daily Bible verse

[jcribb16]

But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    

The main thing for a Christian is God is real.  You don't choose to believe that - that's your belief and choice.  Christians aren't trying to school as much as some of you are just trying to mock and be hateful to those who do believe.  Your smart alec speech is condescending and ridiculous. 

Now you're confusing yourself without any help from me.  My comment has to do with translations, history, archeology and the interpretation of literary evidence.  Try not to get so overly emotional and stay with reality, you'll just make yourself look like one more irrational religious fanatic.

I know exactly what you are talking about.  Christians believe in God first and most.  Some Christians don't know all of the history like what you are speaking of, unless they take courses, like I have, or they research deeply on their own.  You are getting way too technical for the average Christian who loves their Lord and studies His Word.

[alaric99x]

But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    

The main thing for a Christian is God is real.  You don't choose to believe that - that's your belief and choice.  Christians aren't trying to school as much as some of you are just trying to mock and be hateful to those who do believe.  Your smart alec speech is condescending and ridiculous. 

Now you're confusing yourself without any help from me.  My comment has to do with translations, history, archeology and the interpretation of literary evidence.  Try not to get so overly emotional and stay with reality, you'll just make yourself look like one more irrational religious fanatic.

I know exactly what you are talking about.  Christians believe in God first and most.  Some Christians don't know all of the history like what you are speaking of, unless they take courses, like I have, or they research deeply on their own.  You are getting way too technical for the average Christian who loves their Lord and studies His Word.

That is exactly my point.  I don't want to step on your shoes, because you seem to be getting a little emotional already, but how can you get "too technical?"  I mean, is there too much education in those ideas, would the research and learning be too disturbing, will it be too troublesome and difficult to learn the actual facts?

You just made my point for me, I'm too "technical," as you say, not really the appropriate word, but I guess you mean too "complicated" for the average christian, of course, I know the average christian is much too simple minded to understand such self-evident concepts, that's why they believe in a simple minded belief like christianity.

[falcon9]

But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    
 
My comment has to do with translations, history, archeology and the interpretation of literary evidence.  Try not to get so overly emotional and stay with reality, you'll just make yourself look like one more irrational religious fanatic.

I know exactly what you are talking about.  Christians believe in God first and most.  Some Christians don't know all of the history like what you are speaking of, unless they take courses, like I have, or they research deeply on their own.  You are getting way too technical for the average Christian who loves their Lord and studies His Word.

That is exactly my point.  I don't want to step on your shoes, because you seem to be getting a little emotional already, but how can you get "too technical?"  I mean, is there too much education in those ideas, would the research and learning be too disturbing, will it be too troublesome and difficult to learn the actual facts?

You just made my point for me, I'm too "technical," as you say, not really the appropriate word, but I guess you mean too "complicated" for the average christian, of course, I know the average christian is much too simple minded to understand such self-evident concepts, that's why they believe in a simple minded belief like christianity.

That's hitting the nail on the head; nearly everything beyond blind simplistic 'faith' is too complex and confusing for the "average" xtian.

[tuscarorarain]

"5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
 
6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
 
7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
 
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
 
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
 
Romans 5:5-9 KJV Bible

[tuscarorarain]

"Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast 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 by Your generous Spirit." (Psalm 51:10-12

Psalms
Chapter 51
1 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.
 
2 Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
 
3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
 
4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
Rom 3:4
 
5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
 
6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
 
7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
 
8 Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.
 
9 Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities.
 
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
 
11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.
 
12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.
 
13 Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee.
 
14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.
 
15 O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.
 
16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
 
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
 
18 Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem.
 
19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.
 
KJV Bible

I wanted everyone to see the whole chapter. Also, KJV is the only completly accurate translation that I know of. I hope this is a real blessing to you all. I really enjoy this daily thread.

[falcon9]

There is no valid basis for the superstitious concept of soteriolgy, ("sacrificing" so-called 'deities' in exchange for "absolution").  Blind religious faith is an invalid basis.

"For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. Christ died for us.

[falcon9]

Such reposting of religious superstition constitutes offensive spamming of proselytizing nonsense.

Psalms
I wanted everyone to see the whole chapter. Also, KJV is the only completly accurate translation that I know of. I hope this is a real blessing to you all. I really enjoy this daily thread.

[IceKittyNM]

Oh now, falcon, you're doing just as much "spamming"/"flooding" with your opposing posts (and are "requoted" as well!!).

No, the 'lesser number' of responses to the more numerous initial flooding isn't spamming in turn.  That's why they're called responses, (even though fewer in number because not all of the verse-flooding is responded to).

Okay, if you need to get technical, we'll call yours "responses" instead of "spamming", although still just as repetitious in some places (especially the images you like to post).  

