Correctly translating ancient texts. GENESIS 1, LEVITICUS 20:13, and Muslim Prayer closing

I don't usually bother reading replies on threads I post, or my other posts,

I have found (without meaning to be insulting to the regulars of this forum) that posting on this board is best done whilst keeping the following in mind,

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.

That being said, I plan to actually keep an eye on this particular thread, in case anyone posts anything I feel is worth translating. I am offering for people to post verses in this thread they wish for me to analyse and correctly translate for them.

I will do my best to answer all of them, but if I don't answer particular posts it will be because I didn't see any need for a correction to be applied to the verse, or there is nothing worth correcting within it.

I have a certain 'gift' that has been afforded to me, which allows me to understand, speak and translate pretty much any language there is. Even dead ones.

And as my understanding of certain modern languages comes from their proto-dialects, I can usually understand the foundation of 'meaning' within modern languages better than those who speak it themselves.

Not only this, but I also sometimes get some 'insight' into their origins.

An example of this would be the closing to Muslim prayer when they turn their head to each side and say,

"AS SALAM ALAYKUM WA RAHMATULLAHI WA BARAKATUHU"

Which basically translates to,

'THERE IS TOO MUCH OF ME HERE FOR THAT'.

THIS ORIGINALLY COMES FROM A SONG. IT IS A SONG THAT WAS GIVEN TO HELP APPEASE THE FEAR OF CHILDREN.

IT WOULD BE MORE ACCURATELY TRANSLATED TODAY TO SOMETHING LIKE "I AM PHYSICAL AND HERE. MONSTERS AREN'T PHYSICAL AND HERE, SO THEY CAN'T HURT ME".

TO USE ITS ORIGINAL FORM AS CONTEXT, YOU WOULD SAY, "THERE IS TOO MUCH OF ME HERE FOR THAT (TO HARM ME)"

There a very common misconception of what an ANGEL is within this text.

Most of us fail to understand that an "ANGEL" or "MESSENGER" is actually a living consciousness capable of communication. If you can COMMUNICATE (hence messenger), YOU ARE AN ANGEL!!!

We are all Angels.

Next is GENESIS 1,

GENESIS actually talks about the function of who you are. How the consciousness works. How you fit in with the Universe and also, where they got the information from.

GENESIS 1 basically states. That if you were to take the entire Universe, condense it down to the point where it turns inside out, that you would have your brain.

That the function of your brain, is in essence a INTERNALISED replication of the entire EXTERNAL universe surrounding you.

This is where they get the saying, "AS ABOVE, SO BELOW". Which actually means, ALL THAT IS OUTSIDE OF ME, IS INSIDE OF ME.

GENESIS 1 translated (correctly) from the Hebrew Aleppo Codex explains the foundation of this. And that the point where the EXTERNAL universe crosses over to being our INTERNAL brain, is a focus which we call our consciousness.

It is like the concentration of sun-rays through a magnifying glass. That point of focus. Where the internal turns around to reflect the external, is what you call your SELF.

When GENESIS 1 is correctly translated, it is easy to understand this.

GENESIS 1:1
Everything comes to be by the balance of its 'over-source', which is both within itself and outside itself.

GENESIS 1:2
And within the span of the opposing balance of darkness outside to the darkness within, we find a focus. And it is within that focus we exist and find ourselves.

GENESIS 1:3
Presented to us from higher energetic system(s) (over-source) we receive a supply of power, all power which we know and sustains us.

I have only given you part of Genesis, as I am yet to translate any more. I understand the workings of the what is contained within the texts without having to translate them. Therefore the only reason I do so, is for others ... But!

I am locked in an ongoing battle with the Catholic Church where I am trying to force them to come clean and give the truth to the world on their own without me having to RE-TRANSLATE texts that they already have translated

I believe it would be far better for them to admit to the world they have been lying to them, than for me to have to do it for them.

They know these translations VERY WELL. And they understand who we are and how the Universe works from the correct translations of these texts. They just choose to keep the truth from the rest of the world, because it allows them power, influence, authority and most of all wealth.

Something that will be changing very soon, whether they like it or not.

Proof of this can be found within the last part that I will provide you with as an example.

This part will explain to you why Francis and the Roman Catholic Church have expedited a process to have homosexuals accepted within the Catholic Church, as a priority before the equal-rights of women.

This of course is illogical, as the foundation for all 'equality' in creation, is that of a MALE and FEMALE in balance and harmony.

