The Little Stone of Daniel 2 * Temperal Vatican Papal State to End Soon

Dear Daniel

As far as the outcome or the truth of Daniel chapter 2 is concerned it does not matter whether King Neb. remembered the dream or not, does it?

However" Also my understanding of the stone that grows is the stone represents the Kingdom of God which will destroy all of other earthly kingdoms. "

This sentence should be examined. Does the dream say that the stone would bring down "all the kingdoms of the world?" Or does it say it will bring down four kingdoms and their structure represented by the statue?

That does not mean that there are not other places in the Bible that teach that Jesus will overcome all his enemies in historical time. But that Neb.'s dream is limited to these four empires and their destruction in the fourth and the system associated with it which was started by and passed on by the Babylonians.

The statue represents not only the four kingdoms but also the ethos strenghtened by Nebuchadnezzar that was passed on to the three succeeding kingdoms making it world wide, and would be brought down with the demise of the fourth . The Paganism of the Babylonians was passed on to all those symbolized and come to its end with the struggle with the ethic of Jesus at the time of Constantine when after 300 years of persecution the moral ethic of Jesus overcame was accepted as the truth in the Western World until 1963. Thus chapter 2 in Daniel reached to the end of the Roman Empire and not to the end of the world.

That means that the little stone's appearance and continuation in History is in the past and not to be expected to show up for the first time in the future.

Most of the orthodox denominations accept that the little stone is the church of Christ established some time in the summer of 30 AD and came into conflict with the Roman Empire which ultimately expired and with it the predominance of paganism in the civilized world which condition existed until about 1963 when Satan was loosed from his chains to deceive the nations again, but not the church nor the Christians.

Other fringe groups like the JW's Mormons, Seventh Day folk and many evangelicals of the "Left Behind" persuasion do not see the church of Christ as the Kngdom of God, which it is.

The same four empires are pictured as animals (beasts) in Daniel 7 and the predictions there extend the the parcelling of the Roman Empire into ten kingdoms and the rise of an antichrist kingdom. (If the Ten horns are kingdoms as almost all seem to agree then the little horn is a kingdom as well and not a person.) He has a period of time given to his tenure. In Daniel it is "time, times and half a time" The same figure is given in Revelation as well as 1260 days and fourty two months and three and a half years.. They all represent the same 1260. The year in which the symbol was first given was 360 days, 3 1/2 X 360 = 1260; 42 x 30 = 1260.


The restoration of the pagan ethic (1963 to the present) and the rejection of the ethics of Jesus that held sway in the Western World for about 1600 years marks us as being close to but not at the end. There is more... "Then shall the saints take the kingdom." and "The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our LORD and of His Christ. That will ne history some day.

Many historical interpreters believe the reign of the temporal Papal State combining the authority of Earthly political power with assumed heavenly power began in 533 and the first blow (of seven) to limit that power came in 1793, which end the 1260 day-years of prophecy. The first vial of the last seven was poured out at that time and the demise of the Vatican State lost power by degrees until the present weakened unrepentent condition of their spurious false claim to Statehood. One blow left and the Vatican State, not to say the Roman church, will join other states in the dust bin of history.

If you are interested in a more in-depth study of these same thigs covering Dan 2, abd 7 and Revelation 13 which is built on the seventh chapter of Daniel you can find it here: http://www.moellerhaus.com/rev666.htm

all the best

Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
Do not cast me away from your presence; and do not take your
Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of your salvation;
and uphold me with your free spirit.

