July 31, 2009

Who is the Antichrist? A Perspective



I could not resist posting this. In the past we discussed Adam's rib and Strong's etymology of words. This is one for the records indeed.

60 comments:

  1. I'm glad to know that Obama is the Anti-Christ.

    Hopefully he will finish off Judeo-Christianity once and for all. :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm every bit as convinced of this as I have ever been of anything Dan's ever posted on this here blog.

    It's funny, though, I'll give it that.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  3. Aramaic is not a form of Hebrew.

    It is a Semitic language, but it isn't Hebrew, and it did not originate with the Jews.

    This guy is getting basic facts wrong and I have a very strong feeling his Hebrew (Jesus would not have spoken in Hebrew, but whatever) is broken.

    Even if it IS perfect, this is still a bogus of "proving" someone is the Antichrist.

    It reminds me of those old Usenet posts that purported to show Barney the Dinosaur is Satan.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What does this show? That, given a big enough text, an agenda, and unlimited credulity, one can manufacture just about any message one pleases.

    Personally, I think the case for Santa being Satan is better, but to each his own. The language skills this anonymous hatemonger brought to bear in this clip would also have been a bit more impressive if he had not misspelled "heights" as "heigths", not once but twice. Pathetic.

    So, Dan, come clean. Are you convinced that Obama is the Antichrist? If not, why do you post this silly trash?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I suspect this is just an illustration of Dan's sense of humor, Z; he did, after all, link to his epic failure of the 'rib = DNA' post, and I'd say this is in keeping with his warped sense of humor...

    I liked "heigths" as well, but more than that, I loved how he (the narrator) felt it necessary to remind us that he was just reporting "the facts," and that we should "decide," the last time with an intentionally foreboding image of Obama as the backdrop.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  6. UPDATE: The updated video is now up.

    ReplyDelete
  7. considering all the 2012 end of the world mumbo jumbo floating around I would not be surprised if this turned out to be true.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What was updated? The video is identical...

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  9. Theological Discourse said...
    considering all the 2012 end of the world mumbo jumbo floating around I would not be surprised if this turned out to be true.
    ------------------------------

    whoooooaaaa, run for your lives. It's the dink with the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dan, and anyone else interested: here's a perspective on this clip from someone who understands Aramaic (something which no one here, if I am not mistaken, can claim). His conclusion:

    "I believe that in light of the languages in question, that it is clear that this entire argument, theology and politics strictly aside, is based upon several, demonstrably faulty premises."

    Check it out.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Zilch,

    Thanks for that but that is addressing the old video, not the new one. He fully admitted that he made a mistake or two and addressed those issues in the second video. All is cleared up and stands as it is.

    As far as your question to me if I think Obama is the antichrist...I might. Do you remember that 911 blog, in that Young Brother thought Bush was the antichrist? Well, after he was wrong about Bush he said that Obama was our savior and will make things right. Well, I told him that Obama is far more likely the Antichrist then Bush. I still believe that, but I will not hold my breath until I start seeing some more signs.

    Obama is poised to ruin this Country and throw this world into total chaos and only time will reveal that. It is hard to see who that will be.

    If I lived in the time of my Dad and saw what Hitler was doing I sure would have prepared for Christs return. It is disturbing to think that the actual Antichrist will do far worse the Hitler.

    I do believe in a post-trib rapture, that we all will go through the tribulation together. Some people think that Christ will come twice, once to meet us in the clouds where million just disappear like the left behind series (pre-trib rapture). I don't believe that will happen. I see Christ coming in all His glory and the whole world will know and that is when we will go with Him at that time. It will be interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Obama is the same old mediocre status quo president model with a different paint job and a different name; the world is not coming to an end because of him; get over it

    ReplyDelete
  13. Wait, what? He's serious about this? Dan, I mean -- he actually thinks there's something to this?

    Get the fuck out.

    Here's what happened:

    1. The guy recognizes Obama's name may match the pronunciation of certain Hebrew words.

    2. A search is conducted to find those Hebrew terms which would sound like Obama's name, with inflection and leading vowels largely ignored to maximize results.

