|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 2:58:48 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
The truth is not believable, so I offer this for you and the others. Yah.
Exodus 23:21. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him.
Psalm 68:4. Sing to Elohiym, sing praise to His name, extol Him who rides on the clouds His name is Yah and rejoice before Him.
John 5:43. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him.
The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua". But Galileans always dropped their 'ayins', hence "y'shu" for which in the talmud many Jewish people use as an acronym meaning “may his name be blotted out”.
The name Jesus is an unknown word that was invented. In the NIV Exhaustive Concordance you will find the name Joshua along with the name Jesus. In English the name Joshua is pronounced Jah/ shoo/ ah. We do know as a matter of fact that “Jah” in Greek is for “Yah” in Hebrew and English.
The assignment of the vowels in Hebrew are arbitrary, in order to hide his real name. This is also true of God’s own personal name which is Yahwah.
The Orthodox Jews believe that it is their duty to conceal God’s personal name from the public.
So if you wish to use the Messiah’s real name in English, that would be “Yahshua.”
Numbers 13:16 (Moses gave Hoshea son of Nun the name Joshua.)
Why did Moses give Hosea the name Joshua? (Yahshua)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Haran
Aramaic is virtually irrelevant (It is also virtually the same as Hebrew...but that's a different topic).
Michael, you seem to know that the name of your Messiah is "Yahshua". How do you know the name of your Messiah? What told you the name of the Messiah? Please do answer...I'm very curious.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 8:49:33 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2904
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua". But Galileans always dropped their 'ayins', hence "y'shu" for which in the talmud many Jewish people use as an acronym meaning “may his name be blotted out”.
Funny that you should mention the dropping of the 'ayin' because while you have this fact almost correct, you don't have a clue as to what that means. The name "y'shua" already reflects the dropped 'ayin'. The 'a' sound is the sound of the 'petah' and the 'ayin' is NOT vocalized. Most Hebrew speakers today still drop the 'ayin' (as do I) because proper vocalization of the 'ayin' is nearly impossible for someone who did not grow up speaking this sound from their early childhood. Do you know what any 'ayin' sounds like, or what letter of the alphabet is used to transliterate the true sound of an 'ayin'?
More importantly Michael, this is a good example of why you can not extrapolate the kinds of things you do from the objective information that you began with. You need to either learn the language, or ask someone who knows the langauge before making the kind of extrapolations that you continually make. While some of the basic information you have found is correct, every extrapolation that you have made from that basic information IS NOT!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 11:17:23 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
Feel free to state the facts of my errors I'm busy with other things.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua". But Galileans always dropped their 'ayins', hence "y'shu" for which in the talmud many Jewish people use as an acronym meaning “may his name be blotted out”.
Funny that you should mention the dropping of the 'ayin' because while you have this fact almost correct, you don't have a clue as to what that means. The name "y'shua" already reflects the dropped 'ayin'. The 'a' sound is the sound of the 'petah' and the 'ayin' is NOT vocalized. Most Hebrew speakers today still drop the 'ayin' (as do I) because proper vocalization of the 'ayin' is nearly impossible for someone who did not grow up speaking this sound from their early childhood. Do you know what any 'ayin' sounds like, or what letter of the alphabet is used to transliterate the true sound of an 'ayin'?
More importantly Michael, this is a good example of why you can not extrapolate the kinds of things you do from the objective information that you began with. You need to either learn the language, or ask someone who knows the langauge before making the kind of extrapolations that you continually make. While some of the basic information you have found is correct, every extrapolation that you have made from that basic information IS NOT!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 12:58:50 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 3600
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
Benelchi.
I pm'ed you but your box is full.
I was wondering if you or others can help me out
on Romans 14:10. i.e., "judgment seat of Christ"
My lexicon showed a form of theos.
*The Nestle Greek text; Rev. A. Marshall, D. Litt.
(could this be a not so good reference?)
My Greek NT Dict. showed christos.
Do the articles of it render it "son of God?"
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 1:16:59 PM
|
|
|
Haran
Posts: 26
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lapidoth
I was wondering if you or others can help me out
on Romans 14:10. i.e., "judgment seat of Christ"
My lexicon showed a form of theos.
*The Nestle Greek text; Rev. A. Marshall, D. Litt.