And honestly, why do you care so much that verses get requoted? Is it because you have already "slammed" those verses and need new content to slam?

These repetitious "verses" are available elsewhere, (which is how they're able to be cut & pasted here), so why keep repeating them here unless for the purposes of 'slamming' others with offensive religious propagandizing proselytization?

Falcon, I think those who enjoy this thread really don't care that verses get repeated. You seem to be the only one who has a problem with it.

The content in this thread is not posted to be offensive....those who are offended take it that way, which is not our fault. If you are offended, then you don't have to frequent the thread....it's your choice right??

The viewpoints opposing such religious proselytization are not posted to be offensive, those who are offended take it that way, (which is the "fault" of the religious adherent offending others in the first place with repetitous "verses").  If the religious adherents are offended by views opposing thier faith-blindness, they can use the ignore function or not read the thread; that being their choice as well.

Point taken....the broom sweeps both ways, indeed!!  

Nite, nite, falcon!! Was away from home for 11 days, and I'm pooped!!  

[falcon9]

Oh now, falcon, you're doing just as much "spamming"/"flooding" with your opposing posts (and are "requoted" as well!!).

No, the 'lesser number' of responses to the more numerous initial flooding isn't spamming in turn.  That's why they're called responses, (even though fewer in number because not all of the verse-flooding is responded to).

Okay, if you need to get technical, we'll call yours "responses" instead of "spamming", although still just as repetitious in some places (especially the images you like to post).  

Posting the same responses to the same initially-spammed religious proselytizing posts isn't the same as INITIATING the spamming which elicited the responses however.

And honestly, why do you care so much that verses get requoted? Is it because you have already "slammed" those verses and need new content to slam?

These repetitious "verses" are available elsewhere, (which is how they're able to be cut & pasted here), so why keep repeating them here unless for the purposes of 'slamming' others with offensive religious propagandizing proselytization?

Falcon, I think those who enjoy this thread really don't care that verses get repeated. You seem to be the only one who has a problem with it.

Such repetition of religious propaganda constitutes overt proselytizing of an offensive superstious belief.  I'll oppose it if I choose to, regardless of whether others choose to, (and some have so, I'm not the only one who is offended by those expressions of blind faith which could remain private, instead of being publically posted and not exempt from public comment).

The content in this thread is not posted to be offensive....those who are offended take it that way, which is not our fault. If you are offended, then you don't have to frequent the thread....it's your choice right??

The viewpoints opposing such religious proselytization are not posted to be offensive, those who are offended take it that way, (which is the "fault" of the religious adherent offending others in the first place with repetitous "verses").  If the religious adherents are offended by views opposing thier faith-blindness, they can use the ignore function or not read the thread; that being their choice as well.

Point taken....the broom sweeps both ways, indeed!!  

Nite, nite, falcon!! Was away from home for 11 days, and I'm pooped!!  

The broom always did sweep both ways; it's just that most xtians falsely believe they own the 'broom'.

[ben50]

Jesus paid the price, and our reward is to be with our Father in Heaven for eternity.

[falcon9]

There is no rational correlation between a non-sacrifice of a non-deity, (the so-called soteriology pseudo-hypothesis), and some supernatural 'redemption/absolution'.  This remains a specious religious myth since it has no evidentiary basis, (blind faith is specifically a lack of evidentiary basis).

Jesus paid the price, and our reward is to be with our Father in Heaven for eternity.

[Cuppycake]

"Religion is the most malevolent of all mind viruses."
-- Arthur C. Clarke

I couldn't agree more. I told a long time friend yesterday that I chose as a child not to buy into the  of religion and "god" and this was the responce I got " (rollseyes) Kind of a BIG decision to make for a child but okay. I'm not going to debate it, I don't do that. I just think that picture is ignorant because whoever did it must not be capable of understanding God and has a narrow view of the world and purpose. But on the other side of it, I know just as many "Religious" people don't really understand themselves so.... More of the blind leading the blind (shrug). Peace!"

It may very well be that those who were 'forced' to attend 'church' against their will, (due to parental pressure/propagandizing the young), are the most mind-blinded by religious blind faith.

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful g-d, who creates faulty humans, and then
blames them for his own mistakes."
-- Gene Roddenberry

Oh I was most certainly forced to go to church. But I wasn't stupid enough to buy into the  !

[falcon9]

Oh I was most certainly forced to go to church. But I wasn't stupid enough to buy into the  !

Good for you!  It takes a mind willing to discern for oneself, rather than blindly accept superstitions without evidence, to see without self-imposed blinders.

[hitch0403]

Ben50...ru 1 of the 144000?

[gramev64]

God is our refuge and strength,a very present help in trouble.Psalm 46:1