    3. The results are parsed against direct statements made by Jesus, with those statements assumed to have been made in Hebrew.

    4. With the results in hand, another search is conducted to find places in the OT where the Hebrew words in question may have been used, to be used as evidence in support of the pending claim.

    5. A libelous video is made citing all of this as undisputed fact, implying that Jesus spoke Hebrew, and that the author of Luke (as well as the other synoptics) translated the spoken Hebrew into the written Greek.


    There is a clear agenda, and it has produced the expected results. How much would you like to bet that a similar search of the Qur'an would produce something equally amusing, and equally bullshit?


    Beyond the agenda, the video fails to acknowledge other brute facts about the passage(s) in question: Luke has the word "fall," which the video conveniently ignores, and two verses earlier in Isaiah (14:12) we find a virtually identical statement as that made in Luke 10:18 -- but the word for "heaven" is not Strong's H1116, but Strong's H8064.

    The narrator claims, however, that the statement "matches the exact context of Jesus' words in Luke chapter 10" (~3:05). This is a lie. Rather, the context fits Isaiah 14:12, as I noted earlier:

    How hast thou fallen from the heavens, O shining one, son of the dawn! Thou hast been cut down to earth, O weakener of nations. (Young's Literal)

    This depicts almost verbatim what Jesus says in Luke.

    Need more?

    How about the fact that the Greek word translated as "lightning" is also used in Luke (11:36) to describe the shining of a candle -- just like the use of "O shining one" in Isaiah. Given the propensity for the synoptics -- especially Matthew and Luke -- to quote OT text, it seems far more likely that if Luke was referring to Isaiah chapter 14, he was probably going for verse 12, not verse 14.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Still not convinced?

    Fine. How about some good old fashioned lying on the part of the narrator. At ~3:09, he makes the following claim:

    In the verses of Isaiah that refer directly to Lucifer, several times it is mentioned that Satan has fallen 'from the heights' or 'from the heavens.' 

    He then claims that "in this text" the Hebrew word for the "heights from which Satan fell" is Strong's H1116.

    Not true.

    In fact, Strong's H1116 is used precisely five times in Isaiah, only one of which refers to Satan (Lucifer) at all, namely, Isaiah 14:14 which the narrator references, yet the context in question has nothing to do with Lucifer falling, but with him ascending.

    How many times does Isaiah discuss Lucifer falling?

    Once. See for yourself. You may even try this if you object to "fall."

    So "several times" is a lie. That Lucifer has "fallen from the heights" or "fallen from the heavens," and that this is mentioned as described, is a lie. That the depiction of Lucifer falling involves Strong's H1116 is a lie.

    Don't forget, though, that Jesus was speaking Aramaic -- not Hebrew -- if he even said this at all, so until you trot out the Aramaic pronunciation of Luke 10:18, you're still making shit up, at best. Updating the video to remove the explicit claim that Aramaic is a form of Hebrew, and replace it with the vague implication that the relation of the two implies complete compatibility, is a lie.

    English is a close cousin of German, yet when I say, "This guy is a fucking liar," I can't find the German words that sound most similar to the English, and make my translation out of it, and I can't translate it into German and claim the German version to sound like what I said. Zilch?

    I grow weary of this nonsense.

    You know, this all reminds me of a joke:

    A Mexican, who can speak no English, walks into an American department store where none of the staff speak Spanish. Evidently, the man wishes to purchase something, but the language barrier proves too much an obstacle. Frustrated, the staff bring items to the man, hoping that they will discover the item he wishes to purchase.

    One after another, they bring out items.

    A towel.

    "Eso no es."

    A toolbox.

    "Eso no es."

    A television.

    "Eso no es."

    On and on. Finally, a wearied salesperson brings a package of socks to the man, who grins and nods emphatically.

    "¡Eso, sí, que es!"

    The salesperson, miffed, throws the package at the man and quips, "For crying out loud. Why didn't you spell it in the first fucking place?"


    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  15. Heh. That joke reminds me of another...

