Is the "white" man's ? Lucifer?
Options
Comments
-
-
waterproof wrote: »My study tools use strongs but does not use that definition for 119.......
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H119&t=KJV
From strongs......
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
119 ~ 'adam ~red ~ to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).
Hebrew is a difficult language.........
What's the usage????????
adam
Exo 25:5 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood,
Exo 26:14 ~ And thou shalt make1 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering above [of] badgers' skins.
Exo 35:7 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood.
Exo 35:23 ~ And every man, with whom was found8 blue, and purple, and scarlet, 8438 and fine linen, and goats' [hair], and red30 skins of rams, and badgers' skins, brought52 [them].
Exo 36:19 ~ And he made4 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering [of] badgers' skins above [that].
Exo 39:34 ~ And the covering of rams' skins dyed red,30 and the covering of badgers' skins, and the vail of the covering.
Prov 23:31 ~ Look4 not thou upon the wine when it is red,101 when it giveth4 his colour in the cup, 3599 [when] it moveth101 itself aright.
Isa 1:18 ~ Come now, and let us reason together,11 saith4 the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white55 as snow; though they be red55 like crimson, they shall be as wool.
(No problems surrounding white)
Nahum 2:3 ~ The shield of his mighty men is made red,30 the valiant men [are] in scarlet:30 the chariots [shall be] with flaming torches in the day of his preparation,53 and the fir trees shall be terribly shaken.90
ruddy
Lam 4:7 ~ Her Nazarites were purer1 than snow, they were whiter1 than milk, they were more ruddy1 in body than rubies, their polishing [was] of sapphire:
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
The descriptions of Adam "flush (to redden/blush) to turn rosy" (strongs 119) are all adjectives, associated with Adom (122)........
'describing' words; the main syntactic role of which is to qualify a noun..........
The masculine noun of Adam is (strongs 120)............
Those vowel points mean a lot in Hebrew...............
אָדָם ~ Adam ~ noun ~ a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.)
אָדֹם ~ Adom ~ adjective ~ used in the name of colors, i.e. rosy cheeks..........
Song of Solomon 4:3
Your lips are like scarlet ribbon; your mouth is inviting. Your cheeks are like rosy pomegranates behind your veil.
@waterproof.......
Maybe you can clear this up................
That's the tricknology of the scribes Pharisee's the serpent seed who is not Hebrews are black that is known as Amalek who was put in the seat of Moses by rome. They mixed the word Adom and Adam and the only way even though the scripture says what color the people of the book are to deceive the people is saying that Adam and Adom is the same and when it's not and also by word of mouth and they wrote it in some strongs.
See how easy by a stroke of a pen that because can change the meaning of the word by changing one letter.
But check this out in scripture when the word Adom is used it was used for dark brown blacks the color of MAHOGANY also.....
I will have to go in my notes again to give a better explanation how and who changed the word and why.....
That's what I'm saying.........
There are scriptures that specifically associate laban with whiteness and flesh..........
לָבָן ~ Laban = "white"
Exodus 4:6
Then the LORD said, "Put your hand inside your cloak." So Moses put his hand into his cloak, and when he took it out, the skin was leprous --it had become as white as snow.
The tricknology surrounding red & "blushing white" is quite obvious..............
Only in European & Arabic translations...............
-
Can't take the bible in a literal sense, a lot of stuff aren't given into accurate description for a reason. Adam and Eve didn't bite into an apple because the bible says it was a fruit but not an apple. Some say it was a fruit that wasn't a fruit of the spirit (meaning love, joy, peace, happiness, self control, patience, etc..). Also look at the context of ? saying let there be light before he created the sun, the moon and the stars. Earth was always here, it was just formless and without life, it was called earth once it became habitable and then the heavens were created.
My bad, off topic, lucifer was a cherubim of the highest choir (2nd rank of angels, seraphim are the highest angels and there's only 4 of them that surround ? ). White people created a different religion of their own with a white Jesus and black people like to imagine a black jesus and white devil. The first settlers were all middle eastern/native american looking.
I'm still reading into this though. -
fact: white man created the invention of faggotry which only explains that Lucifer is white cause only white people do ? ? .
fact: angels don't have a race/color but once lucifer rebelled against ? he became white which explains why white people always think that they're better than everyone else. -
so i would think a thread about the white man's religion would get properly placed...
-
waterproof wrote: »My study tools use strongs but does not use that definition for 119.......
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H119&t=KJV
From strongs......
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
119 ~ 'adam ~red ~ to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).
Hebrew is a difficult language.........