So why would they skip this step, repetitively denying the nuns and women who are fighting for their equality, yet look at giving homosexuals equality???

Because it is something they MUST do in order to maintain their position, authority and control of the Church.

It is something which is dictated to them within LEVITICUS.

LEVITICUS literally means, "PASSAGES FOR GROWTH". It is a book which details how to maintain stability within a regime of authority, such as with the Catholic Church. It is cognate with the roots of the word LEVY.

For all Catholics and Christians it is important to know that LEVITICUS 20:13 doesn't talk about homosexuals.

It actually speaks about the balance of power that is A EMPEROR AND EMPRESS.

It basically states,

What is given for a man to know with a woman, is not given for a man to know with other men.

This essentially says. That true balance of understanding within positions of power comes from both a MAN AND A WOMAN.

A KING AND A QUEEN TOGETHER.

And cannot be sufficiently known or understood by a man alone.

A couple, both of whom, coming together, understand the deeper wisdom of this world. Who are IMPERATIVELY non-religious. But understand the need for the young souls among us to have something similar to religion.

This book states that balance of power, cannot be the balance of power WITHOUT A MALE/FEMALE BALANCE.

IT IS NOT TO BE KNOWN BY MEN WITH OTHER MEN.

This refers to the Vatican, Freemasons, and every other male dominated society who think they run this world.

Amusingly, if you understood things properly and you had to pick a dominant sex, it would actually be female!

Male dominated authority is highly illogical.

So, because they know LEVITICUS speaks specifically about their power. They are trying to 'accept' the homosexual community, in order to see themselves accepted.

This actually proves they know EXACTLY what the Bible says, under the corrupted version.

The fact they are aiming to see homosexuals accepted before a feminine balance, shows they know EXACTLY WHAT LEVITICUS SAYS.

And no doubt the rest of the Bible.

LEVITICUS 20:13
THE BALANCE OF POWER IN THIS WORLD, CAN ONLY BE KNOWN BY A MAN WITH A WOMAN. NOT A MAN WITH OTHER MEN.

AS THIS BRINGS ABOUT INSTABILITY, CONTRARY TO HOW THE BLOODLINES AND ALL OTHER BALANCE IN THIS WORLD WORKS.

Further to this. Out of interest:

Within the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, and their own Bible and other texts, it is ILLEGAL for them to function without a EMPEROR AND EMPRESS.

Their hierarchy states that what we today know as 'The Pope' is only a spiritual adviser. Someone that was employed by the Empire to assist with upholding morale and hope among the poor.

The Empire CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT A EMPEROR AND EMPRESS as the Roman Empire had in the past.

A King could not sit without a Queen, or a prospect Queen. And a Queen could not sit without a King.

There is actually more to this which states a Queen would need to stand down if there was a suitable male (brother) replacement for the deceased/ex King. This ensured the legitimacy of the bloodline.

Hence Queen Elizabeth of the Western Empire is illegitimate.

This is why her 'partner' was never crowned King.

IT IS ILLEGAL!!!

But, back on the topic.

THE ROMAN EMPIRE, CANNOT STAND, WITHOUT AN EMPEROR AND EMPRESS.

Without them, the Pope has no claim to power. NONE!

The Emperor and Empress can exist without their spiritual adviser, but not the other way around

The Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church have no authority to be seated in the house and city they claim is theirs.

Lastly (for now),

It is worth mentioning.

That the true, legitimate Emperor heir to the Roman Empire and his Empress Queen are well known to the Catholic Church.

They have been fighting to claim their throne for many years.

The Church ignores them, and they are systematically attacked.

If you think this is ridiculous and can't be true ...

You need to stop and think about just how familiar this should sound to you ...

The Jewish and Catholic Churches crucifying their true King???

Stealing what belongs to him???

It's happening now.

Any of you who believe the Pope to be a good person, and not the most evil person on Earth (next to Queen Elizabeth), are going to be the very same people as those who had Jesus crucified.

When the Church burns soon. I hope you all recognise the truth. That they deserve it, for denying the true King and Queen their Kingdom.

a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

The Pope.


Yeah. About that one. Had some recent posts on that one.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Solar arch.

The sun my friend. The sun.

F#$K the Masons. I'm on a mission to destroy them.

*Edit* This comment makes no sense now, as 'inforlurker' edited his comment from the original post, which gave out my personal information, and then said "Royal Arch Mason"?

The pet then changed his post.

Ignore this post.

a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

And the true King and Queen are .... ?