    (True story)

    My father, while leading a 'missions' trip in Mexico, was to deliver a sermon to his Mexican hosts. Having the sense of humor from which my own is derived (read: dry), he thought to begin with a joke. Unfortunately, what my father has in humor he lacks greatly in common sense...

    With his translator at his side, my father took the podium, and spoke into the microphone, "God is like baseball."

    (Pause for translation.)

    "In the Big Inning..."

    (Pause for translation.)

    (Pause for laughter.)

    (Continue pausing for laughter.)

    (Seriously, why aren't they laughing?)

    ...


    After a good face-palm, I had to explain to my father why his effort at a joke was retarded. He thought an ice-breaker was a good idea, and it is, but he stupidly thought to use an English play-on-words on a Spanish-speaking audience, as though the translation would be even close to as humorous.



    Okay, one more translation joke...

    (Also a true story.)

    My high school Spanish teacher, when he was studying in Mexico, was out with his [Mexican] friends, when one asked about another's whereabouts:

    "¿Dónde está Juan?"

    My teacher, not bound to answer questions in full proper form, provided the precise answer:

    "Safeway." Evidently, Juan was picking up groceries.

    The questioner, however, was visibly annoyed, and asked incredulously, "¿A dónde?"

    "Safeway." Some annoyance in the reply.

    "¿A dónde?" More forceful.

    "SAFEWAY." Definite attitude.


    I don't know for how long the two exchanged staccato syllables, but the joke lies in the confusion, which bears directly on the "Baraq Ubama" claim. If the response, "Safeway," is heard as, "Se fue," it literally means, "He went away." While our instructor provided this anecdote as an example of why we properly form our answers in complete sentences, equally important is the fact that forcing a translation based on the possible sound, or inferring modern information from the possible sound of an ancient conversation in a foreign tongue, is retarded, and will undoubtedly lead to false impressions.

    If Jesus wanted to tell us who the Antichrist was, he could have said so directly, by saying, "His name is [insert preferred pariah here]." He didn't, according to the synoptics.

    Seriously, Dan, this shit is bananas.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  16. Nice stories, Stan. And I too thought of saying what you said about English and German.

    Achtung, Dan: naughty words approaching on the starboard bow!

    Hmmm... as you point out, Stan, translation is tricky. The closest I can get in German to "this guy is a fucking liar" is "dieser Typ ist ein beschissener Lügner". The words that are cognate are:

    this-dieser
    is-ist
    liar-Lügner

    "ein" means "one" (cognate, natch) or "a".

    "Typ" is of course "type", but can also mean "guy", for which there is no cognate in German.

    "beschissener" means "shitty". The cognate for "fucking" would be "verfickter", but the verb "ficken" and its derivatives are not used in German as expletives, but only literally to indicate intercourse. It's pretty obscene, but not used much outside of porn sites.

    Btw- there's a small town in Austria named "Fucking". Needless to say, the name has nothing to do with stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  17. P.S. Dan, haven't we had this conversation before anyway? What Stan said about extracting "Barack Obama" from the Bible is the same thing as what the various Bible Code guys do. There are even computer programs that will do it for you. But as Stan says, and I think I said the same thing some time ago here, you can find just about anything you want in any sufficiently large corpus if you know what you're looking for.

    In fact, come to think of it, the alleged evidence creationists have against evolution or an old Earth is massaged from the great mass of data in a similar way. Or the Holocaust deniers, or the 9/11 troothers: it's all cherry picking and massaging, ignoring the big picture and zeroing in on those bits and pieces that can be cobbled together to fit a predefined agenda.

    The problem is that the supporters of all these various constructs are not usually interested in investigating the big picture, which is the only way to get a handle on what is most likely to be going on: they simply sift and sort and look for any angle that can be construed to support their preconceived story. And any time one particular story is debunked, another pops up to take its place.

    And of course there's always the last line of defense: "lalala I can't hear you".

    ReplyDelete
  18. Look, if you really need an anti-christ, I'll take the job.
    Sounds like a blast!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Stan/ Zilch

    great stuff. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
    Very well said.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Froggie: the perks are great, but the pension plan leaves a lot to be desired...

