[Christ's Word]

The simple fact is the Strong's concordance done for the KJV did not take into account the Dead Sea Scrolls, or The Hebrew text of the third edition of Rudolf Kittel's Biblia Hebraica, or The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.

All of these were considered in the NASV updated in 1995, and that is EXACTLY WHY THE KJV concordance say "NAQAB", and the the NASV Concordance says "QABAB".

The men working with Strong on the KJV concordance did not have the resources or older Hebrew to texts found in Qumran after 1940, and studied by the scholars that completed the NASV Concordance.

Both verbs are a generated biforms (qbb, and NQB): any modern day Hebrew scholar with the resources available today would go with 'QBB'.

The Lockman Foundation, Emanuel Tov, and the Scholars that worked on the NASV all agree with me, I think I will stick with them.

Once again, the truth....... "QABAB", def. 'To utter a curse against' Leviticus 24:11 "blasphemed" 6895

You can stick with the KJV, and show everyone how it is so much more important for you to ban those that speak the truth, than actually accept the truth. Or you can go with your original false statements. Good luck with that. Here are the links again, in case you missed them....

http://www.blueletterbible.org/searc...sphemed&t=NASB

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...s=H6895&t=NASB

[Christ's Word]

Here is a short list of false statements made by ebenz in just this thread.


Ebenz false statements:

1. “It doesn't define blasphemy. It says the son "blasphemed the name of the Lord and cursed."

Answer: If you read Leviticus 24:11 in Hebrew, it does define blasphemed as "uttering a curse against", the definition of the word 'qabab', a generated biform qbb, which is translated to the English blasphemed.



2.“The verse you referenced did not say he "cursed the holy name of God."

Answer: Yes it does if you read it in Hebrew, not English.


3. “yet the verse you give to define the word doesn't define the word at all.”

Answer: It does in Hebrew.


4. “The verse you referenced did not say he "cursed the holy name of God."

Answer: Yes it does, if you read it in Hebrew.


5. “And, the verse you used as a reference did not say that the son cursed the name of the Lord.”

Answer: IN HEBREW IT DOES.



6. “The funny thing is that you still haven't given your definition, except for cursing the name of the Lord (which wasn't shown in your reference verse).”

Answer: That is the definition, you did not accept the simple truth.

7. “Looks like everytime qabab is used, it is used in reference to God cursing people, not people cursing God.”

Answer: NOT TRUE: Only in the outdated KJV Strong's Concordance. In the modern Strong's NASV Concordance, qabab is the word in Leviticus 24:11 translated to blasphemed, Strong's # 6895.



8. “According to Blue Letter Bible, the word used for blasphemed in Leviticus 24:11 is naqab, not qabab.”

Answer: WRONG. You failed to look at the modern Concordance on Blue Letter Bible, as proven in the links posted previously.


9. “Looks like you may have gotten the words mixed up just a little bit.”

Answer: WRONG. I got the words exactly right the first time. I got the sources right the first time, as noted above.




10. “The word you gave me, qabab, is not used in Leviticus.”

Answer: Wrong. As proven previously by Strong's Concordance updated in 1995. And your source, Blue Letter Bible.org


Question from page 5, but previously answered on page 3 of the thread.
Ebenz quote “Now, why don't you answer the question: What is the definition of blasphemy?”

Christ’s Word’s answer two pages earlier on page 3 of the thread,

“I will go with Leviticus.....and swearing against the name of YHWH.”


Answer again, from Christ's Word, also on page 3, two pages before ebenz question on page 5,

“I would think that cursing the holy name of God "YHWH" would qualify, there are those that believe just speaking the name YHWH in vain would also qualify,…”

[Christ's Word]

Originally Posted by ebenz47037

Nice try, CW. This username is banned, permanently, unless Knight decides otherwise. Take your three days and come back with a better attitude.

So you ban a coworker who told me about this forum?

Real classy, nice and christian like. What did she do, disagree with you too?

[YahuShuan]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

Blasphemy of the Spirit of God has serious long term spiritual consequences. I think the original use of blasphemy is found in Leviticus chapter 24. I believe it involved cursing the name of God, 'YHWH'. I believe that English speaking people have expanded the definition of "blasphemy" as did the Pharisees, well beyond it's original and truthful meaning.

