The Black Vault

shadowcass wrote:I did not say Jesus called out Elijah...I said he called out "Eloi" which is a cognate of the Hebrew "El" "Elohim" which does NOT mean "God."

It means "Most High" as I said previously. "God" is NOT a name...it is a title at best, A job description even




The word "God" comes from the Indo-European and means (literally) "that which is invoked."

The true name of the being Moses encounters at the Burning Bush is given in Exodus as I referenced previously and the accurate pronounciation of that name has been lost (since written Hebrew had no vowels and the Name was NEVER spoken. Other names or words being substituted in its place "El Shaddai" "Adonai" and so on.

Yod He Vau He "YHVH" the Tetragrammaton...IS the Name "God" gives Moses at the Burning Bush and it means what I said. Now..no vowels (in Hebrew, that is) and as for Yod it can represent the English letters "I" "Y" or "J" , "Vau" (sometimes written "wau" can represent the English letter "V" OR "W" are you beginning to see the problem?

I am getting very sick of people who have never studied Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic OR scripture writing about it.

The Gospel Writers did NOT say people misunderstood the WORDS Jesus uttered from the cross...but some misunderstood the meaning of "El" or "Eloi" as it is rendered in English according to the whims of the translators.
It meant "Most High"

The correct pronounciation in Aramaic, by the way, is " AaLaH" and it is related to the Arabic "Allah" (which means roughly the same).

Jesus did not pronounce El or the most high in Hebrew on the cross


"'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani' was a mixture of Aramaic and Hebrew, translated by Matthew for his readers.

Jesus of Nazareth primarily spoke Aramaic in a Galilean dialect, perhaps along with some Hebrew and some Greek.Nazareth and Capernaum, where were primarily Aramaic-speaking community. Jesus may have also known enough Hebrew to discuss the Torah which is the Hebrew bible, and he may have known Koine Greek.

Jesus and his disciples spoke a Galilean dialect clearly distinguishable from that of Jerusalem.
On the other hand historian Josephus wrote in Aramaic, and Philo and Paul of Tarsus ( Saint Paul ) wrote in Greek.

Most of the apostles from the Galilee region also spoke Aramaic. The message of Christianity spread (primarily among Jewish Aramaic-speaking enclaves) throughout Judea, Syria and Mesopotamia, and even to Kerala, India in Aramaic.

Ηλι Ηλι λαμα σαβαχθανει/ܐܝܠ ܐܝܠ ܠܡܢܐ ܫܒܩܬܢܝ ("Eli Eli Lama Sabachthanei"/"Eli Eli Lmana sbaqtani")

Sayings of Jesus on the cross

Matthew 27:46

Around the ninth hour, Jesus shouted in a loud voice, saying "Eli Eli lema sabachthani?" which is, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Mark 15:34

And at the ninth hour, Jesus shouted in a loud voice, "Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani?" which is translated, "My God, my God, for what have you forsaken me?"



Overall, both versions appear to be Aramaic rather than Hebrew because of the verb שבק (šbq) "abandon", which is originally Aramaic.
The "pure" Biblical Hebrew counterpart to this word, עזב (`zb) is seen in the first line of Psalm 22, which the saying appears to quote.
Thus, Jesus is not quoting the canonical Hebrew version (êlî êlî lâmâ `azabtânî); he may be quoting the version given in an Aramaic Targum (surviving Aramaic Targums do use šbq in their translations of the Psalm 22:2 alohi alohi lmaza šbaqtoni ).

Mark's word for my God , ελωι, definitely corresponds to the Aramaic form אלהי, elāhî.
Matthiew's word for my God, ηλι, fits in better with the אלי of the original Hebrew Psalm, as has been pointed out in the literature, however, it may also be Aramaic, because this form is attested abundantly in Aramaic as well.


In the following verse, in both accounts, some who hear Jesus' cry imagine that he is calling for help from Elijah (Ēlīyāhū or Ēlīyā). This is perhaps to underline the incomprehension of the bystanders about what is happening. This detail has been argued to fit in better with Matthiew's version, since êlî seems somewhat more prone to be confused with Ēlīyā(hū) than ělāhî does.

Almost all ancient Greek manuscripts show signs of trying to normalize this text. For instance, the peculiar Codex Bezae renders both versions with ηλι ηλι λαμα ζαφθανι (ēli ēli lama zaphthani). The Alexandrian, Western and Caesarean textual families all reflect harmonization of the texts between Matthew and Mark. Only the Byzantine textual tradition preserves a distinction.

