inchrist

Wrong it has 2 horizontal dots underneath the first letter. These two horizontal dots represent the Hebrew Vowel point "Tsere"

No you just exposed yourself as always.... Its obvious you dont know the difference between Sheva and Tsere. Either Ill take archeological evidence over some wanna be anyday of the week. Cuneiform tablets discovered near the Ishtar gate in Babylon gives the biblical account in 2Kings 25:27-29 : Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud,("Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah") The New Unger's Bible Dictionary Also, a family of Jewish businessmen living in the Mesopotamian city of Kippur in the fifth century BC left behind a collection of clay tablets. The clay tablets, known as the Murashu documents, contain vowels and list the names of about 70 Jewish settlers in Persia. The Hebrew names which begin with יהו (Yod Heh Waw) are all written "Yahu-" and never "Yeho". "In the cuneiform texts Yeho [YHW], Yo [YW] and Yah [YH] are written Yahu, as for example in the names Jehu (Yahu-a), Jehoahaz (Yahu-khazi) and Hezekiah (Khazaqi-yahu)" A. H. Sayce in "Higher Criticism" on p. 87 "The evidence from the Murashu documents thus corresponds to that from other sources: after the Exile the ordinary form of the divine name used as an initial theophorous element was yahu" "Patterns in Jewish Personal Names in the Babylonian Diaspora" JSJ, Vol. 4 Issue 2 Pg. 188 Notice that not only were names beginning with "Yeho" written as "Yahu", but also names beginning with "Yo" such as "Yochanan" (John) and "Yoel" (Joel) were written as "Yahu". This indicates John and Joel were originally pronounced "Yahuchanan" and "Yahuel". Also found was an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (Gressmann Bilder 348; ANET 282a). When listing those kings who were paying tribute to this Assyrian King, it mentions "Yauhazi", also known as "Ahaz". Please come back with actual evidence next time to back yourself up.....

Actually I used briggs lexicon alot in conjuction with strongs, backed up with archeology....but that just went over your head didnt it? No they are not Yeshua and Y'shuah are actually pronounced differently, and they mean completely different words, hence why I said go check all other lexicons.....hello?

No sounds like you dont, which Im not surprised as usual. Yeshua has ey sound which sounds like hey at the end and sounds similar to heh which is a very short e sound but they are not the same words. Turn to any lexicon 3444 (Yeshuwah) = salvation with the hebrew vowel Sheva 3442/3443 (YESHUA) = he is saved with the hebrew vowel Tsere They are completely two different words. All indicating that "Yeshua" isn't from Hebrew, but is Aramaic.

Y'shuah means salvation Yeshua and the Hebrew word Y'shuah are not the same. For Yeshua to mean "Salvation" it would have to have the Hebrew letter "heh" added to the end of it, changing the spelling to ישועה (Yod Shin Waw Ayin Heh) and it would need to have the "Sheva" vowel point under the Yod. Thats because its based from the Masorite scribes. They used "Yeho" vowel points in "Yehoram", "Yehosheba", "Yehoshaphat" and numerous other names which contain the first part of Yahweh's name. These scribes didnt want anyone to accidentally pronounce the Heavenly Father's name. However please pay attention actual archeology on vowl points show something else which predates the vowel points of the Masorite svribes which rabbinical literature draws on: Cuneiform tablets discovered near the Ishtar gate in Babylon gives the biblical account in 2Kings 25:27-29 : Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud,("Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah") The New Unger's Bible Dictionary Also, a family of Jewish businessmen living in the Mesopotamian city of Kippur in the fifth century BC left behind a collection of clay tablets. The clay tablets, known as the Murashu documents, contain vowels and list the names of about 70 Jewish settlers in Persia. The Hebrew names which begin with יהו (Yod Heh Waw) are all written "Yahu-" and never "Yeho". "In the cuneiform texts Yeho [YHW], Yo [YW] and Yah [YH] are written Yahu, as for example in the names Jehu (Yahu-a), Jehoahaz (Yahu-khazi) and Hezekiah (Khazaqi-yahu)" A. H. Sayce in "Higher Criticism" on p. 87 "The evidence from the Murashu documents thus corresponds to that from other sources: after the Exile the ordinary form of the divine name used as an initial theophorous element was yahu" "Patterns in Jewish Personal Names in the Babylonian Diaspora" JSJ, Vol. 4 Issue 2 Pg. 188 Notice that not only were names beginning with "Yeho" written as "Yahu", but also names beginning with "Yo" such as "Yochanan" (John) and "Yoel" (Joel) were written as "Yahu". This indicates John and Joel were originally pronounced "Yahuchanan" and "Yahuel". Also found was an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (Gressmann Bilder 348; ANET 282a). When listing those kings who were paying tribute to this Assyrian King, it mentions "Yauhazi", also known as "Ahaz". lexicons such as the New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon (p. 219 b) and the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (under "Ahaz") mention this inscription as well.