(could this be a not so good reference?)
My Greek NT Dict. showed christos.
Do the articles of it render it "son of God?"
You have run into a matter of Textual Criticism here...a variant among the Greek manuscripts. The oldest and "best" manuscripts contain "judgment seat of God" while the majority of manuscripts contain "judgment seat of Christ". So, your lexicon is following the oldest and "best" texts, while your Greek NT Dictionary is following the majority of manuscripts.
You will note the same difference between modern English versions. If you read the KJV, you'll read "Christ" because it is based on the majority of manuscripts. If you read a more modern translation like the NIV or NET, you'll read "God" because that is found in the oldest and "best" manuscripts.
I'm not sure what you mean by "son of God", as that is not found in this verse. Hope that helps.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 1:23:51 PM
|
|
|
Haran
Posts: 26
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
Exodus 23:21. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him.
Psalm 68:4. Sing to Elohiym, sing praise to His name, extol Him who rides on the clouds His name is Yah and rejoice before Him.
Ok, so you've taken a couple of Messianic verses from the Old Testament. So, from these, I can understand that you believe the Messiah's name should include God's name...Yah. Fine.
quote:
John 5:43. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him.
Ok, I'm not sure I completely agree with your interpretation here, but you now take a New Testament text to say that the Messiah has come in his "Father's name"....again, Yah. Fine.
However!!!!!
quote:
The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua". But Galileans always dropped their 'ayins', hence "y'shu" for which in the talmud many Jewish people use as an acronym meaning “may his name be blotted out”.
You just made a HUGE leap of logic here! You went from saying that Yah must be a part of the Messiah's name to "The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua"." How did you get from "Yah" to "Y'shua"?? Why not some other theophoric name from the Old Testament that contains "Yah"?
What is this "best evidence" you write of and what is it based upon? Please answer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/12/2008 3:58:46 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2904
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
You just made a HUGE leap of logic here! You went from saying that Yah must be a part of the Messiah's name to "The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua"." How did you get from "Yah" to "Y'shua"?? Why not some other theophoric name from the Old Testament that contains "Yah"?
What is this "best evidence" you write of and what is it based upon? Please answer.
Actually, he made an even bigger mistake here. In ''Y'eshua' the 'yod' comes from the Hebrew root i.e. 'yod-shin-ayin', whereas in 'Yahshua' the 'yod' from the root is actually dropped because of the prefixed 'yod-hey'. So if Michael is correct (and many scholars do agree here) that Y'shua is the correct Hebrew name for Jesus, then the implication is that YHVH is not part of Jesus name.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/13/2008 9:57:53 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
acronym
1943 coinage from acro-, comb. form of Gk. akros "tip, end" (see acrid) + Eng. -onym "name" (abstracted from homonym; see name). The practice was non-existent before 20c. except in cabalistic esoterica and acrostic poetry.
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
You just made a HUGE leap of logic here! You went from saying that Yah must be a part of the Messiah's name to "The best evidence is that his proper name was "y'shua"." How did you get from "Yah" to "Y'shua"?? Why not some other theophoric name from the Old Testament that contains "Yah"?
What is this "best evidence" you write of and what is it based upon? Please answer.
Actually, he made an even bigger mistake here. In ''Y'eshua' the 'yod' comes from the Hebrew root i.e. 'yod-shin-ayin', whereas in 'Yahshua' the 'yod' from the root is actually dropped because of the prefixed 'yod-hey'. So if Michael is correct (and many scholars do agree here) that Y'shua is the correct Hebrew name for Jesus, then the implication is that YHVH is not part of Jesus name.
Try to focus on the fact that his name has been deformed from the original form.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/13/2008 4:34:30 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2904
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
Try to focus on the fact that his name has been deformed from the original form.
Try to focus on the fact that your claims have absolutely no supporting evidence, and are simply the invention of a fertile imagination.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/13/2008 7:42:36 PM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
So Benelchi, what do you say God,s name is and translates as?
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
Try to focus on the fact that his name has been deformed from the original form.