Long time luker on ATS and I finally created an account just to get in on this thread.

Very interesting OP. Can please comment on Matrhew 5:17--specifically on what was meant with "fulfill?"

Also, can you please elaborate on your gift and how it developed? The back story must be very interesting.

Thanks.

a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

I have a certain 'gift' that has been afforded to me, which allows me to understand, speak and translate pretty much any language there is. Even dead ones.

And as my understanding of certain modern languages comes from their proto-dialects, I can usually understand the foundation of 'meaning' within modern languages better than those who speak it themselves.

Not only this, but I also sometimes get some 'insight' into their origins.

You totally have to hit up the Sumerian texts, as well as all the old scrolls that predate Christ. If cuneiform text and all the other languages and ancient scribe is fair game. If this is possible your life should be spent translating and dictating these into a book.

That would bring about the end to all ignorance with regard to the Old Testament, never mind the Quran.

I personally would be trying to re-animate the dead language types for accuracy and historical preservation.

I am very interested in your response, so begin with the Sumerian texts if possible.

MATTHEW 5:17
Do not mistake the things taken to be out of want, but out of necessity if we wish to keep things going.

Ἀλλὰ is not 'completely accurate' translated as 'But'. It is more 'Ying for yang, tit for tat, ping for pong'. Which is why it has been translated to 'But', because it prepositions an opposition in statement.

Πληρῶσαι (extrapolated) would be close to: The return half/reply of a continuance. A return of something parted. It is negatively phrased in its separation, so likely giving a sense of 'a return of something lost or unwillingly parted.

When combined with the proceeding word is infers a responding UP PART to a DOWN PART. Similar to a waveform. That is necessary to keep the stability of the whole.

If the LOWER PART of the response/reply wave is out of balance with the HIGHER PART which propagated its existence. The whole waveform is compromised.

I believe (without reading more of Matthew 5) that they are likely talking about the necessity of the negative partnership in a balanced system or existence.

My translation would be,

"I don't do these things to you because I want to hurt you. But it is necessary for you to take the good with the bad".

"Without having tasted lemon, could you still say sugar sweet?"

I suspect that cunieform actually requires a legend table to go with it.

Something similar to a clock face, that is placed around a individual 'glyph' to direct lettering and spell out a word.

This is just my guess without going into it.

I speak Sumerian fluently. But it is very hard to understand what I am saying when you apply it to their 'written' language.

Part of this is because of inconsistencies in its correlation to our own language. Especially pronunciation.

I believe (from the limited time I've spent looking at the language as we know it) that what we pronounce as EN in Sumerian was actually pronounced something like ZA,

For instance, the Sumerian God 'Enlil' is actually pronounced as Zuool. (ZZ-OW-UL). SHE (usually a woman's position) was a symbolic deification of (what was considered) a very important 'aspect' role within society. That would today be the equivalent of a 'event planner'. The keeper of the calendar in relation to upcoming events; festivities; celebrations; etc.

This is why Enlil/Zaool; is described as the "decreer of fates". Not because they could foresee, or decide the future; but because they were the one to ask if you wanted to know timelines for future events; as they were the one who kept the calendar and helped organised them.

One other one which I know for a fact (because I've screamed it at my dog when he was misbehaving), is that they called Dogs/Wolves 'GADOOT'.

Pronounced exactly as I've written it GUD-OOT. This came from their interpretation of the noise a Dog/Wolf would make when they howled.

GaaaWOOOOOOOOOT

I'm not kidding! If you think I'm making this up, or that it is ridiculous, remember that we have done things such as this in our own language, called a orange fruit 'oranges', and a animal that eats ants, anteater.


Out of interest, the Royal Stars (Google "Persian Royal Stars") which were recognised by the Sumerians were actually named as follows:

EAST (WHICH IS ACTUALLY NORTH) - AUSWITAR (UZ-SCHWEE-DAR)
SOUTH (WHICH IS ACTUALLY EAST) - DALOSWEN (DA-LOW-SCHWEN)
WEST (WHICH IS ACTUALLY SOUTH) - MAR'SWASINE (MAR-SCWA-SIN)
NORTH (WHICH IS ACTUALLY WEST) - MAR'QUISA (MAR-QUI-SAR)

The Sumerian terms for these were an evolution of these names. The names I have given here actually predate the Sumerians by THOUSANDS OF YEARS!!!

But when I attempted to find the names for these stars I was given the far older names for them, and assured that the Sumerian names were an evolution on this.