The Aramaic word form šəbaqtanî is based on the verb šəbaq/šābaq, 'to allow, to permit, to forgive, and to forsake', with the perfect tense ending -t (2nd person singular: 'you'), and the object suffix -anî (1st person singular: 'me').

In Aramaic, it could be אלהי אלהי למא שבקתני.

One thing for sure Mark Matthiew Paul Luke where not there at the cross.

I think that he was indeed calling Elijah.
Did Jesus not see Elijah and Moise on the mount at the famous transfiguration episode one week before.

Jesus and three of his apostles go to a mountain. On the mountain, Jesus begins to shine with bright rays of light, the prophets Moses and Elijah appear next to him and he speaks with them.
Were they talking about his crucifixion.
Were they suppose to be there to help him out.

Oh I see...you like to argue.

Find someone else.

As to what Jesus may or may not have said from the cross all we have are the gospel accounts.

But if He said "Eloi Eloi lama sabacthani?" He was quoting the first versen of the 22nd Psalm.

Everyone with half a brain knows that.

As for what languages Jesus may or may not have spoken I guess it all depends on whether you think He was a man or the Son of God.

If He was only a man...as the Jesus Seminar would have it then He isn't important at all and there is no reason for even discussing Him.

So don't waste any more time on it.

shadowcass wrote:Just one MORE thing...if you knew anything about history you'd know the first Christian Churcn above ground was not at Rome and had nothing to do with Catholic tradition or teaching...it was in England...at Glastonbury.

Even the Vatican admits that.

Reluctantly...but they admit it.

Nope,
In Jerusalem the apostles founded what became know as the Apostolic Church 40 days after the death of Jesus iin a upper room in a buiding in the Zion section of Jerusalem.
It was an apostolic community of some 120 individuals which multiplied to 80 thousands a decade later.
During the first three decades members of this Jewish Jesus sect were almost all Orthodox Jews. Pagan's were not converting in mass yet.

The first bishops of The Apostolic Jerusalem church were all circumcised Jews united with law of Mose with the doctrines of Jesus.
One must remember that the early apostolic church did not posses the Epistles of Paul or the four Gospels as they were had not not written yet.

The Christianity of the eleven disciples of Jesus consisted of what they remembered of Jesus' sayings and the ordeals and tribulations they had with him,legends and beliefs of their times and embellished by hope and need.

He was view as not a divine being but an anointed one the rightful king of Israel that one day would liberated the Jews from the giant oppressor the Roman Empire
These Nazarenes beleive that their messiah had arrive
Peter was the head of the apostolic church for two decades 30 to 50 Ad Then James the elder Jesus' brother took over the Apostolic Church of Jerusalem.
James was in fact working for the reformation of the Jewish faith and envisioned that through his brand of Jewish Christianity Jerusalem would become the true city of David.
However by that time the Nazarenes were becoming in danger absorbed back into Judaism from which Jesus had sprung out.
This is where A Pharisee Jew by the name of Saul of Tarsus later to be nknow has Paul by his roman name steps in.

Around 50 AD after Barabas asked Paul to accompany him on a missionary journey this is when Paul concocted the future shape of Christianity.
He made three decisions.
Since Jews had not stamped to the Nazarene the Jewish Christian sect he had to take the faith to the pagans.
To make it easier for the gentiles he abandoned the rite of circumcision and dietary laws.
The third decision was to substitute Jesus the flesh for the Torah the word.
Paul changed Jesus from a Jewish Messiah rabbi into the Christ

Paul invented Christianity and perverted the true religion of Jesus.
And these are the facts

shadowcass wrote:Well, once again I was logged out while composing my response.

But maybe that's a good thing.

I told you previously I didn't care whether anyone accepts the deity and resurrection of Jesus or not. But don't try to put it on Paul.

Peter is the first to proclaim that Jesus is the Son of God (Matthew tells us that). So do all the "demons" He encounters throughout the gospels. He states it Himself and says the proof will be given when He rises from the dead.

The Christian Claim begins with Peter preaching that Christ HAS risen "This Jesus God raised up, and we are all witnesses of it. So then, exalted to the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father, he has poured out what you both see and hear..." Acts Chapter 2

If there is to be any more of this we'd best move to the Religion Forum, don'tcha think?

