|
Post by frienduff on May 25, 2019 11:18:18 GMT -5
Look at Giller knocking it out of the park with some solid Biblical analysis. No hermeneutics required! For giller sees the FOREST and not the billions of trees .
Why o why vain men of the earth do we need the wisdom of men to discern what the SPIRIT itself INSPIRED . This angers wise men greatly . BUT OH WELL . For those who build in the house of the LORD , they know it cannot be built by the wisdom of men , FOR ITS THE LORD WHO BUILDS the HOUSE and the laborers seek ONLY HIM , HIS INSRUCTION given BY HIS SPIRIT .
It matters not how old the bible is , what matters is do we KNOW the ONE who inspired it . DO WE FOLLOW the ONE WHOM HE DID SEND . IF we do , then we do so by THE SPIRIT and if we have the SPIRIT then IT ALONE can and will give us all the knowledge, wisdom and understanding OF THE HOLY SCRIPS IT inspired .
Can men learn from GOD by their own carnal reasoning and wisdom . NOPE the carnal mind is enmity with GOD and the wisdom of this world HE Has made foolish. SO HOW or WHY on earth will and does any heed mens wisdom of hermes carnal intellect to try and grasp at WHAT GOD ALONE INSPIRED . I SAY , just walk in the SPIRIT and you will have as you need to know , wisdom as you need to have and understanding as you need to know . This highly angers men of renown to have their idol so mocked as I so mock it . But again , SO BE IT . FOLLOW CHRIST and HE ALONE shall provide as we have need .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 25, 2019 11:28:47 GMT -5
In the French King James, it calls the unicorn a licorne, and corne in french means horn. Is it any wonder why our English language is so influenced by both latin and French .
How do we THINK the saxon went from RUINIC to an alaphabet . LATIN letters ARE OUR ALAPHABET and thus we engrained latin words big time into our language . Then later on around the late eleventh century FRENCH became enamoured into our common tongue . FRENCH was the court language of ENGLAND . Oh but it was . I see French influence , which French itself stemmed from latin , in our language very heavy . Compare old English saxon to even middle English . Middle English underwent a massive change due to French influence .
Cwen . IS now QUEEN . and many other changes . UNICORN , simply means ONE HORN . The reason I even know this , was I went about to research our English history from root to stem to today . And on that note , I stand on what I already stood on by grace , long before I took this journey . THE KJV IS FULLY ACCURATE . IT always has been . They tried so hard to deceive us they did . they truly did , they say things like the translation got messed up in the English language as it grew and changed . OH but they LIE . I knew this of course by grace , long before I did the research . But the research only CONFIRMED what I already by grace knew . THAT IS , the KJV IS FULLY ACCURATE , its todays versions THAT AINT . ITS TODAYS versions that they have changed . the lie they built against the KJV , THEY DO THEMSELVES , it is they who change the meaning it is they who changed things . BUT WE DONT HEED THE THEY , LET US HEED ONLY THE SPIRIT .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 25, 2019 11:34:00 GMT -5
Men through their carnal wisdom have tried to make babel back into ONE , and instead have turned babel into scrabble . For the mind of men cannot undo what GOD has done . NOR can it understand the HOLY ONE . And the churches should never have turned unto the wisdom of men to discern ANYTHING from that bible. The moment men turn to men for wisdom , IS the moment they are doomed to failure and destruction .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 25, 2019 11:40:08 GMT -5
Just came back from bible studies with my uncle. He informed me that there are two species of Rhino's that have a single horn, so I was corrected there. We looked more into it and the unicorn is likened to a very strong animal, and most probably the Rhino. So my light-bulb moment turned out to be a sinking ship! I'm sharing to correct.
Job 39:9 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?
No, it's not like a dog who comes at our command and sleeps by our bed!
Job 39:10 Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
No, he will most likely try to kill you!
Psalms 92:10 But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.
Something good came out of this. Our horn is our connection to God. We hear him and he hears us. If we have a strong horn like the unicorn, we have a strong connection with God. Solid, unmovable.
Isaiah 34:7 And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
Speaking about the armies Christ will judge at his return (the winepress). The unicorns (the very strong) will come down with the bullocks and bulls (the other strong ones)
Good one Sister. OUR HORN IS OUR CONNECTION TO GOD . SPOT ON RIGHT . WHO IS OUR CONNECTION UNTO THE FATHER . THE SON IS . THATS RIGHT JESUS is OUR HORN and HE ALONE shall be exalted above all that is named as HE is in TRUTH already been given that name . And the lowly In Christ shall be exalted on HIS DAY as the high and mighty who rejected him are brought low and the lowly inherit the very earth the high ones tried to rid us from . The very snare they set for us , WILL take their own feet . But soon many lambs will die when the war hits its peak and the world as one has merged under the beast in the final hour battle , many saints will bleed . OH BUT WE WIN , FOR HE HAS WON . Whether in life or even in death , THE LAMBS GOT THE SONG OF VICTORY < FOR HE ALONE IS OUR VICOTRY . Hands up and praise the LORD and don't fear one thing that man can do to us .
