JCS1977 Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelg Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCS1977 Posted May 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 NO. "NO" as in you don't agree, or your fluency in Hebrew and Aramaic lead you to a different conclusion? Expand please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxx1 Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Trust me JCS1977, you Really don't want to know the real truth and this isn't it, meaning the videos that you posted. They are categorical and traditional "smoke and mirrors", so cut it out, PLEASE!!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzur Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) I feel the need to be fair to my dentist, lest I sounded like I was chiding him.... To be fair, he takes off every 4 months or so and spends a couple weeks in very poor countries or countries devastated by disaster, doing free dental work on kids and their parents... He showed me pictures of his last venture to the PI following that hurricane and photos of this one kid he did a cleft pallet repair cause the kid asked if he could help him..... It was almost a tear jerker is was so touching..... So truthfully , I don't really care what he believes as far as the a/christ goes..(and he does believe that heart and soul)..... He is a man who walks the talk and I very much respect him and his work for which he asks nothing in return.... Had to clear that up.... Oh and I would love to meet a person fluent in ancient Aramaic and had a hard time following the video with out mapping... though it seemed like the guy jumped between Aramaic (ancient by definition), Greek (ancient by definition) and Hebrew.... and though jumping between the languages to make his point, it didn't seem like he traced out who would have been speaking what, at the time they would have apparently been speaking..... And instead the guy seemed to jump between them with this huge assumption he could do so (no) And there is this really equally huge assumption everyone would agree as to what was being spoken (not necessarily) .... And even more to the point.... what was spoken and then translated as it was put into writing at the time the particular passage was written..... Specifically, Jesus likely spoke Aramaic.... and when His Words were originally written, were they written first in Aramaic... (not likely) or were they first translated into Greek at the time they were written... And then what derivation of Greek.... Given that translation is at the core of this assertion... there are very serious issues to ignore....(and I probably didn't say that as clearly as I could have as I'm tired, so if it doesn't make sense, let me know).. Edited May 31, 2014 by Rayzur 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCS1977 Posted May 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Trust me JCS1977, you Really don't want to know the real truth and this isn't it, meaning the videos that you posted. They are categorical and traditional "smoke and mirrors", so cut it out, PLEASE!!! What do you mean by "truth"? The pronunciation of the Aramaic and Hebrew texts of that particular verse that coincide with the name? That can be prove. Just like any true math statement. So, on that issue, I would recommend you to do some homework of your own. Or, are you trying to infer that I believe Barack Obama is the Antichrist, which I never stated? The former is absolutely true, whether it's a coincidence or not. The latter you are just inferring. Now, please tell me what " real truth" you are talking about that I "Really don't want to know". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelg Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 "NO" as in you don't agree, or your fluency in Hebrew and Aramaic lead you to a different conclusion? Expand please. I will defer my first comments to what Rayzur has written. There are too many twists and turns that have no correlative bearing on the the meaning of the words. The entire premise is based on trying to force the passage to refer to Barack Obama, someone in the future as far as Jesus is concerned. When in reality the passage is referring to an entity in the time of Jesus. If the simplest hermeneutic had been done the "expert" would have recognize that this passage is referring to Satan's downfall because the demons were subject to the 70 disciples by the authority of Jesus' name. In English it is simply, "I was watching . . . " (first person, singular, imperfect, active, indicative). The imperfect verb is like the present tense, except it dwells on the course of an event instead of stating its occurrence. It draws the picture and helps you to see the course of the act. So Jesus is stating that he was watching Satan fall as the disciples authoritatively proclaimed His name and cast out demons. There is no thought to a future predictive event of another person being involved in being cast down. Therefore, no, Jesus did not give us the name of an antichrist, Barack Obama. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPSprayduster Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 I will defer my first comments to what Rayzur has written. There are too many twists and turns that have no correlative bearing on the the meaning of the words. The entire premise is based on trying to force the passage to refer to Barack Obama, someone in the future as far as Jesus is concerned. When in reality the passage is referring to an entity in the time of Jesus. If the simplest hermeneutic had been done the "expert" would have recognize that this passage is referring to Satan's downfall because the demons were subject to the 70 disciples by the authority of Jesus' name. In English it is simply, "I was watching . . . " (first person, singular, imperfect, active, indicative). The imperfect verb is like the present tense, except it dwells on the course of an event instead of stating its occurrence. It draws the picture and helps you to see the course of the act. So Jesus is stating that he was watching Satan fall as the disciples authoritatively proclaimed His name and cast out demons. There is no thought to a future predictive event of another person being involved in being cast down. Therefore, no, Jesus did not give us the name of an antichrist, Barack Obama. Thank you Nelg, some folks just do not get it. If it is not in the bible then it is not true. If Jesus wanted us to know the name of the antichrist it would spelled out clearly. Trying to twist the words of Jesus to prove a point JCS is sinful. You should be ashamed of yourself. I won't judge you, God will. Just remember when you standing in front of him reviewing your life and he ask you why you posted this trying to speak for him then i am sure you will have a good story. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djorgie Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 No, Yahushua/Jesus did not give us the specific name of the anti Christ. Anyone claiming this or pushing this is simply deceived and pushing a fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renomac Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 Holy Scripture tells us that anyone against Christ is considered antichrist ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts