Protestant disinfo debunked-Catholics are also Christians

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

It must be nice to be able to define what a term is rather than let scripture define the term.

Scripture says that Christ's name is Jesus. I am not the one using other, non-Jewish/Christian sources to redefine Scripture.

Non-sequitur.

The context of or discussion was the spirit of antichrist.

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by adjensen

So, no, it is fairly evident that I'm not brainwashed.

So do you think that it is reasonable or sensible to consider that the malevolent character called Yahweh in the Old Testament is somehow the Father? Or is that merely an assumption that you don't care to challenge?

What if we don't see Him as manevolent, but rather holy, righteous, and just against wickedness, idolatry and unrepentant unrighteousness?

Which would be a right of a Sovereign God would it not?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by truejew

 

Ofcourse, an english translation would, because we speak english.

In the original Greek it was Jesous, which is the same name.

In the original Greek it was "Iesous", pronounced "ae-soo", not even close. In Latin, it is pronounced "yay-soo", not even close. If you want to get technical, your best bet is German or Spanish, which are far closer to the Greek pronunciation than the English is. Your non-omniscient god has no idea you're calling on him when you say "gee-zus", because it's not even close.

Technically the iota and epsilon beginning would be "EE- AY- soos". The iota alone carries a "Y" equivelant phonetic pronunciation (YO-ta), but with the e after it it becomes a long E sound.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Technically the iota and epsilon beginning would be "EE- AY- soos". The iota alone carries a "Y" equivelant phonetic pronunciation (YO-ta), but with the e after it it becomes a long E sound.

I always appreciate your accurate inputs to conversations on ancient languages, NOTurTypical. While I can claim an expertise in a few areas, languages (apart from English and German) are not one of them.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

What if we don't see Him as manevolent[sic], but rather holy, righteous, and just against wickedness, idolatry and unrepentant unrighteousness?

I would have to think that you have a Bronze Age religion, complete with Bronze Age tribal war deity, Bronze Age ethical standard, and most likely, a Bronze Age superstitious dread

.
Which would be a right of a Sovereign God would it not?

Sovereignty speaks only of the supreme, permanent authority over something. The something must still be defined.
Is it:
1) a tribe
1a)genetic group or race
2) a nation
3) an empire
4) the World
5) the universe
6) a cult of worshippers

Also, Sovereignty does not imply benevolence. In fact, obsession of a deity for exclusive worship, may just render benevolence quite impossible.

reply to post by pthena


You may see it as "Bronze Age", but I just think He doesn't change. In fact, He said just that. I think God is much more concerned with our character than our comfort.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Technically the iota and epsilon beginning would be "EE- AY- soos". The iota alone carries a "Y" equivelant phonetic pronunciation (YO-ta), but with the e after it it becomes a long E sound.

I always appreciate your accurate inputs to conversations on ancient languages, NOTurTypical. While I can claim an expertise in a few areas, languages (apart from English and German) are not one of them.

Are you flirting with me?

reply to post by NOTurTypical


No, just noting where my expertise ends and yours begins

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

No, just noting where my expertise ends and yours begins

Oh, so I'm fat?

(Jus playin, I appreciate it, but I'm very much a student, not close to an expert. But I do read books from them who are though.)

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Technically the iota and epsilon beginning would be "EE- AY- soos". The iota alone carries a "Y" equivelant phonetic pronunciation (YO-ta), but with the e after it it becomes a long E sound.

I always appreciate your accurate inputs to conversations on ancient languages, NOTurTypical. While I can claim an expertise in a few areas, languages (apart from English and German) are not one of them.

Are you flirting with me?

It would not surprise me since he does claim to be catholic.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

I just think He doesn't change.

Just to get this straight, we are discussing Yahweh of the Old Testament.
And you assume somehow that this clan god is your sovereign. Under which category/categories of sovereignty do you fall? ( referring to the list you didn't touch )

reply to post by pthena


My understanding of a Sovereign God would he over the universe, the totality of creation.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

My understanding of a Sovereign God would he over the universe, the totality of creation.

Is their some link that you can provide which may explain your doctrine in some form which is not just one-liners?

There is much I would like to know, such as, does this universal unchanging sovereign deity still engage in collective punishment? Such as earthquake, plague, tornadoes, hurricanes, war, etc.

If so, is it the duty of "the faithful" to root out unrighteousness so as to save localities from said collective punishment?

If so, then how is this rooting out to be carried out?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by truejew

 

Ofcourse, an english translation would, because we speak english.

In the original Greek it was Jesous, which is the same name.

In the original Greek it was "Iesous", pronounced "ae-soo", not even close. In Latin, it is pronounced "yay-soo", not even close. If you want to get technical, your best bet is German or Spanish, which are far closer to the Greek pronunciation than the English is. Your non-omniscient god has no idea you're calling on him when you say "gee-zus", because it's not even close.

Technically the iota and epsilon beginning would be "EE- AY- soos". The iota alone carries a "Y" equivelant phonetic pronunciation (YO-ta), but with the e after it it becomes a long E sound.

If that was the case, the English "Jesus" would not have the "j" sound or later, the "j" letter. The Church would not have perverted the name of Christ as you claim. Not even the Catholic Church would have done that.

reply to post by truejew


I'm not talking about English. English is Latinized.

reply to post by pthena


What do you mean by a "link"? It would be my understanding that whatever God created His is Lord over. And no I don't think He sends judgments on the form of natural disasters and the like. For one, sin was judged at Calvary, and two, disasters are the natural consequence of the Sun and energy.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

I'm not talking about English. English is Latinized.

As I said, if what you say is true about Iesous not being pronounced Jesous, then the English with a "j" is a perversion.

Do you really think that the Church, even the Catholic Church, would have went along with perverting the name of Christ?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

I'm not talking about English. English is Latinized.

As I said, if what you say is true about Iesous not being pronounced Jesous, then the English with a "j" is a perversion.

Do you really think that the Church, even the Catholic Church, would have went along with perverting the name of Christ?

Your bizarre logic is mind boggling. It truly is a testament to your absolute inability to critically think.

a) You've claimed that the name can be translated into other languages, why would its translation into English be a perversion?

b) Do you think that the Catholic Church is English? That it formulated the English language?

c) Do you not realize that the Catholic Church's native language is Latin? Jesus' name in Latin is "yay-soo", derived from "ae-soo" in Greek, "Jesus" is just the English version of the Latin "Jesu".

You owe your pronunciation "gee-zus" to some unknown guy (probably Catholic, but not necessarily,) centuries after Jesus walked the Earth in Palestine, answering to his given name of Yeshua or Iesous, neither of which sounds anything like "gee-zus."

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Are you flirting with me?

It would not surprise me since he does claim to be catholic.

What is that supposed to mean? What "fruits of the spirit" does a remark like that reveal?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

I'm not talking about English. English is Latinized.

As I said, if what you say is true about Iesous not being pronounced Jesous, then the English with a "j" is a perversion.

Do you really think that the Church, even the Catholic Church, would have went along with perverting the name of Christ?

It wouldn't be saying that at all. Every language has distinctive phonetics.