The Undiscovered Christ

[Dave L]

You seem to be a bi tter and closed off man. I feel bad for you. Where is your jo y in the Spirit? What have you faced that has made you this sour? I'm all ears if you want to share. Let us try to help you.

Thanks for your concern. But I'm pretty happy overall.

 

[APAK]

As @Dave L says, folks do take liberties with their translations, and even more.

Whether it is in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic. I speak a few languages, well honesty only one fluently. If I spoke say in Polish then translated this into French then into English, man can I have really missed the mark. The expression, sayings, and the used of key words might not translate exactly from one language into another. And then we get words of nonsense. Or words we want it to say, not that it is correct.

Let’s look at this video clip again.

Now with a little time, this is what I can concoct:

Adam – (red)man

Seth – appointed – made – created - called

Enosh – (a) human being – mortal

Kenan – same as Cain – possession - who had - with

Mahalalel – praise of God – surrender to God – to release

Jared – decline – go down – descend - humbled

Enoch – dedicated - devoted

Methuselah – when he is dead it shall be sent – man with a mission – a man sent – missionary

Lamech – powerful – wild man – young man – to – towards

Noah – rest – settle down – guide – lead – peace



Voila..One of many of my statements:

A male human being dedicated to God and having the praise of God humbled himself, sent on a mission for peace.


Blessings,

APAK

 

[Helen]

As @Dave L says, folks do take liberties with their translations, and even more.

Whether it is in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic. I speak a few languages, well honesty only one fluently. If I spoke say in Polish then translated this into French then into English, man can I have really missed the mark. The expression, sayings, and the used of key words might not translate exactly from one language into another. And then we get words of nonsense. Or words we want it to say, not that it is correct.

Let’s look at this video clip again.

Now with a little time, this is what I can concoct:

Adam – (red)man

Seth – appointed – made – created - called

Enosh – (a) human being – mortal

Kenan – same as Cain – possession - who had - with

Mahalalel – praise of God – surrender to God – to release

Jared – decline – go down – descend - humbled

Enoch – dedicated - devoted

Methuselah – when he is dead it shall be sent – man with a mission – a man sent – missionary

Lamech – powerful – wild man – young man – to – towards

Noah – rest – settle down – guide – lead – peace



Voila..One of many of my statements:

A male human being dedicated to God and having the praise of God humbled himself, sent on a mission for peace.


Blessings,

APAK

There is always a party pooper somewhere..

But bless you anyway. x

 

[Dave L]

There is always a party pooper somewhere..

But bless you anyway. x

Just sayin' we need to be careful listening to those who "Rorschach" the scriptures.

 

[Nancy]

There is always a party pooper somewhere..

But bless you anyway. x

IMHO-there is still nothing that can be proven wrong within the name interpretations Mr. Misler quoted. God rest his soul...he passed earlier this year.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Just sayin' we need to be careful listening to those who "Rorschach" the scriptures.

I don't believe that's what the man did in the video.

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't believe that's what the man did in the video.

i guess everyone Rorschach's the Scriptures anyway, but names obv had meanings to them; not quite getting Dave's objection there tbh

 

[Dave L]

I don't believe that's what the man did in the video.

I though it was interesting, but why not just read what it says instead of adding to God's words?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I though it was interesting, but why not just read what it says instead of adding to God's words?

God Himself spoke often, through the prophets, on what names mean. I think it's a valid thing therefore, to look into and examine. I get that you have an object tion to it, though I still don't understand why...maybe because of the excesses of certain men?

You remind me a bit of Tolstoy, who wrote The Gospel in Brief, in which he removed any part or parable he felt men had abused, or could abuse...

Your objection to looking up hebre w definitions of names has been noted. We've all seen nutso abuses and flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants interpretations. But it's not really a great reason to not study and examine the hebre w in my opinion.

Have a good day! ☺

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't believe looking up something in the original hebre w is adding to God's word.

 

[Dave L]

God Himself spoke often, through the prophets, on what names mean. I think it's a valid thing therefore, to look into and examine. I get that you have an object tion to it, though I still don't understand why...maybe because of the excesses of certain men?

You remind me a bit of Tolstoy, who wrote The Gospel in Brief, in which he removed any part or parable he felt men had abused, or could abuse...

Your objection to looking up hebre w definitions of names has been noted. We've all seen nutso abuses and flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants interpretations. But it's not really a great reason to not study and examine the hebre w in my opinion.

Have a good day! ☺

We are adding to God's word when we make it say other than what it says. And the passages CM uses don't say what he alludes to.

 

[bbyrd009]

We are adding to God's word when we make it say other than what it says. And the passages CM uses don't say what he alludes to.

how would you prove this, bc you will need to i guess

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Th

We are adding to God's word when we make it say other than what it says. And the passages CM uses don't say what he alludes to.

The entire outline of the bible, our story, succinctly told, just in the names of the first generations, is a marvel to some of us. It's okay that it isn't to you. Men will marvel over what they marvel over. Others won't be impressed. That's okay.

 

[Dave L]

how would you prove this, bc you will need to i guess

Where do the passages Chuck uses, say what he makes them to say?

 

[Dave L]

Th


The entire outline of the bible, our story, succinctly told, just in the names of the first generations, is a marvel to some of us. It's okay that it isn't to you. Men will marvel over what they marvel over. Others won't be impressed. That's okay.

Faith comes from hearing the word, not Chuck.

 

[bbyrd009]

Where do the passages Chuck uses, say what he makes them to say?

they are provided in the video, and the etymology of the names can be looked up in several places? Where they are not sure they are usually pretty open about saying so

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Where do the passages Chuck uses, say what he makes them to say?[/QUOTE/]
He wasn't saying the passage said what the names spell out. It's clearly a dry geneology. He was pointing out the meaning of the names in Hebrew. You are an exhausting man.

 

[Dave L]

But he's stringing them together in a way scripture does not. And besides, the area of meaning is broad in word translation so using his technique, you can come up with several variations.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

All I have left for you is a big fat raspberry.
I don't have time for this argument. It's silly to me. ☺

 

[stunnedbygrace]

And the point is that the meanings DO seem to outline our story in the generations. I'm moving along now. ☺