Well no, actual archeology refutes your position on vowels. Unless you going to tell me archeologist are wrong on the cunieforms found? And I really couldnt careless of its yeshua, Iesous, Yahusha, or Yahushua or Jesus. I really think Christ is bigger than scubbles over vowels. I'm simply just pointing out yeshua is Aramaic. Besides please tell me what the name means?

Yes but most of Ezra was written in aramaic.

Well youve already been proven wrong with archeology. Adoniyahu (Adonijah) - “my Master is Yahweh” Azaryahu (Azariah) - “ Yahweh is help” Bereḵyahu (Berekiah) - “blessed of Yahweh” Gedalyahu (Gedaliah) - “Yahweh is great” Kenanyahu (Chenaniah) - “Yahweh has planted” Hananyahu (Hananiah) - “favoured of Yahweh” Mattanyahu (Mattaniah) - “gift of Yahweh” Pelatyahu (Petaliah) - “Yahweh has delivered” Semaḵyahu (Semakiah) - “Sustained of Yahweh” Shephatyahu (Shephatiah) - “Yahweh has judged” Since Yahweh so favoured to have His Name in theirs, you would think God placed His Name in His own Son's Name, Yahushua. After all what does the name mean?

And the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon, briggs Lexicon, and archeological evidence which you seemed to have ignored. Correct but Yahushua is.

Lucky for me I dont trust everything you say......Please see that #3442 and #3443 in the strongs lexicon are the same exact word with the same Hebrew spelling, but strongs lexicon lists them separately. Why is this? If you looked up "Jeshua" in the concordance, you will notice that it lists "Jeshua" in Ezra 3:2 as coming from #3442 and "Jeshua" in Ezra 5:2 coming from #3443. The reason for the two different Strong's word numbers is Ezra 5:2 is a part of the book of Ezra which was written in Aramaic (Ezra 4:8 through 6:18; 7:12-26). This is why #3443 mentions "Yeshuwa" as coming from "Chaldean" (Aramaic) in the above definition (3443. ישוע Yeshuwa' (Chald.) ........ Lucky for me I also have archeological evidence Cuneiform tablets discovered near the Ishtar gate in Babylon gives the biblical account in 2Kings 25:27-29 : Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud, ("Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah") The New Unger's Bible Dictionary Also, a family of Jewish businessmen living in the Mesopotamian city of Kippur in the fifth century BC left behind a collection of clay tablets. The clay tablets, known as the Murashu documents, contain vowels and list the names of about 70 Jewish settlers in Persia. The Hebrew names which begin with יהו (Yod Heh Waw) are all written "Yahu-" and never "Yeho". "In the cuneiform texts Yeho [YHW], Yo [YW] and Yah [YH] are written Yahu, as for example in the names Jehu (Yahu-a), Jehoahaz (Yahu-khazi) and Hezekiah (Khazaqi-yahu)" A. H. Sayce in "Higher Criticism" on p. 87 "The evidence from the Murashu documents thus corresponds to that from other sources: after the Exile the ordinary form of the divine name used as an initial theophorous element was yahu" "Patterns in Jewish Personal Names in the Babylonian Diaspora" JSJ, Vol. 4 Issue 2 Pg. 188 Notice that not only were names beginning with "Yeho" written as "Yahu", but also names beginning with "Yo" such as "Yochanan" (John) and "Yoel" (Joel) were written as "Yahu". This indicates John and Joel were originally pronounced "Yahuchanan" and "Yahuel". Also found was an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (Gressmann Bilder 348; ANET 282a). When listing those kings who were paying tribute to this Assyrian King, it mentions "Yauhazi", also known as "Ahaz". lexicons such as the New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon (p. 219 b) and the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (under "Ahaz") mention this inscription as well.

Actually "Yeshua" is Aramaic. Youll find this in the books Nehemiah and Ezra where it lists the names of those who returned from the Babylonian exile. Ezra 3:2 "Jeshua, the son of Jozadak" The change in spelling to "Jeshua/Yeshua" (ישוע) is due to the Aramaic influence during the exile. Parts of the book of Ezra are written in Aramaic.

Can you also provide evidence here that God is going to resurrect the Israelites old men who had seen the first temple to build the 3rd temple before the antichrist comes? Since youre two steps ahead of me

You've not proven a single thing. The second temple was more glories than the first, the third temple (being us) is far more glories than the previous 2. Now please show me verses that God dwells in your supposedly third temple the antichrist desecrates inorder to be glories in the first place.