    ReplyDelete
  21. zilch said:

    "dieser Typ ist ein beschissener Lügner"

    be careful with that ;) The meaning is pretty clear in this case "beschissen" can also be used in the sense of 'bad'. A "fucking soccer-player" is probably something else than "ein beschissener Fußballspieler". I'd rather use "verdammter".

    A part of Berlin is called "Wedding", but it's not really romantic there

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anna: I hadn't thought of it that way, but you are, of course, quite correct: "dieser Typ ist ein beschissener Lügner" could also mean "this guy is a lousy liar" (which can of course be wiederum translated into German as "dieser Typ ist ein lausiger Lügner").

    My first impulse was indeed to translate "fucking" as "verdammter", but that's just "damned", which doesn't have the denigrating impact of "fucking". How about "dieser Typ ist ein lügnerischer Wixer" (literally, "this guy is a lying jerkoff")?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Dan wrote:
    "Obama is poised to ruin this Country and throw this world into total chaos and only time will reveal that...

    If I lived in the time of my Dad and saw what Hitler was doing I sure would have prepared for Christs return."

    Stay classy, Dan. :)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Of course, Zilch and Anna -- the plight of the honest translator. Do you translate the words as directly as possible, or do you manipulate the words to reproduce the intended meaning as accurately as possible?

    The Christian's problem is that he must a) assume the translators are all divinely inspired such that the original meaning is maintained throughout the translation process, and b) assume that the original author, who we know translated as he wrote, likewise made appropriate choices in preservation of meaning. Worse than this, though, is the fact that the Christian must suspend his understanding of translation when considering the quotations of Jesus -- he desires very much to accept the current most accepted translation (in his preferred language) as the actual words of Jesus, but he knows that the actual spoken words are in a language few of us can understand, much less articulate.

    All of this, of course, means that Zilch's latest effort to translate "This guy is a fucking liar" is the most accurate -- as only I, the person being translated, can attest, given implicit trust in the translator. If the offered German phrase truly means, "This guy is a lying jerkoff," then the meaning has been preserved, even if the actual text has not.

    The direct implications of this are that when our Wixer friend makes claims about Aramaic-spoken words, which were translated into written Greek, based on Hebrew correlations, he ignores the fact that the actual words uttered by Jesus are most likely not direct correlations to the ones he's chosen for his second-generation translation. When he makes his grand assumptions, then, it is clearly -- and only -- with the agenda in mind of identifying a phrase which obviously does not exist in the written Hebrew. If Strong's H1300 and H1116 were used in close proximity with one another in any of the Hebrew OT texts, surely this Wixer would have said so. It is because they were not that he plays this convoluted game, spinning a delightfully fictional web of lies in the process.

    In all this, though, I'm still relatively shocked that Dan might actually lend credence to this crap. Especially after the shellacking he received in the Adam's rib comments (forgive me for linking to my own comment; this comment, and the one which directly follows it, are better, and are not self-promotions).

    I still cannot believe this is not a joke. I can easily believe some tools think it serious, but I prefer to think Dan is not one of them. Please, Dan, tell me I'm correct, that this is just a charade, and that you are laughing at the serious responses...

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  25. Stan,

    I can easily believe some tools think it serious, but I prefer to think Dan is not one of them. 

    Now, haven't you made it clear to all that I am not the sharpest tool in the shed? Now stop fence sitting.

    To be clear, when Obama went on his worldwide tour, before he even became president, Patty and I noticed how much people were falling over themselves to greet and welcome him. it was quite the spectacle to see that many people cheering for a man that was not even our President. We thought at that time that he may very well be the "one" to destroy this country and give rise to the one world government and currency depicted in the Bible. We talked about it and we concluded he may be. Now, after all that has transpired so far, the belief still stands. This video sure give evidence to that, no matter how slight.

    Could it be true? Possibly. Could the prediction be wrong? Sure. Like I said only time will tell if Obama is the "one" to ruin the world enough to bring Christ to save us. I sure hope and pray that Obama is the "one" since I want this evil to end soon. I cannot stand sitting here in limbo waiting to get things going on the right (righteous) path.

