Jesus: The Missing Years in the East

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I still think 'manifested' is the true meaning

Of egeneto? This word is littered across Greek literature over a period of centuries. Can you provide examples of the usage you refer to? What is the point of arbitrarily saying what a word you can't read means?

 

[godnotgod]

Of egeneto? This word is littered across Greek literature over a period of centuries. Can you provide examples of the usage you refer to? What is the point of arbitrarily saying what a word you can't read means?

I already qualified my statement. Not going to do it again. You know I stick with the Aramaic Pe****ta as the primary source, with the Greek coming later, and give credence to Victor Alexander's translation, which reads:

"In the beginning was The Manifestation and the Manifestation was with God and the Manifestation was God, and God was the embodiment of the Manifestation".
*****


"The Greek logos, or ‘word,’ "denotes a word or saying as the
expression of thought" (Bullinger, note on Mark 9:32). Milta,
though, the Aramaic word used in the original text, means
manifestation (see Victor Alexander's introduction to John).
Manifestation is a whole different ball of wax, though it is also an
expression of thought.

You or I say something and it is, indeed, an expression of thought.
But that is as far as it goes. Manifestation, on the other hand, is a
thought's becoming flesh. It is transcendence from thought form
into expression in concrete reality. This announcement is
something that God does. It certainly is a step up from the
expression of a mental idea...

...The Ineffable, the Most High
God (incomprehensible to us), exists in a state beyond form or
movement. The Ineffable is beyond "thingness." It is beyond mind,
thought, form, spirit, force, life – if you can name it, It is beyond
it. Not that things are not in it, but It's essence is beyond them -
- It is No-Thing."

http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2013/07/hearing-and-speaking-milta-manifestation.html

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I already qualified my statement. Not going to do it again. You know I stick with the Aramaic Pe****ta as the primary source, with the Greek coming later, and give credence to Victor Alexander's translation, which reads:

"In the beginning was The Manifestation and the Manifestation was with God and the Manifestation was God, and God was the embodiment of the Manifestation".
*****


"The Greek logos, or ‘word,’ "denotes a word or saying as the
expression of thought" (Bullinger, note on Mark 9:32). Milta,
though, the Aramaic word used in the original text, means
manifestation (see Victor Alexander's introduction to John).
Manifestation is a whole different ball of wax, though it is also an
expression of thought.

You or I say something and it is, indeed, an expression of thought.
But that is as far as it goes. Manifestation, on the other hand, is a
thought's becoming flesh. It is transcendence from thought form
into expression in concrete reality. This announcement is
something that God does. It certainly is a step up from the
expression of a mental idea...

...The Ineffable, the Most High
God (incomprehensible to us), exists in a state beyond form or
movement. The Ineffable is beyond "thingness." It is beyond mind,
thought, form, spirit, force, life – if you can name it, It is beyond
it. Not that things are not in it, but It's essence is beyond them -
- It is No-Thing."

The Becoming God: Hearing and Speaking Milta, the Manifestation

You got a hateful grudge against Captain America?

 

[godnotgod]

You got a hateful grudge against Captain America?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

"In the beginning was The Manifestation and the Manifestation was with God and the Manifestation was God, and God was the embodiment of the Manifestation".

I give your source an "L" for laziness. If you're going to make something up, it should at least serve another purpose = humor, entertainment, poetry, naked chicks, anything but just boring poo that does nothing but look stupid.

He's stupidly bastardizing the text. And in a cheap, boring way.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

[His comic books are better than the one you're using]

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

You know I stick with the Aramaic Pe****ta as the primary source

Fine. How about an instance of ܐܬܝܠܕܘ meaning "manifestation" outside of some god-awful translation of John? I don't care whether it's the Greek or the Syriac you wish to say means "manifestation", neither do and if you think they do why can't you provide a reason for this translation that has to do with the way that the word is used? Otherwise, your argument is akin to saying the word "become" means "appear". You can say it until you are blue in the font (bad pun allowance used up) but it is still nonsense.

