King Solomon's Temple

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by WalterRatlos

 

here ya go. any word with a number after it, was in the original hebrew. any word without a number, was not in the original hebrew. select the little numbers after the words that do have numbers, to see what the original hebrew was, how many different ways it could be used in a sentence, how to pronounce it (with a sound file too if you want to hear it spoken) and the root word(s) if any
www.blueletterbible.org...

Nice, but that's really not that interesting for me.

I trust that the Bible I used when I was a born-again Christian is correct. Besides, the whole topic does not interest me that much and, as a retired translator, I can tell you that while such sites are helpful a good knowledge of both source and target language is required to produce a decent translation. Nope, I will not study Hebrew, Aramaic and Ancient Greek to make sure that I can translate - and hence interpret - the Bible perfectly.

Hi Walter!

Just to touch base with some of the things you were asking and saying.

The video topic was posted after I mentioned to Undo that the 'blueletterbible' is a great place to learn but we also need to really study deeply the Hebrew language if we are going to study the Bible.

The example I gave was that there is not a 'Hebrew' word for created....but we translate 'bara' as 'created'. The Hebrew word 'bara' actually means to 'fill or to fatten'. You would not know such a thing unless you really studied the origin of the OT books which were in Hebrew language. You can trust your limited understanding of your translated bible, and you can even trust sites like blueletterbible....but for any really deep understanding of any 'belief or story' you need to look back in the culture and language of that writing.

The video UNDO posted actually supports the idea of the Earth and Heavens were 'filled and fattened' more so then 'created from nothing' and the video goes along very well with my point of what the Hebrew language is really saying in Genesis.

Any time one language gets translated or a story gets passed on....things are limited. You can gather the general concept of the passed on story or the translated words...but you may gain a whole new deeper understanding if you study the actual language and actual culture and time of the people and story.

We know that before the 'time' of the OT getting logged into many books that there were many other beliefs and many other lands influencing the people. We can see past practices and past beliefs getting passed on in the OT. We can see a merging of many faiths into one faith and a sifting out of what didnt work for them.

We can look into the old lands and see how belief in one god transpired and formed. We can see how they took things of nature and personified it. We can see how they took human attributes like anger and jealousy and placed those into 'god'.

Even the Latin language of alot of the NT has its failures when translated. Often there are words that were translated as 'meat' but they really do not mean literal 'meat'. So there are debates now on when they really meant meat or when they were talking about something like a seed pod.

Sometimes, one word, can change the whole idea.

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
or the ark is under the calvary location and the blood of Jesus dripped down on the mercy seat of the ark when the ground broke open during the earthquake that split the curtain...thus qualifying justification for all by His final blood sacrifice of sacrifices

That was a claim made by Ron Wyatt who claimed to have found, Noah's ark, the ark of the covenant and most other religious relics.

reply to post by jam321


I'm sorry, but Ron White has been debunked. i will find the link and post them later.

reply to post by aliencatlady


Wyatt, not White. Sheesh, need sleep!

Interesting that France was mentioned as a possible location for the Ark
As we are on the subject of France and ancient artifacts, anyone have a theory of what the Holy Grail actually is?

reply to post by Skyfloating


Rabbi Chaim Richman of the Temple Institute claims that there has been an unbroken tradition since the destruction of the 1st temple (since in the 2nd temple, the Midrash and Talmud explains - the most ancient source for knowledge of the ark of the covenant - that King Josiah had the ark buried in a chamber directly beneath the room where the Ark was genrrally placed, in a system of subteranean caverns) of the exact location of the Ark of the covenant. Apparently only these Rabbis (and of all people, only they deserve the right to claim to know where it is, since they are the direct descendants the biblical Hebrews. And our bible was translated by these very men, thus, some respect should be shown to the Rabbis on this subject) who have inherited this knowledge knows where it is.

Its quite interesting.

