Troy

Just a quick one for reasons that I'll explain in a sec.

Great dialogue here, I think that we have exchanged most of our supporting evidence. I do want to reiterate that that Lucifer translation as "morning star" in Isaiah is from Latin Vulgate-based agenda-driven (that agenda being to undermine Christ's divinity & nature) translations. Also Wikipedia, as useful as it is & as much as I use it, has been hacked by the Vatican & the CIA in the top two positions. My issue with that article that you refer to is that as far as I recall, it doesn't discuss the refutation of that translation. I'm not saying that I want articles that agree with me, I just expect them to fairly show the different sides to any strongly challenged matter.

The fact that things like that get into Wikipedia without challenge is yet more evidence of how far mainstream religious establishments & committees have been so thoroughly infiltrated by agents of Rome & ecumenicalised. They have been soaked in their Romish NIV & other Vulgate-derivatives. The KJV was written at a moment when spoken English was at its peak & has degenerated since then. The translators were multilingual polymaths & some of the most intelligent mean ever assembled. Today's specialisation has some significant drawbacks & is obviously better for social control (compartmented knowledge).

People go on about other things like advances in archeology, Fact: most archeological sites have only lower single-figure percentages of the area excavated at most of any site. The implications of this are obvious once considered. In fact most academics now know more & more about less & less & even the better ones - especially the "better" ones - are like idiot savants.

The KJV is also a literal or formal translation, not one based on multi-choice selected dynamic equivalence. I also consider it to be the result of divine working that brought the full blossoming of the English language about at a very specific point in time. It had very specific (good word that) variants of words that were the result of a subtler more nuanced mode of thought. It's quite shocking how far this degeneration has affected thinking processes.

I have had arguments with an apparently intelligent American (relatively speaking, you know - L.O.L.!!) about what the term "Before the Lord" meant. He was insistent that the Bible was referring to some time before God existed! I explained that no, it meant "in front of the Lord" or in the "understanding of the Lord". He went on & on about me being biased! I said "no, my friend. Just ask any secular scholar of English at a major university".

Not that I recommend academics for everything. It's a bit like just using doctors when you break a bone, though not quite as crucial! He was another ex-Catholic & basically hated all forms of Christianity - still does really, but likes my research, so what can you do! He's alright in many other ways. I guess that America is a different world in many ways - "two nations divided by a common language", as somebody once remarked once upon a time about England & America.

In the first edition of the AV1611, the spelling was "Iewe". which is the same word as "Jew", like some say "Yehovah" instead of "Jehovah", etc, ad infinitum. It's neither a "j" or a "y" sound in actual fact, it's that lower-lip breathy attack to the sound in Hebrew that is ambiguous when trying to capture in English or other European languages. The subsequent revisions of the AV1611 in no way changed any of the meaning or intent, but English was still being standardised for another couple of hundred years. So consistencies like this were introduced.

For Freedman to say that the word didn't exist before the 17 or 1800's or whenever is false implication, though not false as a contextless textual analysis, if you catch my drift. That's why I say that his pedantry is nonsensical & in fact intentionally so & thus Jesuitical ("dissembling or equivocating, in the manner associated with Jesuits."). The sound IS the word. Thus the importance of Jews not speaking the Tetragrammaton. Writing it - no problem. Also interesting to note that Hebrew was a set, standardised language a long time before English, as obvious as it is regardless.

There are different levels of Satanism. The gateway level, e.g. the LaVeyan Church of Satan is Atheistic. The Satanic Bible is apparently among the top all-time selling books. Temple of Set, which is higher level is deity-based.

As for what I was getting at with my mentioning the denial of Jesus as Messiah, in terms of emphasis or intent I was referring to your methodology being that of Rome, not merely your viewpoint on the matter.

The Pike quote - aahh, I have a feeling - more of an intellectual assessment, that that letter is a hoax, after examining the investigations into it. An evidence-less & ultimately discrediting red herring There are a couple of very thorough articles on the net somewhere that look into this. FWIW, Barry Chamish's assessment is the same on this one.

Right, my friend, I will have to leave this for a while, as I have a large bunch of evidence to assess that has been sent to me regarding the Constantinian Order. So if you will excuse me I have to attend to that, as it is most pressing that I do so, based on what I have seen. I hope that you understand.

Thanks for the exchange -

Troy



http://www.massresistance.org/index.html


http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wolves/ronpaul.htm