What's the usage????????
adam
Exo 25:5 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood,
Exo 26:14 ~ And thou shalt make1 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering above [of] badgers' skins.
Exo 35:7 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood.
Exo 35:23 ~ And every man, with whom was found8 blue, and purple, and scarlet, 8438 and fine linen, and goats' [hair], and red30 skins of rams, and badgers' skins, brought52 [them].
Exo 36:19 ~ And he made4 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering [of] badgers' skins above [that].
Exo 39:34 ~ And the covering of rams' skins dyed red,30 and the covering of badgers' skins, and the vail of the covering.
Prov 23:31 ~ Look4 not thou upon the wine when it is red,101 when it giveth4 his colour in the cup, 3599 [when] it moveth101 itself aright.
Isa 1:18 ~ Come now, and let us reason together,11 saith4 the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white55 as snow; though they be red55 like crimson, they shall be as wool.
(No problems surrounding white)
Nahum 2:3 ~ The shield of his mighty men is made red,30 the valiant men [are] in scarlet:30 the chariots [shall be] with flaming torches in the day of his preparation,53 and the fir trees shall be terribly shaken.90
ruddy
Lam 4:7 ~ Her Nazarites were purer1 than snow, they were whiter1 than milk, they were more ruddy1 in body than rubies, their polishing [was] of sapphire:
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
The descriptions of Adam "flush (to redden/blush) to turn rosy" (strongs 119) are all adjectives, associated with Adom (122)........
'describing' words; the main syntactic role of which is to qualify a noun..........
The masculine noun of Adam is (strongs 120)............
Those vowel points mean a lot in Hebrew...............
אָדָם ~ Adam ~ noun ~ a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.)
אָדֹם ~ Adom ~ adjective ~ used in the name of colors, i.e. rosy cheeks..........
Song of Solomon 4:3
Your lips are like scarlet ribbon; your mouth is inviting. Your cheeks are like rosy pomegranates behind your veil.
@waterproof.......
Maybe you can clear this up................
That's the tricknology of the scribes Pharisee's the serpent seed who is not Hebrews are black that is known as Amalek who was put in the seat of Moses by rome. They mixed the word Adom and Adam and the only way even though the scripture says what color the people of the book are to deceive the people is saying that Adam and Adom is the same and when it's not and also by word of mouth and they wrote it in some strongs.
See how easy by a stroke of a pen that because can change the meaning of the word by changing one letter.
But check this out in scripture when the word Adom is used it was used for dark brown blacks the color of MAHOGANY also.....
I will have to go in my notes again to give a better explanation how and who changed the word and why.....
That's what I'm saying.........
There are scriptures that specifically associate laban with whiteness and flesh..........
לָבָן ~ Laban = "white"
Exodus 4:6
Then the LORD said, "Put your hand inside your cloak." So Moses put his hand into his cloak, and when he took it out, the skin was leprous --it had become as white as snow.
The tricknology surrounding red & "blushing white" is quite obvious..............
Only in European & Arabic translations...............
You're in Exodus.......
I'm talking about Adam in Genesis.... he is a man that blushes, meaning, turns red in the face...
Well that's what my Strong's concordance is telling me. Nothing more.
Given that information, I can figure one thing.... LORD ? didn't create Blacks in Genesis... He created a man that turns red in the face......
I don't understand the purpose of this "white" talk (outside of identifying race). I wasn't referring to the color white, whiteness, snow, or Moses... lol. -
so i would think a thread about the white man's religion would get properly placed...
Figured it'd make it to R&R but you know ? gotta get they marketin on. edit: and yeah thats definitely the overall point here, this is the white mans religion, the Bible is instructions for the white man comin out them caves. ? are gods... -
Can't take the bible in a literal sense, a lot of stuff aren't given into accurate description for a reason. Adam and Eve didn't bite into an apple because the bible says it was a fruit but not an apple. Some say it was a fruit that wasn't a fruit of the spirit (meaning love, joy, peace, happiness, self control, patience, etc..). Also look at the context of ? saying let there be light before he created the sun, the moon and the stars. Earth was always here, it was just formless and without life, it was called earth once it became habitable and then the heavens were created.
My bad, off topic, lucifer was a cherubim of the highest choir (2nd rank of angels, seraphim are the highest angels and there's only 4 of them that surround ? ). White people created a different religion of their own with a white Jesus and black people like to imagine a black jesus and white devil. The first settlers were all middle eastern/native american looking.
I'm still reading into this though.
I heard someone say before that the fish (most simple people, the pawns) are to take the Bible literally and the fowl are those that are knowledgable and rule over them for they actually understand the Bible and its meaning -
Yes.
