Sign Related

Relax... Join me in a box of popcorn, first. :eating_popcorn:

"How many takes does it take to comprehend what a single book in the bible is indicating in a written form to your language"--Line of thought of the day

1. In the first take in reading any book in the bible:

What was the first thing you learned from that one (and which one might it be? Do live to tell)?

2. In the recent take in reading any book in the bible:

What is the recent thing only you learned from that one (and which one might it be? Do live to tell)?

bacht

I recently obtained a NRSV translation which includes the OT apocrypha which I'm re-discovering after 20 odd years. I find the flavour of these writings (Ben Sira, Tobit, Maccabees etc) an interesting intermediate between the more formal OT style and the Christian Hellenistic style of the NT.

I'm seeing more differences in the apocrypha and the Tanakh than I noticed before, like the emphasis on resurrection, and the mention of anti-Jewish sentiment from Egyptians (3 Maccabees). 2 Esdras is a bit crazy, but useful as a example of pre-Christian apocalyptic. There's also a story about Jeremiah hiding the ark during the Babylonian conquest, hardly believable but great fun (2 Macc).

Sign Related

As for me, the first takes got me to a point concerning knowing in that in knowing in what I read means the Father right where I (a very core point). The book Matthew.

The more recent learning rather concerning the (rather: in general) stars (rather: 5-point star airplane crafts) shall fall from heaven (rather: the skies) rather than the stars in far space. And those equal in general sun rise (rather: crafts' take off into flight) and fall (rather: crafts' hit into certain things on ground, and make a sun by way of bright explodings across planet in some way awesome). Also it's rather Heaven's shaken version, or even Heaven's a 'no longer' shaking version, I recent wise learn from the befallen. And so, the other Heaven which be, and do not be, when it wants, is not the skies but rather a Living Heaven which do sendings concerning in general "aircraft" even for a first Sign. Same book: Matthew. And the reference in Matt 24 do bridge to the Revelation book in the mighty angel points, and do bridge to a specific re consider song I then know to call: "intro double-broken ruler point bomb first person (rather fill this bridge: kill lume men naughty. rather even: multiply by decoy)" by D's (Detroit's) very own famous, morning star. O, and "decoy" even trade certain away for it then other then to make it even enough show the close against the close in any sectors on the globe. But who may tell too earily on of a sudden switch-a-roo? The one which is the same single person manning many human bodies, should know when its own member, innerly, is then not its own member, since should be first person to know. In my conclusions at least concerning "Legion." Another human being should not know the inner of any across from it, unless it, and the posing other across, is of "Legion" (same inner person such a demon of a small and great cowardice signing amongst).