Fred P Miller
10 Valley Drive
Carrollton, GA 30117
770 214 0627
Cell 770 880 8089
www.moellerhaus.com
Blog: http://moellerhaus.blogspot.com
Please visit Charlotte's paintings and art
http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/charlt.htm

Hello Mr. Miller,

I thank you for you insight comments about the Euphrates River and the beginning of the divided kingdom between the northern and southern tribes. I hope you did have a nice Christmas, I do have to admit it is really hard for me to focus at times on the true "reason for the season," but at least I have noticed that people tend to be more giving and selfless, some of them anyways. But I wish I would get less caught up in who I need to buy gifts for and more in the fact that I'm supposed to be celebrating a really special event. I have been reading in the book of Daniel about the dream of Nebuchadnezzar and the "great image," that he saw in Daniel chapter 2. I have a couple of questions. I was under the impression that Nebuchadnezzar was troubled by a dream that he had forgotten and for that reason he called his magicians, astrologers, etc. to tell him the dream and then interpret his dream for him. But now that I am reading it again, a footnote attached to the King James version that I have (actually I saw it first in one of my Spanish versions and then I looked it up also in my English King James version) for verse 5. "The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, the thing is gone from me: if you will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation.... A footnote referencing the phrase "gone from me," in verse 5 says, Persian: sure with me, then whoever added the footnotes then explains a little, "i.e. he knew his dream and desired to test them." So now that I am reading this chapter again and thinking somewhat in the matter, that does make some sense to me, as the king complains in verse 7 about the Chaldeans, "would gain the time," which seems to me that the Chaldeans are trying to stall to gain time, and in verse 9 the king says; "for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me." So I can believe that Nebuchadnezzar wanted to have his dream interpreted, but wasn't totally convinced that his Magicians & Astrologers, etc. would be able to give him the correct interpretation and for that reason he wanted them to tell him his dream first so that way he could feel sure that he would be getting the correct interpretation of his dream instead of being told, "lies and corrupt words." I've read other translations that use the verb to forget in verse 5. Do you feel that to forget or what I quoted before; "the thing is gone from me," is a bad translation or a confusing translation in that verse? Knowing that Nebuchadnezzar remembered his dream fairly well makes a difference as opposed to, I dreamed something, now I feel bothered, and now I want to know what I dreamed about. I easily believe that the king of Babylon didn't really believe in or trust his court magicians, chaldeans, astrologers, and wise men, that they really truly had those special powers that they claimed to have or if they weren't just going to tell him something he wanted to hear. Another thing, I have a question about the dream itself. He saw an image that makes me think of a humanoid, with a head, chest, legs, etc. As a side note, I will have to say that I am favorably impressed with the humility of Daniel in verse 30. Back to the dream, so a humanoid figure made of gold, silver, bronze, iron, and clay destroyed or perhaps crushed into dust by a stone cut out of a mountain without hands that then grows into a mountain. The image of a person apparently represents worldly kingdoms, the Babylonians is one of them for sure, along with perhaps the Persians, Greeks, Romans. Also my understanding of the stone that grows is the stone represents the Kingdom of God which will destroy all of other earthly kingdoms. Okay, but what I really don't understand is the part of the image with feet of clay and iron. I don't understand that, really. The fact that the feet are made out of clay and iron, some kind of divided kingdom that is partially strong due to the iron and partially fragile due to the clay. So feet and toes made out of clay and iron, maybe I just don't understand, but what kind of divided kingdom is strong and fragile (Daniel 2: 41 -43)? Human alliances, but they don't mix together. Well, definitely an interesting chapter, so did Nebuchadnezzar remember his dream or not, and I'm confused about the feet and toes made out of clay and iron. I will have to say that I do find the Old Testament more interesting now that I understand it better. I feel that a lot of that has to do with my studies of your book of Isaiah. I wish you a prosper 2011.


Respectfully Yours,

Daniel

Hebrew Pronunciation of Jesus' Name

Tim

Your question about the right Hebrew spelling of the name of Jesus or Yeshua.

I am not convinced that getting the "correct" pronunciation of a Hebrew name is all that important nor does the correct pronumciation carry any revelation with it.

And - Also -Importantly - Biblical Hebrew was (is not now) a tonal language. If you look at a Hebrew Masoretic text of the Scriptures you will find 10 or so added markings for vowels added by the masoretes. Masorah means traditional. Different vowel sounds change the meaning of a word. Thus, just in case the proper vowel pronunciation might be lost the masoretic scholars added vowels for what they believed was the traditional and correct reading. For vowels they were probably right most of the time but they were human so their choices are subject to discussion in some cases. However We are dependent on fifth and sixth century Jews (who rejected Jesus as the Messiah) for being able to read the Hebrew text. The unpointed text would be indecipherable to most scholars including Modern-Hebrew speaking scholars. There are just too many possibilities to get it right if those who memorized and, from generation to generation, orally transmitted the masorah, had not developed marks to indicate proper vowel, accent and tone. Modern-Hebrew is a close relative to Biblical Hebrew but it has a much different grammar.