Another very interestng and highly meaningful piece of information is found in Samuel. When David bought the threshing floor - the site of the temple mount from Ornan the Jebusite. The 'threshing floor' in Hebrew, can also be rendered 'threshold'. The threshold is the point of contact between the spiritual and physical world. These two realities interact at this exact site, the temple mount: Hence why the microcosm of all creation - the temple, was built upon it, and why Christianity and Islam have struggled to gain control of it (despite the fact that it is rightfully the property of King Davids, and thus the heritage of the Jewish priesthood/Judaism). Mans spiritual life can be directly influenced by the structure - the Temple that is built upon it. When the Temple mount stood, with its four corner - indicating equality (without the pagan dome of the rock currently on the mount) and its courtyards, walls and other features, each of which have distinct kabbalistic signficance, the spiritual effluence of the creator flowed unimpeded into this physical dimension. The house of G-d, built on the treshold of two realities, made this world into G-ds 'abode', his house.

When Jacob dreamed of the ladder that reached up to heaven with 'angels' descending and ascending, it was at this site which he dreamt. The angels were the benevolent, godly emanations from G-d that pour into this reality from above. Jacob then said "Surely the Lord is in this place; and I did not know it." And he was afraid, and said, "This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven."

This is the main reason why the elite war against the Jewish people. Its their gnostic vision of the world, verses Judaism, and essentially G-d.

reply to post by Skyfloating



Al Aqsa is the original site of Solomon's Temple, NOt the "Dome of the Rock". The MSM has it wrong and is misleading everyone.

Originally posted by mcguyvermanolo
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

Al Aqsa is the original site of Solomon's Temple, NOt the "Dome of the Rock". The MSM has it wrong and is misleading everyone.

Any evidence for this claim?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I always find it odd how Christians advise against me looking into Jewish and Muslim books and Muslims advise against me looking into Jewish & Muslims sources and Jews advise against me looking at Christian and Muslim sources. The KEY to understanding the ancient History of that region is to combine all three information sources and check how they differ and how they agree. And then to check which non-religious sources confirm any of the data. Instead, followers of the respective Religions are advised not to look into the other books.

edit on 1-3-2011 by I Skyfloating because: (no reason given)

I disagree as the Bible actually teaches to prove the truth of it,not pretend and hope it is true,lol. As far as the Koran I believe it does teach to search the truth of nature and the universe but to avoid the Bible...if this is incorrect I apologize to the followers of Islam. As far as the Ark of the Covenant...not much mentioned here about the problems,recorded in the Bible,other people had when they stole it. It says the Ark was returned to the Jews,lol (if I remember correctly this happened before the temple was built the first time....the temple was built where the dome of the rock is now and I think the Ark is underneath but because of the religious issues even the Muslims can't dig for it(or they do have it but keep dying when they touch it so believe it to be an evil trick of the Jews,lol btw I've read a number books dealing with other religious beliefs,as any THEOLOGIAN would and I find it interesting how the "experts" say the Jews derived their belief from other ancient cultures instead of all other religions having roots in the same original history including the fallen angels,who some cultures,I believe, worshipped

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
Actually...

I'm more fascinated with the man standing with a drawn sword who Joshua (the anointed leader over Israel when Moses was condemned), upon crossing the Jordan river to begin his campaigne to enter the pomised land immediately encountered, informed Joshua (after asking this man if he was for them or against them) that he was the Commander of the Army of the Lord, and that he had then arrived.

The man then goes on to tell Joshua that he needed to take his sandals off because he was standing on Holy Ground. At that point Joshua, King of Isreal, Took off his sandals, and then bowed to the ground before this man (an act of worship) which the 'Commander' accepted.

Noteable here is that biblically - those who encountered Angellic spirit creatures that felt compelled to drop to thier knees and bow were IMMEDIATELY stopped by that angel and then told to not do that, but to instead worship God...

Interesting indeed...

