Book of Revelation had multiple authors who were Asher Gentiles - the most Essenic of all NT Books
crunch
> On Dec 22, 5:25 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
> > On Dec 22, 8:12 pm, "(<<Kelly>>)" <rosie_be...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 22, 3:30 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 22, 4:08 pm, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>...
> > > > Thiering lexicon of special meaningshttp://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_For_Reference....
>
> > > > Dog kyōn
>
> > > > "A homosexual, as in Deuteronomy 23:18. In the list of members of a
> > > > militant abbey in Revelation 22:15 the homosexual, as a plu. rep. In
> > > > Mark 7:27,28 the question of homosexuality is dealt with in Jesus'
> > > > exchange with Helena the Syrophoenican woman on the subject of "little
> > > > dogs" kynaria, homosexual initiates. Jesus is quoted as saying that it
> > > > was not Herodian practice, kalos, to give the sacred bread of Nazirite
> > > > Gentiles, tekna, to the "little dogs". Helena replies that it was the
> > > > practice of monastic Gentiles, paidia, "under the table" to share the
> > > > crumbs of sacred bread after the meal with homosexuals, so having some
> > > > fellowship with them. Jesus' answer to her meant that she was
> > > > permitted to act as a lay levite, a teacher, with the congregation.
> > > > Her role as the head of Asher was to be the Mother Sarah to
> > > > proselytes, who included the eunuchs of the Herodian court."
>
> > > If she seriously thinks that "keleb" translates directly to
> > > "homosexual", then Thiering's homophobia is showing. The Hebrew word
> > > "keleb" can mean:
>
> > > 1) dog
>
> > > a) dog (literal)
>
> > > b) contempt or abasement (figurative)
>
> > > c) of pagan sacrifice
>
> > > d) of male cult prostitute (figurative)
>
> > > Notice that male cult prostitute is at the bottom of the list and that
> > > it says "male cult prostitute" and is not referring to natural
> > > homosexuality but to those who protituted themselves out for cultic
> > > homosexual behavior.
>
> > > Once again, Thiering proves herself to be a crackpot who strays so far
> > > from reality that she could almost be your twin. Note I said,
> > > "almost" (you stray from reality much more frequently - I seriously
> > > doubt Thiering thinks herself to be Spock from Star Trek).- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Yet, right from the start you are off on the wrong foot
> > because Thiering lexicon/pesher is Greek, not Hebrew.
> > So, she is working from "kyōn".
>
> Then she never should have referred to Deuteronomy, since the Torah
> (where Deuteronomy is found) was written originally in Hebrew.
> Apparently, those on "the wrong foot" is BT and you, Soggy. Once
> again, you only prove BT to be a crack-pot.
Yet -
The writer of Rev 22:15 shares the Essene prejudice that
sex is defiling and sees Deuteronomy 23:18 thru that
prism. Further, Asher Gentiles spoke Greek in the synagogue
and used the Septuagint.
The Descendants of Jesus:
Decoding Revelation Parts C and D
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index10.html
"The Book of Revelation divides itself naturally, by means of its sets
of 7, into four parts, A, B, C, and D. The dates that each part deals
with can be discovered from the dates of events that are described.
The parts do not appear in the book in order - Part B precedes Part A
because of its greater value at a certain stage. The different parts,
with the dates they cover, are:
Part B 1:1 - 8:5 44 AD to 51 AD
Part A 8:6 - 14:5 1 AD to 44 AD
Part C 14:6 - 19:21 54 AD to 74 AD
Part D 20:1 - 22:21 100 AD to 114 AD"
-----
BT? In Papias: who is Aristion?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/4949
"On Dylan's question previously asked, whether John the Elder was the
same as
John Mark, Eusebius himself was confused on this question, because of
the
smooth way in which the monastic celibate order of John Mark, that of
Dan,
was taken over by the eremitical Gentiles of Asher under James Niceta
and
subsequently John Aquila. The book of Revelation, written by Asher
Gentiles,
abolishes Dan, leaving it out of the list of "tribes" (ascetic orders)
in
7:4-8. James Niceta is shown "eating the little book" - taking over
John's
gospel - in ch. 10. John Mark was called Elder (presbyteros) in the
introduction to his 2nd and 3rd epistles in the NT, but when John
Aquila
took up his position he became John the Elder. See Jesus of the
Apocalypse,
note 9 to ch. 8 for the fuller explanation."
David Christainsen
Newton, Mass. USA
Sir David
> Decoding Revelation Parts C and Dhttp://www.pesher ... <FLUSH>
Carl rides his hobbyhorse.
(<<Kelly>>)
>
> "The Book of Revelation divides itself naturally, by means of its sets
> of 7, into four parts, A, B, C, and D. The dates that each part deals
> with can be discovered from the dates of events that are described.
> The parts do not appear in the book in order - Part B precedes Part A
> because of its greater value at a certain stage. The different parts,
> with the dates they cover, are:
>
> Part B 1:1 - 8:5 44 AD to 51 AD
> Part A 8:6 - 14:5 1 AD to 44 AD
> Part C 14:6 - 19:21 54 AD to 74 AD
> Part D 20:1 - 22:21 100 AD to 114 AD"
>
> -----
>
>
> "On Dylan's question previously asked, whether John the Elder was the
> same as
> John Mark, Eusebius himself was confused on this question, because of
> the
> smooth way in which the monastic celibate order of John Mark, that of
> Dan,
> was taken over by the eremitical Gentiles of Asher under James Niceta
> and
> subsequently John Aquila. The book of Revelation, written by Asher
> Gentiles,
> abolishes Dan, leaving it out of the list of "tribes" (ascetic orders)
> in
> 7:4-8. James Niceta is shown "eating the little book" - taking over
> John's
> gospel - in ch. 10. John Mark was called Elder (presbyteros) in the
> introduction to his 2nd and 3rd epistles in the NT, but when John
> Aquila
> took up his position he became John the Elder. See Jesus of the
> Apocalypse,
> note 9 to ch. 8 for the fuller explanation."
