We are living in a world of illusion

[Dave24]

sometimes but probably not enough

I want to start reading some everyday and do the read the Bible in one year plan.

 

[MMS]

I want to start reading some everyday and do the read the Bible in one year plan.

Change it to "I will start" and you will

 

[Dave24]

Change it to "I will start" and you will

I will start tomorrow

 

[Koichos]

@Koichos i know you dislike this site but once again this is another opportunity to show how the "symbolic" interpretation can be the more trustworthy interpretation

The amazing name Balaam: meaning and etymology

An indepth look at the meaning and etymology of the awesome name Balaam. We'll discuss the original Hebrew, plus the words and names Balaam is related to, plus the occurences of this name in the Bible.

www.abarim-publications.com

Balaam means "To Swallow/Destroy the People"


compare this dialogue to Luke 22 (Judas betrayal)

Bilʿom is regarded in Hebrew literature as one of the shivʿoh n'viyʾim nith'nabʾu lʾummoth hoʿolom ('seven prophets who prophesied to the gentile nations')—the other six being his father Bʿor; ʾIyyov; and ʾIyyov's four friends ʾAlifaz ha-Teimoni, Bil'dadh ha-Shuhi, Ssofar ha-Naʿamothi and ʾAlihuʾ ha-Buzi). According to the Midhrosh, Bilʿom was the greatest of all the gentile prophets and he achieved this status only so that the gentile nations should not be able to say 'If only we had a Moshah, we could have been as pious as ʿAm Yisroʾel'.

Now notice "Whose story begins in chapter 22 of the book of numbers"

now also notice the first mention of "Satan" is also ironically in the chapter 22

Numbers 22:20-32

Grammatically, the inflection לְשָׂטָֽן l'soṭon, which occurs only in B'midhbar 22:22, 22:32 and Sh'muʾel ʾAlaf 29:4, Béth 19:23 is just the noun שָׂטָֽן soṭon ('an obstruction/opponent') prefixed by the preposition לְ־ l- ('to/for'). The expression used in B'midhbar 22:22 is לְשָׂטָֽן לוֹ l'soṭon lo which means 'as an obstruction to him [referring to the 'wicked' prophet Bilʿom]'; if לשׂטן were an infinitive-construct, it would have to be pointed לִשְׂטֹֽן (or לִשְׂטֽוֹן) lis'ṭon and followed by the direct object אוֹתוֹ ʾotho ('him') instead of the indirect object לוֹ lo ('for/to him').

וַיִּחַר־אַף אֱלֹקִים​

ʾAlohim's anger flared up

כִּי־הוֹלֵךְ הוּא​

because he [i.e., Bilʿom] was going,

וַיִּתְיַצֵּב מַלְאַךְ ה׳​

so a messenger [or, 'an angel'] of Hashem's stationed itself

בַּדֶּרֶךְ​

in the roadway

לְשָׂטָֽן לוֹ​

as an obstruction to him;

וְהוּא רֹכֵב עַל־אֲתֹנוֹ​

he [Bilʿom] was riding on his she-donkey

וּשְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו עִמּוֹ׃​

and his two attendants [were] with him.

The second clause of this verse reads: 'an angel of Hashem's (מַלְאַךְ ה׳) stationed itself (וַיִּתְיַצֵּב) in the roadway (בַּדֶּרֶךְ) as an obstruction to him (לְשָׂטָֽן לוֹ)'; the מַלְאָךְ 'messenger' is the subject, וַיִּתְיַצֵּב 'stationed itself' is the verb and (לוֹ) לְשָׂטָֽן 'as an obstruction (to him)' is the noun expressing the 'messenger's reason for 'stationing itself in the roadway'. The verb being used is something the messenger is doing, not a separate entity from it. So, the מַלְאָךְ malʾoch ('angel') is the messenger tasked with operating לְשָׂטָֽן l'soṭon ('as an obstruction') to Bilʾom.

now even though Moses said to the israelites that "The Egyptians" were dead on the shore...behold here is one right here? This is why I say the pattern copying + misunderstanding of words creative power is beguiling israel despite their confidence in the language that was given to them..

the eloquent peasants "donkey"

I swear to God, if we're not already in hell I'd be honestly surprised

let it rip* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eloquent_Peasant#Story_summary The story begins with a poor peasant, Khun-Anup, traveling to market with his donkeys heavily laden with goods to exchange for supplies for his family. While Khun-Anup was en route, Nemtynakht, a vassal of the high...

www.thecoli.com

To understand the plague from The Book of Numbers:
The name of the book comes from the two censuses taken of the Israelites.

Each of the Five Books of Moshah is named after its opening word (which serves as the Hebrew name).

The names of the 1st, 2nd and 4th book are in s'michuth (the technical term for Hebrew's genitive case).

1. b'reshıth in B'reshıth 1:1 means 'at the beginning of...' | a.k.a. Genesis
2. sh'moth in Sh'moth 1:1 means 'the names of...' | a.k.a. Exodus
3. wayyiq'roʾ in Wayyiq'roʾ 1:1 means 'and he called' | a.k.a. Leviticus
4. b'midhbar in B'midhbar 1:1 means 'in the desert of...' | a.k.a. Numbers
5. d'vorim in D'vorim 1:1 means 'the things [or words or statements]' | a.k.a. Deuteronomy

The Book B'midhbar is interesting in that it can be said to contain three books in one, so that the Books of Moshah actually consists of seven books, because our Sages of antiquity teach that the passage B'midhbar 10:35-36 (which is set off from the surrounding material by nun hafuchoh (the symbol ׆), a 'reversed nun', before and after it) is sefar bif'nei ʿassmo 'a Book in its own right' (so that, in a sense, B'midhbar can be considered as three books: i. 1:1-10:34, ii. 10:35-36, iii. 11:1-36:13). Furthermore, Rav Sh'muʾel bar Nahmon taught

...אֲמַר ר׳ יוֹנָתָן: 'חָֽצְבָה עַמּוּדֶֽיהָ שִׁבְעָֽה'—אֵלּוּ שִׁבְעָה סִפְרֵי תוֹרָה...​

...in R' Yonothon's name: 'she [i.e., Wisdom, which is a feminine noun hoch'moh in Hebrew] has carved out for herself seven columns' (Mish'lé 9:1)—these are the Seven Books of the Toroh...

[מס׳ שַׁבָּת דַּף קט״ז עַמּוּד א׳]​

Our tradition prescribes that the two verses B'midhbar 10:35-36 ought to be preceded and followed by nun hafuchoh ('a reversed nun'), to separate them from the surrounding text; these marks are the equivalent of modern typography's brackets. There is a brief discussion in the same folio of the reason for these marks, where Rabbon Shimʿon ban Ğamaliyʾel (the great-grandson of Hillel 'the Elder') opines that one day these two verses are destined to be removed from the end of chapter 10 and inserted into their proper location in chapter 2.

Incidentally, the Hebrew term nun hafuchoh is often translated as 'inverted nun', but this is incorrect because the nun's 'tagin' (Aramaic term for the ornamental 'crowns') are still added to the letter's upper י so it is in reality 'reversed' rather than 'inverted'. In a handwritten Hebrew scroll there are small marks made by a Jewish scribe as a kind of ornaments on the heads of 13 letters of the Hebrew alphabet: the 6 letters ב, ד, ה, ח, י, ק are marked with a single stroke; while the 7 letters ג, ז, ט, נ, ע, צ, ש are marked with a 'crown' of three strokes.

-------------​

The reasoning behind the English name 'Numbers' is news to me. I must say that I learned something new today.

Census - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A census involves "numbering the people"...which was a practice of Egypt.[/SPOILER]

Maybe you can now understand why it is sinful to hold a census (see Sh'muʾel Béth 24:1 & Div'ré Hayyomim ʾAlaf 21:1). Interestingly, Jews don't count people, even in Jewish prayer-houses to determine whether the required מִנְיַן עֲשָׂרָה min'yan ʿasoroh ('quorum of ten') is present. How, then, can we know whether we have a quorum or not? We make use of the words found in the T'na"ch (in T'hillím 28:9):

הוֹשִׁיעָה ׀ אֶת־עַמֶּךָ וּבָרֵךְ אֶת־נַחֲלָתֶךָ וּרְעֵם וְנַשְּׂאֵם עַד־הָעוֹלָם׃​

Rescue Your nation and bless Your inheritance; feed and uplift them forever!

This verse has precisely ten words in Hebrew: now the tenth word of this verse is הָעוֹלָם hoʿolom, which has the meaning 'forever' in the context עַד־הָעוֹלָם ʿadh hoʿolom; but it has given rise to an amusing pun because when only nine worshipers are present (that is one short of a quorum), the comment made is 'We are short by an 'ʿolom'!', because the Hebrew word עוֹלָם ʿolom can also mean 'a [whole] world'.

The term מִנְיָן min'yon (a contraction of מִנְיַן עֲשָׂרָה min'yan ʿasoroh 'count of ten') does not occur anywhere in Scripture in the context of a 'quorum' (in fact the word only occurs once in any context, in the mostly Aramaic ʿAzroʾ 6:17). The מִנְיָן min'yon is derived from Ruth 4:2, where ʾIv'sson or 'Boʿaz' takes 'ten men' in order to celebrate his marriage to Ruth, for a marriage 'requires a blessing to be recited'.

 

[MMS]

Bilʿom is regarded in Hebrew literature as one of the shivʿoh n'viyʾim nith'nabʾu lʾummoth hoʿolom ('seven prophets who prophesied to the gentile nations')—the other six being his father Bʿor; ʾIyyov; and ʾIyyov's four friends ʾAlifaz ha-Teimoni, Bil'dadh ha-Shuhi, Ssofar ha-Naʿamothi and ʾAlihuʾ ha-Buzi). According to the Midhrosh, Bilʿom was the greatest of all the gentile prophets and he achieved this status only so that the gentile nations should not be able to say 'If only we had a Moshah, we could have been as pious as ʿAm Yisroʾel'.


Grammatically, the inflection לְשָׂטָֽן l'soṭon, which occurs only in B'midhbar 22:22, 22:32 and Sh'muʾel ʾAlaf 29:4, Béth 19:23 is just the noun שָׂטָֽן soṭon ('an obstruction/opponent') prefixed by the preposition לְ־ l- ('to/for'). The expression used in B'midhbar 22:22 is לְשָׂטָֽן לוֹ l'soṭon lo which means 'as an obstruction to him [referring to the 'wicked' prophet Bilʿom]'; if לשׂטן were an infinitive-construct, it would have to be pointed לִשְׂטֹֽן (or לִשְׂטֽוֹן) lis'ṭon and followed by the direct object אוֹתוֹ ʾotho ('him') instead of the indirect object לוֹ lo ('for/to him').

The second clause of this verse reads: 'an angel of Hashem's (מַלְאַךְ ה׳) stationed itself (וַיִּתְיַצֵּב) in the roadway (בַּדֶּרֶךְ) as an obstruction to him (לְשָׂטָֽן לוֹ)'; the מַלְאָךְ 'messenger' is the subject, וַיִּתְיַצֵּב 'stationed itself' is the verb and (לוֹ) לְשָׂטָֽן 'as an obstruction (to him)' is the noun expressing the 'messenger's reason for 'stationing itself in the roadway'. The verb being used is something the messenger is doing, not a separate entity from it. So, the מַלְאָךְ malʾoch ('angel') is the messenger tasked with operating לְשָׂטָֽן l'soṭon ('as an obstruction') to Bilʾom.

I'm glad you opened this topic up. An interesting thing that I noticed in your description is that "elohim's anger" flared which implies that God created something in response to Balaam's actions. However there is another way of seeing this is that the work of Balak (empty or emptyness, which is considered the "king" of Moab) sought to tempt "The Swallower or Destroyer" (Balaam) with money in order to curse israel...

Exodus 32:1

32 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

why "before us"

The she-donkey saw something that made it not want to go forward, but Balaam only saw the she-donkeys disobedience. He smites the donkey three times before the Angel of the lord "spoke" through the donkey and he saw the image of the angel holding the sword ready to smite...in himself.

Its very similar to the line from the LORD God to Cain as follows:

5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

in the other thread we were talking about "asking of the lord" this is precisely why I consider it in this context because here what was Cain asking for before rising up against his brother and what was he asking for when he ultimately did? Sin, therefore, is something that has to be deduced as something that we ask for...but we must rule over. That also opens up many questions about how and what exactly we ask...people take free will for granted until our will slowly becomes ruled over by outside forces and we ultimately die. Perhaps the reason people lived so long is they asked for different things than we do before the flood? God says he numbered mans years 120 but what does that say about before the flood where he makes no mention of what a mans years should be (the ages of people are written in a past tense rather than an active declaration like the 120 years)

Each of the Five Books of Moshah is named after its opening word (which serves as the Hebrew name).

The names of the 1st, 2nd and 4th book are in s'michuth (the technical term for Hebrew's genitive case).

1. b'reshıth in B'reshıth 1:1 means 'at the beginning of...' | a.k.a. Genesis
2. sh'moth in Sh'moth 1:1 means 'the names of...' | a.k.a. Exodus
3. wayyiq'roʾ in Wayyiq'roʾ 1:1 means 'and he called' | a.k.a. Leviticus
4. b'midhbar in B'midhbar 1:1 means 'in the desert of...' | a.k.a. Numbers
5. d'vorim in D'vorim 1:1 means 'the things [or words or statements]' | a.k.a. Deuteronomy

The Book B'midhbar is interesting in that it can be said to contain three books in one, so that the Books of Moshah actually consists of seven books, because our Sages of antiquity teach that the passage B'midhbar 10:35-36 (which is set off from the surrounding material by nun hafuchoh (the symbol ׆), a 'reversed nun', before and after it) is sefar bif'nei ʿassmo 'a Book in its own right' (so that, in a sense, B'midhbar can be considered as three books: i. 1:1-10:34, ii. 10:35-36, iii. 11:1-36:13). Furthermore, Rav Sh'muʾel bar Nahmon taught

Our tradition prescribes that the two verses B'midhbar 10:35-36 ought to be preceded and followed by nun hafuchoh ('a reversed nun'), to separate them from the surrounding text; these marks are the equivalent of modern typography's brackets. There is a brief discussion in the same folio of the reason for these marks, where Rabbon Shimʿon ban Ğamaliyʾel (the great-grandson of Hillel 'the Elder') opines that one day these two verses are destined to be removed from the end of chapter 10 and inserted into their proper location in chapter 2.

Incidentally, the Hebrew term nun hafuchoh is often translated as 'inverted nun', but this is incorrect because the nun's 'tagin' (Aramaic term for the ornamental 'crowns') are still added to the letter's upper י so it is in reality 'reversed' rather than 'inverted'. In a handwritten Hebrew scroll there are small marks made by a Jewish scribe as a kind of ornaments on the heads of 13 letters of the Hebrew alphabet: the 6 letters ב, ד, ה, ח, י, ק are marked with a single stroke; while the 7 letters ג, ז, ט, נ, ע, צ, ש are marked with a 'crown' of three strokes.

-------------​

The reasoning behind the English name 'Numbers' is news to me. I must say that I learned something new today.


Maybe you can now understand why it is sinful to hold a census (see Sh'muʾel Béth 24:1 & Div'ré Hayyomim ʾAlaf 21:1). Interestingly, Jews don't count people, even in Jewish prayer-houses to determine whether the required מִנְיַן עֲשָׂרָה min'yan ʿasoroh ('quorum of ten') is present. How, then, can we know whether we have a quorum or not? We make use of the words found in the T'na"ch (in T'hillím 28:9):

This verse has precisely ten words in Hebrew: now the tenth word of this verse is הָעוֹלָם hoʿolom, which has the meaning 'forever' in the context עַד־הָעוֹלָם ʿadh hoʿolom; but it has given rise to an amusing pun because when only nine worshipers are present (that is one short of a quorum), the comment made is 'We are short by an 'ʿolom'!', because the Hebrew word עוֹלָם ʿolom can also mean 'a [whole] world'.

The term מִנְיָן min'yon (a contraction of מִנְיַן עֲשָׂרָה min'yan ʿasoroh 'count of ten') does not occur anywhere in Scripture in the context of a 'quorum' (in fact the word only occurs once in any context, in the mostly Aramaic ʿAzroʾ 6:17). The מִנְיָן min'yon is derived from Ruth 4:2, where ʾIv'sson or 'Boʿaz' takes 'ten men' in order to celebrate his marriage to Ruth, for a marriage 'requires a blessing to be recited'.

I have never seen it stated that there are actually 7 books, but that actually makes sense relative to some of the passages

Yes, the issue with numbering the people is something unique to Hebrew (and Egyptian). Only in certain cultures is the mythos of numbers expanded to the degree it is. So once people are numbered and labeled they are "tracked" in a sense linguistically...how that works or if it works at all is a mystery to me. You could live your whole life without knowing the "number of your name" but like any label all it does is fix a perception. So once that perception is fixed so are the thoughts that spawn from it. So in a way, a census infects people in a very subtle way. Is it good for wisdom?

consider our modern news cycles, we rely very heavily on polls and gross measurements of "public consent" but in truth people are dynamic such that if you werent feeding them media, and they were unaware of eachothers takes i wonder would they poll the same...

 

[DoubleClutch]

@MMS

 

[jj23]

I expect a few punctures. Hopefully Lewis gets some luck

 

[010101]

@MMS

like a baby eating whatever you put to her mouth

it's all fiction

ha

*

 

[MMS]

@MMS

i dont see the connections

egyptian rituals have different meaning than british crown symbolism because they believe different things.

 

[DoubleClutch]

i dont see the connections

egyptian rituals have different meaning than british crown symbolism because they believe different things.

I think you missed the part about Abraham being the pharaoh Amenemhet I.

I think that’s what you were saying in another thread a while ago

​

 

[MMS]

I think you missed the part about Abraham being the pharaoh Amenemhet I.

I think that’s what you were saying in another thread a while ago

​

why would you think Amenemhat (which one?) is Abraham, someone who is regarded to come from ancient Babylon (Ur or Light of the Chaldees)

egypt made some interesting literary works that have similar themes to biblical stories but arent necessarily the same.

Remember I've said to you that the Egyptians deified their language/speech/numbers and used weird divination to prophecy

but their concerns unlike Israels are a whole different thing.

 

[DoubleClutch]

why would you think Amenemhat (which one?) is Abraham, someone who is regarded to come from ancient Babylon (Ur or Light of the Chaldees)

egypt made some interesting literary works that have similar themes to biblical stories but arent necessarily the same.

Remember I've said to you that the Egyptians deified their language/speech/numbers and used weird divination to prophecy

but their concerns unlike Israels are a whole different thing.

That’s not what I believe. I’m quoting the video

Judging from your posts in the older thread I know you’re big on the ancient Egyptians being the ones with the original monotheistic religion so

But maybe your position has changed since then

 

[MMS]

That’s not what I believe. I’m quoting the video

Judging from your posts in the older thread I know you’re big on the ancient Egyptians being the ones with the original monotheistic religion so

But maybe your position has changed since then

i think that how they defined "God"(s) is not completely the same as the biblical narrative

so even their idea of monotheism while similar is not the same because most of egypt deified their kings whom they believe collectively represented both the sun, 1, and creative speech incarnated. Read these and tell me what do you think he believed?

English Translation of the Unas Pyramid Texts - Pyramid Texts Online

Read the complete English translation of the Pyramid Texts from the pyramid of Unas.

www.pyramidtextsonline.com

 

[DoubleClutch]

i think that how they defined "God"(s) is not completely the same as the biblical narrative

so even their idea of monotheism while similar is not the same because most of egypt deified their kings whom they believe collectively represented both the sun, 1, and creative speech incarnated. Read these and tell me what do you think he believed?

English Translation of the Unas Pyramid Texts - Pyramid Texts Online

Read the complete English translation of the Pyramid Texts from the pyramid of Unas.

www.pyramidtextsonline.com

But why should we even care what Egyptians believed when we have a much superior version on Monotheism in Judaism/Christianity?

 

[MMS]

But why should we even care what Egyptians believed when we have a much superior version on Monotheism in Judaism/Christianity?

Context (see post 150)