    I will continue to wait patiently for the time when we all see and know Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dan, I think you need some sort of help if you're convinced Obama could be the antichrist.

    That's just bizarre - more bizarre than the 9/11 truthers.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This video sure give [sic] evidence [that Obama may be the Antichrist], no matter how slight. 

    No. It. Does. Not.

    You have been shown why this is not passable evidence of anything other than a directed effort at slandering Obama. Your refusal to admit that this guy clearly seeks to perpetrate libel is willfully and inexcusably dishonest on your part.

    True, it is possible that Obama may match the biblical description of the Antichrist -- eventually, I guess -- but to claim that Jesus actually said his name is ludicrous beyond measure, and to deny any willful misconduct on the part of this guy is absolutely unconscionable.

    The guy is a douche, and so is anyone who thinks his "research" on this topic is at all valid. If I had more time, more incentive, and more knowledge of the Hebrew alphabet and its accepted phonemes, I'd "prove" that something equally absurd was spoken by some biblical figure. As it was, I found evidence that Strong's H1288 (pronunciation here) gives rise to a much less sinister meaning to Obama's name, and if an inflected form is used in place of H1288, Barack Obama sounds an awful lot like the Hebrew for "Blessing from the high places."

    All it takes is a working knowledge of the available phonemes, a sufficiently large text to work with, and a legitimate set of phonemes, and the equivalent to this nonsense can occur with equal value. Browsing a Hebrew lexicon will give you ideas, if you don't yet have any.

    Seriously. Forget it. I'll not devote any more time to tracking down this sort of pedantic crap, and instead merely tell you that you're a dipshit if you think this bullshit is at all credible. At all.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  28. Dan you said,"Could it be true? Possibly. Could the prediction be wrong? Sure. Like I said only time will tell if Obama is the "one" to ruin the world enough to bring Christ to save us. I sure hope and pray that Obama is the "one" since I want this evil to end soon. I cannot stand sitting here in limbo waiting to get things going on the right (righteous) path.

    Dan, let me make sure I understand you correctly. Hopeful that Obama is the Anti-Christ, and cheering for the 'End of Days' to begin?!

    Also, appears that you hate something about your life or the world.

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dan said:

    "To be clear, when Obama went on his worldwide tour, before he even became president, Patty and I noticed how much people were falling over themselves to greet and welcome him. it was quite the spectacle to see that many people cheering for a man that was not even our President. We thought at that time that he may very well be the "one" to destroy this country and give rise to the one world government and currency depicted in the Bible. We talked about it and we concluded he may be. Now, after all that has transpired so far, the belief still stands."

    All this really shows is how much the rest of the world feared the Republican party's platform, as laid out by George W. Bush and the current (at the time) Republican candidates.

    In effect the world was trying to tell Obama:

    "Thank goodness you're here! These bitches is crazy!"

    ReplyDelete
  30. Sorry Dan, that should have said, "Dan, let me make sure I understand you correctly. you are hopeful that Obama is the Anti-Christ, and cheering for the 'End of Days' to begin?!"

    ~AC

    ReplyDelete
  31. ``Could it be true? Possibly. Could the prediction be wrong? Sure. Like I said only time will tell if Obama is the "one" to ruin the world enough to bring Christ to save us. I sure hope and pray that Obama is the "one" since I want this evil to end soon.''

    The world will be happy to disappoint you, Dan.

    ReplyDelete
  32. UCT,

    "Thank goodness you're here! These bitches is crazy!"  

    Nice point, that may just be the case. I certainly felt that way, not necessarily about Republicans, but certainly about Bush and his administration. That dude buried our constitution after 9/11 and we all know what Ben Franklin said about that:

    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    Now we have to deal with additional problems of a government that is out of control. In addition to Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson said something about these current times:

    "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

    I sure hope America gets a set again and takes back their country. We sure need a Founding Father running this country right now or, at the very least, a true constitutionalist. God help us all.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Chimp,

    Also, appears that you hate something about your life or the world. 