One thing you should take away from this, is that the POLES (North, South, East, West) have actually been mixed up.

The sun rises in the NORTH.

They refer to the sun as STAR OF THE MORNING. In many texts. Because the STAR rises over the horizon every morning.

You should take a crack at RongoRongo.

Figure that out and they'd probably listen to you on other languages.

a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

GENESIS 1:1 
Everything comes to be by the balance of its 'over-source', which is both within itself and outside itself. 

GENESIS 1:2 
And within the span of the opposing balance of darkness outside to the darkness within, we find a focus. And it is within that focus we exist and find ourselves. 

GENESIS 1:3 
Presented to us from higher energetic system(s) (over-source) we receive a supply of power, all power which we know and sustains us.

In what form of reality could this even be close to an accurate translation of Genesis 1?

I know enough Hebrew and Greek to know that you pulled that out of your ass.

You do realize that translation and interpretation are two different things, and it would be a stretch to call that an accurate interpretation.

I am afraid that as a translator you must be misunderstanding something.

You write that the translation of "AS SALAM ALAYKUM WA RAHMATULLAHI WA BARAKATUHU ..."

is

"THERE IS TOO MUCH OF ME HERE FOR THAT THIS ORIGINALLY COMES FROM A SONG. IT IS A SONG THAT WAS GIVEN TO HELP APPEASE THE FEAR OF CHILDREN. IT WOULD BE MORE ACCURATELY TRANSLATED TODAY TO SOMETHING LIKE "I AM PHYSICAL AND HERE. MONSTERS AREN'T PHYSICAL AND HERE, SO THEY CAN'T HURT ME".

This seems imagination not reality.
The root "rahman" means merciful in Western Semitic languages, similarly in Hebrew.
"Baraka" refers to powers - omnipotence.
Salam (Sala'am really) means peace, like Hebrew Shalom.

Where is this in your "translation"? No equivalents of any of these three words. No reference at all.

One could just as well say that the Latin text "Stabat Mater dolorosa iuxta crucem lacrimosa" means that a grey donkey was hitching a ride on a Volkswagen Beetle.

Doesn't make sense at all.

No,

Baraka is DEFINITELY NOT OMNIPOTENT, and it doesn't refer to powers. Obama WISHES it did! It refers to animation between realms. In the context it is used here it is comparative between HERE and THERE, when you could exist within either, or both.

Your place in one side, when you could actually sit within both.

This is where the root (mis)translation omnipotent comes from. As it has a similar meaning.

This is where you have to correlate several languages to understand the CORRECT translation.

OMNIPOTENT DOES NOT MEAN 'Almighty'.

It means 'COULD BE IN ANY' or 'COULD BELONG TO ANY'.

OMNI -Any
POTENT - Cognate root of POTENTIAL ... A ROOT ESSENCE.

COULD BE IN ANY.

Salam is close. It means, "To be left in peace". Not peace itself. It is more accurately (if it is broken down to its contextual roots) "No harm, and be not harmed".

Rahmat is 'Held safely'. Or to extrapolate, "The importance of holding close". The second part of this is 'WITH A HAND THAT CAN'T BE HELD'

RAHMATULLAHI - HELD IN SAFETY, WITH A HAND THAT CAN'T BE HELD.

It could be 'interpreted' to be Merciful (which it has been) but that interpretation is fairly rough.

I assure you, my translation is correct.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

OK then,

I am happy to debate anyone that disagree with me on our origins, as long as they can provide me with a solid basis for their argument besides, "No you are wrong".

So please explain to me how the consciousness is born. How we are connected to the Universe.

I have already given you an answer to this which ties into both spirituality and science.

If you have a better theory, or explanation which doesn't require blind faith, then I would love to hear it and would be happy to debate it with you.

Otherwise you are not providing any counter to what I have given, other than to say you refuse to believe it.

Or, let me ask you a simpler question first.

Q: Explain to me what the consciousness is. And how it works. Why we have it. It's purpose. How it came to be?

I'll start the debate by giving you my own quick guide to understanding the consciousness. I welcome your own theory in response.

Consciousness is the necessity of understanding self. It is born of need.

We can't survive on passive energy input like plants do, we require active input. So the brain gives us 'need'. "I NEED".

For it to be able to deliver 'I NEED' for the purposes of food and other bodily maintenance, we are given a sense of self.

It's no more mysterious than a mobile phone identifying that its battery is getting low and needs to be charged.