Try to focus on the fact that your claims have absolutely no supporting evidence, and are simply the invention of a fertile imagination.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/14/2008 11:14:46 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2904
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
For now, here is the KJV and NIV quotes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11696110@N04/2858462506/sizes/l/
Your photo demonstrates what I was trying to explain earlier. Do you notice that the first letter i.e. the one on the Right is not always the same? Sometimes the left leg is connected to the top (as it is in 10261 and 10262) and sometimes it is not (as in 10201), you will also notice that in the transliteration there is a small '.' under the 'h' in 10261 and 10262, and the '.' is absent in 10201. The reason is that these are different letters alphabet! One is a 'hey' and the other is a 'chet', and although they look similar they are not the same.
The Hebrew Alphabet:
aleph, bet, gimal, dalet, hey, vav, zayin, chet, tet...
As I said before, your confusion over 'to be' and 'to live' is because you are not recognizing the difference between these letter!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/15/2008 12:01:35 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
I do understand what you are saying Benelchi, but look at the list of words how they are translated. And compare the Aramaic to the Hebrew. Besides, isn't that the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew: The different letters and sounds.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
For now, here is the KJV and NIV quotes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11696110@N04/2858462506/sizes/l/
Your photo demonstrates what I was trying to explain earlier. Do you notice that the first letter i.e. the one on the Right is not always the same? Sometimes the left leg is connected to the top (as it is in 10261 and 10262) and sometimes it is not (as in 10201), you will also notice that in the transliteration there is a small '.' under the 'h' in 10261 and 10262, and the '.' is absent in 10201. The reason is that these are different letters alphabet! One is a 'hey' and the other is a 'chet', and although they look similar they are not the same.
The Hebrew Alphabet:
aleph, bet, gimal, dalet, hey, vav, zayin, chet, tet...
As I said before, your confusion over 'to be' and 'to live' is because you are not recognizing the difference between these letter!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/15/2008 12:28:29 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 2904
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
I do understand what you are saying Benelchi, but look at the list of words how they are translated. And compare the Aramaic to the Hebrew. Besides, isn't that the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew: The different letters and sounds.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
For now, here is the KJV and NIV quotes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11696110@N04/2858462506/sizes/l/
Your photo demonstrates what I was trying to explain earlier. Do you notice that the first letter i.e. the one on the Right is not always the same? Sometimes the left leg is connected to the top (as it is in 10261 and 10262) and sometimes it is not (as in 10201), you will also notice that in the transliteration there is a small '.' under the 'h' in 10261 and 10262, and the '.' is absent in 10201. The reason is that these are different letters alphabet! One is a 'hey' and the other is a 'chet', and although they look similar they are not the same.
The Hebrew Alphabet:
aleph, bet, gimal, dalet, hey, vav, zayin, chet, tet...
As I said before, your confusion over 'to be' and 'to live' is because you are not recognizing the difference between these letter!
There is a difference between Aramaic and Hebrew, but it is not the letters or the sounds. The Hebrew square script used in the lexicon page you provided is actually an Aramaic script. Hebrew changed from the Paleo Hebraic script the Aramaic script during the period of the captivity. There is actually a one to one correspondence between the Paleo Hebraic script and the Aramaic Script, and the names of the letters remains the same in both scripts. There are some significant differences in spelling and grammar, but both languages share many common words (as is evident in the lexicon page you provided).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/15/2008 1:48:42 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
Do you see where I get the translation that Yahwah means "Life Began?" Or do I need to color code the picture and draw arrows? In regards to Chey or Hey meaning life also along with Yah; I presume that some kind of change took place in the language. Perhaps some day a Archaeologist will find the answer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
I do understand what you are saying Benelchi, but look at the list of words how they are translated. And compare the Aramaic to the Hebrew. Besides, isn't that the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew: The different letters and sounds.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
For now, here is the KJV and NIV quotes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11696110@N04/2858462506/sizes/l/
Your photo demonstrates what I was trying to explain earlier. Do you notice that the first letter i.e. the one on the Right is not always the same? Sometimes the left leg is connected to the top (as it is in 10261 and 10262) and sometimes it is not (as in 10201), you will also notice that in the transliteration there is a small '.' under the 'h' in 10261 and 10262, and the '.' is absent in 10201. The reason is that these are different letters alphabet! One is a 'hey' and the other is a 'chet', and although they look similar they are not the same.
