Conversations with sylvius: Rashi, 666 in Genesis 1:31, etc.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The point was that "bone from my bones" doesn't refer to one of his ribs.

No one knows what it means. The text doesn't explain itself, so everyone can make up their own interpretations.

"etsem" does also mean essence.

Yes, but it also means "bone." So you are free to choose which you like. There is no meaning in the text itself because different presuppositions lead to different conclusions and there is no way to know who is right or wrong.

Jewish tradition knows the Luz-bone, that cannot decay and from which man is resurrected.

Animals do not have such a bone.

There you go! Another absurd Jewish tradition that is demonstrably false. There is no such bone. Indeed, this is very easy to prove since you said that it "cannot decay" which means we should find them in any grave where the rest of the body decayed. But they don't exist any more than Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. I don't know how anyone could take rabbinical teachings seriously if they make up this kind of false crap all the time. I wonder if they even take themselves seriously.

What exactly is meant with side, I think has to do with the original Adam being an hermaphrodite, both male and female. God took away the female-side and fabriqued the woman out of it.

That's a fine metaphorical interpretation. I've been know to think along the same lines.

[sylvius]

Second, the name was already well known long before that date. Why would you say that he made it known on the sixth of Sivan?

Revelation at Sinai.
It reveals something that before was only hidden.

Third, there are problems with the date of Shavuot. Yes, the dominant tradition says that it was the sixth day of Sivan. But not everyone agrees. Here's what the wiki article says:

Now you show your misunderstanding.

Rashi was telling that he knows about the name hidden in "yom hashishi" by saying that it refers to the sixth day of Sivan, no martter what others may say/think about the date of Pentecost.

Where does it say that the Name is hidden in the first story of creation?

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_...showrashi/true

ברא א-להים: ולא אמר ברא ה', "bara elohim: v'lo bara hashem"

"elohim" is God as judge, while "hashem" is God as mercifull one.

Yes, of course 318 is the value of Eleazar. But that does not imply that they were the only two in the battle!

It is not history, but scripture.

Please give examples of other places he "plays with the root panah." It is interesting that that word plays an important role in Malachi on Spoke 17, corresponding to Pey (as in panah).

It is in the quotations from Isaiah and Malachi Mark begins with.
"Panah" is also root of "panim" = face, "lifnei", before,

Are you agreeing that your previous statement makes no sense? That's the impression I get when you say "ok" and change to something else.

No.

His (dwelling)place is the entrance of sabbat.

Have you considered this may be because you are not trying to make yourself clear? You have been studying this for 35 years and you can't even state what your thesis is. That's the source of much confusion.

Clear

[sylvius]

There you go! Another absurd Jewish tradition that is demonstrably false. There is no such bone. Indeed, this is very easy to prove since you said that it "cannot decay" which means we should find them in any grave where the rest of the body decayed. But they don't exist any more than Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. I don't know how anyone could take rabbinical teachings seriously if they make up this kind of false crap all the time. I wonder if they even take themselves seriously.

Luz is the name of the place where Jacob dreamt of the ladder with its top in heaven.
God made himself known there as
(Genesis 28:13): "I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father, and the God of Isaac"

On which Rashi comments:
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_...showrashi/true

and the God of Isaac: Although we do not find in Scripture that the Holy One, blessed be He, associates His name with that of the righteous during their lifetimes by writing “the God of so-and-so,” for it is said (Job 15:15):“Lo! He does not believe in His holy ones,” [i.e., God does not consider even His holy ones as righteous until after their deaths, when they are no longer subject to the evil inclination,] nevertheless, here He associated His name with Isaac because his eyes had become dim, and he was confined in the house, and he was like a dead person, the evil inclination having ceased from him (Tanchuma Toledoth 7).

To this, I want to contend, refers also Mark 12:26-27,
And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You greatly err.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Second, the name was already well known long before that date. Why would you say that he made it known on the sixth of Sivan?

Revelation at Sinai.
It reveals something that before was only hidden.

"Something" could be anything. Why do you say it was the divine name that was already well-known?

Third, there are problems with the date of Shavuot. Yes, the dominant tradition says that it was the sixth day of Sivan. But not everyone agrees. Here's what the wiki article says:

Now you show your misunderstanding.

Rashi was telling that he knows about the name hidden in "yom hashishi" by saying that it refers to the sixth day of Sivan, no martter what others may say/think about the date of Pentecost.

Actually, you are the one with the misunderstanding. Pentecost is just another name for Shavuot which was used by the Jews in the first century:

Acts 2:1 When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

The Complete Jewish Bible tries to "fix' the Bible by changing the text to fit their preconceptions:

CJB Acts 2:1 The festival of Shavu'ot arrived, and the believers all gathered together in one place.

This shows that they don't understand that the Jews themselves used the word "Pentecost" to mean "Shavuot."

