Scientist: Terrorists Could Use Insects as Weapons

Leauki, thank you for reading it and your comments I will get to them if the L-RD wills. Due to the administration change I have a lot of work before I come back to the States and try to find a another job. I have a lot of fun times a head of me.

I encourage to continue to read the Scriptures.  We are cut from the same cloth if you know what I mean. G-D promised that if we seek HIM with all of our heart we will find HIM. Keep seeking HIM. I didn't want to have anything to do with religion back in the day then some heavy stuff happened to me that got me to start thinking that this life is far to short and is there more out there.  I looked at other religions hardcore.  Then I looked and read the Tenach.  The more I read it the more I could see that this was a real true living G-D with kindness and severe HE was/is always good through out all of Scripture.  I didn't want to have anything to do with christians due to cruel and harsh treatment of Jews through out time.

I then came upon a book by a man who was a Jewish lawyer who was one of the founders of Harvard Law school, Simon Greenleaf.  He was sick and tired of christians saying that Yeshua/Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, so he figured he would see if all of the evidence would stand up in court.  A man after my own heart, for I would have done the same thing to smash those silly christians.  After both looking at the evidence and reading that book (the testimony of the evangelists) I came to the same scarey truth that he did.

Baruch Hasem!

Wow, i can see why I steer clear of religious articles most of the time. Too much reading, too much "the way I see it" and too many different versions of the bible or it's chapters.

Still, I always find it interesting how some tend to express their beliefs, faiths and understanding of God as if they knew God and everything about him. Some people really need to stop commenting as if they knew for sure what God would and would not do. It's called faith not facts. This is someone no one could ever truly know.

Well, this pretty much describes my beliefs in God. Couldn't have put this better myself.

what was the scary truth?  What conclusions did he come up with? 

The silly Christians started out Jewish.  The beginning of the church was ALL Jewish.  In fact there was much discussion in the first Jerusalem council if they should accept the Gentiles into the church.  While the Church (all true beievers) are predominately Gentiles today there are still Jews coming to the realization that Jesus is the Messiah afterall. 

It really has nothing to do with biblical versions at all.  I can read the KJV, the NKJV, the ESV, the NIV, the NASB even the Catholic bible isn't so bad (only the extra books they put in there).  They all say same essentially the same thing Charles. 

Lula posts:

Leauki posts:

Scripture is the Holy Bible composed of 73 sacred writings.....46 in the Old and 27 in the New Testament.

And so do I and that's why I quoted from it to make my point that Almighty God revealed something of Himself in it, namely, that He is One and Three at the same time.

Using Deut. 6:4, "Hear O Isreal the Lord our God is One God.", Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man in Our image and likeness." and 11:7, "Let us go down and there confuse their language.", we can equate our belief in One God, the ONe Divine Being, having One Divine Nature in a plurality of Persons,  the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, with the affirmation of God's oneness in the She-ma.

Lula posts:

Leauki posts #24

And then in #25, you  write:

OK....the plural of persons is implied in the Hebrew name of God...Elohim...which is plural in name though used with a singular adjective and verb. Thus if we were to translate the first paragraph literally according to the plurality and oneness of Elohim, it would appear like this:

"In the beginning the Gods, He created heaven and earth"....

We do find a plurality of persons involved in the name Elohim...Gen. 3:22, "Behold Adam is become as one of us". Is. 6:8, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us".

LEAUKI POSTS:

The Catholic  concept of monotheism --oneness in substance and triuneness in persons---alone can explain the plural sense in which the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob  speaks to us through the testament of the Jews.

The belief in but One God and that He functions as three distinct Persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, is hinted at in the Old Testament and more fully revealed in the New. Isaias said that the "Son" whom the Virgin was to conceive, was to be "the Emmanuel" which means "God with us" 7:14, that He is "the mighty God" 9:5, as Jesus is. This warrants St.Paul's declaration that Jesus is "God manifest in the flesh."

The dogma was revealed by Jesus Christ who alone could teach us concerning the intimate life of God. St.Matt. 11:27. It's clearly mentioned in St.Luke's account of the Incarnation, 1:32-33, in St.Matthew's description of the Baptism of Christ, in our Lord's discourse at the Last Supper, and in His Divine commission to the Apostles. It's set forth in the baptismal formula which all critics acknowledge to be primitive in the early Church in the first centuries and in all the early Father's writings which we still have. The dogma of the Blessed Trinity was handed down by the Chruch's divine Tradition as a doctrine which distinguishes Christianity from all other religions.

And what I find puzzling is that the She-ma is the one and only universal profession of faith of Jewry though its interpretation ranges from belief in the Mosaic, eternal, transcendant God to the Spinoza pantheistic concept of God.

leauki posts:

The Blessed Trinity and common sense...

I can appreciate it this way. We can believe that any thing is one from one aspect but at the same time three from another aspect. Electricity for example is one in nature, but 3 in its manifestation...motion, light and heat.

