This does not mean they were physically virgins. In many cases, the temple was dedicated to some licentious deity whose worship involved ritual prostitution, as in the Pergamos cult that you mentioned.

In the Biblical case, I believe what is indicated is that Mary was attached to the service of the Jewish temple. Extra-Biblical sources seem to indicate that she was a seamstress whose service in the temple had to do with the weaving/sewing of the temple veils. Which brings us back to "veiled woman."

In Isaiah, the scandal is that the prophet impregnates one of the women attending the temple - a woman who was meant to be permanently betrothed to God.

 

[Wick Stick]

1Timothy 1:4 seems relevant to this thread.

Why argue over the genealogies? They aren't accurate. The ages given are different in different manuscripts of the Scriptures, a product of pious forgery.

While we're at it, all the translations giving us lengths of time in "years" purport themselves to come from a time when the tribes didn't even measure solar years. Either they are written far later than believed, or they refer to some period other than solar years. I tend to believe that latter (which also solves the difficulty of men living to be 900+ years old).

-Jarrod

 

[S-word]

Both Alma and Parthenos refer to a veiled woman.

If you check historical usage of the words, you will find that they refer to (a) unmarried women who literally cover their faces, OR (b) women who attend temples.

From antiquity, women who attended temples were "married" to the god, and thus did not take husbands (as nuns, even to this day). This does not mean they were physically virgins. In many cases, the temple was dedicated to some licentious deity whose worship involved ritual prostitution, as in the Pergamos cult that you mentioned.

In the Biblical case, I believe what is indicated is that Mary was attached to the service of the Jewish temple. Extra-Biblical sources seem to indicate that she was a seamstress whose service in the temple had to do with the weaving/sewing of the temple veils. Which brings us back to "veiled woman."

In Isaiah, the scandal is that the prophet impregnates one of the women attending the temple - a woman who was meant to be permanently betrothed to God.

According to the flesh, Jesus is the biological son of Mary and her half brother Joseph, who were both sired by Alexander Helios/Heli.

 

[Wick Stick]

According to the flesh, Jesus is the biological son of Mary and her half brother Joseph, who were both sired by Alexander Helios/Heli.

Well that's a fun assertion. You have any kind of evidence to back that up, other than the obvious similarity between Heli and Helios?

 

[S-word]

Well that's a fun assertion. You have any kind of evidence to back that up, other than the obvious similarity between Heli and Helios?

The Ancestors of Jesus in First and Second Century Judea BCE
By Robert Mock M.D.
December 2007
Book One
Chapter Two
This young maiden, Miriam, was a child of sorrow. Her father, Heli, a Davidic and Hasmonean prince, called Alexander Helios III”, was apparently executed, in the world where many Davidian aspirants, as the “young lions of Judah”, were eliminated by the cruel and tyrannical King Herod the Great., Etc.

A son of the famous Boethus family of seven sons, Mary’s great-great-great grandfather, arrived into Jewish history as one of the giants of the priests of the House of Zadok. The High Priest Hananeel (Ananelus) the Egyptian/Jew was privileged to sacrifice one of the nine red heifers before the temple of Herod was destroyed in 70 AD.

The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC. The sonless Yehoshua, had three elderly daughters, Joanna, Elizabeth and Anna/Hanna, whose mother was ‘Phanul’ from the tribe of Asher.

These elderly daughters had lived their lives in the precincts of the temple, and were seen as prophetess'.

Knowing that his Zadokian lineage would become extinct unless his daughters were placed with future husbands according to the Torah, he married them off to chosen husbands.

Joanna, was betrothed to Joachim from the non-royal genetic lineage of David. The second daughter of Yehoshua III, was Elizabeth. This was the Elizabeth, who, at a very advanced age was to become the mother of John the Baptist in 7 BC, some 16 years after the death of her father in 23 BC, and she was betrothed to a Levite priest by the name Zacharias of the priestly course of Abijah.

Hanna/Anna, the third daughter, was betrothed to Alexander Helios (Heli) a young Macedonian Jew, of the tribe of Judah through Nathan the Levite, who was the stepson of King David. Alexander Helios [Heli] is thought by some, to be the twin brother of Herod’s young Jewish wife Cleopatra, a Macedonian Jewess, perhaps the twin children of Queen Cleopatra and Mark Antony, who were adopted out when their parents committed suicide after losing their war against Caesar Augustus.

Alexander Helios=Heli, the biological grand-father of Jesus, according to the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in Luke, was a descendant of Nathan the prophet who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite.

Uriah became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-Edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah an Ethiopian woman, [See Numbers 12: 1; KJV] who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, [See Judges 4: 11.]*

The pregnancy of the aged Elizabeth, who gave birth to John the Baptist in 7 BC was seen as a miracle, Elizabeth, was the sister of Hannah who gave birth to Mary when she was 70 years old, was 84 when her 14 year old daughter Mary, gave birth to Jesus in 6 BC. Hannah, whose husband Heli, who had been murdered at Herod's command in 13 BC, had been a widow for 7 years when Jesus was born.

That will do for now.

 

[Wick Stick]

The Ancestors of Jesus in First and Second Century Judea BCE
By Robert Mock M.D.
December 2007
Book One
Chapter Two
This young maiden, Miriam...

Ah... a modern "reconstruction."

It's a fine job of cobbling things together, but like most reconstructions, it seems to ignore primary sources.

The historian Cassius Dio recorded that Alexander Helios (and his twin sister) were captured by Octavian in Egypt while still children, carried back to Rome and paraded through the streets, given to an elder relative to raise, educated in Rome, and the sister married off politically to a minor king in what is now Liberia.

This fable your author weaves about him living and siring children in Judea prior to that time is, well.. .a fable. Real history precludes the possibility that "Heli" is the same person as Alexander Helios.

 

[daqq]

Ah... a modern "reconstruction."

It's a fine job of cobbling things together, but like most reconstructions, it seems to ignore primary sources.

The historian Cassius Dio recorded that Alexander Helios (and his twin sister) were captured by Octavian in Egypt while still children, carried back to Rome and paraded through the streets, given to an elder relative to raise, educated in Rome, and the sister married off politically to a minor king in what is now Liberia.

This fable your author weaves about him living and siring children in Judea prior to that time is, well.. .a fable. Real history precludes the possibility that "Heli" is the same person as Alexander Helios.

He will likely come back with something on the order of, "I said Alexander Helios III", because of course that makes the weave even more fantasmagorical. There is one main, (popular), site spreading this yarn online, (biblesearchers-dividian-dynasty).

---

Ηλι Ηλι λαμα σαβαχθανι