Forum Tools
Forums |  Register |  Login |  My Profile |  Inbox |  Address Book |  My Subscription |  My Forums 

Photo Gallery |  Member List |  Search |  Calendars |  FAQ |  TOS |  Disclaimer |  Ticket List |  Log Out | 

RE: Yahwah

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine >> RE: Yahwah
Jump to post #:
Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:14:07 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
My size 4 font in blue is for making it easyer to find and read. If I go over size 4 then Im shouting.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kath

MichaelTheeArchAngel

Sustained argument against the Trinity is a violation of our Terms of Service 15.

Also, if your intent with the large font is to shout, you need to know that is a violation of TOS 12 so it might be advisable to take it down a notch.

Sincerely
Kath
Volunteer Assistant Administrator

Please do not reply to this message within the Community.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message as I am unable to discuss it further.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns allowing time for a response during normal business hours.
Posts which ignore this warning will be removed without warning and may result in other action in accordance with the Terms of Service.
Please review our FAQ for an explanation as to why one cannot confront a moderator directly.

Post #: 151
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:16:39 PM   
JimboFletch


Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
I am 56 years old, Mike, and I do not need glasses to read the normal, unbolded font. So anything larger than normal is too much for normal conversation.
Post #: 152
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:21:12 PM   
Fritzpw_Admin


Posts: 7691
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
Cut it down to size 3 please.

You may keep the bolding if you must.

Please do not reply to this message within the Community.

Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.

Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.


Messages which disregard the words in red will be removed without warning and the poster may also be banned.


_____________________________

Fritz
Senior Manager of Social Media
fritz@salemwebnetwork.com


Want to see my latest online project? Check out http://budurl.com/CWonFacebook
Post #: 153
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:27:31 PM   
solarflare

 

Posts: 798
Status: offline
quote:

My size 4 font in blue is for making it easyer to find and read. If I go over size 4 then Im shouting.


Post #: 154
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:43:20 PM   
WesP


Posts: 2451
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
Solution:

On computer screen click:

start
all programs
accessories
accessibility
magnifier

and tada!!!!!!!!!

_____________________________

Peace,

Wes
___________________________________

<--- BTW, this is the true function of corn! It is to help the oil industry and its functionaries, not detract from them!
Post #: 155
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:54:30 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
It has everything to do with the post. Do you worship Jahovah the God of Hell; or do you worship Yahwah?
quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF

Mike, that had absolutely nothing to do with my post, other than to confirm how bad theology flows from the anti-Trinity premise.
Post #: 156
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:58:11 PM   
Fritzpw_Admin


Posts: 7691
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wreid77

And we come to it.

I hope this is not what you believe Michael, but once you said Jehovah is the god (little 'g') of hell I know I have heard this before. Either the Jews or the Christians demoized the serpent who was the chief creator and chose to worship Jehovah who is supposed to be the false god seeking to overthrow the good serpent. Is that what you believe. Please say it isn't.

Or would you compare Jehovah to the norse god loki? Simply a mischief maker?

Just wondering here MichaelTheeArchAngel... will you be answering this post anytime soon?

_____________________________

Fritz
Senior Manager of Social Media
fritz@salemwebnetwork.com


Want to see my latest online project? Check out http://budurl.com/CWonFacebook
Post #: 157
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 4:58:18 PM   
solarflare

 

Posts: 798
Status: offline
Titus 3:9.........

I worship in Spirit and in Truth. Amen. Come quickly Lord Jesus
Post #: 158
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 6:06:21 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
If the question is: Do I believe in dualism, then the answer is no. I do not believe that Yahwah is evil, or does evil. If my post was not chopped up, then you would see what I believe.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fritzpw_Admin

quote:

ORIGINAL: wreid77

And we come to it.

I hope this is not what you believe Michael, but once you said Jehovah is the god (little 'g') of hell I know I have heard this before. Either the Jews or the Christians demoized the serpent who was the chief creator and chose to worship Jehovah who is supposed to be the false god seeking to overthrow the good serpent. Is that what you believe. Please say it isn't.

Or would you compare Jehovah to the norse god loki? Simply a mischief maker?