This can apply to any object..like a hat....As an object it is one, a unity....yet to be an object it must have a triunity of dimensions...length, breadth and thickness.

kfc posts: 45

LULA POSTS:

OK, KFC, it's your blog, it's your message...Locusts is to be believed literally, but Jesus' words in St. John 6 aren't.

I'm neither deceived nor following paganism.

KFC POSTS:

Here's my rejoinder..using v. 63-64 "If then you shall see the SOn of man ascend up where he was befoe? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."  

When Christ promised that He would give His very flesh to eat, the Jews protested becasue they imagined a natural and cannabalistic eating of Christ's Body. Christ refuted this notion of the manner in which His flesh was to be received by saying that He would ascend into Heaven, not leaving His Body in its human form on earth. But He did not say that they were not to eat His actual Body and Blood. He would thus contradict Himself becasue earlier He said, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." v. 56. 

He meant, therefore, you will not be asked to eat my flesh in the horrible and natural way you think, for my body as you see it with your eyes will be gone from this earth and in Heaven. Yet, I shall leave my flesh and blood in another  and supernatural way which your natural and carnal minds cannot understand. The carnal or fleshly judgment profits nothing. I ask you therefore to have faith in Me and trust in Me. It is the spirit of faith which will enable you to believe not your natural judgment. 

Then as you know, the Gospel goes on to say that many would not believe, and walked no more with Him. Christ's Body is ascended into Heaven, but it's substance independently of all the laws of space which effects substance through accidental qualtities, This Body is present in every consecrated Host.  

You should stop bearing false witness against the Church in which Christ abides 24/7 in fulfillment of Malachais' prophecy 1:11 until the end of the world.  

talk about irony. 

anyone who lived in socal then surely remembers fleets of helicopters flying over us at night spraying malathion on everything and everyone.  a couple smartass morning deejays held a marathon fundraiser for "jerry's flies" (playing on both the annual jerry lewis thing and the fact jerry brown was governor at the time). 

that oughta be prettttty innaresting considering locusts are pretty benign except when they horde...and the only thing powering the horde is group hunger.  so if they aren't consuming plants nor actually eating people, the horde's gonna quickly run outta fuel and phhhhht.

nothing new need be created or be imbued with special powers when there are plenty of scary bacteria & virii kickin around just waiting for an opportunity to exploit some arcane flaw in our immune systems.  the whole idea of exotic scorpion locusts insults the intelligence and power yall ascribe to your gods (plural since it seems there's some question as to grammatical as well as physical number depending on your preferred flavor of christianity). 

without meaning to add even more confusing elements, i can't help but call attention to the recent discovery of several dozen fossilized specimens of what may be the most intimidating and largest snake to ever crawl the planet--a superboa longer than a city bus.  too bad they didn't hang around long enough to infect the garden of eden.

You are closer now.

There is two words "elohim". One is the plural of "eloah". That "elohim" is used with plural verb forms.

The other is the name "Elohim" (spelt the same in Hebrew, but with an upper-case "E" in transliteration). It derives from the plural of "eloah" but is used with singular verb forms.

Neither version of "elohim" is the correct number of a Trinity. Hebrew has three numbers: singular, dual, and plural.

Singular is used to describe zero, one, or more than twelve.

Dual is used to describe a pair or other inherent plural.

Plural is used to describe three to eleven in a non-inherent plural.

The following terms each use a different number in (ancient) Hebrew but only two different numbers in (modern) English:

1. one leg

2. four legs of the same dog

3. three legs

1. one day

2. two days

3. three days

A trinity is like a pair, not like a generic collection of things without relation other than being of the same type. But "elohim", even if you insist on reading it as a plural of "eloah" (despite the fact that the verb it commands is a singular), is not a dual number and does NOT describe a pair, a trinity, four of the same set, or anything like that.

(The dual number also applies to teeth in a mouth

Not quite.

"In the beginning gods (he) created the heavens and the earth."

(I inserted the "he" to show what verb form is used.)

Let me use the name of my friend "Arnolds" again. He is one person but has a name that sounds like the plural of "Arnold".

If you see this sentence:

"Arnolds is a big man, he can look over everyone's shoulder."

What would you derive from it?

1. Arnolds is several people.

2. Arnolds is one person with a funny name.

3. Arnolds is a trinity (but not a pair or group of four).

How do you know what he meant when you don't use the rest of scripture to interpret what he meant?

You just don't stop do you Lula?  Even after I asked you not to turn this into a CC discussion you have diliberately ignored my request.  If we hadn't already been around and around this already I would have been pleased to discuss this with you.  But we have.  And I've learned it's not worth my time to go over such things with you because you completely do not hear a thing I say. 

Again, that's what you've been told by the CC.  Christ DOES NOT abide in any Temple or Church made by hands.  That's what the scriptures tell us.  He indwells believers not church buildings. 

