₦airaland Forum

Maynnmann:
you don’t know Yet you are quoting canonical books?

So tell me.

budaatum:
What does "going through canon mean"?

Maynnmann:
Don’t be slow, the tanakh went through canon in what century?

What does going through canon mean?

Maynnmann:
Bud Bud

I'm beginning to think you have a comprehension problem.

So, in your own reading, what I am saying is that the previous books that were compiled and translated and which has gone through numerous rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretisms, omissions, etc etc, etc, is not the Tanakh?

If so stand corrected that I am saying the exact opposite of what you seem to understand, that the previous books that were compiled and translated and which has gone through numerous rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretisms, omissions, etc etc, etc, is the Tanakh, and which is only a part of what I am reading.

Maynnmann:
Yea i edited it and ADDED more
Where did you read that the tanank was interpolated and forge by the early church fathers?

See mine above, then Google "editing the tanakh" download pdf and come tell me what you see.

Maynnmann:
The tanakh didn’t evolve from various sources, they are jewish books used in first temple judaism.

And was there no before they were written in first temples anywhere?

Go seek please.

Maynnmann:
Stop lying Bud, You said HOLY BIBLE IS NOT THE TANAKH!l

Please provide evidence for the above.

Maynnmann:
”,no “jesus”inside it, you said it yourself remember.

I see you edited your post with the addition, lol. Is there a Jesus in the Tanakh?

What I meant was I am not reading the Tanakh but the Tanakh plus what you say "the early church fathers did a great work of interpolations and forgery" and which does include a Jesus Christ which I would not read about if I only read the Tanakh.

Basically, I am reading a translation of the Tanakh with the interpolations and forgery of the early church fathers which includes a Jesus Christ and at least one or two of the early church fathers who may have forged it and interpolated what I am reading.

Maynnmann:
Brutal lies.

Tanakh has nothing to do with “holy bible”, you said it yourself remember.?

I never said anything of the sort Mayn, that the Holy Bible has nothing to do with the Tanakh!

Everyone knows the Holy Bible evolved from the Tanakh which evolved from various other sources, and you yourself drum that fact down everyone's throat in almost all your posts.

Maynnmann:
All what you are saying is still bordering on New Testament created by the early church fathers, where did the church fathers forge from?

In their homes and their houses or in a temple or a library, perhaps?

To you, all I am saying is "still bordering on New Testament created by the early church fathers". Some may have better eyes than you.

Maynnmann:
Who was before them, bud?

The 70 who translated one book to another, those who wrote what the 70 translated, those who verbally transmitted what they'd heard and those who verbalised it in the first place, each of who over many centuries left their own interpolations and forgery and some.

budaatum:
......does include the Tanakh which went through numerous rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretism, omissions, etc etc, etc, ......

budaatum:
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

I lost this in the diversions and felt I insulted it for which I burn in hell until my penance.

I first read this in the 70s mostly with a lantern and sometimes with moonlight so it might have left an impression on my pre-teen mind three floors up on 2 Bola Adewunmi Street watching the transformer on Adebambo Street go NEPA! For weeks at time, no light was like no God ever said let there be light, least not where I was, and not despite, but yet the moon in the sky at night.

What likely impressed on me was there was no moon where I'd come from, coal smug and all, and there was constant light though I would never have connected the light with the coal smug if not for the [url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_miners'_strike_(1972)]miners strike[/url] when the light did go out very briefly.

I am saying this so that the subjectivity of what I post be noted. Not everyone was reading with moonlight or lantern three floors up at 2 Bola Adewunmi Street after the transformer on Adebambo Street blew up, so ask and knock and seek with your own mind please.

KnownUnknown:
Maynmann is either insane or a bot. Lol

The fault is really mine. I can not resist temptation.

Maynnmann:
Yeah, The early church fathers did a great work of interpolations and forgery.
Keep reading “holy bible”

Damn! I fail at ignoring you already.

Didn't those before them too not do a great work of interpolation and forgery too?

Those early church fathers must have learnt well.

Maynnmann:
Bud, Who was talking in the psalm 86:2, and who was he talking to? Who is the “most high” that “gods” are children to?
What does “god” mean, not examples of “god”? What does “most high” mean?
And do you believe the verses you quoted talking about “light” “salt” and “gods” from the jewish book(tanakh)?

I have given you my answers to these questions with references to aid you in your understanding of my answers but it seems my subjective answers do not satisfy you - as they mustn't, mind, which is precisely why each must seek for themselves instead of just accepting the answers one is given.

I am now going to try really very hard from letting you further make me derail this thread.

Maynnmann:
Okay bud, keep reading “holy bible”

One of my top ten reads, I must say.

Maynnmann:
Bud, Who was talking in the psalm 86:2, and who was he talking to?

Psalm 86:2 is a verse from the Psalms allegedly written by numerous people over centuries who are putting words into the mouth of what they call God, so I guess the writers are the one's doing the talking like an artist talks through art. And the art, Psalm 86:2, is talking to the reader just as the Mona Lisa talks to its observer and as I am talking to you the reader of that which I say.