Just wondering here MichaelTheeArchAngel... will you be answering this post anytime soon?
Post #: 159
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 6:11:14 PM   
solarflare

 

Posts: 798
Status: offline
Or, you could actually just write what you believe, in one post for all to see.
Post #: 160
RE: Yahwah - 8/13/2008 11:46:47 PM   
benelchi


Posts: 2907
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF


This is just plain NONSENSE and shows a complete lack of understanding of the HEBREW Language (or any langauge for that matter). The root of Yehovah/Yawheh is HYH not HVH, a quick check of ANY theological dictionary will confirm this.

This is like saying that Shells are evil because you can find the word hell contained in the letters!
Post #: 161
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 1:05:26 AM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
If you believe that the Strong's Concordance is in error, then please show a scholarly resource that states other wise.
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF


This is just plain NONSENSE and shows a complete lack of understanding of the HEBREW Language (or any langauge for that matter). The root of Yehovah/Yawheh is HYH not HVH, a quick check of ANY theological dictionary will confirm this.

This is like saying that Shells are evil because you can find the word hell contained in the letters!
Post #: 162
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 2:09:57 AM   
benelchi


Posts: 2907
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

If you believe that the Strong's Concordance is in error, then please show a scholarly resource that states other wise.
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF


This is just plain NONSENSE and shows a complete lack of understanding of the HEBREW Language (or any langauge for that matter). The root of Yehovah/Yawheh is HYH not HVH, a quick check of ANY theological dictionary will confirm this.

This is like saying that Shells are evil because you can find the word hell contained in the letters!




Strong's is not in error, it never in any place connects HVH #1942-43 with God's name; that is something you just plain made up. Again that is just like trying to show a relationship between "shell" and "hell"; just because they share similar letters does not mean there is any relationship at all.

Under this listing for YHVH in "The brown-Driver-Brings Hebrew and English Lexicon it states that HVH in the Qal form is HYH, and that YHVH is the nominal form and means "He who will be". It is Strong's numbers 3068-69 and is connected with 1961 HYH (the verb 'to be')
Post #: 163
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 2:13:24 AM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
Once again we are not on the same page. I am talking about apples, and you are? Who knows?
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

If you believe that the Strong's Concordance is in error, then please show a scholarly resource that states other wise.
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF


This is just plain NONSENSE and shows a complete lack of understanding of the HEBREW Language (or any langauge for that matter). The root of Yehovah/Yawheh is HYH not HVH, a quick check of ANY theological dictionary will confirm this.

This is like saying that Shells are evil because you can find the word hell contained in the letters!




Strong's is not in error, it never in any place connects HVH #1942-43 with God's name; that is something you just plain made up. Again that is just like trying to show a relationship between "shell" and "hell"; just because they share similar letters does not mean there is any relationship at all.

Under this listing for YHVH in "The brown-Driver-Brings Hebrew and English Lexicon it states that HVH in the Qal form is HYH, and that YHVH is the nominal form and means "He who will be". It is Strong's numbers 3068-69 and is connected with 1961 HYH (the verb 'to be')
Post #: 164
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 2:21:36 AM   
benelchi


Posts: 2907
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
Well then you should have looked up tapuach (strong's number 8598).

Either way, what you presented was both linguistically and theologically invalid.


quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Once again we are not on the same page. I am talking about apples, and you are? Who knows?
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

If you believe that the Strong's Concordance is in error, then please show a scholarly resource that states other wise.
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Since you will not give any thought to what I say, I will make it more plain to you. The Hovah part of Je-hovah means RUIN and MISCHIEF in Hebrew, according to Strong's Concordance #1943. Hovah is another form form #1942; RUIN and MISCHIEF


This is just plain NONSENSE and shows a complete lack of understanding of the HEBREW Language (or any langauge for that matter). The root of Yehovah/Yawheh is HYH not HVH, a quick check of ANY theological dictionary will confirm this.

This is like saying that Shells are evil because you can find the word hell contained in the letters!




Strong's is not in error, it never in any place connects HVH #1942-43 with God's name; that is something you just plain made up. Again that is just like trying to show a relationship between "shell" and "hell"; just because they share similar letters does not mean there is any relationship at all.

