ReXteryalizerUri Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [font="Arial Black"][size="4"]Jesus never asked anyone to care for mary......MARYS SON...took her on Home..... THE Home was Probably the HOME Jesus lived in as a child. The home of Mary & her sons,, Jesus was out of his mind in agony on the cross SEEING his mother and brother he simply said look at your mother * look at your son. no one wrote a single word of the the origional GREEK BIBLE in Aramiac. OVER the cross was written in Hebrew, LATIN & GREEK KING OF JEWS No one spoke aramiac,,,,,,in dealing with the bible. Jesus did not speak aramiac,,, the disciples did not speak ARAMIAC,, ARAMIAC is a slang MIX....of arabic,,CHALDIAN with a tiny bit of hebrew,,,,,,root words, Hebrew being one of the oldest languages known... its root word structure is found in many languages.................ARAMIAC is a slang language that NO ONE speaks today.. there are no bibles in ARAMIAC,,,, there may be a couple old trashed useless UN READABLE scripts preserved of a couple chapters some threw together after the 4 th century. no one can read aramiac today SPEAKING aramiac,,,,,,AS THE SLANG it was back when the CHALDIAN & arabian worlds began mergin with the civilized world of Rome & The Jews. is useless..JESUS NEVER SPAKE A SINGLE WORD of aramiac,,,,THAT IS PROVABLE........discriptive,,,or RECORDED in a page of history,,,, IT IS what muslims & catholics use to muddle & confuse & JUSTIFY their LIES,,........... , THIS IS A CATHOLIC & ISLAMIC LIE to confuse & add confusion, extra flare to their bogus claims that change nothing but give people more lies to skirt around the FACTS.. OVER the cross was written in Hebrew, LATIN & GREEK KING OF JEWS IT WAS NOT written in aramiac,,,,,, NO ONE IN THE BIBLE spoke aramiac,,,,, THERE is no proof....of anyone of Jesus disciples speaking a word of aramiac,,, Just bec,,,,,,,,,a couple books of the bible have been translated many yrs after THE GREEK N T,.....was written Does not mean anything........but someone translated a couple books of the GOSPEL into another useless LANGUAGE.. WHY translate in aramiac..............who speaks aramiac........... NO ONE it is a forgotten slang.....garbage language.........that died the generation it was sprung in [/size][/font] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 You know what? This character just revealed something to me. Since pretty much every guy I've met wants my body, I figure I should just marry me some mens and get busy. Because hai secks is super fun lol and Jesus just wants us to seX it up. I think that was the central point of the Gospel. That's what the Bible says rite? Shhh I wanna hear what he has to say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReXteryalizerUri Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) [font="Arial Black"][size="4"][b]All of the original books of the New Testament came to us in Greek - (not the Greek of classical writers, but that of Hellenistic Greek - Greek speaking Jews).' Aramiac [/b]There is no modern aramaic, it's a dead language. People like to lie...pretending some backward civilization in the MID east is still speaking aramiac.. THIS is a lie,,,, there are SOME aramiac WORDS that are still used ARAMIAC is a slang COMBINATION jive language with many diferent STYLES & complex diverse ways to use it,,, Its just combining Some hebrew alphabet root words with THE PAGAN chaldian PAGAN arabian dialect.. There is no aramiac worth even diccussing ,, it is ueless THE BIBLE was written in Hebrew & GREEk JESUS had brothers & mary had children.. aramiac is not the language Jesus spoke,,,,or even probably knew... people who did not speak hebrew could learn a few hebrew root words & mix them with their chaldian & arabic.. THis was a way to comunicate,,,,,,,..... many of them disageed with how it was spoken.. THats Y no one speaks the forgotten language ARAMIAC the JOke catholics have played like a broken record on Gods word,,, to pervert it Luk 23:38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. aramiac and its,,,......worthless use is just a useless distraction CATHOLICS & muslims throw up in a last moment ditch attempt to divert the facts of the origional BIBLE they hate.. [/size][/font] Edited February 13, 2011 by ReXteryalizerUri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReXteryalizerUri Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) [b][font="Arial Black"][color="#2f4f4f"][size="4"]The HEBREW bible does in fact HAVE a way to discribe a COUSIN.... It does not have a Old Testament WORD just to sAY COUSIN...but if someone IN THE Old Testament HEBREW.......are COUSINS...... [/size][size="4"][color="#000000"]The bible has NO PROBLEM.......at all......... telling of this............ [/color][/size][/color][/font][/b][b][font="Arial Black"][size="4"][color="#000000"]Lev 25:49[/color][/size][/font][/b][size="4"][b][font="Arial Black"][color="#000000"] Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him [/color][/font][/b] [color="#000000"][b][font="Arial Black"]1Sa 14:50[/font][/b][b][font="Arial Black"] the name of the captain of his host [i]was[/i][/font][/b][/color][/size][size="4"][b][font="Arial Black"][color="#2f4f4f"][color="#0000ff"][color="#000000"] Abner, the son of Ner, Saul's uncle. [/color] [/color]Saul & Anbner were cousins,,,,,,,, The bible has no problem telling of this...THIS is through the entire HEBREW.. [size="4"][color="#008080"][size="4"][color="#008080"]Jer 32:9[/color][/size][/color][/size][size="4"][color="#000000"] And I bought the field of Hanameel my uncle's son,[/color] [/size][size="4"]Hanameel & [size="4"]Zedekiah are cousins... VERY CLEAR.... [/size][/size]Catholics are again LYING..... [color="#006400"]Again ....[/color][/color][/font][/b] [b][font="Arial Black"][color="#8b0000"]Jer 32:7[/color][/font][/b][/size][size="4"][b][font="Arial Black"][color="#8b0000"] Behold, Hanameel the son of Shallum thine uncle shall come unto thee, The King of Judah has a COUSIN.... [/color][/font][/b] [b][font="Arial Black"][color="#8b0000"]Jer 32:8[/color][/font][/b][/size][b][font="Arial Black"][color="#2f4f4f"][color="#006400"][size="4"][color="#8b0000"] So Hanameel mine uncle's son came to me.. [/color]His cousin came to HIm.... This is in the entire bible.. [/size][size="4"][color="#000000"]Catholics have a problem....with the bible............so they invent lies about the bible.......... ..such as there is no wording for cousin in the HEBREW therefore .... [/color]Jesus did not even have brothers because God screwed up writing the bible in hebrew then Greek then we found a sort of old faded looking aramiac text ... in the dust someone can barely read a word of it... So no one knows really for sure.. but hey we have all the answers,...... We have the corrections to the great VOID called the BIBLE... [/size][size="4"][color="#000000"][color="#8b0000"]Catholics really really need to write a Catholic BIBLE.. [/color] [color="#ff0000"]Because the Holy bible is the most anti~catholic BOOK ever written [/color] & God wrote it.....Muslims have their own BIBLE Catholics could write one & stop lying about Jesus,,,& his WORD.. [/color]WHAt are they saying... [/size][/color][size="4"]they dont have answer...........aramiac answers this becaue aramiac is a junk language That helps support junk science [/size][/color][/font][size="4"][size="4"] [size="4"][size="4"][size="5"]MARY & JOSEPH WERE MARRIED OLD TESTAMENT prophecy TELLS MARY has children... The aramiac is best......to believe BEC ... it has no word for cousin..so it proves something is wrong with Gods word... They dont like the ORIGIONAL greek version...or its message.... THEY will tell you anything............. . .they have hate.....for every single page of the TRUE BIBLE...[/size][/b] [/size][/size][/size][/size] Edited February 13, 2011 by ReXteryalizerUri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1297577585' post='2211894'] This has to be a bot. It just has to be. [/quote] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VCs4pPn98k&NR=1k[/media] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 two points. 1. scholars say that Jesus and his lot spoke Aramaic. who's going to believe some random dude who shows up to an internet forum without citing souces, that says that he didn't speak it? 2. even if he didn' speak it, Hebrew was the language that changed the way the bible was written. ""In the Septuagint the Hebrew word that includes both brothers and cousins was translated as adelphos, which in Greek usually has the narrow meaning that the English "brother" has. Unlike Hebrew or Aramaic, Greek has a separate word for cousin, anepsios, but the translators of the Septuagint used adelphos, even for true cousins." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 -the septunagint and even the dead sea scrolls were in hebrew. don't focus on how aramaic screwed up the translation, focus on how hebrew did. -about aramaic, even parts of the dead sea scrolls were written in it. if scholars and other evidence such as this show that it was used and matters, who is some random dude who can't complete sentences, lacks the ability to engage in constructive dialouge, etc, to say otherwise? -good way to go about ignoring when Jesus said 'behold your son' to John. trying to make it some nothing when it clearly says something. ive never seen such illogical footwork. and he wants to talk about respecting the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithLuin Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [quote] Jesus never asked anyone to care for mary......MARYS SON...took her on Home..... THE Home was Probably the HOME Jesus