Rashi was telling that he knows about the name hidden in "yom hashishi" by saying that it refers to the sixth day of Sivan.

You just made that up. The real reason Rashi mentioned the sixth of Sivan is because that was the day the Torah was given, and he connected the letter hey = 5 with the 5 books of the Torah. He neither said nor implied anything about the acrostic.

Where does it say that the Name is hidden in the first story of creation?

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_...showrashi/true

ברא א-להים: ולא אמר ברא ה', "bara elohim: v'lo bara hashem"

Yes, I already knew it said that. But it doesn't say that "the Name is hidden in the first story of creation."

OK - now I think I know what you are getting at. The name YHVH = 26 = 2 x 13 is associated with love (ahavah = 13) and the 13 attributes of mercy as opposed to the name Elohim = 86 which is associated with law and judgment. So you think that his comment implies a knowledge of the acrostic merely because he mentions mercy? I don't see how that implication follows.

"elohim" is God as judge, while "hashem" is God as mercifull one.

Yes, I already knew that, as you should know since I wrote it in a previous post.

Yes, of course 318 is the value of Eleazar. But that does not imply that they were the only two in the battle!

It is not history, but scripture.

What's that supposed to mean?

Please give examples of other places he "plays with the root panah." It is interesting that that word plays an important role in Malachi on Spoke 17, corresponding to Pey (as in panah).

It is in the quotations from Isaiah and Malachi Mark begins with.
"Panah" is also root of "panim" = face, "lifnei", before,

Duh! I already knew that. But you said that >>>MARK<<< was the one "playing with panu" whereas the other Gospels mention it too. So I was asking if there was anything beyond the obvious quote from Isaiah. It would help if you tried a little harder to understand what I write.

No.

His (dwelling)place is the entrance of sabbat.

His "dwelling place" is not the stone that was rolled over Christ's tomb.

Have you considered this may be because you are not trying to make yourself clear? You have been studying this for 35 years and you can't even state what your thesis is. That's the source of much confusion.

Clear

What's that supposed to mean? Like I said, it seems you are not even trying to make yourself clear. How then can you expect anyone to understand what you write?

[sylvius]

What's that supposed to mean? Like I said, it seems you are not even trying to make yourself clear. How then can you expect anyone to understand what you write?

It is clear you don't understand.
We differ in thinking, we don't share the same presumptions.
The bible is not a historybook, not even meant to be.
I (think to) see certain things for which you seem to be blind.

About Mark and "rosh pinnah":

Mark begins with "archè" ἀρχή.
which can have two meanings, maybe best expressed in Latin, "initium" and "principium", or better in Hebrew: "t'chillah" and "reishit".
("Beginning" having also double meaning).

I think Mark intends a same kind of wordplay Rashi presented with:

for in the beginning it was His intention to create it with the Divine Standard of Justice, but he perceived that the world would not endure; so He preceded it with the Divine Standard of Mercy, allying it with the Divine Standard of Justice

Mark ends in Mark 16:8.
Last two words: ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ.
These words meant to be connected with the first words: Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου.
Now Ἀρχὴ for sure carries the meaning of "reishit", after "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom".
But this was all the time already the case, only that it was "rejected by the builders", to say it that way.

Mark 8:31,
Καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν γραμματέων καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστῆναι:

ἀποδοκιμάζω,v \{ap-od-ok-ee-mad'-zo}
1) to disapprove, reject, repudiate

Same in Mark 12:10,
οὐδὲ τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην ἀνέγνωτε, Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας:
"

κεφαλὴ γωνίας = "rosh pinnah" - head of the corner.

What corner?

Where two different roads meet?

Verb "panah" means to turn.

I always thought it as a circle that turns into a spiral.

Which I saw expressed in Mark 11:4,
καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ εὗρον πῶλον δεδεμένον πρὸς θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀμφόδου, καὶ λύουσιν αὐτόν.

ἄμφοδον = circular route, way around anything.

Also here mentioned θύρα = Hebrew "delet" gematria 434.

[sylvius]

Mark 11:4 is after Zachariah 9:9,
the colt being the colt of a donkey.

Be exceedingly happy, O daughter of Zion; Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem. Behold! Your king shall come to you. He is just and victorious; humble, and riding a donkey and a foal, the offspring of [one of] she-donkeys.

LXX,
χαῖρε σφόδρα θύγατερ *σιων κήρυςε θύγατερ Iερουσαλημ ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι δίκαιος καὶ σῴζων αὐτός πραὺς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον

cf Mark 11:2,
καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν κώμην τὴν κατέναντι ὑμῶν, καὶ εὐθὺς εἰσπορευόμενοι εἰς αὐτὴν εὑρήσετε πῶλον δεδεμένον ἐφ' ὃν οὐδεὶς οὔπω ἀνθρώπων ἐκάθισεν: λύσατε αὐτὸν καὶ φέρετε

Donkey = "chamor".