Oh the Message of Christianity has nothing to0 do with any later creeds put about at various councils...it was already there.

Many scholars believe that it was written some time after St. Matthew's death by an unknown person

John Carroll (The Existential Jesus) says that the author of Matthew copied something like 80% of Mark virtually word for word. His reliance on Mark for the story of Jesus shows that he was not the disciple Matthew, as once supposed.

The author of Matthew, writing the gospel of Matthew was between 80 and early 90s CE, was a Jew familiar with mid rash storytelling, but his primary language must have been Greek.
The Gospel known to us as the Gospel According to St Matthew does not identify its author.
For many decades after it was written, it was not attributed to any specific author.

It is only in the middle of the second century, it was felt that the author must have been one of the disciples, because of his apparently intimate knowledge of the life of Jesus.
The disciple called Matthew was decided on as the most likely author because, as a tax collector, he would have been well educated.
However, some believe the author of this Gospel copied most of his information about the life of Jesus from Mark's Gospel. The author did not have any first hand knowledge of the life of Jesus and therefore the author could not have been the disciple called Matthew. We are back in the position where we do not know the name of the author.

shadowcass wrote:Well, once again I was logged out while composing my response.

But maybe that's a good thing.

I told you previously I didn't care whether anyone accepts the deity and resurrection of Jesus or not. But don't try to put it on Paul.

Peter is the first to proclaim that Jesus is the Son of God (Matthew tells us that). So do all the "demons" He encounters throughout the gospels. He states it Himself and says the proof will be given when He rises from the dead.

The Christian Claim begins with Peter preaching that Christ HAS risen "This Jesus God raised up, and we are all witnesses of it. So then, exalted to the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father, he has poured out what you both see and hear..." Acts Chapter 2

If there is to be any more of this we'd best move to the Religion Forum, don'tcha think?

Oh the Message of Christianity has nothing to0 do with any later creeds put about at various councils...it was already there.

Peter did not beleive that Jesus was God


After the ascension of Jesus, when Peter testified for Jesus in front of thousands of Jews in Jerusalem he said “You that are Israelites, listen to what I have to say: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with deeds of power, wonders, and signs that God did through him among you, as you yourselves know ... ” (Acts 2:22 NRSV) Peter calls Jesus a Man and said that God worked through him like God worked miracles through Moses.

Peter said, “Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him Jesusboth Lord Master and Messiah of the Jews ...” (Acts 2:36 NRSV)
Peter believed that God “made” Jesus Lord and Messiah (the Christ, the Anointed one).
Peter said, “... God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power ...” (Acts 10:38 NRSV) Peter knew that God does not need to be anointed with the Holy Spirit.
This shows that Peter did not believe Jesus was God. Peter believed that there was a time when Jesus was not anointed, and was not the Lord and Messiah (the time before his baptism).
When Peter said “Messiah” he meant “Messiah of Israel,” not “savior of the world.” His listeners were Jews.
When he said “Messiah,” they understood “Messiah of Israel”: the one they were waiting for.

Peter believed that Jesus was a prophet, like Moses. He said, “For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you.’ ” (Acts 3:22 NIV)
Peter also said, “... {King David} a prophet, therefore, being, and knowing that with an oath God did swear to him, out of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, to raise up the Christ, to sit upon his throne ...” (Acts 2:30 YLT)
Peter believed that Jesus was a physical descendant of David (“the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh”) and that God will put Jesus on the throne of King David, the throne of Israel. In other words, Peter implied that Jesus will return as the king of Israel. He was preaching to Jews, not to Gentiles. He told them, “For the promise {God’s promise} is for you {the Jews}, for your children, and for all {the Jews} who are far away {the Diaspora Jews}, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him.” (Acts 2:39 NRSV)
Peter believed hat Israel “will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations will be blessed through Israel.” And this is what Jesus taught. “He {Jesus} said to her, ‘Let the children {i.e. the Jews} be fed first {and then the dogs: the Gentiles}, for it is not fair to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs.’ ” (Mark 7:27 NRSV) The Jews believed that God promised salvation first to the Jews. Then from the Jews, salvation will become available to the Gentiles: “{Jesus said:}... salvation is from the Jews.” (John 4:22 NASB) Of course, they believed to be saved Gentiles must first be circumcised and obey the Law.