lived in as a child. The home of Mary & her sons,, Jesus was out of his mind in agony on the cross SEEING his mother and brother he simply said look at your mother * look at your son. [/quote] Interesting proposition. Funny how you say Catholics are ignoring and distorting the Bible...and yet...when what is written does not agree with what you say...any elaborate re-interpretation of [i]what is clearly there[/i] will do . While I will not argue the point that Jesus was in agony on the cross, I *will* argue (vehemently) that he was not 'out of his mind.' What Jesus spoke from the cross was true. [quote]Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," and to the disciple, "Here is your mother." From that time on, this disciple took her into his home. [i]John 19:25-27[/i][/quote] 'From that time' means that Mary did not live with this disciple prior to the crucifixion. The beloved disciple is of course John, and nowhere in scripture is there any indication that he was related to Jesus at all. Anyway, when are we going to move this thread to the debate table (or lock it), since clearly it is way off topic now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" Mark 6:2-3 - "And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, "Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands? "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" would they refer to cousins as if they mattered that much, though? and if the bible references brothers, that's one thing to get confused with cousins. but sister is pretty specific right? that contexttual argument is what this person argued: The primary argument against these biblical texts is as follows: In Greek, the word for brother is adelphos and sister is adelphe. This word is used in different contexts: of children of the same parents (Matt. 1:2; 14:3), descendants of parents (Acts 7:23, 26; Heb. 7:5), the Jews as a whole (Acts 3:17, 22), etc. Therefore, the term brother (and sister) can and does refer to the cousins of Jesus. There is certainly merit in this argument, However, different contexts give different meanings to words. It is not legitimate to say that because a word has a wide scope of meaning, that you may then transfer any part of that range of meaning to any other text that uses the word. In other words, just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in context to see what it means. Lets briefly analyze a couple of verses dealing with the brothers of Jesus. •Matthew 12:46-47, "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You." •Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" In both of these verses, if the brothers of Jesus are not brothers, but His cousins, then who is His mother and who is the carpenters father? In other words, mother here refers to Mary. The carpenter in Matt. 13:55, refers to Joseph. These are literal. Yet, the Catholic theologian will then stop there and say, "Though carpenters son refers to Joseph, and mother refers to Mary, brothers does not mean brothers, but "cousins." This does not seem to be a legitimate assertion. You cannot simply switch contextual meanings in the middle of a sentence unless it is obviously required. The context is clear. This verse is speaking of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus brothers. The whole context is of familial relationship: father, mother, and brothers. Edited February 13, 2011 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [quote]Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, "But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause." He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise." His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Thy house will consume me." Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted. To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9, "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. 9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me." The question is, "Was Jesus estranged by His brothers?". Yes, He was. John 7:5 says "For not even His brothers were believing in Him." Furthermore, Psalm 69:8 says both "my brothers" and "my mother's sons." Are these both to be understood as not referring to His siblings? Hardly. The Catholics are fond of saying that "brothers" must mean "cousins." But, if that is the case, then when we read "an alien to my mother's sons" we can see that the writer is adding a further distinction and narrowing the scope of meaning. In other words, Jesus was alienated by his siblings, His very half-brothers begotten from Mary.