Comments for Decoding The Bible

Comment on 16.Job in Jehovah’s Betting Shop by stefan

stefan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:53:19 +0000

canisdent: you landed gain in spam because of that one literal (t>s) You may be right, but The Book of Job is one of the most ancient parts of the Old Testament and we can only guess why Satan is presented as one of the Examiners of Jehovah. We may also wonder who IHVH really was. Or, for that matter, who was that mysterious man of Uz.

Comment on 16.Job in Jehovah’s Betting Shop by canisdens

canisdens — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:45:41 +0000

Thank you Stefan. You are right that Job was clever, but I think that Job of Uz was more clever than Satan and Jehovah.

Comment on 16.Job in Jehovah’s Betting Shop by stefan

stefan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:25:03 +0000

canident: do forgive my oversight but my brain was somehow closed to Latin translation. Cave canem, as Romans used to say. Only when I looked it up again after blip, penny dropped. I think that Satan wanted Job to snarl, because he would then won the bet.But Job was clever because he let his “friends” to do the snarling, I think.

Comment on 16.Job in Jehovah’s Betting Shop by canisdent

canisdent — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:04:04 +0000

Why did not Job start snarling?

Comment on 9. Another Serpent Licks the Dust by stefan

stefan — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:27:54 +0000

LaJuanaDorris: The problem with this definition is that in teh current stage of knowledge about atomic sub-particles, “the smallest” would be verz difficult to name: muon, hadron, pion or perhaps “charm” yes that might be “aphar”

Comment on 9. Another Serpent Licks the Dust by LaJuana Dorris

LaJuana Dorris — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:25:58 +0000

I have heard another definition for aphar. how about “smallest created particle?”

Comment on 15. Mouth-to-Nose With a Golem by stefan

stefan — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:12:51 +0000

andsol: that comes from studying too much such blissfully irrelevant subject as golems, gollums and Kabbala. But thank you for the compliment. Salem aleikum and shalom

Comment on 15. Mouth-to-Nose With a Golem by andsol

andsol — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:52:04 +0000

You’ve got an eye for details that might be called “insignificant” by more hasty people…

Comment on 13.Fishy Secrets of The Virgin by stefan

stefan — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:13:05 +0000

db: the symbol of Aquarius is a man with a pitcher of water on his shoulders. The Water-carrier. The glyph -two wavy lines -means release of solar energy from its polar opposite, Leo.My favourite astrologer Dane Rudhyar says that the sign may mean “complete upheaval of State and civilization by a new type of human being and of new ideals which the existing State blindly refuses to tolerate or against which it must fight, because it cannot possibly assimilate it.” It figures.

Comment on 13.Fishy Secrets of The Virgin by db

db — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:07:43 +0000

Since the meaning of the Aquarius symbol has been said to be the pouring out of God’s spirit on the earth, I think we should hope that the new ‘religion’ would be Enlightened Gnosis. Or maybe that is redundant.

But nothing based on belief imposed, or even suggested, by anyone…or any one dogma. Rather based on personal awareness.