In the masoretic text, beside vowel points, there are about 35 other marks added to indicate kind of accent and probably tones.

There are no forms for tense-time in Biblical Hebrew. There are no forms for subjunctive mode in Biblical Hebrew. At this time these grammatical concepts must be determined by the context. Thus there is disagreement in rendering the tense time of a verb depending on the translaters doctrinal position.

One good example of this among many, many, is Zechariah 8:3 "Thus says the LORD; I am returned to Zion" If you believe as I do that the passage is announcing the return of the Shekina to the Second Temple then the KJV is correct. However if you are a "Futurist" you will follow the NIV and translate "I will (or shall) return to Zion."

Is one of them wrong? No! the tense time depends on the context and therefore the translation is subject to interpretation because there is no tense-time forms in Biblical Hebrew. But, since the concepts of time and subjunctive are a part of any language, they had to be a part of Biblical Hebrew, that is now lost. I believe the tones that are understood only partially by only a few of the current Hebrew scholars would have indicated these concepts.

Like saying the English slang word "yeah." Depending on the tone of voice in English, you might be agreeing with something, or you might be (depending on the tone), expressing extreme doubt.

Thus getting the pronunciation of a name right is an exercise in furility. Getting the pronunciation of a verb correct however will determine whether your doctrinal position is right or wrong.

There are other reasons,in changing spelling, and not being right or wrong, in the pronunciation or vowel pointing of a Hebrew name in the masoretic text. The place of the name in the sentence, whether it is subject or object, and what sounds go before and after, whether it has sufformatives or preformatives added to the word are a few of the reasons the same Hebrew word or name will have a different vowel spelling.

Also; Tim - the question that you asked indicates that you know only a little of the Holy language. I recommend that you take some college level courses in this language. It is a very simple language. But it takes about four years to see the simplicity.

All the best en el nombre de Jesu Christo
o en ho onoma Iasou Christou

Islam and Sharia Law in the USA

Many Muslims have come to the USA because they enjoy the freedom guaranteed by our Constitution which could not be enjoyed by them in their countries of origin. If indeed they are here for that reason then they ought to be required to publically renounce Sharia Law. How can we non-islamic citizens be required to trust or respect them othewise? Imagine Sharia Law excusing a parent or relative for physically injuring or killing a daughter or sister for refusing to marry a man or leaving an abusive husband chosen by the relative. Imagine justifying killing a former Muslim who chooses to convert from Islam to another religion. If Muslims want ordinary non-muslim citizens to trust and respect their right of religious freedom then let them publically renounce Sharia Law. Let them accept publically the right of personal choice in religious matters. Let that begin with the leaders of the proposed Mosques in Manhattan and Murfreesboro, TN. How can we trust them otherwise? Let Mr Obama be the first to ratify this idea or quit supporting Islam publically.

Let them also renounce the absolutely offensive doctrine that men will enjoy endless physical sex with unlimited virgins for eternity. What an evil doctrine! How does that sound in light of Islamic claims of equality of the sexes? I can not think that any non-muslim woman could see equality in eternity in that perverted doctrine. At present Muslim women dare not, without fear, renounce that ugly doctrine which means enslavement in eternity and thus here too.

The Song of Solomon: A Drama

SONG OF SONGS

Dead Sea Scrolls hoax

Today an article on Yahoo.com reads:

"The scrolls include the earliest known version of portions of the Hebrew Bible and have shed important light on Judaism and the beginnings of Christianity." (Full text of the article here)

Except for Isaiah and Habakkuk there is very little of Hebrew Bible in the scrolls. Most items are fragments many hardly bigger than a postage stamp.