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 The psychological and anthropological reality of speaking and writing in a language of another culture is, however, more complex. I was able to witness it when I was living in Abidjan, the major city of the Ivory Coast, in West Africa. It is today a big city of about four million inhabitants that grew up in a zone originally scarcely populated. The sparse original population was not able to absorb the waves of immigrants coming from all over the former French colonies in West Africa. The only language all these people had in common was French, and French became thus the native language of Abidjan. In most native languages of West Africa, no distinction is made between a "brother" and a "cousin," whereas such a distinction exists in French. Nevertheless, the inhabitants of Abidjan, whose mother tongue is French, who have been raised and educated in French, continue to use the French word for "brother" when they speak of a "cousin." Using the French word for "cousin" would betray the way they envision social and family relationships. When the people of Abidjan want to specify that "brother" means a true blood sibling, they need to add "same father, same mother" (même père, même mère). Full siblings are a particular kind of brothers; they do not constitute the benchmark of brotherhood. The socio-cultural milieu of the authors of the New Testament is Judaism. So, we can accept the idea that, even if their text does not suppose a Hebrew or Aramaic substrate, in their use of Greek words they would naturally convey the way their own Judaic society and culture envision social and family relationships. We cannot make an argument ex silentio, but we can also observe that there are no “cousins” in the New Testament, except for one case. We find the word anepsios once, in Colossians 4:10. Most scholars today think that the Letter to the Colossians was not written by Paul, but probably by a disciple of his from the second generation of Christians with a Greek background. Otherwise, we find the word adelphos 343 times in the New Testament (and adelphê, "sister," 26 times), but no other “cousin.” The only family relationship that existed among people of a same generation in the New Testament seems to be brotherhood. Is it relevant, since we know that in Judaic society the inmost family group was not limited to the nuclear family as we know it in North America or in Europe? Other Greek words such as homopatôr ("half-brother by the father") or homomêtôr ("half-brother by the mother") are also not found in the New Testament. If the authors of the New Testament wanted to render the relationships within Jesus’ family as precisely as possible in Greek, they should have used such expressions since--and Matthew and Luke make it very clear--Jesus was not the true son of Joseph. If Jesus' "brothers" were sons of Mary, they would have been only Jesus' "half-brothers by the mother," and there was a Greek word for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeology cat Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [url="http://www.insidecatholic.com/feature/biblical-evidence-for-the-perpetual-virginity-of-mary.html"]Biblical Evidence for the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, by Mark Shea[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1297611476' post='2211945'] two points. 1. scholars say that Jesus and his lot spoke Aramaic. who's going to believe some random dude who shows up to an internet forum without citing souces, that says that he didn't speak it? [/quote] Teh part that defies my logic is that someone who can't even master the basics of English grammar with sufficient expertise to prevent Winchester from having a panic attack, expects us to believe that they are some kind of authority on ancient languages and their translations. Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 he won't even talk to me. I'm leaning more towards bot. He can't answer simple question. He fires off random sequences of letters and phrases that make no coherent sense. Dumb bots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReXteryalizerUri Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) [font="Arial Black"][size="4"]reX is quoting the BIBLE.....saying PAUL PETER and JESUS himself even from heaven SPAKE in hebrew The bible says HE SPAKE in hebrew.....from the heavens.. you dont read the bible ? none of the Dead sea scrolls ARAMIAC books are in your bible..... your church rejected these aramiac books.. WHY ? Bec they are full of lies......... and so far from reality.... they are considered evil and fake. CONTRADiCTING the whole bible.. You should read reXes posts instead of diverting the facts.....and Get some truth in your religion.. Then you can give up your crusade to write a catholic bible based on lies & junk history and lies about Gods word. [/size][/font] [font="Arial Black"][b][size="6"][color="#ff00ff"][/color][/size] [font="Arial Black"][/font] [/b][/font] Edited February 14, 2011 by ReXteryalizerUri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now