Peter did not preach that Jesus is a god. The Christian Church father, Irenaeus (who was instrumental in putting the New Testament together), confirms this, “Peter together with John preached to them {to the Jews} this plain message of glad tidings, that the promise which God made to the {Jewish} fathers had been fulfilled by Jesus; not certainly proclaiming another god, but the Son of God ...” Peter did not proclaim Jesus as a god.

Later on, in front of another group of Jews Peter preached, “The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our ancestors {Yahweh} has glorified his servant Jesus ...” (Acts 3:13 NRSV) When he said “God,” he meant Yahweh, the Father of Jesus. Peter believed that Jesus was a mere “servant” of God. “But Peter and the apostles answered {to the priests}, ‘We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers {Yahweh} raised up Jesus ...” (Acts 5:29-30 NASB)

When Peter and the apostles told the priests, “we must obey God,” they meant “we must obey Yahweh,” the Father of Jesus. When they said, “the god of our fathers,” they meant Yahweh, the Father of Jesus. Peter and the priests believed in the same god.

Irenaeus wrote, “But it is evident from Peter’s words that he did indeed still retain the God who was already known to them {the Jews}.” [2] Irenaeus’ statement indicates that Peter did not believe in the Trinity. He believed in exactly the same god that the Jews believed. He was a Jewish Christian.

As Irenaeus indicates, Peter never told them that Jesus is God, or a god. Later on, Peter, John, and their friends prayed to God, not to Jesus: “... they raised their voices together to God and said, ‘Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth, the sea, and everything in them ... the peoples of Israel, gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed {i.e. God anointed Jesus, during his baptism, as the Son of God}...” (Acts 4:24, 27 NRSV) They prayed to God “who made the heaven and the earth, the sea.” Unlike the writer of the Gospel of John and Paul, they believed that God “made the heaven and the earth,” not Jesus. These verses show that Peter (and the editor of Acts) did not believe in the Logos doctrine. Peter never said that Jesus pre-existed. He was a Jewish Christian, an Ebionite. Irenaeus wrote, “The so-called Ebionites admit that the world was made by the true God {the Father of Jesus} ...” [3] The Logos doctrine was the doctrine of the Hellenist Christians.

Peter believed that Yahweh was the Father and the god of Jesus. He wrote, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” (1 Peter 1:3 NRSV) This is similar to what Jesus said himself: “I ascend to my Father, and your Father; to my God and your God.” (John 20:17 KJV) Peter’s God was the god of Jesus, not Jesus. [4]

Peter believed that God is one person. James held the same belief. James wrote, “There is only one {Gr. eiV, referring to one person} lawgiver and judge the one who is able to save and destroy.” (James 4:12 NASB) The phrase “there is only one lawgiver and judge” refers to the Father of Jesus, Yahweh. The Father of Jesus is the “lawgiver” because he gave the law to Moses. He who gave the law is God. He is the one who will judge the world. “But God is the judge.” (Psalms 75:7 KJV) “... God will judge the righteous and the wicked.” (Ecclesiastes 3:17 KJV) James also wrote, “You believe that God is one {Gr. eiV, referring to one person}; you do well.” (James 2:19 NRSV) The word “one” in English is an inadequate translation of the Greek word “eiV”, which, when applied to a person, means “one male person.” The Greek word “qeoV” is a noun that refers to one male person. The article “o” when applied to a person, it refers to a male person.
So the phrase “eiV estin o qeoV” literally means, “God is one male person.” James referred to God as one person. James was a Jewish Christian, the leader of the Ebionites. Eusebius wrote, “They {the Ebionites} regarded Him {Jesus} as plain and ordinary, a man esteemed as righteous through growth of character and nothing more, the child of a normal union between a man and Mary.” Nicodemus was a “closet” Jewish Christian (a Jew who secretly accepted Jesus as the Messiah). He believed that Jesus performed miracles not because he was God but because God was with him: “This man {Nicodemus} came to Jesus by night and said to him, ‘Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.’ ” (John 3:2 RSV) The Jewish Christians believed that God was with Jesus, not that Jesus was God. They believed he had died and rose (went to Heaven) spiritually (not in the flesh). Their belief that Jesus rose spiritually was not unusual in those days. Spiritual resurrections were common. The Jewish Christians did not make his death and resurrection a central factor in their interpretation of his significance. They did not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Matthew 1:21 says Jesus will save the world from their sins: “She {Mary} will bear a son, and you {Joseph} are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” (Matthew 1:21 NRSV) This verse was not part of their gospel. As mentioned earlier, their gospel of Matthew did not have a virgin birth narrative. Their gospel of Matthew may have served as one of the sources for the Gospel of Matthew, which we have today. The Ebionites believed that “even after Christ descended on Jesus in the form of a dove at his baptism, Jesus remained simply a man.” They saw him as a righteous teacher, the Messiah, who brought the law back to the true ideas of Moses. James and Peter believed likewise. They were the leaders of the Jewish Christians.