John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth were unique teachers and there is nothing in the scrolls relating to them. Some "scholars" have made money making allegations, but they are far fetched and have been disproved.

Many scholars say the scrolls were assembled by a sect known as the Essenes. Others - including University of Chicago professor Norman Golb, Raphael Golb's father - say the writings were the work of a range of Jewish groups and communities.

The origin of the scrolls is suspect. There are too many medieval markings in the scrolls to discount. I have some of them cataloged under "Controversial Marks." If interested you can see some of them here.

Also, check here and scroll to the end of the page.

Pediphile Priests not limited to 2010

The following was written in Feb. 26 2007

except for Peter who was a bishop in Babylon but no doubt died in Rome, the rest of the first six men listed as Popes in your list may have been bishops of Rome but they made no claim to being the head of all the churches. Historical facts seem clear that there was no fusion of the authority of Spiritual and the temporal or what is known as the Temporality until Justinian in the 6th century. While Constantinople remained in the Catholic community and were participants in the first seven councils they did not a ccept the superiority of the Bishop of Rome over "all the churches."

However in some things I accept the moral superiority of Roman Catholic influence over the secular demon that now holds sway over western civilization. The Roman church held the line on abortion and properly taught that human life begins at the moment of conception. This too while evangelical protestants thought it was a political issue rather than a moral issue and had to be taught by their Roman Catholic friends and who eventually (most of them) adopted the thinking of the Roman church on this issue.

The principles confronting the Roman church on homosexuality are under assault. I hope they can not only hold the moral ground on the issue but get their priesthood cleansed from the sexual sins plaguing the system world wide.

Albert Barnes on Rev 19 written before 1850


And out of the mouth of the false prophet. The word rendered false prophet--qeudoprofhtou--does not before occur in the book of Revelation, though the use of the article would seem to imply that some well-known power or influence was referred to by this. Compare Barnes on "Re 10:3". The word occurs in other places in the New Testament, Mt 7:15; 24:11,24; Mr 13:22; Lu 6:26; Ac 13:6; 2Pe 2:1; 1Jo 4:1; and twice elsewhere in the book of Revelation, with the same reference as here, Re 19:20; 20:10. In both these latter places it is connected with the "beast." "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet." "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are." It would seem then to refer to some power that was similar to that of the beast, and that was to share the same fate in the overthrow of the enemies of the gospel. As to the application of this, there is no opinion so probable as that it alludes to the Mohammedan power--not strictly the Turkish power, for that was to be "dried up" or to diminish; but to the Mohammedan power as such, that was still to continue for awhile in its rigour, and that was yet to exert a formidable influence against the gospel, and probably in some combination, in fact, if not in form, with Paganism and the Papacy. The reasons for this opinion are,

(a) that this was referred to in the former part of the book is one of the formidable powers that would arise, and that would materially affect the destiny of the world--and it may be presumed that it would be again referred to in the account of the final consummation- see Re 9:1-11;

(b) the name "false prophet" would better than any other describe has that power, and would naturally suggest it in future times--for to no one that ever appeared in our world could the name be so properly applied as to Mohammed;

Ordinary Islam Fosters Terrorism

Islam fosters terrorism. The religion itself is of human origin and archaic. Medieval violence and ugly hatred is imbedded in the religion. It is oppressive to women and any free thought.

The youth in Iran want to over throw the oppression and seek secular freedom. Islam in general itself is in the way of that proper attitude. The God of creation has allowed freedom to choose good or evil for your self in this life until the day of the Great Divide. Then the "blessed and only Potentate" will make the final decisions. At this point you can love him or hate him without impunity. Islam has no such doctrine of freedom of speech or thought for the enemy.

I have been writing and speaking for more than 20 years that Islamic nations will open to religious and political freedom in the season we are living in. The Wahabi militants will not let that happen without murder and mayhem and worse of all is that a majority of so called moderate Islamists condone and intellectually justify the method of murdering working class bus riders and countless children to make their religious-political point.