This is a shame because Oatmeal was the most civil member on TOL, and I have found no evidence of Oatmeal ever blaspheming the name of God.

Just keeping it real ladies.

The Pharisees used the false charge of blasphemy to justify the extinguishment of their theological and political enemies.

Oh...Really? It's not a false charge...but it is leveled with certain prejudices...which are not our business because we don't rule over this place and can go somewhere else. Andhey, you were blessed to even get a response from Knight telling you anything, lol! Don't sweat the small stuff, as someone once told me. And get some deeper learning before you go ranting about stuff you aren't filled with.

Leviticus 24:16 ‘And he who blasphemes the Name of יהוה shall certainly be put to death, and all the congregation certainly stone him, the stranger as well as the native. When he blasphemes the Name, he is put to death.

So, let's keep it real then...

Blasphemeth, Blasphemes...H5344

ָנַקב
nāqaḇ: A verb meaning to pierce, to designate, to curse. The word signifies the piercing of an animal's head, jaw, or nose with a spear (Job_40:24; Job_41:2 [40:26]; Hab_3:14). It also signifies the piercing of a person's hand by a reed, symbolic of pain. Egypt was charged with bringing such pain on its allies (2Ki_18:21; Isa_36:6). In Hag_1:6, the passive participle described a bag as being pierced. This word can also refer to wages being paid (Gen_30:28); and to men being singled out for some task or distinction (2Ch_28:15; Amo_6:1). The meaning to curse may also be derived from a different root, qāḇaḇ (H6895). It signified the cursing or blaspheming of God's name (Lev_24:11, Lev_24:16); the speaking of a negative spiritual sentence on people (Num_23:8; Pro_11:26; Pro_24:24); or things associated with people (Job_3:8; Job_5:3).

Seems a lot of people are guilty of that around here, but as long as it's a man's party, seems the rules are up to the man hosting the party to determine the interpretation and enforcement thereof. When Yeshua hosts the party, then things will be determined with right rulings. According to Him. But methinks people expect to much in a world that has yet to be claimed by the Owner of this Kingdom. When it IS His Kingdom, then He said "My People would fight". But it ain't yet, (except in the hearts of those who love Him), but soon it will be. Then y'all won't have anything left to argue about...you will all be shown publicly to be wrong. And I won't be so lonely anymore, lol

Anyway, in the spirit of trying to get to righteous thoughts the best we can, let's see what H6895 has to say...

H6895

ָקַבב
qāḇaḇ: A verb meaning to curse. The general idea of this word is a pronouncement of bad fortune or ill favor bestowed on another. This word is used often in the story of Balaam and Balak, where Balak repeatedly requested that Balaam pronounce a curse on Israel (Num_22:11; Num_23:13, Num_23:27). Rather than a curse, Balaam pronounced a blessing on them (Num_23:8; Num_24:10). In other instances of this word, it describes cursing the Lord (Lev_24:11); cursing the day of one's birth (Job_3:8); or cursing the home of the foolish (Job_5:3). It is used twice in the Proverbs in a general way (Pro_11:26; Pro_24:24) as an opposite to the word berāḵāh (H1293), meaning blessing, and similar to the much more frequent word qālal (H7043), meaning to curse.

And on to H7043...

H7043

ָקַַלל
qālal: A verb meaning to be slight, to be trivial, to be swift. This word is used in many different ways, but most uses trace back to the basic idea of this word, which is lightness. In its most simple meaning, it referred to the easing of a burden (Exo_18:22); lightening judgment (1Sa_6:5); lessening labor (1Ki_12:9-10; 2Ch_10:9-10); or the lightening of a ship (Jon_1:5). This idea leads to its usage to describe people who were swifter than eagles (2Sa_1:23); swift animals (Hab_1:8); or days that pass quickly (Job_7:6; Job_9:25). When describing an event or a circumstance, it means trivial (1Sa_18:23; 1Ki_16:31; Isa_49:6). In many instances, it is used to describe speaking lightly of another or cursing another: a person cursing another person (Exo_21:17; 2Sa_16:9-11; Neh_13:2); people cursing God (Lev_24:11); or God cursing people (Gen_12:3; 1Sa_2:30; Psa_37:22).