I know little about satanism, but from what I do know about it, it preaches selfishness. It consists of negative rights rather than positive rights and this is exactly the ideology we see from powerful white people. -
waterproof wrote: »My study tools use strongs but does not use that definition for 119.......
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H119&t=KJV
From strongs......
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
119 ~ 'adam ~red ~ to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).
Hebrew is a difficult language.........
What's the usage????????
adam
Exo 25:5 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood,
Exo 26:14 ~ And thou shalt make1 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering above [of] badgers' skins.
Exo 35:7 ~ And rams' skins dyed red,30 and badgers' skins, and shittim wood.
Exo 35:23 ~ And every man, with whom was found8 blue, and purple, and scarlet, 8438 and fine linen, and goats' [hair], and red30 skins of rams, and badgers' skins, brought52 [them].
Exo 36:19 ~ And he made4 a covering for the tent [of] rams' skins dyed red,30 and a covering [of] badgers' skins above [that].
Exo 39:34 ~ And the covering of rams' skins dyed red,30 and the covering of badgers' skins, and the vail of the covering.
Prov 23:31 ~ Look4 not thou upon the wine when it is red,101 when it giveth4 his colour in the cup, 3599 [when] it moveth101 itself aright.
Isa 1:18 ~ Come now, and let us reason together,11 saith4 the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white55 as snow; though they be red55 like crimson, they shall be as wool.
(No problems surrounding white)
Nahum 2:3 ~ The shield of his mighty men is made red,30 the valiant men [are] in scarlet:30 the chariots [shall be] with flaming torches in the day of his preparation,53 and the fir trees shall be terribly shaken.90
ruddy
Lam 4:7 ~ Her Nazarites were purer1 than snow, they were whiter1 than milk, they were more ruddy1 in body than rubies, their polishing [was] of sapphire:
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index2.htm
The descriptions of Adam "flush (to redden/blush) to turn rosy" (strongs 119) are all adjectives, associated with Adom (122)........
'describing' words; the main syntactic role of which is to qualify a noun..........
The masculine noun of Adam is (strongs 120)............
Those vowel points mean a lot in Hebrew...............
אָדָם ~ Adam ~ noun ~ a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.)
אָדֹם ~ Adom ~ adjective ~ used in the name of colors, i.e. rosy cheeks..........
Song of Solomon 4:3
Your lips are like scarlet ribbon; your mouth is inviting. Your cheeks are like rosy pomegranates behind your veil.
@waterproof.......
Maybe you can clear this up................
That's the tricknology of the scribes Pharisee's the serpent seed who is not Hebrews are black that is known as Amalek who was put in the seat of Moses by rome. They mixed the word Adom and Adam and the only way even though the scripture says what color the people of the book are to deceive the people is saying that Adam and Adom is the same and when it's not and also by word of mouth and they wrote it in some strongs.
See how easy by a stroke of a pen that because can change the meaning of the word by changing one letter.
But check this out in scripture when the word Adom is used it was used for dark brown blacks the color of MAHOGANY also.....
I will have to go in my notes again to give a better explanation how and who changed the word and why.....
That's what I'm saying.........
There are scriptures that specifically associate laban with whiteness and flesh..........
לָבָן ~ Laban = "white"
Exodus 4:6
Then the LORD said, "Put your hand inside your cloak." So Moses put his hand into his cloak, and when he took it out, the skin was leprous --it had become as white as snow.
The tricknology surrounding red & "blushing white" is quite obvious..............
Only in European & Arabic translations...............
You're in Exodus.......
I'm talking about Adam in Genesis.... he is a man that blushes, meaning, turns red in the face...
Well that's what my Strong's concordance is telling me. Nothing more.
Given that information, I can figure one thing.... LORD ? didn't create Blacks in Genesis... He created a man that turns red in the face......
I don't understand the purpose of this "white" talk (outside of identifying race). I wasn't referring to the color white, whiteness, snow, or Moses... lol.
I know what you are talking about, it was an example.........
Nowhere in Genesis is their any mention of Adam turning red in the face..................
You can think whatever you want................
However...........
Studying the Hebrew language illustrates the definitions for Adam..................
& how Adam in Genesis is not referring to "blushing"........Clarity.........
'adam
The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon
Strong's Number: 0119
Original Word Word Origin
~da of unknown derivation
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
'adam TWOT - 26b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
aw-dam' Verb
Definition
to be red, red
(Qal) ~ ruddy (of Nazarites)
A. QAL and NIPHAL verbs were very simple, but the opposite is true with Piel and Pual verbs. They are extremely difficult even for the advanced scholar. The dictionary will determine how the word is used.