Just now in the USA our media is beginning to insist on describing the hate filled muslims as "Fundamental Islamist terrorists" instead of the generic term "terrorist" as though terrorist acts are not 99% the product of muslims in Algeria, Somolia, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Indonesia, Saudi, Russia, Palestine, etc. etc. And several now see the terrorist war as an ideological struggle of resurgent Islam with the goal to spread its ugly sharia to every "infidel" nation in the world. The Mosque is the center for hate and destruction, it is inherent in the religion. It will not go away until the religion changes.

This struggle will get worse before it gets better and in all likelihood some one involved in the "Holy Jihad" will detonate an atomic device in a Western city and murder millions to make a point for their false, ungodly, and unholy religion. OK , not every doctrine or cultural expression is bad. So down with the worse! i.e. the Koran, and Mohammed. I am not naive.

King Arthur Tour: Joseph of Armethea

The legend says that Joseph of Armethea was uncle of Jesus of Nazareth and he was also a business man and trader in metals. The latter would have brought him to Cornwall where B.C. tin mines existed and still exist. You will see the tin mine towers in Cornwall. The legend says this is why Joseph evangelized in Cornwall where he had visited on business trips earlier. (Tin is mentioned in the Bible and there are no tin mines in the Near East.)

One Anglican Hymn that all Brits used to know as a favorite "Jerusalem" indicates there is the possibility that Joseph took his nephew Jesus on one of those journeys. William Blake's poem, based on the same legend, and famously set to music by Sir Hubert Parry as 'Jerusalem':

And did those feet in ancient time

Walk upon England's mountains green?

And was the holy Lamb of God

On England's pleasant pastures seen?

And did the countenance divine

Shine forth upon our clouded hills?

And was Jerusalem builded here

Among those dark satanic mills?

Here is a video of these words being sung at The Proms at Royal Albert Hall in 2008.

There are many other oral traditions that affirm that Joseph had Jesus with him. For instance one: as a confirmation of an oath.

"In the 19th century, the people of Priddy, a tin mining village just north of Glastonbury, had a saying, "As sure as our Lord was in Priddy."

This should enhance a visit to Glastonbury and Cornwall.

King Arthur Tour

Tour of the West Country Featuring King Arthur's Historical Locations but not excluding Interesting Sites on the Way.


There are so many extraordinary things to see on this tour. You can not see them all. Stick with what is recommended. You can always come back. Start your tour on the M3.


Actually the Arthur tour really starts at Cadbury Camelot also called Cadbury Castle, located just south of South Cadbury in Somerset. Just off the A303 a mile or two past Wincanton, but:


If you have time, the tour should start with a visit to Winchester. Which is the first capitol of Saxon England. There is a giant statue of Alfred the Great (about the year 800) the first Saxon King of England in the center of town (park there) near the Norman Cathedral which has the longest nave in Europe. See it. There is an Arthur round table near the Cathedral. Ask directions there. The M3 goes to Winchester.


From Winchester I recommend that you take the short cut to the A 30 to Salisbury and visit the Norman Cathedral there which has the highest spire in Europe and its repair by Wren is worth learning about. It almost fell down.


Then leave Salisbury take the road straight north to Amesbury 5 or 6 miles and junction with the A 303 and two miles west (left) find Stone Henge. If you haven't seen it stop for a few minutes


Then about 15 miles further west on the A 303 pass Wincanton and find Cadbury Camelot located just south of South Cadbury in Somerset. Just off the A303 a mile or two past Wincanton. At the site is a path owned by National Trust to the top of the tel. Many Arthur sites are close by. The Battle of Baden was fought at Badbury Rings some miles southwest near Poole which we will visit at the end of the tour. Cadbury Camelot is a major site and time spent here will be worth while. Archaeologists have found pottery from Tintagel in the ruins of this Camelot. Arthur was born at Tintagel Castle (later on the tour). Glastonbury Tor is less than 10 miles away, as the crow flies. It can be seen from the top of Camelot. Further by car.