I'd be interested to know what you've been reading.....btw Saul was the Jews' first king,long after Joshua --who was the leader of their army---not king

Originally posted by 4winds

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I always find it odd how Christians advise against me looking into Jewish and Muslim books and Muslims advise against me looking into Jewish & Muslims sources and Jews advise against me looking at Christian and Muslim sources. The KEY to understanding the ancient History of that region is to combine all three information sources and check how they differ and how they agree. And then to check which non-religious sources confirm any of the data. Instead, followers of the respective Religions are advised not to look into the other books.

edit on 1-3-2011 by I Skyfloating because: (no reason given)

I disagree as the Bible actually teaches to prove the truth of it,not pretend and hope it is true,lol. As far as the Koran I believe it does teach to search the truth of nature and the universe but to avoid the Bible...if this is incorrect I apologize to the followers of Islam. As far as the Ark of the Covenant...not much mentioned here about the problems,recorded in the Bible,other people had when they stole it. It says the Ark was returned to the Jews,lol (if I remember correctly this happened before the temple was built the first time....the temple was built where the dome of the rock is now and I think the Ark is underneath but because of the religious issues even the Muslims can't dig for it(or they do have it but keep dying when they touch it so believe it to be an evil trick of the Jews,lol btw I've read a number books dealing with other religious beliefs,as any THEOLOGIAN would and I find it interesting how the "experts" say the Jews derived their belief from other ancient cultures instead of all other religions having roots in the same original history including the fallen angels,who 'me cultures,I believe, worshipped

edit on 8-3-2011 by 4winds because: mis-spell

I am just wondering about your last point, isnt it really that no other culture that shares historical stories originating from previous cultures, actually claim those stories as their own heritage and use it to qualify their own history.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

which part ? lol
dimensions of the sarcophagus and the ark, are the same.
the ark is an electrical capacitor. when it was housed in the completed temple, along with the rest of the gold furniture, the levite priests had to wear special, imported linen, that didn't hold a static charge to do their priestly duties. the entire room was a giant capacitor. anybody trying to go in there, without the correct attire, stood the chance of being electrocuted.

This is actually true as it has been found that gold is an extremely good conductor of electricity and heat. It is much better than even copper! If gold wasn't so rare then it would have been the metal used in our wires instead of copper.

reply to post by jam321


The problem with Ron Wyatt is he claimed to find all the famous bible antiquities including: Noah's ark, the ark of the covenant and all the items that came from Solomon's temple.

I don't think people should be putting Noah's Ark and Ark of the Covenant in the same category. The former is a mythical vessel appropriated from Sumerian mythology. The latter is something else altogether, and is most likely, if not completely mythological itself, simply a box with a meteorite in it stolen from Egypt.

If there was anything to find under the Dome of the Rock, it's been found and stashed away by some elite person(s) a very long time ago and clearly has absolutely no power whatsoever, otherwise they would be using it or showing it off as proof of Yahweh's existence. Since they're not, it's mostly likely complete bunk.

reply to post by 4winds


Saul was the first king of Israel.

The first king was Moses. What else is a king but a LAW-GIVER?

Originally posted by downunderET
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

But just one thing, when Moses came down from the mountain with the ten commardments, what language were they written in ????

If you said Hebrew you'd be wrong, as the written from of Hebrew was not invented for another 300 years.

It would have been the proto-Aramaic (or even proto-Hebrew) language; it's easy to find out, anyway.

And languages are not invented - they evolve.
In light of this, why is it even important what language specifically it was?
(Not being hostile, just asking.)

What else is a king but a LAW-GIVER?

In this case, a LAW-TRANSMITTER? :-)

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by 4winds

 

Saul was the first king of Israel.

The first king was Moses. What else is a king but a LAW-GIVER?

Hi

Its easy to google a list of the Kings of Judea and Israel. You will see from these they don't list Moses as either a King or a Prophet.

One thing that looking at a simple list shows up, is that in the list representing Judea, each son inherited the kingship from his father. However, the list from Israel shows that 8 of its kings overthrew the previous king.

Its a just a little detail but shows a huge difference between Judea and Israel during those times.

reply to post by Lynda101

Its easy to google a list of the Kings of Judea and Israel. You will see from these they don't list Moses as either a King or a Prophet.

I have read the Tanakh enough times to know that Moses wasnt a king of either Israel or Judea.

But i guess you missed the philosophical point i was trying to make. A king is an authoritarian. Moses, was and continues to be the ultimate authority in Judaism.

Although he never held any official title, he was the King/President or whatever title you would prefer to give him. He was the ultimate prophet, speaking to G-d face to face.