The difference is that our 'NEED' is tied into a complex system which allows us to identify, seek and consume what we need, as needed.

To satisfy need.

Everything else is a by-product of this.

Emotional responses are the product of a system which promotes satisfactory stasis. If you are living within an optimal environment, emotional systems are sated by the fulfillment of need.

Though, in 1st world societies, the line between need and want has become blurred, with need being easily provided for.

And our emotional selves are becoming entangled within 'WANT' as if it were need.

This arises as a by-product of a under-active emotional system within optimal stasis. Where a successful place within sociological equilibrium brings forth a question of 'higher purpose' from the systems of the brain put into lower function.

'What is the purpose of what I am doing?' becomes part of the question 'What is the meaning of life?'.

A lot of the confusion people feel in their purpose in this world arises from not understanding the physical consciousness. It is the first step towards truly understanding (or knowing) self.

This confusion or feeling of hopelessness is the system of 'need for self' recycling on itself within the brain. Searching for purpose which will promote it's higher function.

This is where the systems which sustains life, either promote intellectual complexity and growth, or become a weapon against themselves.

Analytical deduction of self and Intelligence arise from this.

Contrary to popular belief, humans deduce VERY WELL. We just do it at a sub-conscious level, because society has taught us to simply accept most of the things within the construct of our environment. We take things as given, or believe that things are supposed to be a certain way without questioning them. This is 'LOGICAL DEDUCTION'. And it is conditioned and pre-programmed into us from birth within the parameters of society.

The problem with this, is that we then overlook so many things. We fail to see things around us such as beauty, pain, hatred. Things we should see. Problems (and pain) we cause without realising.

The programming of logical deduction within recursive need patterns within the brain by things such as religion, actually poison our sub-conscious deductive patterns. Writing over the top of the logical deductive patterns, with those specified to us within written texts. Or given from the teachings of others.

It is essentially like a virus written into the BIOS of our brains hardware.

It sickens the entire 'operating system' of our brain.

The search for higher purpose which should promote complexity and growth within the brain, is instead 'disabled' by an illusion created within the mind, to answer all the questions the brain is asking. Without ever having answered anything!

And the reason those subscribing to religion feel so threatened by those around them asking questions, is because it may cause them to start questioning things again. It may compromise the frail illusion they have created within their brain to avoid the need to understand more, or find higher purpose.

The reason many falsely believe that our species doesn't 'deduce' things very well, is because we have 'tuned out' deduction on many things so we don't have to think as much.

Switching our brains off. Similar to how those within religious orders are taught to 'switch off' the parts of their brain seeking higher function.

This is being done to us intentionally. And it is part of the reason we are seeing the human race slowly using less and less of the brain.

a reply to: gspat

Thanks for the suggestion, I just had a brief look at it. It's awesome!

Some part of me was very excited to see this language. It made me feel really happy for some reason. Though I've never personally seen it before.

It has accumulative components, which should make it fairly easily to interpret.

I did one line of this for you, as an example. Is there a specific part of their texts you want translated in particular???

Here is the rest of the RongoRongo example I downloaded.

Their written language is actually fairly intuitive.

THE MOAI AND RONGORONGO,

THIS LANGUAGE WAS WRITTEN BY THE PEOPLE WHO WERE PLACED ON EASTER ISLAND.

THEY WERE ORIGINALLY FROM NEAR NEW NEW GUINEA. THEY WERE A GENTLE PEOPLE WHO WERE BEING DOMINATED BY EXPANSION OF OTHER TRIBES IN THE AREA, WHO NEEDED A PLACE OF THEIR OWN. OR THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED/INTERBRED.

AS THEIR DISTINCT GENETICS WERE STILL RELATIVELY PURE, THEY WERE RELOCATED TO EASTER ISLAND. WHICH AT THE TIME WAS COVERED IN TREES.

THE MAOI WERE BUILT BY THE 'SEA-PEOPLE' WHO RELOCATED THEM TO THE ISLAND. THESE PEOPLE HAD ACCESS TO CERTAIN 'ADVANCED METHODS' FOR CREATING THINGS LIKE THIS.

IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A DEFENSE SYSTEM FOR THOSE THEY WERE RELOCATING TO THE ISLAND, TO PROTECT THEM AGAINST POSSIBLE INVADERS FROM THE SEA.

THEY WERE INTENDED SO THAT ANYONE WHO WOULD GET CLOSE THE ISLAND WOULD SEE THE MAOI ON-GUARD AND THINK A RACE OF GIANTS LIVED THERE.

