Post by kAHANyAH on Jun 11, 2004 8:05:55 GMT -5
Semantics ? LOL!! come on 1dell, you can do better then this. Now lets get back to the original topic...
I had already explained the word "virgin" in an earlier posting in the thread. Here is a caption from that post:
The above translation demonstrates how the word Virgin in fact signifies a vow. And in this case, the vow of celibacy.
Again I ask you 1dell, Why is it said the 144k were not defiled with women. Explain to me what law prevents a man from becoming defiled with women. You get that answer and you should be able to understand what the dealy is.
GOOD LUCK!
It just gives you the ability to retract what you say when proven wrong or try and spend 3/4ths of a post trying to make me appear incompetent. You and I BOTH know that verse could be retranslated and wouldn't even appear the same
In fact the word WITH in greek is Meta. Here are the other meanings of Meta: AV - with 345, after 88, among 5, hereafter + 5023 4, afterward + 5023 4, against 4, not tr 1, misc 32; 473
Lets take that meaning AMONG and we will have an ENTIRELY different meaning to this verse. In fact that would shed better light on this verse thereby making these "virgins" WOMEN instead of men! This book was written by a Hebrew and the hebrews didn't call men virgins. So why then all of a sudden did their cultural speak change? This could very well mean that these virigins were indeed women:
"These are they which were not defiled with women"
to
"These are they which were not defiled among women"
Which means what? that these virgins where those found among women who were not defiled.
So don't play the word game with me man. This ish is much deeper than that.
And for god's sake don't sit here and try to insult my intelligence like I don't see what you are saying. I just see thru your bull jank and skip all the pomp and get to the meat of what we are talking about. You throw up a lot of smoke screens and fanfare that aint really necessary that really don't need to be entertained. Just a bunch of diversion tactics that you think make you look intelligent.
And it's obvious you don't even read your own questions because the question you asked me was this:
Let me ask you something 1dell, do you know why the men were instructed NOT to come at their wives
not
Why did he say NOT TO GO UNTO THEIR WIVES
which one Kah? "come at" or "go unto"? besides I did ansaar your question thats why I posted the verses BEFORE Shimot 19:15 Let me do it again because obviously you are the one that don't read posts:
um because of this:
Exd 19:10 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes,
Exd 19:11 And be ready against the third day: for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.
I started off my thread ansaaring your question. Sorry if it wasn't the ansaar you were looking for but I ansaared the question with the truth.
See all this bullshit you do with this trying to make me look all incompetent and like I am evading your questions. spending most of your posts trying to act like I don't read everything you say or didn't ansaar questions is an insult to me. Then when I start insulting you back then you want to scream bloddy murder! I reserve that name calling and insulting for my enemies I don't expect another illuminopolite to come at me like that unnecessarily. But when you do don't expect to be exempt when I start throwing that ish back at you.
I had already explained the word "virgin" in an earlier posting in the thread. Here is a caption from that post:
- The greek word used in revelation for virgin is Parthenos. The root word here is Parthos which means to PLEDGE. This is where the catholic priests get the vow of celibacy from or pledging to abstain from sexual gratification or intercourse. What and why are these 144k men pledging or vowing to do to prevent from being DEFILED (Rev 14.4, These are they which were not defiled with women...)?
The above translation demonstrates how the word Virgin in fact signifies a vow. And in this case, the vow of celibacy.
Again I ask you 1dell, Why is it said the 144k were not defiled with women. Explain to me what law prevents a man from becoming defiled with women. You get that answer and you should be able to understand what the dealy is.
GOOD LUCK!
1dell said:
Dude, this backdoor semantic game you like to play often gets old and tired and it's useless and meaningless. It just gives you the ability to retract what you say when proven wrong or try and spend 3/4ths of a post trying to make me appear incompetent. You and I BOTH know that verse could be retranslated and wouldn't even appear the same
In fact the word WITH in greek is Meta. Here are the other meanings of Meta: AV - with 345, after 88, among 5, hereafter + 5023 4, afterward + 5023 4, against 4, not tr 1, misc 32; 473
Lets take that meaning AMONG and we will have an ENTIRELY different meaning to this verse. In fact that would shed better light on this verse thereby making these "virgins" WOMEN instead of men! This book was written by a Hebrew and the hebrews didn't call men virgins. So why then all of a sudden did their cultural speak change? This could very well mean that these virigins were indeed women:
"These are they which were not defiled with women"
to
"These are they which were not defiled among women"
Which means what? that these virgins where those found among women who were not defiled.
So don't play the word game with me man. This ish is much deeper than that.
And for god's sake don't sit here and try to insult my intelligence like I don't see what you are saying. I just see thru your bull jank and skip all the pomp and get to the meat of what we are talking about. You throw up a lot of smoke screens and fanfare that aint really necessary that really don't need to be entertained. Just a bunch of diversion tactics that you think make you look intelligent.
And it's obvious you don't even read your own questions because the question you asked me was this:
Let me ask you something 1dell, do you know why the men were instructed NOT to come at their wives
not
Why did he say NOT TO GO UNTO THEIR WIVES
which one Kah? "come at" or "go unto"? besides I did ansaar your question thats why I posted the verses BEFORE Shimot 19:15 Let me do it again because obviously you are the one that don't read posts:
um because of this:
Exd 19:10 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes,
Exd 19:11 And be ready against the third day: for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.
I started off my thread ansaaring your question. Sorry if it wasn't the ansaar you were looking for but I ansaared the question with the truth.
See all this bullshit you do with this trying to make me look all incompetent and like I am evading your questions. spending most of your posts trying to act like I don't read everything you say or didn't ansaar questions is an insult to me. Then when I start insulting you back then you want to scream bloddy murder! I reserve that name calling and insulting for my enemies I don't expect another illuminopolite to come at me like that unnecessarily. But when you do don't expect to be exempt when I start throwing that ish back at you.
and have the nerves and audacity to say I dissed you! Where have I dissed you mang! ? HUH!!!!!!!!!!!!
;D 