I'll be the first to say the trinity is not easy to understand completly.  Jesus was considered God.  YHWH in the OT was considered God.  The Holy Spirit is considered God.  We are told in the prophet Isaiah's words:

"For unto us a child is born.  Unto us a son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God (Elohim).  The everlasting father, the Prince of Peace."  9:6

We see this printed in Christmas cards but in all reality this is the Messiah the Jews were waiting for.  This is a description of the Messiah (Jesus) but not at his birth, but at his final appearance when he comes to rule the earth for good. 

So we see, from Isaiah,  that God will be born a child.  How can that be?  We go over to  the NT John and we get another picture o this:

"In the beginning (before creation) was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS GOD.  The same was in the beginning with God.  ALL things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made........and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us"........ John 1.

Basically what we are seeing is God made himself flesh "ginomai."  He came from one type of existence to another.  He changed from God to God in the Flesh.   We see that this baby Messiah was the creator of the earth.  How can that be? 

We may not exactly understand all the intrinsic ways of God but he tells us what we need to know and later all the minute details will fall into place. 

It is not my goal to "understand" the trinity. You can believe what you want and I don't have to understand it.

I am worried about the Hebrew Bible, a text that is of very high value to me. I cannot understand why someone would say that they base their religion on that same text and then make up new meanings of words and create a new understanfding of grammar.

Whatever "elohim" sounds like, it is a word in singular when used with a singular verb. That's a simple fact of Hebrew grammar.

There are other Hebrew words and names that sound like plural words, but it rarely implies a trinity or the idea that there is more than one of the person.

"Mayim" means "waters" and is also a female name. But the excellent actress Mayim Bialik has never been accused of being a trinity or hiding several people within herself.

"Achot" is Hebrew for "sister" and sounds like a plural (female suffix -ot). (The actual plural "sisters" is "achiot".)

King "Jehoiakim" had a name ending on "-im" but few people would argue that he consisted of more than one person.

I will accept validity of the claim that the name "Elohim" used with singular verbs implies a trinity or more than one god if you will accept that the name "Mayim" used with singular verb implies a trinity or more than one person for the same grammatical reason.

But until then Mayim is one girl and Elohim is one god.

Lula posts:

Good, good, good...

And this is how Catholics can equate the trinitarian God of Christianity wiht the affirmation of God's oneness found in the She-ma.

I think the main obstacle to Jewish appreciation of the three in one principle of God Who is in His nature One in substance, yet, God is three in Persons is partly due to the realization that belief in the Trinity carries with it belief in Jesus, the Second Person of the Triune God, as the Messias.

Just to be clear, when I say Elohim is plural, I don't mean three Gods...I believe and worship but One Eternal God. The Divine sayso of Jesus Christ, the infallible Catholic Church that He established, and the New Testament warrants belief in the Blessed Trinity, the Triunity in unity in God.

I'd change that...But until then Mayim is one girl and Elohim is one God. Get my drift?

I can see the oneness, but whence do you take the "trinity" thing?

(And what is the dash for in "she-ma"? The vowel between /sh/ and /m/ is null.)

I really don't care what or whom the trinity contains. I am just wondering where you see the "three".

I know what you mean by the trinity. I am solely commenting on how you read the Hebrew Bible. You see plurals where the grammar doesn't warrant seeing them and you mistranslate words (like "unity" instead of "one").

The Shema is directed at a people surrounded by polytheists and reminded them that Elohim is one god, not many gods. It has nothing to do with a trinity.

You are removing the Torah from the time it was written and look at it as if were written today. When the Torah was revealed people had to choose between belief in many gods (like the majority did) or one god. There were others gods the Torah referred to. They didn't exist, but they had names and people believed in them. Gramatically, a god is the same as a girl: a person who can be a subject in a sentence.

Sounds like you're getting caught up with semantics again Leauki. 

You're saying Elohim can be plural right?  But it can also be singular right? 

So what's the problem?  It still says..."let us" make man in "our" image.   Isn't that plural? 

We also see Elohim as plural in other parts of scripture.  Say Psalm 81:1,6 for instance.   In John 10:34 when Jesus was accused of blasphemy he appealed to this Psalm making the case crystal clear that all believers who "are sons of the Most High" to be "gods."   He said to the Jews, "Is it not written in your law I have said you are gods?"  Jesus was demonstrating that the title could be attached to certain men "to whom the word of God came" and therefore could not be any objections lodged against his claim to be divine. 

I'm reading a book right now by a very Jewish Scholar, Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889). He spent his lifetime studying scriptures especially the OT scriptures and wrote many books on Jewish Doctrine and History.   He was one of the leading authorities of his time regarding the docines and practices of Judaism in the centuries preceding and during the early Christain era. 

He brought up that the scriptures say "spirit of Elohim" in 1 Samuel 10:10.  How does that figure in your reading of the languages?   We see in Gen 1:1 that God created the heavens and the earth and his spirit moved over the waters. 

From a Christian POV this spirit of Elohim is just another way of saying Holy Spirit which is also God.