It IS possible to get so hung up on being erudite that one can miss the point

http://www.horrormasters.com/Text/a1126.pdf

Elohim

Elohim is one of three Divine Names by which the Creator is known as He creates.
'Elohim' is a plural word, which is peculiar because God is one (Deuteronomy 6:4). The etymology is generally deemed uncertain but most likely it comes from lh ('lh), and perhaps from elim, the plural of el, el, the common Canaanite word for god.

'Elohim' is a plural word. It therefore, cannot be translated into the singular 'God', because the singular of 'Elohim' is 'Eloha'.

The word el (singular) is a standard term for "god" in other related Semitic languages including Ugaritic.


Jewish scriptures, Genesis1:26 "Elohim created mankind in their own image, in the image of Elohim they created them, male and female they created them." Based on independent scholar Zacheria Sitchin, the plural word "Elohim" means "those who came from the sky" and has the same meaning as the word "Annunaki" from the Sumerian tablets which are older than the Old Testament.

The word "Elohim" was later translated into the word "God", once translated into this singular word, making Judaism the world's first monotheist religion, the belief in one god. All of the major Western religions (Christianity and Muslim) found their roots in Judaism based on this "false" translation, as per Sitchin.

The point my dear lady is that a ll life on earth was created scientifically by Extra-terrestrials with mastery of Genetic Engineering and DNA.'Let us create man In our own image…’.They are the ELOHIM of the Bible, word wrongly translated for God, Elohim in Hebrew is a plural and means 'Those who came from the sky'. The ELOHIM decided to leave us progress alone and sent prophets to help us and leave traces of their creation.

No, Elohim doesn't mean "those who came from the sky". But this discussion has been moved (at least, insofar as I am concerned) to its proper place..the Religion & Spirituality Forum.

Now if your main point is that you believe that Genesis and so on can be explained by a reference to Space Visitors may I suggest you pay a visit to the website Judaism 101 http://www.jewfaq.org/index.htm where those whose religion Judaism IS can explain it to you?

I don't discuss Judaism much because I wasn't raised in it. My understanding of the Hebrew Bible (aka the Old Testament) is slanted by by upbringing with a Christian POV or weltanshaunng.

Even my studies in the Seminary were colored by that because those who were TEACHINg the Old Testament were Christians...with a Christian slant.

NOT a good starting point for understanding Judaism as it IS...one must go to those whose religion it is for that.

Try that.

zoltan2 wrote:IMO Extraterestials can be in this 3 rd dimensional form or into another lower or higher dimensional form whereby the atoms and molecules vibrate at different frequencies.

This is mentioned in the Ancient Aliens episode "Angels and Aliens"
as the Ultraterrestrial Theory.

shadowcass wrote:REALLY? Have you not heard of "The Collins Elite"? You need to read Nick Redfern's book FINAL EVENTS . BTW: here's some music to read it BY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SelI5uBwwnE

Nope. Haven't heard of either of these and I don't I'd be interested anyway.

So can we please get this thread back on topic and take out the religious discussion. This is not a thread for that topic. There is another section of the board for that type of thing. For those who wish to discuss it.

[quote="WarAngel Nope. Haven't heard of either of these and I don't I'd be interested anyway.

So can we please get this thread back on topic and take out the religious discussion. This is not a thread for that topic. There is another section of the board for that type of thing. For those who wish to discuss it.[/quote]

Well, warangel...I believe I have made that point about the "religion" aspect more than once...I even started a thread in the Religion and Spirituality Forum but I can get Zoltan, the Hound of Dracula to follow me over there. As for Nick Redferhn..he's an extremely well know researcher in cryptozoology and ufos and the Collins Elite was/is a US Government "secret" group and the book, likie all Nick's books.... THREE MEN SEEKING MONSTERS, THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE WOODS, and so on is extremely well written and very interesting. He used to do a podcast with Raven Meindel called "Exploring All Realms" http://apexn.com/ I don't know if they're still doing it but I believe there are still some podcasts on-line at that link.

All the best!