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jul 15, 2019 13:00:08 GMT -5
Deuteronomy 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh. Notice (or research) the oddity in this verse - famous or infamous because in this verse the 're-em' has two horns (agreed by almost everyone - two horns, not one horn) .....
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 15, 2019 13:14:53 GMT -5
Deuteronomy 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh. Notice (or research) the oddity in this verse - famous or infamous because in this verse the 're-em' has two horns (agreed by almost everyone - two horns, not one horn) ..... This is not really a debate thread, and I just take it as written, unicorn, most likely a rhino with one horn.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jul 15, 2019 14:33:52 GMT -5
Notice (or research) the oddity in this verse - famous or infamous because in this verse the 're-em' has two horns (agreed by almost everyone - two horns, not one horn) ..... This is not really a debate thread, and I just take it as written, unicorn, most likely a rhino with one horn.
Almost no scholar agrees , (any kind of scholar, Biblical, historic, Greek, Hebrew or Jewish). Most likely agreed upon (most visited sites reporting) , "as written" , >> www.beliefnet.com/columnists/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/08/are-there-really-unicorns-in-the-king-james-bible.html"The original Hebrew is the word re’em. What was a re’em? Scholars cannot agree. In the late Jewish author and skeptic Isaac Asimov’s Guide to the Bible, he offers this: "“The Hebrew word represented in the King James Version by ‘unicorn’ is re’em, which undoubtedly refers to the wild ox (an urus or an aurochs) which is ancestral to the domesticated cattle of today. Re’em still flourished in early historical times and a few existed into modern times, although it is now extinct. It was a dangerous creature of great strength and was similar in form and temperament to Asian water buffaloes.” "Biblical scholar Bert Thompson, Ph.D., agrees. “When the first Greek translation of the Bible was prepared about 250 B.C., the re’em was already rare in the long-settled areas of the Near East. The Greeks, who had no direct experience with it, had no word for it.” " Read more at www.beliefnet.com/columnists/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/08/are-there-really-unicorns-in-the-king-james-bible.html#Rrl3PSExZto7BKPL.99
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 15, 2019 14:41:21 GMT -5
This is not really a debate thread, and I just take it as written, unicorn, most likely a rhino with one horn.
Almost no scholar agrees , (any kind of scholar, Biblical, historic, Greek, Hebrew or Jewish). Most likely agreed upon (most visited sites reporting) , "as written" , >> www.beliefnet.com/columnists/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/08/are-there-really-unicorns-in-the-king-james-bible.html"The original Hebrew is the word re’em. What was a re’em? Scholars cannot agree. In the late Jewish author and skeptic Isaac Asimov’s Guide to the Bible, he offers this: "“The Hebrew word represented in the King James Version by ‘unicorn’ is re’em, which undoubtedly refers to the wild ox (an urus or an aurochs) which is ancestral to the domesticated cattle of today. Re’em still flourished in early historical times and a few existed into modern times, although it is now extinct. It was a dangerous creature of great strength and was similar in form and temperament to Asian water buffaloes.” "Biblical scholar Bert Thompson, Ph.D., agrees. “When the first Greek translation of the Bible was prepared about 250 B.C., the re’em was already rare in the long-settled areas of the Near East. The Greeks, who had no direct experience with it, had no word for it.” " Read more at www.beliefnet.com/columnists/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/08/are-there-really-unicorns-in-the-king-james-bible.html#Rrl3PSExZto7BKPL.99 I am not concerned with the opinion of Biblical scholars. I am sticking with what my Bible says. If it says unicorn, it is a unicorn. As I said, this is not a debate thread. All we do here is post scriptures that use the word that is referenced.
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 15, 2019 14:45:36 GMT -5
I moved these last few posts to a debate discussion on unicorns. They were originally placed in a thread in the Fellowship area that was just a place to post verses, not debate.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jul 15, 2019 15:49:00 GMT -5
I can’t imagine the Bible would speak of unicorns in a positive way if they were freaks of nature. I think Cletus probably got it right about a rhino with one horn. It seems to fit.
"May 7, 2019 11:08:51 GMT -5 Cletus said: Personally I think unicorns are rhinos. I saw a video on a word study on this before. they took the word back thru time and it lead back thru many versions of dictionaries where it shows the word in the bible being traced back to being a rhino. a whole lot of researching had to be done going back, way way back. check it out:" The King James Translators might have had in mind, like others in the century they lived in and later, thought of musk-ox or auroch (which they would have known about at that time, and most people today never saw one as they went extinct) ... Rhino is still a possible candidate also, of course..... Re'em could be any of these, or another , and whatever it was, a re'em was a re'em ....... they (the translators) knew what a re'em was at the time, as re'ems apparently were still around in some places, (or did they guess?) .... =========================================== I didn't know how to quote quotes from this thread into the/ another thread, but if it fits better there, move it. Thx!
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 15, 2019 15:56:45 GMT -5
It is possible that what was called a unicorn still existed in 1611. Perhaps they still do in some remote areas.
|
|