The Hebrew Alphabet:
aleph, bet, gimal, dalet, hey, vav, zayin, chet, tet...
As I said before, your confusion over 'to be' and 'to live' is because you are not recognizing the difference between these letter!
There is a difference between Aramaic and Hebrew, but it is not the letters or the sounds. The Hebrew square script used in the lexicon page you provided is actually an Aramaic script. Hebrew changed from the Paleo Hebraic script the Aramaic script during the period of the captivity. There is actually a one to one correspondence between the Paleo Hebraic script and the Aramaic Script, and the names of the letters remains the same in both scripts. There are some significant differences in spelling and grammar, but both languages share many common words (as is evident in the lexicon page you provided).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/15/2008 11:19:20 AM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 3600
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Haran
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lapidoth
I was wondering if you or others can help me out
on Romans 14:10. i.e., "judgment seat of Christ"
My lexicon showed a form of theos.
*The Nestle Greek text; Rev. A. Marshall, D. Litt.
(could this be a not so good reference?)
My Greek NT Dict. showed christos.
Do the articles of it render it "son of God?"
You have run into a matter of Textual Criticism here...a variant among the Greek manuscripts. The oldest and "best" manuscripts contain "judgment seat of God" while the majority of manuscripts contain "judgment seat of Christ". So, your lexicon is following the oldest and "best" texts, while your Greek NT Dictionary is following the majority of manuscripts.
You will note the same difference between modern English versions. If you read the KJV, you'll read "Christ" because it is based on the majority of manuscripts. If you read a more modern translation like the NIV or NET, you'll read "God" because that is found in the oldest and "best" manuscripts.
I'm not sure what you mean by "son of God", as that is not found in this verse. Hope that helps.
Thanks. That was what I thought it would be.
For the son of God part I was just reading all the variations
of the words used they were using. It said the judgment seat of "God."
I was just wondering if there was an article or such that might have
changed it . Thanks again.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/20/2008 12:20:09 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
A few days ago Microsoft contacted me at my computer when I was online. They had noticed I have been studying the name Yahwah, and they requested that I allow them to copy and use that information. Since everyone and the dog is watching everything I cut, paste, copy, and read, I thought that I would give them permission for asking. You never did answer my question as to what name is God,s personal name. What do you think it is, or means?
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
Try to focus on the fact that his name has been deformed from the original form.
Try to focus on the fact that your claims have absolutely no supporting evidence, and are simply the invention of a fertile imagination.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/20/2008 1:21:23 AM
|
|
|
Haran
Posts: 26
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
A few days ago Microsoft contacted me at my computer when I was online. They had noticed I have been studying the name Yahwah, and they requested that I allow them to copy and use that information. Since everyone and the dog is watching everything I cut, paste, copy, and read, I thought that I would give them permission for asking.
Wha???  What on earth does Microsoft want with information you specifically have posted about a name "Yahwah"???
Oh. I get it. Do you work for Microsoft? Were you posting while at work? Are you in trouble? 
Just joking. Sorry to say so, but given the already fanciful things you've said about Hebrew, Aramaic, and some of us being a part of secret societies, I'd have to give your statements a zero chance of being truthful.
quote:
You never did answer my question...
I know this wasn't directed at me, but you also never answered my question that I pleaded for you to answer. Would you now answer it without referring to secret societies and Microsoft being mysteriously interested in your posts about the Hebrew name of God?
On second thought. I'm not sure why bother at this point.... We've tried pretty hard already, have we not? *sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/20/2008 1:35:57 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
I have a new computer with Vista on it. My software says that in order to use it I have to agree to let them record everything. As for their interest in the name Yahwah I do not have a clue. I did not ask. Perhaps they are thinking about an enclyclopidia article.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Haran
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
A few days ago Microsoft contacted me at my computer when I was online. They had noticed I have been studying the name Yahwah, and they requested that I allow them to copy and use that information. Since everyone and the dog is watching everything I cut, paste, copy, and read, I thought that I would give them permission for asking.
Wha??? What on earth does Microsoft want with information you specifically have posted about a name "Yahwah"???
Oh. I get it. Do you work for Microsoft? Were you posting while at work? Are you in trouble?
