05-17-2008, 04:26 PM
I find the distinctions between persons and beings to be arbitrary philosophical nonsense. Which is probably one reason I'm such a rotten haggadist.
No, I am not putting Kabbalistic texts on par with the NT. As I stated before, I began studying it in order to refute it. Then I found that in a number of places its view and comments helped make sense of things. I never understood Hebrews until I had a little Kabbala under my belt. Looking at Hebrews in the context of a Jewish mystical commentary like Kabbalistic or Essenic works finally made sense of it to me.
I do not think that it is on par with the "New Testament" books. I simply think that they had a few things right. We've really only discussed one issue based on Kabbala, that is why I seem so gung-ho about it. If we were to get into reincarnation, the afterlife in general, or any of a number of other issues I could tell you where I disagree with Kabbalistic principles.
Perhaps the concept existed, but I do not think it originated with the Hebrews, and I do not think it is the essence of tenses. Tenses, as everything in Hebraic philosophy, come back to action. Action comes down to two forms, the complete and the incomplete.
Maybe it was written in Aramaic. I tend to think Revelation was written in Hebrew, and this is one case where even the Greek attests to that idea, but I'm not going to press that issue.
I have admitted no such thing. I have merely attempted to point out that things that are happening can be expressed without a present tense being necessary. Any way I try to communicate these Hebrew concepts in English will be used as evidence against me, because one must make these points cross-linguistically. Please don't stoop that low. You know Hebrew better than I do, so don't try to twist my words. I am merely pointing out that there is no gap here, that all that need be expressed is perfect and imperfect. These are the basic tenses.
If you understood what you are speaking of, if you had studied Kabbala yourself you would know that saying that something is a Divine Attribute is not a relegation. It is as much a part of God as the "persons" of the trinity theory.
I have already answered you, but you did not believe me. I will let the words of the prophet speak for me, I looked, and there was none to help and I wondered that there was none to uphold, therefore My own Arm brought Salvation to Me, and My Fury upheld Me.
No, I am not putting Kabbalistic texts on par with the NT. As I stated before, I began studying it in order to refute it. Then I found that in a number of places its view and comments helped make sense of things. I never understood Hebrews until I had a little Kabbala under my belt. Looking at Hebrews in the context of a Jewish mystical commentary like Kabbalistic or Essenic works finally made sense of it to me.
I do not think that it is on par with the "New Testament" books. I simply think that they had a few things right. We've really only discussed one issue based on Kabbala, that is why I seem so gung-ho about it. If we were to get into reincarnation, the afterlife in general, or any of a number of other issues I could tell you where I disagree with Kabbalistic principles.
Perhaps the concept existed, but I do not think it originated with the Hebrews, and I do not think it is the essence of tenses. Tenses, as everything in Hebraic philosophy, come back to action. Action comes down to two forms, the complete and the incomplete.
Maybe it was written in Aramaic. I tend to think Revelation was written in Hebrew, and this is one case where even the Greek attests to that idea, but I'm not going to press that issue.
I have admitted no such thing. I have merely attempted to point out that things that are happening can be expressed without a present tense being necessary. Any way I try to communicate these Hebrew concepts in English will be used as evidence against me, because one must make these points cross-linguistically. Please don't stoop that low. You know Hebrew better than I do, so don't try to twist my words. I am merely pointing out that there is no gap here, that all that need be expressed is perfect and imperfect. These are the basic tenses.
If you understood what you are speaking of, if you had studied Kabbala yourself you would know that saying that something is a Divine Attribute is not a relegation. It is as much a part of God as the "persons" of the trinity theory.
I have already answered you, but you did not believe me. I will let the words of the prophet speak for me, I looked, and there was none to help and I wondered that there was none to uphold, therefore My own Arm brought Salvation to Me, and My Fury upheld Me.