B. These verbs are intensive in nature, but the intensification happens in one of four ways.
1. Quality: Something becomes stronger
2. Quantity: Something becomes greater
3. Reality: It is made reality
(Pual)
to be rubbed red
dyed red
reddened
(Hiphil) ~ "Hithpael" has 4 main uses :
1 - Describing reflexive verbs (to dress oneself etc.)
2- Mutual verbs (to get married, to correspond with, to chat with etc.)
3- Passive verbs (to suntan etc. )
4-Verbs that describe a false situation : to be a "wise guy" , to "play dumb", to masquerade/disguise etc.
- " Hithpael" can be either future , present or past, depending on the first letters { to get dressed= lehitlabesh ( infinitive)MITLABESH for present, HITLABESH for past and YITLABESH for future }
- It can be either passive active or middle voice.
(Hithpael)
to redden
to grow red
to look red
King James Word Usage - Total: 10
dyed red 5, red 4 ruddy 1
-
Ay peace bro, these aren't my personal thoughts/ideas. This is what SEC says about the word Adam that appears in Genesis 2:19 specifically. It says for the meaning of Adam in Genesis 2:19, refer to #120. which definition includes #119
what you keep quoting is the same definition i'm giving except my source seems to be a little more specific about the hebrew word
it quite possibly could be wrong. i'm just pointing out what it says. nothing more... -
Peace.......
I see what you are saying............
However......
I also believe that your references are vague.............
I posted links for detailed information on the original Hebrew language associated with the translation........
Far more than the dictionary that you referenced.................
You mentioned that the definition needed to be crossed in the op.............
I think that Adam does not stand up to the blushing translation in Genesis............
But, I wont stall the thread any further..........
-
Peace.......
I see what you are saying............
However......
I also believe that your references are vague.............
I posted links for detailed information on the original Hebrew language associated with the translation........
Far more than the dictionary that you referenced.................
You mentioned that the definition needed to be crossed in the op.............
I think that Adam does not stand up to the blushing translation in Genesis............
But, I wont stall the thread any further..........
Your thoughts are valued, b. everything in the OP is open for discussion
i understand what your opposition to my dictionary's definition. Though looking at your definitons, they pretty much says the same thing throughout. It just say "to show red" , "to glow red", "to redden", basically to emit a red color. though its not being specific to context.
in my dictionary, it also says to show red but is more specific by saying "to show blood (in the face)". then goes on to say "flush" and "to turn rosy". No, it doesn't take up a page to say it but it does include the definition you listed as well as making it more specific to human beings -
fact: white man created the invention of faggotry which only explains that Lucifer is white cause only white people do ? ? .
fact: angels don't have a race/color but once lucifer rebelled against ? he became white which explains why white people always think that they're better than everyone else.
what the ? are you trying to say here?? are you trying to defend the white man and his ? gods. ? all that ? you just typed i was just dropping facts
the white man is a natural ? , homosexuality was deeply entrenched in pre-christian europe, their culture and religion has always been ? . -
Peace.......
I see what you are saying............
However......
I also believe that your references are vague.............
I posted links for detailed information on the original Hebrew language associated with the translation........
Far more than the dictionary that you referenced.................
You mentioned that the definition needed to be crossed in the op.............
I think that Adam does not stand up to the blushing translation in Genesis............
But, I wont stall the thread any further..........
Your thoughts are valued, b. everything in the OP is open for discussion
i understand what your opposition to my dictionary's definition. Though looking at your definitons, they pretty much says the same thing throughout. It just say "to show red" , "to glow red", "to redden", basically to emit a red color. though its not being specific to context.
in my dictionary, it also says to show red but is more specific by saying "to show blood (in the face)". then goes on to say "flush" and "to turn rosy". No, it doesn't take up a page to say it but it does include the definition you listed as well as making it more specific to human beings
Appreciate it brother, likewise...............
I am cooking up some ? in here that you might be interested in...........
Stay tuned........
I am interested to see where this thread goes.............
I have an opinion on the other things mentioned in the op................
I'll drop it later..............
-
fact: white man created the invention of faggotry which only explains that Lucifer is white cause only white people do ? ? .
fact: angels don't have a race/color but once lucifer rebelled against ? he became white which explains why white people always think that they're better than everyone else.
what the ? are you trying to say here?? are you trying to defend the white man and his ? gods. ? all that ? you just typed i was just dropping facts
the white man is a natural ? , homosexuality was deeply entrenched in pre-christian europe, their culture and religion has always been ? .