    There is some truth to that. (John 12:25, Mark 8:36)

    I hate evil with all my heart and soul. It has ruined enough and needs to be defeated once and for all. Agree?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Thanks for the answer to the second point Dan, but I was more interested in the first one you seemed to have ignored,

    "Dan, let me make sure I understand you correctly, you are hopeful that Obama is the Anti-Christ, and cheering for the 'End of Days' to begin?!"

    I look forward to your response.

    ~AC

    ReplyDelete
  35. Stan,

    but to claim that Jesus actually said his name is ludicrous beyond measure... 

    I agree that it is merely a stretch, but certainly not impossible. No one person, especially here, can fully understand the ways of our Lord but we all will know in a very short period of time who is right or not.

    I for one will be the very first to say I was wrong about Obama. Will you do the same?

    ReplyDelete
  36. One thing that will nullify this talk about the Antichrist is when Obama is thrown out of the Presidency for not being a citizen of the United States since there is, apparently, proof that he was born in Kenya and going to the courts now.

    I would think, if he is the Antichrist, he would at least follow basic rules to become a President. So you have that on your side of the discussion. Either way I get my way, so I feel good about the whole subject.

    This subject would invent, for the first time, a time machine. Could you imagine everything that man has done being rendered null and void? What a great day that will be. Liberty will prevail since after all "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

    ReplyDelete
  37. Since you are posting quotes again, I thought you might enjoy this one by Benjamin Franklin concerning religion.

    Mr. franklin wrote to his friend Richard Price and and observed, “When a Religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and, when it cannot support itself, and God does not take care to support, so that its Professors are obliged to call for the help of the Civil Power, ‘tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  38. "One thing that will nullify this talk about the Antichrist is when Obama is thrown out of the Presidency for not being a citizen of the United States since there is, apparently, proof that he was born in Kenya and going to the courts now.

    Please tell me you're kidding. You aren't buying this load of hogwash from WND are you?! Please take the time of looking at other sources on the same topic and on the concerning validity of his birth certificate from Hawaii.

    ~AC

    ReplyDelete
  39. Chimp,

    I enjoyed that quote from Mr. Franklin. Thanks for that and humbly I agree.

    That reminded me of a video I just watched.

    The religion that will help a man out of a hole to "save" him is the same truth that will save you.

    ReplyDelete
  40. So... You admit that the video is nonsense, but you maintain that Obama may nonetheless be the Antichrist?

    Is there no end to your credulity?

    Oh. I just saw your link to WND. I guess not.

    Here are the simple facts about Dan, then, for all to see:

    1. If an item comes along, no matter the source, which seems to agree with Dan's position or slant, he accepts it uncritically.

    2. If an item comes along, no matter the source, which seems to disagree with Dan's position or slant, he denies it uncritically.

    You're a bit of a retard, aren't you?

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  41. Here's some info about the Kenyan birth certificate from Digg (of all places)

    First, the hospital is Coast Provincial General Hospital (sometimes said to be Coast Province General Hospital), not Coast General Hospital.

    Second, Kenya was a Dominion the date this certificate was allegedly issued and would not become a republic for 8 months.

    Third, Mombasa belonged to Zanzibar when Obama was born, not Kenya.

    Fourth, Obama's father's village would be nearer to Nairobi, not Mombasa.

    Fifth, the number 47O44 -- 47 is Obama's age when he became president, followed by the letter O (not a zero) followed by 44 -- he is the 44th president.

    Sixth, EF Lavender is a laundry detergent.

    Seventh, would a nation with a large number of Muslims actually say "Christian name" (as opposed to name) on the birth certificate?

    Eighth, his father (born in 1961) would have been 24 or 25 when he was born and not 26.

    Ninth, it was called the "Central Nyanza District," not Nyanza Province. The regions were changed to provinces in 1970
    .

    ReplyDelete
  42. Looks like you're not the only credulous dupe, Dan. Apparently other uncritical asses are devouring this video, too.

    Too bad this guy -- especially his commenters (self excluded, though present) -- shows how stupid your "reasoning" is.

    Anytime, then, you wish to retract your specious allegations toward Obama -- specifically with respect to the amusing fiction in the video -- I'll be happy to accept your apology.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  43. Tenth, the date the document was "entered," August 9th, 1961, is the date on which James Benton Parsons became the first black to receive a lifetime appointment as a U.S. District Court judge.