Just joking. Sorry to say so, but given the already fanciful things you've said about Hebrew, Aramaic, and some of us being a part of secret societies, I'd have to give your statements a zero chance of being truthful.
quote:
You never did answer my question...
I know this wasn't directed at me, but you also never answered my question that I pleaded for you to answer. Would you now answer it without referring to secret societies and Microsoft being mysteriously interested in your posts about the Hebrew name of God?
On second thought. I'm not sure why bother at this point.... We've tried pretty hard already, have we not? *sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/20/2008 1:49:13 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
I was reading God's name backwards as "Haw/hay." Does that say anything in Hebrew?
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
I do understand what you are saying Benelchi, but look at the list of words how they are translated. And compare the Aramaic to the Hebrew. Besides, isn't that the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew: The different letters and sounds.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel
For now, here is the KJV and NIV quotes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11696110@N04/2858462506/sizes/l/
Your photo demonstrates what I was trying to explain earlier. Do you notice that the first letter i.e. the one on the Right is not always the same? Sometimes the left leg is connected to the top (as it is in 10261 and 10262) and sometimes it is not (as in 10201), you will also notice that in the transliteration there is a small '.' under the 'h' in 10261 and 10262, and the '.' is absent in 10201. The reason is that these are different letters alphabet! One is a 'hey' and the other is a 'chet', and although they look similar they are not the same.
The Hebrew Alphabet:
aleph, bet, gimal, dalet, hey, vav, zayin, chet, tet...
As I said before, your confusion over 'to be' and 'to live' is because you are not recognizing the difference between these letter!
There is a difference between Aramaic and Hebrew, but it is not the letters or the sounds. The Hebrew square script used in the lexicon page you provided is actually an Aramaic script. Hebrew changed from the Paleo Hebraic script the Aramaic script during the period of the captivity. There is actually a one to one correspondence between the Paleo Hebraic script and the Aramaic Script, and the names of the letters remains the same in both scripts. There are some significant differences in spelling and grammar, but both languages share many common words (as is evident in the lexicon page you provided).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/21/2008 11:45:25 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
I have a new computer with Vista on it. My software says that in order to use it I have to agree to let them record everything. As for their interest in the name Yahwah I do not have a clue. I did not ask. Perhaps they are thinking about an enclyclopidia article.
*sigh*
I've read the Vista user agreement, and it most certainly does NOT say you have to let them record everything. Nor do they. What would be the point? There IS such a thing as too much data.
In other words, in my humble opinion, I would strongly suggest the immediate acquisition of an extinguisher, to be utilized on your trousers.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/22/2008 1:52:49 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zhi
quote:
I have a new computer with Vista on it. My software says that in order to use it I have to agree to let them record everything. As for their interest in the name Yahwah I do not have a clue. I did not ask. Perhaps they are thinking about an enclyclopidia article.
*sigh*
I've read the Vista user agreement, and it most certainly does NOT say you have to let them record everything. Nor do they. What would be the point? There IS such a thing as too much data.
In other words, in my humble opinion, I would strongly suggest the immediate acquisition of an extinguisher, to be utilized on your trousers.
They use the term "collect data," for which that is done through cut, past, copy, save, spell check and the websites you visit. I'm not lieing, that is the truth. That is why I'm seeing about a Linux computer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/22/2008 1:57:42 AM
|
|
|
MichaelTheeArchAngel
Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
|
Here is one message I just received while talking to you: HP respects your privacy. With HP your personal information remains private and is not shared with anyone outside of HP. By clicking Next, you will transmit HP product and PC configuration information to HP. To view HP's full privacy statement, visit www.hp.com.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/22/2008 10:49:53 AM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
*sigh*
PC configuration is a list of hardware you currently have connected to your computer, and occasionally licensing information regarding specific applications (for licensing protection purposes). That is ALL.
The Vista agreement similarly states they will collect information regarding the hardware and licensing setup of your computer.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with "cut, past, copy, save, spell check and the websites you visit".
Neither Microsoft nor HP care about your opinions regarding the name of God.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Yahwah - 9/22/2008 12:21:28 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 3600
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
what name is God,s personal name
Here's my opinion or thought.
God DOES NOT have a "personal name."
I've done a rheem of copies on the subject.
And I've read much more material on the matter.
Seems all the SNO subscribers are networking off
the same materials.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