Under this listing for YHVH in "The brown-Driver-Brings Hebrew and English Lexicon it states that HVH in the Qal form is HYH, and that YHVH is the nominal form and means "He who will be". It is Strong's numbers 3068-69 and is connected with 1961 HYH (the verb 'to be')

Post #: 165
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 8:08:42 AM   
JimboFletch


Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

It has everything to do with the post. Do you worship Jahovah the God of Hell; or do you worship Yahwah?

I worship my Savior, God the Son and the one He worshipped, Abba Father or God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

Why do you have an aversion to addressing God the Father as my Savior did? As one of His redeemed and Joint heir with God the Son, I have the privilege of addressing Him as Abba Father.
Post #: 166
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 10:23:49 AM   
benelchi


Posts: 2907
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
Just a thought, if your goal is simply to pronounce people and place names as they were originally spoken, you really should be reading only from the Hebrew bible and studying Linguistic Archeology. There really are a number of significant challenges to this goal.

1) In Hebrew many of the letters have sounds that do not exist in English, you MUST learn Hebrew if you really want to pronounce these names correctly.

2) Hebrew words (including names) can significantly change pronunciation depending on how that are used in a sentence. Some examples "Bethlehem" in Hebrew is "baith lechem", but "and Bethlehem" is "oovaith lechem"; Oh, and "h" or "ch" in the transliteration of "Bethlehem" represents a sound that does not exist in English. Another example, God is "Elohim", but "my God" is "Elohai", and "our God" is "Eloheynu", etc.. If you really want to pronounce the names in the bible correctly, you need to look at each instance and understand how it should be pronounced in that particular verse.

3) In very ancient Hebrew six letters changed their pronunciation based on rules of grammar. While all six letters still follow the same grammatical rules to indicate a change in pronunciation, in modern Hebrew only three really do change their pronunciation. At the time of Christ four (maybe five) did. Again when these letters should change pronunciation is indicated in the Hebrew text, but not in the English. By the way "Bethlehem" has two of these, the 'b/v' at the beginning, and the 't/th' at the end, and the t/th at the end is something that changed only in biblical Hebrew, in modern Hebrew this is always just 't' i.e. (Bait Lechem).

4) Many Hebrew letters have changed pronunciation over the centuries, including the 'vav' and 'Yohd" in "Yehovah/Yahweh", and interestingly enough the ancient pronunciation of 'vav' usually translated as "w" is again one of those sounds that does not exist in English. "w" is close but not quite right.

5) Almost all of the names of people and places in the Hebrew bible are transliterated in a way that represents the name to an English speaker, but does not sound like its transliteration, if we are going to be picky about how names are pronounced we really need a new method of transliteration i.e. a technical transliteration that indicates exactly which Hebrew letters are used so that we can pronounce the names correctly in English. The 'J' that you are so worried about in "Jehovah" is also present in names like Joshua, Jeremiah, Jerusalem, Jonah, etc..., etc..., etc...

6) The name YHVH slightly breaks the normal pattern for the conjugation of a verb/gerund from a Hebrew root, and consequently there are no rules to govern the insertion of vowels. Because the Jewish people believed (for at least the last 24 centuries and probably much longer) that pronouncing the name of God was only permitted by the High priest, and only once a year on the Day of Atonement, the correct pronunciation of this name has been lost and all attempts to pronounce this name are only a guess. As it is was pointed by the Masorites (They invented the Hebrew vowel pointings), it would have been "Yahovah/Yahowah", but we know they intentionally mispointed this word using the vowels pointings from 'Adonai' to remind people of the traditional verbal substitution. "Jehovah" comes from transliterating Yehovah into English using the same rule of "J' for "Y", just like it was done for Joshua, Jeremiah, Jonah, etc... Oh, and by the way the Translation of YHVH as 'Lord' in most English bibles is a reflection of the same verbal tradition of substituting "Adonai (Lord)" for "YHVH" when the text is read in Hebrew.


As a student of Hebrew, and someone who is fascinated by the field of linguistic archeology, I recognize the challenges that face anyone who really wants to use the correct pronunciation; no one can have any more assurance than just a best guess. I am so thankful that there is no biblical requirement to figure it out because it is really something that is beyond our grasp. Ultimately, I think this is something God did intentionally so that we would place our time and effort learning about who he is, and not about how his name is pronounced in Hebrew. Knowing who God is, is far more important to our faith than figuring out how to pronounce his Hebrew name.

