Peter's Vision

[justbyfaith]

The fact that Jesus convinced Paul that there is nothing unclean of itself (Romans 14:14) does not make Him another elohim.

YHWH told Noah that every living thing that moved was there for him to eat.

The term "insects" can be seen to be an enumeration of animals that would be considered unclean by the dietary food laws; if that is even the accurate rendering of it in Genesis 9:3.

 

[HARK!]

YHWH told Noah that every living thing that moved was there for him to eat.

No he didn't.

 

[BreadOfLife]

He's talking about eating with unwashed hands against Pharisaic tradition, not a green light to go against his YHWH's law. If he did; he wouldn't pass the Deuteronomy 13 test.

Deuteronomy 13
CLV(i) 1 In case there arises a prophet or a dreamer of dreams among you, and he gives to you a sign or a miracle, 2 and the sign or the miracle comes about, of which he spoke to you, saying:Let us go after other elohim (whom you have not known), and let us serve them, 3 you shall not hearken to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams because Yahweh your Elohim is probing you to know whether you are loving Yahweh your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 After Yahweh your Elohim shall you go, and Him shall you fear; His instructions shall you observe, and to His voice shall you hearken; Him shall you serve, and to Him shall you cling. 5 Then that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death because he spoke of defection from Yahweh your Elohim (the One bringing you forth from the country of Egypt and the One ransoming you from the house of servants) so as to induce you from the way in which Yahweh your Elohim has instructed you to walk. Hence eradicate the evil from among you. 6 In case your brother, the son of your father, or the son of your mother or your son or your daughter or the wife of your bosom or your associate who is as your own soul should incite you in concealment, saying:Let us go, and let us serve other elohim (whom you have not known, you or your fathers, 7 of the elohim of the peoples who are around you, those near to you or those far from you, from one end of the land to the other end of the land). 8 neither shall you comply with him, nor shall you hearken to him; neither shall your eye commiserate over him, nor shall you spare him; and you shall not cover up for him. 9 For you shall kill, yea kill him. Your hand shall be among the first against him to put him to death, and the hand of all the people thereafter. 10 You will stone him with stones so that he dies, for he sought to induce you away from Yahweh your Elohim, the One bringing you forth from the country of Egypt, from the house of servants. 11 Thus all Israel shall hearken and fear, and they shall not again do anything like this evil thing among you. 12 In case you hear it said of one of your cities which Yahweh your Elohim is giving to you to dwell there, 13 that men, sons of decadence, have gone forth from among you and induced the dwellers of their city, saying:Let us go, and let us serve other elohim (whom you have not known), 14 then you will inquire, investigate and ask diligently. And behold, if the truth of the matter is being established that this abhorrence was done among you, 15 then you shall smite, yea smite the dwellers of that city with the edge of the sword. Doom it, all those who are in it and its domestic beasts, with the edge of the sword. 16 All its loot shall you get together to the middle of its square, and you will burn the city with fire and all its loot as a holocaust to Yahweh your Elohim. It will become an eonian barrow; it shall not be built again. 17 Nothing whatsoever shall cling to your hand from the doomed loot so that Yahweh may turn back from the heat of His anger and be compassionate to you. He will show you compassion and cause you to increase, just as He had sworn to your fathers, 18 provided that you shall hearken to the voice of Yahweh your Elohim to observe all His instructions which I am enjoining on you today, to do what is upright and good in the eyes of Yahweh your Elohim.

Your Scriptural ignorance is astounding.

Christ was not a mere "prophet". He is the FULFILLMENT of the Law (Matt. 5:17) - which trumps any argument you have against "false" prophets. The entire Law and ALL of its legalities point to HIM (Col. 2:16-17).

 

[justbyfaith]

No he didn't.

He did indeed (Genesis 9:3).

You are contending that the English rendering that we normally read is inaccurate.

I have already told you why this mentality is a cult-like mentality.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No he didn't.

Uhhhhh, YES, He did . . .

Gen. 9:3
You may eat any moving thing that lives. As I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

כל
kol
Pronunciation: kole kole
Definition: 1) all, the whole 1a) all, the whole of 1b) any, each, every, anything 1c) totality, everything
or (Jer. 33:8) kowl {kole}; from 3634; properly, the whole; hence, all, any or every (in the singular only, but often in a plural sense):-(in) all (manner, (ye)), altogether, any (manner), enough, every (one, place, thing), howsoever, as many as, (no-)thing, ought, whatsoever, (the) whole, whoso(-ever). see HEBREW for 03634
Part of Speech: noun masculine


רמשׁ
remes
1) creeping things, moving things, creeping organism 1a) creeping things 1b) gliding things (of sea animals) 1c) moving things (of all animals)
from 7430; a reptile or any other rapidly moving animal:-that creepeth, creeping (moving) thing. see HEBREW for 07430
Part of Speech: noun masculine collective

 

[HARK!]

You are contending that the English rendering that we normally read is inaccurate.

I have already told you why this mentality is a cult-like mentality.

I presented my proof on page 1. You obviously reject the proof in absence of any evidence to present a credible refutation. I understand why you might feel compelled to resort to ad hominem arguments as you desperately cling to your false doctrine.


את כל יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה כְּיֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם כָּל רֶמֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר הוּא חַי לָכֶם

to you
He lives
which
insect
all
to you
I gave
grass
A vegetable
For eating
will be
all

I translated each Hebrew word for you.

You can check the definitions here:

Modern Hebrew Dictionary Online Translation LEXILOGOS

Shalom

 

[HARK!]

רמשׁ
remes
1) creeping things, moving things, creeping organism 1a) creeping things 1b) gliding things (of sea animals) 1c) moving things (of all animals)
from 7430; a reptile or any other rapidly moving animal:-that creepeth, creeping (moving) thing. see HEBREW for 07430

I see that you failed to provide a source.

What do you have to hide?

 

[justbyfaith]

I presented my proof on page 1. You obviously reject the proof in absence of any evidence to present a credible refutation. I understand why you might feel compelled to resort to ad hominem arguments as you desperately cling to your false doctrine.

See @BreadOfLife's post #45 (Peter's Vision)

I see that you failed to provide a source.

What do you have to hide?

The source he is referring to is very likely the Strong's Concordance.

Thank you, @BreadOfLife.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I see that you failed to provide a source.
What do you have to hide?

Nothing to hide.
It is from Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon.

 

[HARK!]

See @BreadOfLife's post #45 (Peter's Vision)

He didn't cite a source. I did. By default my argument is more credible.

The source he is referring to is very likely the Strong's Concordance.

So in other words you're speculating.

 

[BreadOfLife]

He didn't cite a source. I did. By default my argument is more credible.
So in other words you're speculating.

Ummmm, I DID cite a source.

YOUR turn . . .

 

[HARK!]

It is from Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon.

Strong is not the most accurate source available. I went with a secular Hebrew dictionary. Surely the people who speak the language every day, know it better than an American from the horse and buggy days, working from a collation of limited, and corrupted. manuscripts.


What else do you have?

 

[justbyfaith]

Strong is not the most accurate source available. I went with a secular Hebrew dictionary. Surely the people who speak the language every day, know it better than an American from the horse and buggy days, working from a collation of limited, and corrupted. manuscripts.


What else do you have?

That's the way...cast doubt on the source. I believe that may even be a logical fallacy called attacking the sender?

We can do the same with your source; and just say to everyone that your source isn't credible.

It's your word against ours.

I would point out this however:

2Co 13:1, This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

It's two against one that our source is credible and yours isn't; and this is an established word.

Therefore, it is clear that your source isn't credible and ours is in fact credible.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Strong is not the most accurate source available. I went with a secular Hebrew dictionary. Surely the people who speak the language every day, know it better than an American from the horse and buggy days, working from a collation of limited, and corrupted. manuscripts.

What else do you have?

Of course Strong's isn't good enough for you.

Nothing I present will ever be good enough because you simply can't admit when you've been defeated.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Strong is not the most accurate source available. I went with a secular Hebrew dictionary. Surely the people who speak the language every day, know it better than an American from the horse and buggy days, working from a collation of limited, and corrupted. manuscripts.

What else do you have?

Just so you don't think I'm a poor sport - here is another source from Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testaments:

Genesis 9:3
(In English order)
כלEvery רמשׂmoving thing אשׁרthat הוא חיliveth לכם יהיהshall be לאכלהmeat כירקfor you; even as the green עשׂבherb נתתיhave I given לכם את כל׃you all things.

Something tells me that they don't meet your standards, either . . .

 

[HARK!]

Of course Strong's isn't good enough for you.

Nothing I present will ever be good enough because you simply can't admit when you've been defeated.

You're left without a credible source; and you claim that I'm defeated? LOL! I must say that you're, if nothing else, spirited; but the empirical evidence, and the readers' discernments, will determine who has been defeated.