Blasphemy is a serious charge, and speaking so disrespectfully lightly about any piece of God is blasphemy. And I would say, that included saying that YOU are "Christs Word", is blasphemy in itself to a not low degree. Your very handle is a lie and a blasphemy, and speaks way too light of His Word from what I see plainly. So, thanks for drawing attention to yourself. Might want to think about what you protest too much

I think I am seeing just why "God" don't give out His real Name to folks that think His first name is "God" and His last name is damit. Seems that is a good call. Most probably why certain folks can't even get a grip on His Name as being real. Yep...they're going to have to get a real good thumping so they know that He even exists. Their fantasy world is about to be left hanging. He does exist, and He IS coming HERE shortly. And there are a lot of folks about to find out what taking His Name vainly really surmounts to. Praisefully, there are many who haven't a clue what His Name is, even after having it put in front of their faces over and over. I Praise Yah for that!

As for the ban by Knight...on this one especially, I say "Well Done good and faithful servant". Bravo!

[ebenz47037]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

So you ban a coworker who told me about this forum?

Real classy, nice and christian like. What did she do, disagree with you too?

That explains why the IP numbers were the same/similar. I will unban her.

When she posted, I checked her IP number. It was close enough to yours that I thought it was you. I will apologize to her if she wants to return.

[Christ's Word]

Originally Posted by YahuShuan

[b]Amo_6:1). The meaning to curse may also be derived from a different root, qāḇaḇ (H6895). It signified the cursing or blaspheming of God's name (Lev_24:11, Lev_24:16); the speaking of a negative spiritual sentence on people (Num_23:8; Pro_11:26; Pro_24:24); or things associated with people (Job_3:8; Job_5:3).



Anyway, in the spirit of trying to get to righteous thoughts the best we can, let's see what H6895 has to say...

H6895

ָקַבב
qāḇaḇ: A verb meaning to curse. The general idea of this word is a pronouncement of bad fortune or ill favor bestowed on another. This word is used often in the story of Balaam and Balak, where Balak repeatedly requested that Balaam pronounce a curse on Israel (Num_22:11; Num_23:13, Num_23:27). In other instances of this word, it describes cursing the Lord (Lev_24:11); cursing the day of one's birth (Job_3:8); or cursing the home of the foolish (Job_5:3).

Just more proof that even people like you can find slivers of the truth, if you look hard enough at your source texts, and don't make up too much garbage.

[Christ's Word]

Originally Posted by ebenz47037

That explains why the IP numbers were the same/similar. I will unban her.

When she posted, I checked her IP number. It was close enough to yours that I thought it was you. I will apologize to her if she wants to return.

I don't think there is any reason to apologize. I saw her this morning in court, and she laughed, and said, "See what I get for telling the truth. None of these people are interested in the truth, sorry for pointing you there, I did not realize they were that fake."

I think we are both pretty much done here, so your fake apology is not necessary. I was taught that a true apology includes the statement, "it won't happen again".

You have proven that making false statements, false accusations, and executing unfair judgments based on bogus assumptions is your mode of operation.

This thread proves that to anyone who actually reads it. It is not often that someone is proven wrong by TWO of their own sources they used for argument.

We all know you can't help yourself, and it will happen again. You count truthful rebuke as disrespect, and I can't fix that, that is on you, it is your personal problem to work out.

You may the only person I know that does something wrong, and says in a private message, "if they want an apology, I will apologize publicly".

And here I was thinking that we apologize when we do wrong, not when someone wants and apology. You have been so wrong about so many things in this thread, I am embarrassed for you. If you really thought you did something wrong, you would have already apologized publicly. The truth is you will only do so if asked. That tells me all I need to know about you, and why I am done with you and TOL.

You are not a moderator, you are a child with way too much authority for your maturity level and lack of wisdom.

[ebenz47037]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

I don't think there is any reason to apologize. I saw her this morning in court, and she laughed, and said, "See what I get for telling the truth. None of these people are interested in the truth, sorry for pointing you there, I did not realize they were that fake."

That's fine. I admitted that I was wrong when I banned her, as soon as you brought it to my attention that it wasn't you. And, I unbanned her. So, if she wants to come back she's welcome to do so.

I think we are both pretty much done here, so your fake apology is not necessary. I was taught that a true apology includes the statement, "it won't happen again".

