funinspace

Ah, I get it...so since Noah, could only see the world around him (aka limited by the technology of the day), then the grand Deluge could have been just a very big localized flood....he was dumped into an ocean he never saw; then bumped into the continent after a year; and let the 50 or so animals of the desert he knew of go back off.

Hey, we could apply this V-7 apologic to Adam as well, and there were no other humans in his valley...

Works for me... :rolling:

John A. Broussard

I think you are here demonstrating the damage that reason can do to your faith. Once you start trying to make your beliefs resaonable, you are in danger of no longer holding to those beliefs.

I suggest you go back to reading the bible and believing in it, period. Life will be a lot simpler if you do that.

spin

You have shown that you don't know anything about linguistics so I wouldn't expect you to do any better than the sources you rehash.

Lots of people have been called virgins.

Doh! Elizabeth I was called a virgin, the Virgin Queen. This doesn't mean that "Elizabeth" meant "virgin" or anything of the sort. This is woeful logic. Woeful.

There is no reason for you to claim anything about the English version of the Greek version of the Hebrew Miriam. The English version. That's just silly. I gave you a simple trajectory and how it happened and you just ignored it. You didn't even attempt to show it wrong -- because you are in no position to do so.

Your lack of argument isn't augmented by using capitals. You are simply avoiding the evidence from the LXX because you can't deal with it. You are being hopeless.

Yup, and neither does Mary <- Maria <- Mariam <- Miriam.

Oh, is that a fact!? So, "man" has nothing to do with the Sanskrit "manu(sh)"? or German Mensch? or Latin *ma[n]s -> mas? Remember that the father of humankind in Sanskrit is manu.

Both Walter Skeat and Lewis & Short (of the Latin Dictionary) tie man to mas.

The Latin word mas which has a genitive of maris providing the source for maritus, "husband", and which has a diminuitive form masculus, the source of "masculine" in English.

That's only because you haven't looked at the data.

You don't even find anything fishy in your out of hand rejection of the relationship between English "man" and Latin mas, meaning "man".

Note your own source regarding the verb "marry" (which you omitted to mention):
The important word for you to notice in the middle is "perhaps". Your source doesn't even know. It obviously is unaware of the connection between maritus and the genitive maris of mas. Lewis & Short have no doubt about the connection.

Once again we see you, Dharma, playing too fast with the data, driven along by your ideological commitments.


spin

Dharma

Oh, and you seem to be a master of linguistics and theology...hmm, Abraham was called "Elohim" out of respect, eh?

if you want to be called a virgin, that's your problem. :rolling:

But jokes aside, Mary theologically is more related to some other theology, NOT Miriam which simply means bitter. There is archeological evidence of a white Mary and Dark Mary, this is completely not Judaism.

spin

Usual non sequitur when you have nothing coherent to say.


Oh, hilarious.

What a bankrupt approach you've got. Nothing to say on the subject. Totally ignorant of linguistics. Got lock jaw over a misinterpreted bit about Abraham. The best you can do is silly editing? What a total waste.

You're confusing gospel with church. If you read the gospel, you'd find a different Mary, Mrs Joseph.

Deal with the gospel before you get into later tradition.


spin

Dharma

the church supposedly follows the gospel. Now historically there is evidence of two different cults, one called the Nazarenes and one called the Christians. One cult imposed on the other...can you guess which one?

spin

Would you like to attempt to state some sort of argument?

You are ready to go off on all sorts of tangents, incidentally avoiding your errors about Mary. Hey, fine, if you don't want to face anything, but make aspersions that don't really have any significance, then fine.

You have happily plowed off the track and into the bushes. Tell me when you come back.


spin

Anat

Do you mean Genesis 23:6? It says 'n'si elohim' = prince of god. Read full sentences. Or do you mean some other passage?

Dharma

Elohim is a plural generic reference to generic divine beings. This would probably be better translated as "prince of the divine" -- this of course is, as I contend, a reference to Abraham not being a mere mortal, but a diety, as later Kabbalistic references to him also state that he was a creator. Again, this discussion was taken care of in the polytheism of the Bible thread.

Anat

Since when does Y is prince of X' mean Y is X?