What I'm saying is that the devil is white because he's the father of faggotry and only white men do ? ? . ? had to kick that ? and his ? molesting followers out of heaven for even attempting to spread his ? theologies. The first settlers were fair to darkskin but sin caused it's descendants to be more paler. Satan even specifically chose a white redneck to be his prophet in Aleister Crowley. Satan loves his white people.
If the devils bible is the bible backwards, Adam and Eve is Adam and Steve. ? created a woman for a man but satan wants man to be with man because it's a ? of nature and Lucifer is a ? .
In other words, if you don't believe in ? , you're a ? that follows the father of faggotry, satan himself and you are gonna get anally ? by ? demons with firey pitch forks for eternity. -
fact: white man created the invention of faggotry which only explains that Lucifer is white cause only white people do ? ? .
fact: angels don't have a race/color but once lucifer rebelled against ? he became white which explains why white people always think that they're better than everyone else.
what the ? are you trying to say here?? are you trying to defend the white man and his ? gods. ? all that ? you just typed i was just dropping facts
the white man is a natural ? , homosexuality was deeply entrenched in pre-christian europe, their culture and religion has always been ? .
What I'm saying is that the devil is white because he's the father of faggotry and only white men do ? ? . ? had to kick that ? and his ? molesting followers out of heaven for even attempting to spread his ? theologies. The first settlers were fair to darkskin but sin caused it's descendants to be more paler. Satan even specifically chose a white redneck to be his prophet in Aleister Crowley. Satan loves his white people.
If the devils bible is the bible backwards, Adam and Eve is Adam and Steve. ? created a woman for a man but satan wants man to be with man because it's a ? of nature and Lucifer is a ? .
In other words, if you don't believe in ? , you're a ? that follows the father of faggotry, satan himself and you are gonna get anally ? by ? demons with firey pitch forks for eternity.
Oh ok you just spitting fire on whites and ? alright homie no argument with you ? . -
This thread is hilarious and of course the bible is full of allegory and poetry. It's not meant to be taken as literal and especially in our day. There were not two people just created, evolution is real, the flood only happened in the middle east, the world was not populated just by 8 people, not 2 of every animal was taken, the earth wasn't formed before the stars, we are not even in the center of the universe, and etc.
-
Evolution is not real.......
-
Ajackson17 wrote: »This thread is hilarious and of course the bible is full of allegory and poetry. It's not meant to be taken as literal and especially in our day. There were not two people just created, evolution is real, the flood only happened in the middle east, the world was not populated just by 8 people, not 2 of every animal was taken, the earth wasn't formed before the stars, we are not even in the center of the universe, and etc.
Do not provoke the ? ............
[img]http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/? .jpg[/img]
-
Ajackson17 wrote: »the flood only happened in the middle east
Expand on this, please. The premises I've developed through my own research lead me to the conclusion that the Flood only affected a certain group of people (whom the Bible is instructing). -
@bambu Do you find any truth in the story of Yakub? I'm hesitant to say this as I don't want to look like a fool and have everything I've said be totally discredited, but I think there may be ties between LORD ? (the Adamites creator) and Yakub...
Which is why you see me attempting to sever the relationship between dark-skinned peoples and Adam. -
@bambu Do you find any truth in the story of Yakub? I'm hesitant to say this as I don't want to look like a fool and have everything I've said be totally discredited, but I think there may be ties between LORD ? (the Adamites creator) and Yakub...
Which is why you see me attempting to sever the relationship between dark-skinned peoples and Adam.
No...........
I made a thread about it.....................
http://community.allhiphop.com/discussion/492028/a-mystery-? -that-s-the-work-of-yacub-the-holy-ghost-got-you-scared-to-death-kid-boo
But we can discuss it..........
-
Ajackson17 wrote: »the flood only happened in the middle east
Expand on this, please. The premises I've developed through my own research lead me to the conclusion that the Flood only affected a certain group of people (whom the Bible is instructing).
They found some heavy flooding around 3000 bc near mesopotamia, but a worldwide flood has not happened. Their world vs how we see this global world is much different and grander. Their world equals a tiny part of Africa and Southwest asia. That's their world. -
Ajackson17 wrote: »This thread is hilarious and of course the bible is full of allegory and poetry. It's not meant to be taken as literal and especially in our day. There were not two people just created, evolution is real, the flood only happened in the middle east, the world was not populated just by 8 people, not 2 of every animal was taken, the earth wasn't formed before the stars, we are not even in the center of the universe, and etc.
Do not provoke the crazy man in me............
[img]http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/? .jpg[/img]
Corrected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rJLLV7U-XY