THE RAPA NUI PEOPLE WERE LEFT WITH VERY LITTLE TO GO ON ABOUT HOW THEY WERE TRANSPORTED TO THE ISLAND OVER GENERATIONS. BUT THEY KNEW THAT THERE WAS LAND ACROSS THE SEA. THE ONLY THING THEY DID KNOW FROM ORAL TRADITION PREDATING THEIR WRITTEN LANGUAGE, IS THAT LAND FAR LARGER THAN THE ISLAND THEY INHABITED LAY ACROSS THE SEA.

THEY DID SET OUT EXPEDITIONS ACROSS THE SEAS IN MOST DIRECTIONS, BUT VERY FEW WHO WENT OVER THE HORIZON EVER RETURNED AS IT WAS DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE BACK ONCE THEY LOST SIGHT OF THE ISLAND. AND NONE EVER FOUND LAND. OR AT LEAST IF THEY DID, THEY NEVER RETURNED.

THEY DIDN'T INTERACT WITH ANY OTHER RACES UNTIL MODERN TIMES.

THE CLAIM THAT THE POPULATION HAD DROPPED 'PRIOR' TO THE EUROPEAN ARRIVAL IS A LIE.

EUROPEANS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MASSIVE DROP IN THE NATIVE POPULATION. JUST AS THE EUROPEAN/BRITISH HAVE BEEN WITH EVERYWHERE ELSE THEY LANDED.

LIKE ANY GOOD VIRUS, THEY DESTROY THE HOSTS AS THEY SPREAD.

a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

Genesis 1:1

Transliteration:
Breshyth barah elohim eth hashamayim weth haerethz

Literal translation:
In the head (beginning) of all things, created God, the heavens (divided waters) and the earth.

The interpretation is straight forward. In the beginning God created the Universe.

Don't use human philosophy to interpret the Bible. That will only result in rewriting it.

Use the words to define the philosophy, then apply that to the larger principles.

No,

You are not accounting for Diacritics.

These distinguish possessive, collective. As well as a hierarchy of positive and negative.

These identifiers for varying degrees can identify not only 'good and evil' within their usage, but also 'macrocosm/microcosm', all the way from 'above/space' to 'below/inside the body ...

If you don't appreciate this fact, then you have no hope of understanding the true meaning of what is written.

You don't simply read the lettering as a word, like they believe today.

You need to read the individual lettering and extrapolate it into a larger sentence using the diacritic functions.

Then, you can use the BELIEVED interpretation we have today, to come to an understanding of what the 'actual' word should be. And 'shorten' it to the intended translation.

But you don't then take that translation and put it as the 'accepted' word for that combination of letters.

Because one word, can have ten VERY DIFFERENT meanings, if you take into consideration the diacritics. Not only this, but the same word with the same diacritic functions can mean multiple different things, when you take into consideration its usage within a sentence.

This is because our modern languages have diverged in their base construction. So you have to account for this 'fluctuation'. You have to not only see and understand languages the way they did in their times, but also how we do now, and correlate them.

I assure you, I am VERY RIGHT in what I am saying here.

The word 'diacritics' itself supports what I am telling you.

It defines EXACTLY what I have just detailed.

Dia - Another/Two ways.
Critic - To interpret

ANOTHER .. WAY .. TO .. INTERPRET!!!

That is LITERALLY what the inflections on the writing mean!!!

Yet even the most avid (so-called) scholars dismiss them as not important?

Think about it.

I'm sorry if my translation upsets you. Truth can be sometimes be painful, but it makes it no less the truth. Regardless of how much you don't want it to be.

The thing which makes it even harder for most people to interpret, is that the texts are speaking about things which most of them don't understand.

So how are you supposed to understand a sentence that talks about concepts you don't understand?

Take a passage/sentence from a medical or science journal today describing things you haven't learned/studied. Then tell me what it means.

You may be able to read it. But you are very likely to not understand a single thing they are talking about. Or what they just described refers to. You probably wont even be able to pronounce the words properly.

This is no different.

One thing you need to appreciate as fact BELIEVERpriest, is that the Catholic Church has EXACT translations of this text. And instead of sharing them with the world, they tell you not to worry about it.

And then, they and their Jewish buddies (not anti-Semitic if its true) are trying to make us forget our understanding of the things detailed within the texts.

So that they can KEEP the things they are supposed to hand over.

I will give you some insight into this, whether you believe it or not in the next post.