Glastonbury Tor


I am not sure how long these visits will take but you should be able to make it to Glastonbury for the night. Perhaps book a B&B there and tour the town next day. There you must climb Glastonbury Tor, a mystical and magical place and visit the spring at the bottom ot the Tor where 25,000 gallons of water issues out every day. Then to town center and visit Glastonbury Abby. Arthur and Guinevere were buried there and the place is marked. Learn the legendary story about Joseph of Armethea starting the Abby after he started the church in Exeter in Cornwall. There is no other legend so it may be true and is the background of Arthur's Knights seeking the Holy Grail because Joseph (Uncle to Mary mother of Jesus) is said to have brought it there. The fact that about the year 500 they were still looking for it 400 plus years later establishes how old and how strong the word of mouth legend was. You will learn about the Dissolution under Henry VIII there. Lots to be seen in Glastonbury. Big drive tomorrow or if time drive 30 to 35 miles to Lynton the same night. Go through Minehead. Don't stop.


From Clastonbury to Lynton-Lynmouth on the Severn Estuary in N Devon. You can see Wales across the estuary. Lots of good B&B's in Lynton ranging fro $27 per person and up up. Look them up on line. Lynmouth is on the bottom of the cliff and is a harbor town. Lynton is at the top. Good hotels there. The main thing you must see is the funicular rail road connecting the two towns. Almost straight up and down and it is free or was when we were there. It is run by gravity and you will enjoy the experience of riding this phenomenal invention which has been operating every day since 1890. 120 years!


Then from Lynton find your way to Clovelly. From Lynton it is probably about 20 to 23 miles just off the A 39 south of Westward Ho and Northam. It is a must see. Many tourists will be there. Clovelly is built on the Cliff side face. It is called up and down Clovelly. There are no roads in this sizeable town with shops and restaurants etc and all shops are stocked by donkey back. No motorized vehicles. At the very bottom there is a Range Rover that will take you a circuitous route to the top for a fee. But it is a walking town and a unique English place. Cornish Pasties that will knock your eye out are sold in most villages. Nothing like them anywhere else in the world.


Continue on south from Clovelly on the A 39 about 15 miles to Tintagel the fabled home of Merlin who raised Arthur after his illegitimate birth. Look it up on line. It was near here that Uther Pendragon committed adultery with Igraine the duke of Cornwall's wife and Arthur was born of the union and raised by Merlin the sorceror. The castle is a ruin but if you don't get an eerie feeling there I will know you do not believe in ghosts. You have to do a lot of walking there and a digital camera is a must.


If you miss Bedruthen Rocks its OK but they are on the coast north of Newquay which is a good place to eat and seals are in the ocean here. But then make the rest of the journey to Penzance I am not sure how far, may be as much as 40 miles from Tintagel. Settle in at Penzance. Here you have to see Mousehole, Land's End, palm trees there. Walk the streets of St Ives too popular to miss. Then visit Michael Mount in the bay of Penzance. It is an Island accessible by walking at low tide but you may have to take a boat back. Don't miss it.


Start the day leaving Penzance and go to Looe Pool only a very few miles east. See it last when you are leaving Penzance. It is near Porthleven just east of it on the B3304. It is where excalibur went back to the Lady of the lake. The first picture in this article is of Looe Pool. You have to open and close gates on private land where there are signs but it is worth the walk. If you can't find it ask, do not miss it. All locals will know where it is. It is on the maps of UK and is a mile long lake which is separated from the ocean by a 200 yard wide causeway of sand and stone almost a mile long. Beside being an authentic Arthur location it is a geological wonder worth seeing.