 

[godnotgod]

Fine. How about an instance of ܐܬܝܠܕܘ meaning "manifestation" outside of some god-awful translation of John? I don't care whether it's the Greek or the Syriac you wish to say means "manifestation", neither do and if you think they do why can't you provide a reason for this translation that has to do with the way that the word is used? Otherwise, your argument is akin to saying the word "become" means "appear". You can say it until you are blue in the font (bad pun allowance used up) but it is still nonsense.

Reality is one thing; academics which try to explain it another.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Reality is one thing; academics which try to explain it another.

Academics are the ones who made the manuscripts and language available. Your Victor Alexander tries to defend his work by claiming he has the necessary education to be considered an academic. And no matter what academics or anybody else does, it doesn't make any sense to claim that words you can't read mean something they don't when other who can read them are telling you they don't and you can't offer anything to defend your understanding such as an example where the word can be understood as you claim. You just link to blatantly biased, freely "interpreted" reading of the text that is as much a translation of those who "translate" the English text into other English words.

 

[godnotgod]

I give your source an "L" for laziness. If you're going to make something up, it should at least serve another purpose = humor, entertainment, poetry, naked chicks, anything but just boring poo that does nothing but look stupid.

He's stupidly bastardizing the text. And in a cheap, boring way.

We're not here to entertain you. Go to Las Vegas.

 

[godnotgod]

And no matter what academics or anybody else does, it doesn't make any sense to claim that words you can't read mean something they don't when other who can read them are telling you they don't and you can't offer anything to defend your understanding such as an example where the word can be understood as you claim.

I already did. Reality works one way; descriptions, via academics, another. The menu is not the meal.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I already did.

You didn't provide an example of either the syriac or the Greek word in question being used the way you claim it is in John.

 

[godnotgod]

You didn't provide an example of either the syriac or the Greek word in question being used the way you claim it is in John.

I explained how the Absolute cannot 'become' something else, because there is no 'something else', no matter what the Greek NT says.

Do you really want to get into a discussion about the nature of Reality?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

We're not here to entertain you. Go to Las Vegas.

I wasn't talking about you.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I already did. Reality works one way; descriptions, via academics, another. The menu is not the meal.

That's an unfortunate bias.

You've demonstrated a preference for pseudo-academics. Your sources are pretending to be academic, so why are you separating academia from reality?

I tell you what - why don't you try Batman?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I explained how the Absolute cannot 'become' something else, because there is no 'something else', no matter what the Greek NT says.

Do you really want to get into a discussion about the nature of Reality?

No, I am interested in what the texts, Greek or Syriac, say. You can argue that the Greek doesn't represent the "real" NT all you want, but the Syriac word in question is even more restrictive than the Greek and it doesn't means "become" too. You can argue that the pre-existent Jesus was light and the logos (a Greek word and concept- ܡܠܬܐ/mlt is closer to the English word than to the nuanced philosophical-mystic meanings behind logos). What you can't do (reasonably, anyway) is assert that because your beliefs are y, then a text you can't read must say x. I'm not arguing about the nature of reality (what would be the point) but about something vastly simpler- the words, Greek or Syriac, do not mean what you say and cannot.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm not arguing about the nature of reality (what would be the point) but about something vastly simpler- the words, Greek or Syriac, do not mean what you say and cannot.

They don't mean what they say in the Greek NT.

You want to interpret the nature of Reality via a description of it, when academics need to be interpreted via the nature of Reality.

Actually, word descriptions are more complex than the true nature of Reality, as words don't exist in nature.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Neither do they in the Greek NT.

I don't see how you can forget where your "Aramaic" texts come from. If it can't say that in the Greek, then the translation to "Aramaic" is a fraud, and the English is just silly.

 

[godnotgod]

That's an unfortunate bias.

You've demonstrated a preference for pseudo-academics. Your sources are pretending to be academic, so why are you separating academia from reality?

I tell you what - why don't you try Batman?

Why don't you try Las Vegas?

 

[godnotgod]

I don't see how you can forget where your "Aramaic" texts come from. If it can't say that in the Greek, then the translation to "Aramaic" is a fraud, and the English is just silly.

Scripture is secondary in importance to Reality. 'Manifestation' is accurate; 'becoming' is not.

What is 'silly', is that you give credence to a text that states that the Absolute can 'become' something. But you won't know that until you pay a visit to your QiGong instructor.