Maynnmann:
What does “god” mean?

Superpower beings like Superman, Thor, Obatala, some Pharaohs and Caesars and Zeus, and I presume, the yahweh of the tribe of shasu, and for me, you my fellow human being.

It is a very subjectively defined word after all, with everyone creating their god in their own image or according to their own understanding and know how.

For a more comprehensive list see here.

Maynnmann:
And do you believe the verses you quoted talking about “light” “salt” and “gods” from the jewish book(tanakh)?

I do not know how many times I have to tell you that buda does not believe, but I do know that one day you will know instead of believing what you want to believe.

Maynman:
Why do you need to believe a book?

Your first question should have been, do you believe in a book, but you did what you usually do and created crap in your head to believe without knowing you believe the crap you created in your own head.

No Maynman, I do not believe books nor anything actually. I ask and knock and seek with my own heart and soul and mind and being until I actually know. That's probably why I don't believe your "reading about yahweh of the tribe of shasu". After all, if I were to accept that's what I am reading about I would merely be believing you which buda does not do, and that's apart from the fact that I would be letting your own heart and soul and mind and being do the knocking and seeking and asking for pot.

Cultists are neither pots nor supposed potters.

jimetagambo:
By da way. Jeremi ah Republikkan hack

Kikikikikikiki

Makes one wonder, especially when dump was telling him to keep rates low so asset prices got inflated.

And the result is shown in first image because of the second.

And Powell said that “we wouldn’t hesitate” to go even higher – so a 100-basis point hike maybe – if inflation data comes in hot.

He said over and over again that the Committee was “determined” to tighten financial conditions, and that it was “necessary” to slow the economy, and it was “necessary” to slow demand, and it was “necessary” to slow the labor market in order to get inflation back down.

And inflation is going to be the top focus until “we confident that inflation is on a path down to 2%.”
https://wolfstreet.com/2022/07/27/powell-puts-75-basis-point-hike-on-table-for-sept-fed-determined-to-get-inflation-down-come-heck-or-high-water-most-hawkish-fomc-press-conference-i-ever-watched/

Powell would rather have a recession than inflation so don't be surprised if we recess.

budaatum:
The recession has been coming since 2019! You can't live on borrowings and asset price inflation for so long and not expect to reap the rewards.

There are furnished one bedroom apartments available for 200-250$ with everything you need,Wi-Fi, tv, washing machine,e.t.c

For a month, a week, an hour or a day, or is that not relevant info?

raumdeuter:
Well we are already in a recession offically by the reports today.

I am hoping the complexity is not beyond your ability to comprehend.

Consecutive quarters of falling GDP constitute one informal, though not definitive, indicator of a recession.

raumdeuter:
Just yesterday Jerome Powell said we are not going into a recession

And you are not yet "going into a recession", though you might arrive at one eventually if Powell got it wrong.

The strength of America's job market, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said at a news conference Wednesday, “makes you question the GDP data.'' The economy posted some encouraging news Wednesday: June reports on the trade deficit (narrower), inventories (higher) and orders for high-priced factory goods (better than expected) suggested that second quarter GDP might turn out to be stronger than previously feared.

Economists at JP Morgan have doubled their forecast for April-June growth to an annual pace of 1.4%.

raumdeuter:
U.S. economic activity contracted for the second consecutive quarter in Q2, data from the Commerce Department showed Thursday.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis's advance estimate of Q2 U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) released Thursday showed a 0.9% annualized decrease in economic growth for the three-month period ended June 30.

It was intended. Were you not expecting it?

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate by a sizable three-quarters of a point for a second straight time in its push to conquer the worst inflation outbreak in four decades.

The Fed is hoping to achieve a notoriously difficult “soft landing”: An economic slowdown that manages to rein in rocketing prices without triggering a recession.

Anyone see a link between revenue and expenditure?


Nigeria’s excess crude account plunges as economy bleeds

Nigerian Oil Pipeline Runs Dry As Rampant Oil Theft Plagues Country

Nigeria’s petrol subsidy in 6 months surpassed NNPC’s oil revenue by N210bn

Maynnmann:
Yes. If you read the kjv which contains the New Testament and tanakh, you are reading the tanakh.
This are basics, wow!

Perhaps it's impossible for you to get because you think it is basic and therefore requires no effort on your part, but let me try once more.

I am reading the Holy Bible, a book that has been compiled and translated from previous books, and which has gone through numerous rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretisms, omissions, etc etc, etc. Is it not true that the israelites would say that the Holy Bible that I am reading is not the Tanakh about their god of the Israelite yahweh, but some book that was corrupted from their Tanakh?

There's a certain individual called Jesus in the Holy Bible I am reading for instance, but I don't think he exists in the Tanakh, or does he?

It's semantic likely, and a rabbit hole you want to drag me down, but I don't think reading the Holy Bible is the same as reading the Tanakh because, even as you have pointed out, logos might not exactly mean dabar (hebrew).

Maynnmann:
Tanakh literally means hebrew Bible.

Does Tanakh mean Holy Bible?