I'm not apologizing to you. I wasn't wrong in banning you. Here is the post I banned you for:

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

Have you done your homework yet Ebenz? Do you, or do you not stand by these statements as true? Have you researched the meaning of the Hebrew word "qabab" which is translated to blasphemed in Leviticus 24:11?

Tell the truth now, what is the truth about that verse?

In that post, you talk to me as if I am a child and accuse me of lying. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm lying. Obviously, I still don't agree with you. Big deal.

You have proven that making false statements, false accusations, and executing unfair judgments based on bogus assumptions is your mode of operation.

I made no false statements. And, by talking to me as if I was a child and calling me a liar, you did disrespect me. You don't have to like it.

This thread proves that to anyone who actually reads it. It is not often that someone is proven wrong by TWO of their own sources they used for argument.

This thread proves that someone gets disrespectful when anyone disagrees with her.

We all know you can't help yourself, and it will happen again. You count truthful rebuke as disrespect, and I can't fix that, that is on you, it is your personal problem to work out.

Once again, it was the fact that you talked to me like I am a child and called me a liar because I disagreed with you that got you banned. If you can treat me as an adult and not call me a liar just because we disagree on something, I won't ban you again. You are not in a position of authority over me. That means that means that, if I'm treating you like I do everyone else (which in this case I did), I deserve to be treated in a like manner. I did not disrespect you. We disagreed. That was it. I didn't ban you after the PM you sent me, telling me that you are so educated and that I should educate myself. Instead, I attempted to find out if I was wrong. And, when I showed you what I had learned, you talk to me like you're the teacher who is giving a student an "F" for work she did and call me a liar (again).

You may the only person I know that does something wrong, and says in a private message, "if they want an apology, I will apologize publicly".

And here I was thinking that we apologize when we do wrong, not when someone wants and apology. You have been so wrong about so many things in this thread, I am embarrassed for you. If you really thought you did something wrong, you would have already apologized publicly. The truth is you will only do so if asked. That tells me all I need to know about you, and why I am done with you and TOL.

You are not a moderator, you are a child with way too much authority for your maturity level and lack of wisdom.

The reason I offered to apologize to Lavlatte7 was because I did make a mistake when I banned her. But, like I said, the IP numbers were close enough that I thought she was you. When I say I made a mistake, that is admitting I was wrong. I can't say that I will never do it again because, a lot of times, when some people get banned, they register several other accounts trying to get around the ban instead of just taking it and coming back when the ban is over.

I will apologize for mistaking her for you. That's the only thing I did wrong in this matter.

If you look at the woodshed (You're a subscriber. So, you can see in there.), you will see that several people reported you for disrespecting staff. So, I'm not the only one who saw what I saw in your posts. You didn't disrespect me by disagreeing with me. You disrespected me by talking to me as you would a child and calling me a liar.

Here, on TOL, we don't have to agree with each other in order to respect them. A lot of people here disagree with me on a lot of things. They don't talk to me the way you have talked to me. And, I don't talk to them the way you have talked to me. I find it hard to talk to even you the way you have talked to me. It's not in my nature.

That said, I'm done talking about this. Talk to me like you would any other adult and I won't say that you're disrespecting me. I will stay out of this thread and let you argue with others over the meaning of blasphemy. I'm done.

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

I don't think there is any reason to apologize. I saw her this morning in court, and she laughed, and said, "See what I get for telling the truth. None of these people are interested in the truth, sorry for pointing you there, I did not realize they were that fake."

I think we are both pretty much done here, so your fake apology is not necessary. I was taught that a true apology includes the statement, "it won't happen again".

You have proven that making false statements, false accusations, and executing unfair judgments based on bogus assumptions is your mode of operation.

This thread proves that to anyone who actually reads it. It is not often that someone is proven wrong by TWO of their own sources they used for argument.

We all know you can't help yourself, and it will happen again. You count truthful rebuke as disrespect, and I can't fix that, that is on you, it is your personal problem to work out.

You may the only person I know that does something wrong, and says in a private message, "if they want an apology, I will apologize publicly".

And here I was thinking that we apologize when we do wrong, not when someone wants and apology. You have been so wrong about so many things in this thread, I am embarrassed for you. If you really thought you did something wrong, you would have already apologized publicly. The truth is you will only do so if asked. That tells me all I need to know about you, and why I am done with you and TOL.

You are not a moderator, you are a child with way too much authority for your maturity level and lack of wisdom.

Why not chill out and speak like a civilized adult?
You are ranting like a child given a timeout.

[WizardofOz]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

OK, now I know you are an idiot.

Trins are dumb as rocks. Total spam for brains.

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

you can't read.

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

when you ask these liars for the true definition

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

if God started striking you liars with a lightning bolt

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

are you a retard?

Just from page 1-2 of this thread.

We'll miss you

[TomO]

Originally Posted by WizardofOz

Just from page 1-2 of this thread.

We'll miss you

...and her friend Lavalamp or whatever.

[john w]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

Here is a short list of false statements made by ebenz in just this thread.


Ebenz false statements:

1. “It doesn't define blasphemy. It says the son "blasphemed the name of the Lord and cursed."

Answer: If you read Leviticus 24:11 in Hebrew, it does define blasphemed as "uttering a curse against", the definition of the word 'qabab', a generated biform qbb, which is translated to the English blasphemed.



2.“The verse you referenced did not say he "cursed the holy name of God."

Answer: Yes it does if you read it in Hebrew, not English.


3. “yet the verse you give to define the word doesn't define the word at all.”

Answer: It does in Hebrew.


4. “The verse you referenced did not say he "cursed the holy name of God."

Answer: Yes it does, if you read it in Hebrew.


5. “And, the verse you used as a reference did not say that the son cursed the name of the Lord.”

Answer: IN HEBREW IT DOES.



6. “The funny thing is that you still haven't given your definition, except for cursing the name of the Lord (which wasn't shown in your reference verse).”

Answer: That is the definition, you did not accept the simple truth.

7. “Looks like everytime qabab is used, it is used in reference to God cursing people, not people cursing God.”

Answer: NOT TRUE: Only in the outdated KJV Strong's Concordance. In the modern Strong's NASV Concordance, qabab is the word in Leviticus 24:11 translated to blasphemed, Strong's # 6895.



8. “According to Blue Letter Bible, the word used for blasphemed in Leviticus 24:11 is naqab, not qabab.”

Answer: WRONG. You failed to look at the modern Concordance on Blue Letter Bible, as proven in the links posted previously.


9. “Looks like you may have gotten the words mixed up just a little bit.”

Answer: WRONG. I got the words exactly right the first time. I got the sources right the first time, as noted above.




10. “The word you gave me, qabab, is not used in Leviticus.”

Answer: Wrong. As proven previously by Strong's Concordance updated in 1995. And your source, Blue Letter Bible.org


Question from page 5, but previously answered on page 3 of the thread.
Ebenz quote “Now, why don't you answer the question: What is the definition of blasphemy?”

Christ’s Word’s answer two pages earlier on page 3 of the thread,

“I will go with Leviticus.....and swearing against the name of YHWH.”


Answer again, from Christ's Word, also on page 3, two pages before ebenz question on page 5,

“I would think that cursing the holy name of God "YHWH" would qualify, there are those that believe just speaking the name YHWH in vain would also qualify,…”

Translation: I, Christ's Made Up Word, will find some source, whether it's a Strong's Concordance, "The Hebrew," "The Greek," a lexicon, a dictionary, The Dead Sea Scrolls, a Septuagant nobody has been able to produce, the back of my Fruit Loops cereal box,...... to validate/support my doctrine, and thus, I can "prove" anything.

Knock yourself out.

[TomO]

Originally Posted by john w

Translation: I, Christ's Made Up Word, will find some source, whether it's a Strong's Concordance, "The Hebrew," "The Greek," a lexicon, a dictionary, The Dead Sea Scrolls, a Septuagant nobody has been able to produce, the back of my Fruit Loops ceral box,...... to validate/support my doctrine, and thus, I can "prove" anything.

Knock yourself out.

Talk to her John....Chicks dig you, maybe you can get through to her.

[Knight]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

I think we are both pretty much done here, so your fake apology is not necessary. I was taught that a true apology includes the statement, "it won't happen again".

I rarely read your posts but you strike me as nothing but a trouble maker. I think you would be happier on some another internet forum.

[Knight]

Originally Posted by Christ's Word

All of these were considered in the NASV updated in 1995, and that is EXACTLY WHY THE KJV concordance say "NAQAB", and the the NASV Concordance says "QABAB".

Could you please type louder, I couldn't really hear you.