This s almost the end. There is just one more stop on the Arthur tour and it is back in Dorset a long long way. You can fill in some places if you like on the way. Seeing the original church at Exeter might be one where Joseph Of Armathea is said to have begun his ministry in England, before he went to Glastonbury. (I am a believer.) And perhaps Plymouth where a replica of the Mayflower, the ship that took the first settlers to New England, is moored. Good fish restaurants in Plymouth harbor. Next stop is near Poole before Bournemouth. Follow the A 35 to the A 31 to Wimbourne Minster and junction with the B3082. and go toward Blandford Forum and Badury Rings will be half way on the right about 4 or 5 miles from Wimbourne. Badbury Rings had been inhabited as a fortress from 800 years before Christ. And it is the location of the Battle of Baden where Arthur defeated the Saxon invaders and turned them back in the early 500's which set the stage for Camelot when Arthur ruled. He ruled when and because the Romans had abandoned Britain until the overthrow of Arthur's Celts by the Saxons, aided by Mordred's foolish overthrow of Arthur. The Saxon vistories began the Anglo Saxon rule which gave England its name derived from the Angles. Badbury Rings was also where, later during Nero's reign, Vespatian and his Roman armies were stationed in Britain. It was most likely that Nero called him from there in about 68 to put down the rebellion in Jerusalem. Vespatian became Emperor before Jerusalem fell. Which event he left to his son Titus who ended the siege of Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple in 70 AD.


There are many extraordinary places and things that you will miss on this tour, like Bodman Moor, Polperro and the town of Looe really beautiful places and great beaches. But you can always go back. One of the best ways to go back is to ask my son George where and how he rents self catering cottages and get one and drive out from there to the areas near by.


All the best and let me know what you think.


Fred

The right Name? Is it wrong to say it "wrong"?

Q:

Fred,

I joined a social network that was originally called Jewish/Christian coalition. It has shifted to more of the Messianic movement and is now called http://4yahweh.ning.com. Anyway, they had a blog post recently stating that the word Jesus is a modern creation and is not in the original text. I wanted to refute that argument, but as I checked my Greek NT and lexicon, I could not find the word Jesus. Wondered if you could give me any thoughts on this. Sure would appreciate any help you can give me.

Leona

A:

The name Jesus from Hebrew יְשׁוּעָ

Trying to get a proper pronunciation for a name does not take into consideration that each language has peculiarities of sounds and that language changes over time. For instance there is no Y or J in Greek and Spanish J is pronounced H etc. Thus Yeshua in Hebrew, which means Salvation, is pronounved Iasous in Greek and the spelling changes when as a noun it is declined like ιησου. In Spanish it is Jesu pronounced Hesu, in Navaho it is Yeasu, In Latin Iesus since there is no J in Latin either; or French Jésus with an accent. Were the Jewish masoretes wrong when they accented Yeshua in Isaiah? Or Russian Иисус If you transliterated it into English it would almost be Aasus, but we have no exact equivalent for И. Croatians have Isus. etc. Or How about Aramaic which you could not read if I printed it. Even many languages which spell the name "Jesus" will not pronounce it the same due to the peculiarities of that language like German for instance. What is the use of getting the "real" pronunciation anyway. What rubbish! Is it a magic thing that makes everyone addressing our Lord unacceptable because they lisp or do not speak Hebrew?

There is no J in Hebrew. The yod is often translated into English as J like Josiah, Jeremiah, Jonah, Jacob, and Javan, Yavan in Hebrew (Or more properly Ion) in Hebrew is translated as Javan (Greece but more likely Ionia) in English.

But the worst part of their arrogance is that Yeshua is not the exact Hebrew original pronunciation. The last consonent in the word is an ayin which is a gutteral like "ghh" but not as rough. This was the original sound but is not used in modern Hebrew. So Yeshua is not the real original pronunciation that would have been used by Isaiah others! Isaiah wrote Yeshuatiy which means my saviour or My Jesus in Isaiah 49:6; and he did have Messiah Jesus in mind. Read it.

Is it wrong to say Messiah instead of the more Hebrew Meshiach or Yeshua Meshiach instead of Jesus Christ? What rubbish!

I also see the group you cite gives a false pronunciation for YHWH. The pronunciation of which is lost and reverent observant Jews will not attempt to pronounce the NAME. They substitue the Hebrew word for my Lord "adonai" Like in the most popular prayer called the Schma which is "Hear O Israel YHWH our God is one YHWH." They pray in Hebrew: "Schma Yisrael, Adonai elohenu adonai 'echod." The proper pronunciation of YHWH is lost but Yahweh is an arbitrary pronunciation with arbitrary vowels the group has presumptiously chosen and most likely not correct! Who do they think they are? If over 2000 years of Jewish Hebrew speaking scholars would not attempt to reconstruct the word with vowels lest they get it wrong -- Who are these upstarts to make such conclusions and attempt to bind them on others. They are heretics pure and simple.