Strong not only believed works-based heresy that directly denies the Gospel of Salvation, but he was also on the committee that produced the corrupt Revised Version of 1881.
(See Rufus Wendell, The Holy Bible (Revised Version): Containing the Old and New Testaments, Revised Bible Publishing Company, 1886, p. ii)


"James Strong, author of Strong's Concordance, has been elevated to the position of fourth member of the Trinity by many. His corrupt Greek and Hebrew definitions pepper today's preaching, as if his lexicon was the final and 67th book of the Bible. His liberal definitions are used as quick and weak patches to fill a void in sermons."
-Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers, A.V. Publications, 2008, p. 162, ISBN: 9780979411762

Next witness...

 

[BreadOfLife]

You're left without a credible source; and you claim that I'm defeated? LOL! I must say that you're, if nothing else, spirited; but the empirical evidence, and the readers' discernments, will determine who has been defeated.

Strong not only believed works-based heresy that directly denies the Gospel of Salvation, but he was also on the committee that produced the corrupt Revised Version of 1881.
(See Rufus Wendell, The Holy Bible (Revised Version): Containing the Old and New Testaments, Revised Bible Publishing Company, 1886, p. ii)

"James Strong, author of Strong's Concordance, has been elevated to the position of fourth member of the Trinity by many. His corrupt Greek and Hebrew definitions pepper today's preaching, as if his lexicon was the final and 67th book of the Bible. His liberal definitions are used as quick and weak patches to fill a void in sermons."
-Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers, A.V. Publications, 2008, p. 162, ISBN: 9780979411762

Next witness...

Ummmm, I gave you another source that concurs with Strong's.
Now - tell me everything that's "wrong" with Vines Expository . . .

 

[justbyfaith]

I must say that you're, if nothing else, spirited; but the empirical evidence, and the readers' discernments, will determine who has been defeated.

Yes, you...

Strong not only believed works-based heresy that directly denies the Gospel of Salvation, but he was also on the committee that produced the corrupt Revised Version of 1881.
(See Rufus Wendell, The Holy Bible (Revised Version): Containing the Old and New Testaments, Revised Bible Publishing Company, 1886, p. ii)


"James Strong, author of Strong's Concordance, has been elevated to the position of fourth member of the Trinity by many. His corrupt Greek and Hebrew definitions pepper today's preaching, as if his lexicon was the final and 67th book of the Bible. His liberal definitions are used as quick and weak patches to fill a void in sermons."
-Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers, A.V. Publications, 2008, p. 162, ISBN: 9780979411762

Strong's definitions are not based on his theology; but on an accurate defining of Greek and Hebrew words.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Why would you want to eat insects?

את כל יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה כְּיֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם כָּל רֶמֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר הוּא חַי לָכֶם

רֶמֶשׂ

insect, bug

Modern Hebrew Dictionary Online Translation LEXILOGOS

I could understand if it was right after a flood and there was little else to eat.

Greetings, HARK.

With all due respect, I would call this exegesis "straining at a gnat." The LXX reads here, καὶ πᾶν ἑρπετόν, with the primary definition of ἑρπετόν being "every beast or animal that goes on all fours" (Liddell-Scott, P.691). If the translators of the Septuagint were using ἑρπετόν here, that would be a good indication that the intended meaning of רֶמֶשׂ was in reference to beasts of the field, would it not?

 

[BreadOfLife]

You're left without a credible source; and you claim that I'm defeated? LOL! I must say that you're, if nothing else, spirited; but th empirical evidence, and the readers' discernments, will determine who has been defeated.

Strong not only believed works-based heresy that directly denies the Gospel of Salvation, but he was also on the committee that produced the corrupt Revised Version of 1881.
(See Rufus Wendell, The Holy Bible (Revised Version): Containing the Old and New Testaments, Revised Bible Publishing Company, 1886, p. ii)

"James Strong, author of Strong's Concordance, has been elevated to the position of fourth member of the Trinity by many. His corrupt Greek and Hebrew definitions pepper today's preaching, as if his lexicon was the final and 67th book of the Bible. His liberal definitions are used as quick and weak patches to fill a void in sermons."
-Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers, A.V. Publications, 2008, p. 162, ISBN: 9780979411762

Next witness...

By the way – ALL of the following Bibles and Biblical commentaries ALSO agree with Strong’s and Vine’s.
But – I’m sure you’ll find issues with ALL of them as well . . .

Benson Commentary
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Matthew Poole's Commentary
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Geneva Study Bible
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Game.
Set.
MATCH.