If you really still believe that figuring out how to pronounce God's Hebrew name is really that important, all I can say is good luck in your studies, you have a lot of work ahead of you. Oh, and by the way the 'ah' ending in Hebrew is almost always a feminine ending, and since all references to God are masculine, the 'ah' ending of "Yahwah" is almost certainly wrong! For example a 'Moreh' is a male teacher, but a 'morah' is a female teacher. Back to the drawing board I guess.

< Message edited by benelchi -- 8/14/2008 10:33:18 AM >
Post #: 167
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 11:35:06 AM   
Lapidoth

 

Posts: 3605
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
quote:

If you believe that the Strong's Concordance is in error, then please show a scholarly resource that states other wise.


The problem is that many "misuse" the Strong's Concordance
just like they "misuse" many other resources. Using it only to
justify their own opinions.

Here's a fairly good article about the Strong's.
I have one at my study table all the time. But, I also have
many other better resources at my table also.

Getting Beyond Strongs

Sacred Name Concerns

What's In A Name?

< Message edited by Lapidoth -- 8/14/2008 11:49:20 AM >


_____________________________

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
Post #: 168
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:04:15 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
Well now that is a better post. It is my understanding that gendering of Hebrew is more modren than the most ancient. I do not know when that change came about. Because I am not a linguistic expert I have been useing information from those who are, and are also Archaeologist.
quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

Just a thought, if your goal is simply to pronounce people and place names as they were originally spoken, you really should be reading only from the Hebrew bible and studying Linguistic Archeology. There really are a number of significant challenges to this goal.

1) In Hebrew many of the letters have sounds that do not exist in English, you MUST learn Hebrew if you really want to pronounce these names correctly.

2) Hebrew words (including names) can significantly change pronunciation depending on how that are used in a sentence. Some examples "Bethlehem" in Hebrew is "baith lechem", but "and Bethlehem" is "oovaith lechem"; Oh, and "h" or "ch" in the transliteration of "Bethlehem" represents a sound that does not exist in English. Another example, God is "Elohim", but "my God" is "Elohai", and "our God" is "Eloheynu", etc.. If you really want to pronounce the names in the bible correctly, you need to look at each instance and understand how it should be pronounced in that particular verse.

3) In very ancient Hebrew six letters changed their pronunciation based on rules of grammar. While all six letters still follow the same grammatical rules to indicate a change in pronunciation, in modern Hebrew only three really do change their pronunciation. At the time of Christ four (maybe five) did. Again when these letters should change pronunciation is indicated in the Hebrew text, but not in the English. By the way "Bethlehem" has two of these, the 'b/v' at the beginning, and the 't/th' at the end, and the t/th at the end is something that changed only in biblical Hebrew, in modern Hebrew this is always just 't' i.e. (Bait Lechem).

4) Many Hebrew letters have changed pronunciation over the centuries, including the 'vav' and 'Yohd" in "Yehovah/Yahweh", and interestingly enough the ancient pronunciation of 'vav' usually translated as "w" is again one of those sounds that does not exist in English. "w" is close but not quite right.

5) Almost all of the names of people and places in the Hebrew bible are transliterated in a way that represents the name to an English speaker, but does not sound like its transliteration, if we are going to be picky about how names are pronounced we really need a new method of transliteration i.e. a technical transliteration that indicates exactly which Hebrew letters are used so that we can pronounce the names correctly in English. The 'J' that you are so worried about in "Jehovah" is also present in names like Joshua, Jeremiah, Jerusalem, Jonah, etc..., etc..., etc...