The clue of it, I thought, is the donkey-burden, "chomer".

1 chomer = 100 omer.

Coinciding the hundredfold produce of the seed that fell in the good earth.

Hundredfold = Hebrew "meah sh'arim" , gematria 666, to be found in Genesis 26:12.



( And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
Ain't Satan the one characterized by the same number?)


What is strange is that the story tells that Jesus went to sit upon the colt, but not that he went off again, so that you might think that he was crucified and laid in the grave and resurrected with colt and all ...

[Richard Amiel McGough]

It is clear you don't understand.
We differ in thinking, we don't share the same presumptions.
The bible is not a historybook, not even meant to be.
I (think to) see certain things for which you seem to be blind.

How is anyone supposed to understand if you choose not to clearly explain what you mean? The issue is not "different presuppositions" about the Bible - I don't even know what your presuppositions are.

About Mark and "rosh pinnah":

Mark begins with "archè" ἀρχή.
which can have two meanings, maybe best expressed in Latin, "initium" and "principium", or better in Hebrew: "t'chillah" and "reishit".
("Beginning" having also double meaning).

I think Mark intends a same kind of wordplay Rashi presented with:

for in the beginning it was His intention to create it with the Divine Standard of Justice, but he perceived that the world would not endure; so He preceded it with the Divine Standard of Mercy, allying it with the Divine Standard of Justice

Why are you focusing on Mark? Matthew, Luke, Acts, and 1 Peter speak of the "head of the corner" (cornerstone).

And why should we think that Mark was intending the same wordplay as a medieval French Jewish rabbi?

Mark ends in Mark 16:8.
Last two words: ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ.
These words meant to be connected with the first words: Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου.
Now Ἀρχὴ for sure carries the meaning of "reishit", after "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom".
But this was all the time already the case, only that it was "rejected by the builders", to say it that way.

Mark 8:31,
Καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν γραμματέων καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστῆναι:

ἀποδοκιμάζω,v \{ap-od-ok-ee-mad'-zo}
1) to disapprove, reject, repudiate

Same in Mark 12:10,
οὐδὲ τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην ἀνέγνωτε, Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας:
"

κεφαλὴ γωνίας = "rosh pinnah" - head of the corner.

What corner?

Where two different roads meet?

Verb "panah" means to turn.

I always thought it as a circle that turns into a spiral.

Which I saw expressed in Mark 11:4,
καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ εὗρον πῶλον δεδεμένον πρὸς θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀμφόδου, καὶ λύουσιν αὐτόν.

ἄμφοδον = circular route, way around anything.

Also here mentioned θύρα = Hebrew "delet" gematria 434.

I don't know what you are tying to get at. What is your overall thesis? It seems that all you do is present bits and pieces as if their meaning were supposed to be self-evident, but you don't provide any explanation of what it's all supposed to mean.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

( And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.
Ain't Satan the one characterized by the same number?)

The number 666 is the value of good things too. For example, The Holy Ark (arun haqadosh) = 666.

And the Bible says shemesh Yahweh = the Lord is a sun = 666 (Psalm 84:11).

What is strange is that the story tells that Jesus went to sit upon the colt, but not that he went off again, so that you might think that he was crucified and laid in the grave and resurrected with colt and all ...

No body in their right mind would ever think such a thing. The fact that something is not specifically mentioned does not imply it did not happen. On the contrary, we have very good reason to think that Jesus did indeed get off the ass he was riding since he "went into the Temple" after riding into Jerusalem on the ass:

Matthew 21:7 And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon. 8 And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way. 9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest. 10 And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this? 11 And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee. 12 ¶ And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

Your comments are becoming ludicrous.

[sylvius]

T
No body in their right mind would ever think such a thing. The fact that something is not specifically mentioned does not imply it did not happen. On the contrary, we have very good reason to think that Jesus did indeed get off the ass he was riding since he "went into the Temple" after riding into Jerusalem on the ass

Of course he went into the temple riding on the ass.

(On Carm.org you are not allowed to write "ass"...)

Mark has this more clear:

Mark 11:11,
Καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα εἰς τὸ ἱερόν -- "he went into Jerusalem into the temple" - one movement.

It teaches you that you must not take these stories as meant to be journalistic accounts of historical events.

[sylvius]

The number 666 is the value of good things too. For example, The Holy Ark (arun haqadosh) = 666.

And the Bible says shemesh Yahweh = the Lord is a sun = 666 (Psalm 84:11).

You look like a wood gatherer ...

Psalms 84:11,
כִּי שֶׁמֶשׁ וּמָגֵן יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים


And I cannot find in the Tenach an instance of "aron hakadosh" ("aron hakodesh") It 's mostly "aron" or "aron hab'rit" or "aron b'rit-hashem"

But I don't have computer-programm to find it ...

And why shouldn't "meah sh'arim" be a good thing?

I think it is very good.