A new brand of Judaisers who are clueless.

All the best,

Fred

Isaiah Study

Mr. Miller,

My church adult Sunday School class wanted to study the book of Isaiah. We are part of the RCA in North central Illinois. I led the class, chapter by chapter. As of today, we have been at it for 10 months and we are on Chapter 53. Your material, although not initially planned, has become a great tool for us. I stumbled on it from the net one day as I was preparing for class. I wanted to thank you for your work and dedication. You have taken a group of about 20 of us, and helped us to learn so much. Thank you again!

(Name Removed)
Ebenezer Reformed Church
Oregon Illinois, 61061


Thanks for your comments, that is why it is online. You give me the satisfaction I have posted it for. I think you will really enjoy my material on Isaiah 63.

Fred P Miller

Is this a prophecy about Jews and Muslims ultimately worshipping together?

Q:

Dear Mr. Miller,

Would you explain whether these verses is a prophecy about Jews and Muslims ultimately worshipping together?

Isa. 19:23-25 23 "In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. 24 In that day Israel will be the third, along with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing on the earth. 25 The LORD Almighty will bless them, saying, "Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance."

A:

THERE WAS AN ALTERNATIVE TEMPLE built in Egypt during the "Silent" years. Since Isa 19 prophecies the building of the alternative Temple which was done at the command of one of the Pyolemies the prophecy you cite was most likely fulfilled at that time long before there was an Islam.

Read my whole chapter called there A Temple Built in Egypt to get the context, then tell me what you think.

Fred P Miller

Variations of Q from M, line 24 of the Qa 8:8 to 9:11

Q:

Dear Mr. Miller,

In the section "Variations of Q from Masoretic" of your comments to your translation of Column VIII of The Great Isaiah Scroll 8:8 to 9:11, you indicate the following: (Line 20: 3rd word: Q adds final "he" to the word "higaltah" (you increased) and in the 4th word "simcha" (joy) for the same reason described in ther last note. Line 21: 3rd word begins vs 3 Heb, Eng vs 4. The word "kiy" has a superfluous yod in Q. Line 22: 2nd word is Midian spelled "midiym" in Q and "midiyn" in the masoretic. Line 25, 1st word: "ha-misrah" has a yod over it which would make it to be pronounced "ha mi siy rah").

I wonder why you do not include the line 24 in the variations list.

Your translation of the line 24 reads:

"24. his shoulders and he shall be called wonderful, counsellor, mighty God, everlasting father the prince of peace." The Tanach translation of this line reads: "For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

I am sure you can agree that there is a great difference between "he shall be called mighty God, prince of peace" and "the mighty God called his name 'the prince of peace'".

How can you explain this discrepancy, please?

Yours sincerely,

(Name removed)

A:

Dear ------,

In English it is Isa 9:6, in Hebrew it is Isa 9:5.

The Hebrew masoretic text is plain. וַיִּקְרָ֨א He shall be called. Not He shall call. The dagesh (dot) in the yod indicates an elided nun making the verb a niphal 2nd stem meaning "he shall be called." The qal or 1st stem would be he shall call. The masoretic (Jewish) text reads "He shall be called." However even if it were a first stem the subject could not be el gibor (mighty God). The placement of el gibor in the sentence makes it one of the titles given to the son who is given to us. It is impossible for it to be the subject of וַיִּקְרָ֨א.

It is obvious why Jews, who do not believe in the messianic Mission of the Nazarene, would want to alter this verse from the masoretic meaning of its text. They also change the tense of the verb from an imperfect implying future to past (called) implying a perfect tense verb which it is not. I believe that Majorettes were correct and that the current modern Jewish translation of this verse is unscholarly to say the least.

all the best,

Fred P Miller