6) The name YHVH slightly breaks the normal pattern for the conjugation of a verb/gerund from a Hebrew root, and consequently there are no rules to govern the insertion of vowels. Because the Jewish people believed (for at least the last 24 centuries and probably much longer) that pronouncing the name of God was only permitted by the High priest, and only once a year on the Day of Atonement, the correct pronunciation of this name has been lost and all attempts to pronounce this name are only a guess. As it is was pointed by the Masorites (They invented the Hebrew vowel pointings), it would have been "Yahovah/Yahowah", but we know they intentionally mispointed this word using the vowels pointings from 'Adonai' to remind people of the traditional verbal substitution. "Jehovah" comes from transliterating Yehovah into English using the same rule of "J' for "Y", just like it was done for Joshua, Jeremiah, Jonah, etc... Oh, and by the way the Translation of YHVH as 'Lord' in most English bibles is a reflection of the same verbal tradition of substituting "Adonai (Lord)" for "YHVH" when the text is read in Hebrew.


As a student of Hebrew, and someone who is fascinated by the field of linguistic archeology, I recognize the challenges that face anyone who really wants to use the correct pronunciation; no one can have any more assurance than just a best guess. I am so thankful that there is no biblical requirement to figure it out because it is really something that is beyond our grasp. Ultimately, I think this is something God did intentionally so that we would place our time and effort learning about who he is, and not about how his name is pronounced in Hebrew. Knowing who God is, is far more important to our faith than figuring out how to pronounce his Hebrew name.

If you really still believe that figuring out how to pronounce God's Hebrew name is really that important, all I can say is good luck in your studies, you have a lot of work ahead of you. Oh, and by the way the 'ah' ending in Hebrew is almost always a feminine ending, and since all references to God are masculine, the 'ah' ending of "Yahwah" is almost certainly wrong! For example a 'Moreh' is a male teacher, but a 'morah' is a female teacher. Back to the drawing board I guess.
Post #: 169
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:06:04 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
[SIZE="3"][COLOR="Blue"]Because I am a Judaeo Christian, I do not believe in deforming God's Name or His Messiah, who is Yahshua. Nor do I believe in misleading people in knowing His name. And that is why you should listen to me before anybody else on the subject. Many people think or believe that they are Judaeo Christians, but are not. A Jew is a convert to Judaism, and before people were called Christians, they were called converts to Judaism.[/COLOR][/SIZE]
Post #: 170
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:08:51 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
Why does everyone have to have their own code on the messages boards and websites?
Post #: 171
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:21:45 PM   
JimboFletch


Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
Mike, like I said a couple of times, since I am one of His blood-bought, joint-heirs, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit, I address Him as Abba, Father. When you're related to the Father by adoption, you're not hung up on insignificant details, like how to pronounce something that cannot be pronounced since it isn't known.

BTW, I watched an interesting documentary on another "Michael" last night. One named Michael Travesser. You ought to read up on him to see what theology gone bad from wrong assumptions can do to a person - and others that trust his delusions.
Post #: 172
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:37:56 PM   
MichaelTheeArchAngel

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
It would be nice if you would find something else to do besides harass me.
quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

Mike, like I said a couple of times, since I am one of His blood-bought, joint-heirs, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit, I address Him as Abba, Father. When you're related to the Father by adoption, you're not hung up on insignificant details, like how to pronounce something that cannot be pronounced since it isn't known.

BTW, I watched an interesting documentary on another "Michael" last night. One named Michael Travesser. You ought to read up on him to see what theology gone bad from wrong assumptions can do to a person - and others that trust his delusions.
Post #: 173
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:38:58 PM   
DaveW


Posts: 4099
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
quote:

It is my understanding that gendering of Hebrew is more modren than the most ancient. I do not know when that change came about.
M3AA: Check thru the text of the OT. Whenever you see a plural suffix as -ot (usually feminine) or as -im (usually masculine) you have the differentiation.

_____________________________

Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
Post #: 174
RE: Yahwah - 8/14/2008 12:45:19 PM   
JimboFletch


Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

It would be nice if you would find something else to do besides harass me.

Mike, when I address something seriously, you either completely ignore it (like part of that post above) or start spouting some of the drivel you've posted in other forums/places on the Internet.

You hold to positions clearly not accepted in Christendom now nor at any time in its history, yet that doesn't bother you.

Grandmother once told me, "Son, when you think everybody but you is crazy, you just might have it all wrong." It's a general principle that can help one from drifting off the main road and into the abyss.
Post #: 175
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine >> RE: Yahwah
Jump to post #:
Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to: