Beth Phillips

Hello Infidels!

In a momentary lack of creativity , my name really is 'Beth Phillips', but I do have something very interesting to show you that takes creative writing to a whole new level!

I have been compiling some very important biblical research that goes straight to the heart of many of the things being discussed on this forum. For anyone with an interest in the biblical texts—whatever that interest—this research is for you.

I have just recently loaded this project onto the Internet for everyone’s convenience. Please, do not be put off by the use of ancient languages, once you get the idea of what is going on, then it is a breeze to follow! I have written it in as much of a non-academic vernacular as possible (no need to make things more complicated than they already are ‘eh?) I have also worked quite hard to present it so as to make it easy to follow and understand. I hope I have succeeded.

In order to get the whole picture of what is going on with the bible, however, and a taste of the implications of this new material—a small commitment of time will be required. I feel confident, however, that it will prove to be well worth your investment.

Part I is, for now, complete. This research is definitely an on-going project without a known boundary. You will see what I mean when you check it out. Part II is already underway, so after your perusal of Part I—please keep going. There is, however, a lot more to add to Part II, and I am adding more links every week.

I am very interested in the opinions of the members of this forum, and welcome all constructive criticisms, observations, suggestions and even networking possibilities. I am not, however, terribly interested in debating the doctrinal implications of this research (although I know some of you will really want to,) but I do have my own opinions on some of the other implications that I will be glad to share.

This is very important research and I need as many discerning minds as possible to provide feedback. Please know, in advance, that both your time and your responses are greatly appreciated.

The web address is: http://www.fireonthewateronline.com/

Thank you!
Beth Phillips

p.s. Thanks Bree...

Barefoot Bree

You're welcome.

Don't forget to stop off down in the Lounge and introduce yourself there!

Chris Weimer

Well, well, well, Beth. We meet again. I still haven't fully explored the site yet, but those interested should also browse through our debates at my forum. Hopefully soon I can afford the time to thoroughly examine your site (along with a myriad other projects also needing my full attention).

Oh, and expect some cross-posting. It is welcome.

Chris

Beth Phillips

Well, well, well, indeed.

You really should check it out Chris, as soon as possible. Really.

Beth

gregor

I hate to ask for spoon feeding, but can you synthesize your thesis a little? My extremely cursory scan couldn't tell whether you were arguing for a Drosnin-style code or literary criticism.

Beth Phillips

Gregor,

Part I of my work is literary criticism. Drosnin's claim is very different. Drosnin's thesis requires an element of ancient prophecy about events from Napoleon to the Clinton Whitehouse as well as requiring a complex computer program to decipher the 'messages'. Drosnin's claim has also been shown to be academically empty.

As far as prophecy is concerned, this material shows where the OT scriptures were not prophecy for the NT, but rather, evidence of an on-going tradition of dual-language proper name wordplay and just good ole' exposition of antecedent texts.

Now, to us today,the literary methodology that I show the writers of the bible to have used could be categorized as a secret code for several reasons: 1) because we haven't known about it for all of these centuries, i.e., it has remained a well kept 'secret'; 2) because having to translate through three different languages (English, Greek and Semitic,) it is a bit like 'deciphering a code'; 3) this is made even more 'code like' since the scriptures have been concretized by Christian tradition to carry a more literal interpretation, rather than an allegorical one, and the necessary deconstruction of the old and the exposition of the new is, therefore, a bit like deciphering/revealing 'a secret code'.

For the presentation of Part One, I intentionally chose to stay away from 'secret code language', primarily because I cannot prove that this was the case in its original context--but I also do not yet know that it wasn't! I have a rough draft of an essay for Part II in the works that approaches the material from that perspective. I hope to have it posted relatively soon.

I hope this adequately answers your question.

Beth

Johann_Kaspar

Well, nothing new under the sun.
Did I miss something? I could not find the name and reference to the work of Dubourg... :angry:

JoeWallack

JW:
Took a look at your Lazarus article:

"As you may already assume, the meaning of the proper name “Lazarus� is derived from the Semitic root zrx which means, “to rise,� “to come forth� or “to appear.�"

This is just an assertion and not proof. I think your assertion is just plain wrong anyway. The underlying Hebrew name "Eliezer" does not mean any of these phrases and none of the phrases have all the "zrx" Hebrew letters in them. Do you know Hebrew Beth or are you just copying someone here?

I think the Lazarus story was originally copying from the Egyptian Osiris resurrection story. The original author knew this and was making a theological point that the figurative resurrection of the Egyptian god of resurrection by Jesus illustrated Jesus' superiority. This was a common theme of ANE religion in general and specifically the Jewish Bible, to place representaives of the competing religion in narrative of the new religion and show the superiority of the new.

You may be interested in a thread here where I try to demonstrate that the source for the Lazarus story is more likely Egyptian than Jewish:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...68#post2486468

You do have the huge advantage over mainstream Christian Bible scholarship in starting out with the correct assumption that bodily resurrections (to tell you the truth I never believed in any Type of Resurrection until I saw John Travolta in Pulp Fiction) are superstitious nonsense and therefore not historical so some source other than history must have been used.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Beth Phillips

Joe,

You wrote: So do I. But it's still wordplay Joe. It may well be a lot of other things too, especially an echo of the Egyptian Osiris resurrection story. Whether it is related to Osiris or not has nothing to do with the proper name of 'Lazarus' being used in 'a resurrection' story as wordplay, but why do you think it must be one or the other? I think that the story can easily be both.

I am not the one that decided 'which meaning' belongs to a certain name; the writers of the bible made those choices. It has been my task to show which ones they chose, and how they used them both, so 'my proof' is in the stories themselves. Moreover, with Lazarus, the writers chose to tell two different stories about 'rising from the dead' but they used the same proper name for both. Why do you suppose they did that other than for dual-lingual wordplay?

What Eliezer's name means and how it was used doesn't make a bit of difference in this case. But if you want the chosen wordplay with his name then consider that aiyn-zayin-reish means "to help" and then read Exodus 18:4 for the wordplay between alpha-lamed-yod-aiyn-zayin-reish and beit-aiyn-zayin-reish-yod.

The difference between Eliezer and Lazarus? aiyn-zayin-reish versus zayin-reish-chet. With Eliezer the 'el' is used as 'God' and with Lazarus the lamed a preposition.

You wrote:
Well I seem to know enough Hebrew to have produced this work. Am I fluent or native? No. Do I, or anyone reading this material, need to be? No. If you know Hebrew that's great too. Do you know Greek as well? Because knowing both is what really makes the wordplays easier to find. If you think I am wrong, look it up. Check it out. Show me if I am 'wrong' by actually looking it up instead of just insulting me or trying to attack my personal integrity.

Believe me, if there had been someone 'to copy from' I would have read every word they wrote, looked for more, and then cited them in my work. Gosh, it would be nice if there were some other people that knew about this. As it stands, I have been working on this for over four years, by myself, trying to figure out what in the world was going on. It would have been nice to have someone to consult. Until I find evidence of that person, I must assume that I am the only one to find it as yet.

Beth

Beth Phillips

Dubourg? I have no idea who this person is. But, I will check it out. Can you provide a reference? Thanks.