Because this verse allows me too have a gap, two different prophecies Haggai 2:20 The word of the Lord came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: [/quote] And could you please provide evidnece on the following verse Haggai 2:9 The glory of this present house will be greater than the glory of the former house,’ says the Lord Almighty. ‘And in this place I will grant peace,’ declares theLord Almighty.” Can you please provide evidence that this 3rd temple, the one which the antichrist desecrates is greater than the former temple? Please keep in mind God dwelled in the first and second temple. Can you provide evidence of God dwelling in this third temple that the anti Christ desecrates Keeping in mind that we are now the temple that God dwells in 1 cor 3:16 Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in your midst

Because this verse allows me too have a gap, two different prophecies Haggai 2:20 The word of the Lord came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: And again Im not surprised to find you once again ripping the verses out of its context. This is work on the 2nd temple that was resumed as per Zechariah 8:9, Ezra 4:24 & Ezra 5:1

Consider now from this day forward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, from the day that the foundation of the Lord’s temple was laid—consider it: 19 Is the seed still in the barn? As yet the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree have not yielded fruit. But from this day I will bless you.’” This section has already been fulfilled. The second temple. The blessings in Haggai 2:19 was also fulled Acts 14:17. "left not Himself without witness, in that He did good, and gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness" We only left with the shaken of heaven and earth that still needs to be fulfilled

What verses claim there will be?

And turn this site in to a pretrib dispensationalist gathering....no thank you.

How about being nice? Just try it.... You might get your questions answered

I support the law, I saw a statement on the law....Im supporting no one..... However if you going to start bulling mven....then I will stand up for her. Theres away to address people....how about trying to do it love....???? Let her talk, listen then correct if correction is needed. Dont just come out with knifes and a bag of paranoia....have same tact....show some Christian class

Christians shouldnt mock, reprimand yes.....mock certainly not.

Well you guys do the same, lets be honest here.

Spiritually speaking He does "This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. You cant escape the fact the letter of the law is written in you. Its been deposited. Which is exactly the same thing you just stated. Lord writes with His Spirit, in our spirits God is still writting the letter of the law in our Spirit. You still end up with the letter of the law but in a different format. Which is called the Spirit of the Law Romans 8 The Spirit is leading you to the law. You shall not commit murder, you shall love your neighbour and and and. Regadless you are being lead by the Spirit to observe the Law.....Hence the Spirit of the law. No, its more like hardware to software.. Luke 4:4 (side snippet - Davids actions of eating shewbread was a prophetic act of the following) 4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. Now if Christ commanded us to live by EVERY WORD of God, do you suppose that he was including the first five books of the Bible? Or do you think he only meant the apostolic writings which came much later after Christ ascended to the Father? Romans 7:4 is dealing with the following: The law in the hardware format (stone) was in a corruptable form, it could never make its way to the hearts of men because it was impersonal. That very law (Christ) made flesh, then died (Christ), then became resurrected and revived with Christ called the Spirit of the Law. Romans 7:6: Deals with deliverance from the “old” way that the marriage contract was read, and now the "new" way in the “newness of the spirit” behind those letters. Still being lead to the law. ........ Lets look at other verses in Romans 7 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. And all the way down to the bottom of Romans 7 So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature[d]a slave to the law of sin. Whats Paul saying here? There are two different natures of laws The law of God (Torah = the written law) and the Law of sin ( fleshly rejection of the written Law Torah) Paul is admitting that the Towrah (law) of God does not bring him into bondage, but it is his own sinful nature that brings him into bondage. Further this also refutes your position completely. Paul now reveals the true meaning of his letter. Paul states that he serves the law of God with his mind yet with his flesh he desires to serve the law of sin and death. The law of sin and death is the law of nature, the fleshly desire to refuse to obey the law.

We are indeed obligated to follow the letter of the law. 2 cor 3 written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. The matter is about whither we are obligated through the flesh or through the spirit to observe the letter of the law. We can not achieve observance of the the letter of the law through the flesh. As the flesh is hostile to God. However the Spirit isn't hostile to God, and therefore we can observe the letter of the law through the Spirit as taught in Romans 8 Yes I do, and indeed they broke the law. Mark 2: 23- 28 And he said to them, “Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry , he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God, in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him However there is something you need to understand.... There is also a moral law regarding the needy and hungry Isaiah 58:10 If you pour yourself out for the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then shall your light rise in the darkness and your gloom be as the noonday. See a law can not threaten once own life, what I mean by that is the following, observance of one law can not supersede the right to life or other laws. Now, while David certainly broke the law, it was suspended or superseded by the very law he is protected by in regards to life which would be hunger. Isaiah 58:10 If you pour yourself out for the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then shall your light rise in the darkness and your gloom be as the noonday. Again, Leviticus 19:10-11 And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God. “You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another. One law can not supersede another law or suspend other laws. And this was fundamentally what Christ stated with the following verse the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath The sabbath law does not suspend all other laws on the day.

Yes you did Your quote As a hell bound sinner, Hell bound sinners are those who reject the salvation work of Christ. So please provide evidence I reject the salvation work of Christ? Romans 3:24 (NET) 3:24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus I am justified sorry to tell you. In other words, because Christ paid the price and provided redemption, it is possible for a Christian to receive grace, or favor, that he does not deserve. You, on the otherhand are disqualifying Christ redemption for me by continuously attacking my relationship with Christ. All youve done is added additional qualifications to salvation. I do not subscribe to your additions. And youre right about one thing, I dont sit at the table of those who reject Gods laws. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith?