2,464 reputation
427
bio website
location Minnesota
age 61
visits member for 1 year, 8 months
seen 1 hour ago

The last letter of the Hebrew alphabet is called Tau, and it has the power of the Roman T. In its present form n, in the square character now in use, it has no resemblance to a cross; but in the ancient Hebrew alphabet, its figure X, or +, was that of a cross. Hence, when it is said, in the vision of Ezekiel (ix, 4) "Go through the midst of the city, and set a mark (in the original"n, tau) upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof"- which mark was to distinguish them as persons to be saved, on account of their sorrow for sin, from those who, as idolaters, were to be slain-the evident allusion is to a cross. The form of this cross was X or +, a form familiar to the people of that day.

It is significant to me in that it not only corresponds to the 1st letter of my name, but it corresponds to the One Who Saves us(The Aleph and the Tav) and His Work in redemption; which became real for me in Mar. 29, 1976 and has been real since.


Mar
17
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
17
comment Circumcision “reversal” in 1 Corinthians
@Susan I examined a couple of your sources, and they concluded although it is possible, it is a 'mutilation' and not a reversal-thus, if the purpose were to 'disguise' the fact of their Judaism, it wouldn't accomplish their objective.
Mar
17
comment Circumcision “reversal” in 1 Corinthians
@Susan No, if one took a purely 'literal' approach and ignored the connotations, one could arrive at this question-especially from a textual/critical hermeneutic. If one understands Paul's euphemism "the circumcision" meaning those upholding the tenets of the Law, then the statement made in context with the rest of the passage follows. I suspect very few men of that day would envision having their 'reversal'.
Mar
17
comment Circumcision “reversal” in 1 Corinthians
@Susan The 'reversal' is the prescription to obey the whole law; required of Judaism but not the Gentile. Just as a wife(or husband) was to remain with an unbelieving spouse(as long as they remained-vss 12-16), so also was one who was raised up in Judaism obligated to remain under the Law-see Acts 21:21). The thought that a circumcision-administered on the 8th day of the life of an infant, could be 'reversed' by a grown man would require some form mutilation which would be hard to imagine if one's purpose was to 'obliterate' one's Jewish heritage-it would still seen.
Mar
17
comment Circumcision “reversal” in 1 Corinthians
@Susan A couple of presuppositions here: 1) Did ostensibly pagan cultures practice circumcision? I would think not, as such a procedure would incapacitate men(Gen. 34:15), leaving them vulnerable to attack. Circumcision on an 8 day old baby is relatively simple-not even requiring a local anesthesia. 2)Of what purpose would a circumcision(or reversal) accomplish? Circumcision is a sign of the Blood Covenant God made with Abraham; the idea of male cleanliness(a 19-20th Century phenomenon) didn't exist then, and wasn't enough 'motivation' for being circumcised.
Mar
14
comment Does Isaiah 7:14 refer to a virgin?
@AdithiaKusno This question is not a "dupe"; the one Susan posed was "What were the LXX thinking?" vs "What is the meaning of the text?" 2 Different Questions. It is a very good question; but please clarify your sources as to remove the 'taint' of plagiarism. Also, (with moderator assistance-Susan wears the diamond) you might consider making this a duplicate and adding the answers to her question, which contain meaningful responses to yours. Thank you!
Mar
14
revised Why is “bloods,” translated as “blood,” in Genesis 4:10?
added 18 characters in body
Mar
14
revised Why is “bloods,” translated as “blood,” in Genesis 4:10?
added 472 characters in body
Mar
14
answered Why is “bloods,” translated as “blood,” in Genesis 4:10?
Mar
10
comment How could the person in Luke 9:49 cast out demons without Jesus' mandate?
@Schuh (cont.) and 2) Let's just say your statement is correct; who do your followers cast them out? Their argument was destroyed by the fact that their followers cast out NOBODY(I dare you to find a source that says they did) which proved that Jesus was correct; otherwise, it would be like saying,"Well, my people do it better than you, so there". As to your other commentaries....find a source which describes Jewish(apart from Jesus) exorcists and I'll eat my words. The sons of Sceva didn't turn out too well...
Mar
10
comment How could the person in Luke 9:49 cast out demons without Jesus' mandate?
@Schuh Does Jesus ever say things that are not 'understood by the plain reading of the text'? What about "You must be born again"? A teacher of the Law(Nicodemus) was apparently confused by the plain meaning of the His statement. The Scribes and Pharisees(nor their followers) were casting out demons-if they were, THEY and NOT JESUS would be announcing "The Kingdom of God is among you". They were finding fault with His Ministry, and trying to paint Jesus as an 'occult' leader. Jesus's response was to tell them 1) You can't cast out demons through other demons-Satan doesn't allow it,(cont.)
Mar
9
comment Did Naamah practice “ritual murder and cannibalism” with Ham?
@Jewels I caution you about making a statement that Canaan was black, his ancestors are not black. This explains the sin of Canaan(From the Book of Jubilees-Ch.10:27-34)
Mar
9
comment Understanding argument in Galatians 3:19-20
This is actually a good answer, although I had to read it a couple of times to see your point. A point of contention(FYI) is the use of Strong's in the place of a Lexicon. I have no problem w/Strong's, as long as one knows it is meant as a concordance, and is incomplete as a Lexicon. The other issue is Strong's only references King James; if you use another text you may not find it in Strong's. There are some more 'militant' than I on this subject, but be advised.
Mar
9
comment Understanding argument in Galatians 3:19-20
Welcome to BHSE! We're a little different here, please read our Site Directives as you ask and answer questions. Thank you!
Mar
9
reviewed Approve What does Jesus mean in Luke 5:36-39? (new wine into old wineskins)
Mar
9
reviewed Reviewed Were they Roman guards who watched Jesus' tomb in Matthew 27?
Mar
9
comment Were they Roman guards who watched Jesus' tomb in Matthew 27?
Welcome to BHSE! We're a little different here, please read our Site Directives as you ask and answer questions. Thank you!
Mar
9
reviewed Leave Open What is the “fourfold sense of Scripture”?
Mar
8
revised Does Babylon get 'attacked twice' on the 'Day of the Lord.'
added 1465 characters in body
Mar
8
answered Does Babylon get 'attacked twice' on the 'Day of the Lord.'