If I read the King James Version of the Holy Bible am I reading the Tanakh too?

Maynnmann:
Why you so interested in middle east gods, why not Greek gods like zeus? They also have a book about “beginning” seems that’s what excite you?

I'll tell you. But first a correction to your question, for you really should ask why are we, you Mayn, and I buda both interested in middle East gods. After all, we are both interested.

My interest in not in any god at this particular moment, but in a particular book because that is the underpinning ideology of a large number of those I share a country with, and being one who has an interest in Buddhism, i would have an interest in the books that are of interest to those in my surrounding as taught one should by Buddhism.

Do know that in order to understand the book that is of interest to those in my surrounding, which is the Holy Bible and not the Tanakh, knowledge of Greek philosophy (which is what their gods died and evolved into) is a requisite requirement as is Atum out of Egypt? Yet, one must not stop there unless one's interests is in gods as opposed to an interest in people which is what drives me.

If one's interest is in people, one might end up studying every single religion one can be bothered to invest the time into so one can further understand people instead of one God called the yahweh of the shasu tribe. Still, how I wished we had evolved to talk about 0hilosiohy or science instead of being stuck at 5he religious stage of evolution

Now tell. Why do you have an interest in books about middle east god?

Maynnmann:
You are a lover of argument.

Do you seriously qualify to judge?

No Mayn. I am not a lover of argument, which is why I give up responding to you eventually. What seems like arguing to you is me pointing out that difference but I eventually always accept that you can't see that. See how I am discussing a book that is read by many Nigerians but you think I am talking about a god of the tribe of shasu called yahweh.

Maynnmann:
Logos and rhema are common greek words and it first appeared in the Septuagint to translate dabar(hebrew).

The idea of the logos in Greek thought harks back at least to the 6th-century-BCE philosopher Heraclitus, who discerned in the cosmic process a logos analogous to the reasoning power in humans. Later, the Stoics, philosophers who followed the teachings of the thinker Zeno of Citium (4th–3rd century BCE), defined the logos as an active rational and spiritual principle that permeated all reality. They called the logos providence, nature, god, and the soul of the universe, which is composed of many seminal logoi that are contained in the universal logos. Philo Judaeus (Philo of Alexandria), a 1st-century-CE Jewish philosopher, taught that the logos was the intermediary between God and the cosmos, being both the agent of creation and the agent through which the human mind can apprehend and comprehend God. According to Philo and the Middle Platonists (philosophers who interpreted in religious terms the teachings of Plato), the logos was both immanent in the world and at the same time the transcendent divine mind.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/logos

Sounds pre Septuagint (c. 3rd century BCE) to me.

Maynnmann:
You are quoting the bereSHIT in the tanakh, if you sincerely need answers on the tanakh you’d go and meet the Jewish people to explain their BOOK for you in the original language. (god, genesis, light, darkness, good etc are all ENGLISH WORDS)

First, you do know that there are many sects of Jews with various diverse and different explanations of their book? Which one do you suggest I go to?

Second. This thread is not about "answers on the Tanakh". If anything, it is about 'answers on the Bible', which is not the Tanakh, but even then it is not about answers, yet, but about questions.

And, no, I do not need to go to a Jewish person to explain a book I can read for myself and do my own research about. You would hopefully not tell me to go to a Christian to explain the New Testament to me or to an English person to explain the King James or to Achebe for an explanation of Things unless you want my head to be brainwashed, so why ask me to go get my head brain washed by anyone when I can read for myself and do my own research which would include what Jews might have written if my current focus were "answers on the Tanakh" which it isn't?

Maynnmann:
In yoruba mythology it was obatala that created humans and earth, it will be unwise for me to go and meet a jew or a roman to explain who is obatala and yoruba mythology.

Yet, some of us read books about Obatala written by non-yorubas who bothered to do their research because we think it unwise to go and meet anybody anywhere to explain anything to us when we can exercise our own minds and own brains and find understanding for ourselves!

But maybe I lie. Please tell me if all you post was explained to you or is the product of your own research done with your own eyes and your own mind.

Maynnmann:
Who are the “Israelite”? When was “israEL” created?
Cherry picking questions to answers?

It was you who mentioned them! You tell.

Maynnmann:
The greeks didn’t adopt it, the jewish book in hebrew language was translated into greek language by the order of alexandria as greek was the predominant language in israel that time.

That is Greek adoption to me, after giving them Greekism. What a noble exchange.

Maynnmann:
And Septuagint only contained the TANAKH, no New Testament inside!

Now let's get one thing clear. I am reading the Bible which does include the Tanakh which went through numerous rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretism, omissions, etc etc, etc, before the New Testament which also went through numerous fabrications and rewrites, redacts, additions, translations, syncretism, omissions, etc etc, etc, was created and added to it.

Maynnmann:
I’m talking about the deity, READ!

And I am talking about Genesis 1 in a book called the Holy Bible, and not about some imaginary deity some may or may not have written about, as you'd find if you read.

Seriously. I do wish you'd note the difference.

And what are gnostic sayings?