"Yet", you completely dodged the importance of being shown BT
referencing the Torah in comparison with the Greek of Revelation and
that she completely ignored the fact that the Torah is written in
Hebrew.
BT's "work" is full or errors, Soggy. It's time you came to that
realization.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Apocalypse generally as by "John, a disciple of the Lord". whom he
clearly meant to identify with the apostle. Since he also mentioned
ancient copies of the book, it is clear that he knew of its
circulation at a much earlier time. It is also significant that the
Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons cites the Apocalypse in one
place as Scripture (see Eusebius 5.1.58). The Muratorian Canon shows
that do doubt existed over the Apocalypse in the Roman church towards
the end of the second century. Tertullian cited the book frequently
and regarded it as by the apostle John. Similarly Clement of
Alexandria accepted the apostolic authorship and cited the book as
Scripture. The same goes for Origen. There are few books in the New
Testament with stronger early attestation.
crunch
Yet, so far you are incapable of pointing out any
Thiering errors, Lazy. Your bad; want to try again?
(<<Kelly>>)
Are you kidding? I just did point out Thiering errors. Did you miss
it? Or are you just lying about it all...?
She uses Deuteronomy as a reference for what's in Revelation, yet
doesn't take in consideration the Hebrew meaning of "dog" (which
doesn't translate the way she wants it to). She doesn't know the
difference between emetics and purgatives in her charge that aloe was
used for Jesus as an emetic after crucifixion.
It's apparent to everyone here but you: Thiering gets it wrong. A
lot.
Now, do you want to continue to live in denial that I pointed out
Thiering errors or do you want to finally admit that at least some of
BT's "pesher" is full of holes?
crunch
> On Dec 23, 1:09 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > The writer of Rev 22:15 shares the Essene prejudice that
> > > > sex is defiling and sees Deuteronomy 23:18 thru that
> > > > and used the Septuagint.
>...
> > > "Yet", you completely dodged the importance of being shown BT
> > > referencing the Torah in comparison with the Greek of Revelation and
> > > that she completely ignored the fact that the Torah is written in
> > > Hebrew.
>
> > > BT's "work" is full or errors, Soggy. It's time you came to that
> > > realization.
>
> > Yet, so far you are incapable of pointing out any
> > Thiering errors, Lazy. Your bad; want to try again?
>
> Are you kidding? I just did point out Thiering errors. Did you miss
> it? Or are you just lying about it all...?
>
> She uses Deuteronomy as a reference for what's in Revelation, yet
> doesn't take in consideration the Hebrew meaning of "dog" (which
> doesn't translate the way she wants it to). She doesn't know the
> difference between emetics and purgatives in her charge that aloe was
> used for Jesus as an emetic after crucifixion.
>
> It's apparent to everyone here but you: Thiering gets it wrong. A
> lot.
>
> Now, do you want to continue to live in denial that I pointed out
> Thiering errors or do you want to finally admit that at least some of
> BT's "pesher" is full of holes?
The Thousand Years are Ended
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1531
"In Rev 20:4-6, the thousand years occurred again, this time for those
who had not worshipped the Beast (Magian zealot monasticism), and who
‘reigned with Christ at year 1000’. They are the Ephesus Christians,
who observed Pentecost as their primary feast, the religious beginning
of the year. In June, AD 100, they declared that the year 4000 (1000)
had now truly come.
The passage speaks of those who had suffered for their testimony to
Jesus and for the Word of God. The title Word of God was now held by
Jesus III, son of Jesus Justus. The detail indicates that he had been
born in AD 77. The grand vision of ch.21 took place in AD 110, when he
began his marriage process. "I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for
the first heaven and the first earth had passed away…and I saw the
holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared
as a bride adorned for her husband." Forty years after the fall of
Jerusalem, the Ephesus Christians had established a new building, a
New Jerusalem, based on the plan of the Temple Scroll, but adjusted
according to the Christian changes in the organisation. The Bride was
the betrothed of Jesus III, who would represent Gentile Christians in
the initiation ceremony that was understood as a symbolic marriage. It
was held at Pentecost, with the initiates wearing the white robe of a
bride, hence the name Whitsunday."
-----
The full story (2). Sep AD 43 in Ephesus
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1989
"The book of Revelation is a good example of what could be called the
pop art of the hellenistic period. Its surface form is directed at the
ordinary people, without learning, who believed in heavenly visions
and revelations. Political leaders and kings were packaged as
supernatural figures. Such claims were made by the Roman emperors, and
were particularly effective in their eastern provinces. But something
else was wrapped up in the package of Revelation and its related
books, a political history that was being offered to those of the
ordinary people who thought hard enough."
Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
(<<Kelly>>)
<Snip Soggy dance-and-paste>
Now...are you going to comment on the actual issue here, or just
continue to cut and paste things that have nothing to do with the fact
that BT referenced Deuteronomy in parallel with Revelation without
taking into account the Hebrew that Deuteronomy was written in?
Thiering is a hack making first-year undergraduate mistakes. It's no
wonder true Biblical scholars laugh in her general direction.