    Eleventh, the date on which the document was signed/sealed, February 17th, 1964, is the date on which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the "one man, one vote" rule, in Wesberry v. Sanders.

    I told you, Dan, that you'd get Poe'd, and here it wasn't even me that caught you.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  44. This whole Obama birth certificate thing is just weird and delusional. When you're delusional, you think you're right, though, and there's no convincing you otherwise.

    So I'm not going to bother. Right wingers are crazy, and this latest bit with Obama's birth certificate is just reminding everyone of that point.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Glen20,

    Thanks for all of that homework on the subject.

    I do trust the competency for our system to detect forgeries and frauds and our courts are fully capable of handling something like this. Again, if it has teeth it will bite him (Obama) and it will go down in history as one great story.

    If not then we have a nation given over to socialism by this joker.

    You must all understand that I do not trust anything man claims at all ever. I enjoy the banter back and forth and the discussions but I trust the Lord and when Jesus tells me the man was born in Kenya, or Hawaii, or even is the Antichrist then I will know fully, the truth.

    Until then...

    ReplyDelete
  46. Stan- I should have known that Mark Chu-Carroll, aka the Good Math, Bad Math guy, would do a proper fisking of this silliness.

    Dan- please read it. And the comments too, if you dare.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Stan, the Half-Truth Teller said...
    This video sure give [sic] evidence [that Obama may be the Antichrist], no matter how slight.

    No. It. Does. Not."

    Man, I can't quit laughing LOL!

    This is cognitive dissonace atit's finest.
    Dan doesn't even make a pretext of being objective.
    He could see dogshit on the lawn and write a thousand word essay on how it represents that Obama is the anti-christ.

    It actually creeps me out that this loon is bringing up five children to this lunacy.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Zilch,

    Did you watch the other video he had about this subject?

    ReplyDelete
  49. I just did, Dan. Did you? Simmons quoted a rabbi as corroborating him, but that's not the case- like many other people, the rabbi pointed out that the Hebrew for "lightning from the heights" would be "Barak U Vamah", not "Barack O Bamah", which is what Simmons claimed. Simmons has the effrontery to say that that's what he said in both films, which is simply a lie. Watch them again if you don't believe me.

    In any case, the most succinct answer to this is Mark Chu-Carroll's: the problem is that this finding of messages is done simply backwards, by starting with a desired word or phrase (say, the name of a black President who is hated by conservatives) and looking for something that sounds vaguely like it (say, "Barak U Vamah") somewhere in the Bible. Doesn't this rather go against what you are always telling us is the way to understand Scripture, with "plain reading"?

    One more minor point which I believe no one has made so far: the fact that the current President's name is from a Semitic language, Arabic, makes it that much easier to find words that sound like it in another Semitic language.

    Dan: okay, now it's your turn. Did you read Mark Chu-Carroll's post that Stan linked to?

    ReplyDelete
  50. [T]he problem is that this finding of messages is done simply backwards, by starting with a desired word or phrase (say, the name of a black President who is hated by conservatives) and looking for something that sounds vaguely like it (say, "Barak U Vamah") somewhere in the Bible. 

    No, Zilch, it's worse. I'm sure you recognize already what I'm about to say, but Dan clearly does not. Not only did this douchebag start with the result he wished to find, and seek something that sounds vaguely like it somewhere in the bible, but he failed to do so.

    The phrase he sought does not appear in the bible. Anywhere. Not dismayed, however, he took the phrase with which he had started ("Baraq Uvama," roughly), and searched for a rough English equivalent.

    When he experienced a minor success in Luke 10, however, it was tempered by the fact that his phrase was Hebrew, yet Luke was written in Greek, so he lied.

    He lied by saying that Aramaic was virtually identical to Hebrew, when he must've known it was not.

    He lied by saying that the misspoken Hebrew phrase "Baraq Uvama" is how a Hebrew might say 'lightning from the heavens,' since that is not how the Hebrew word he insists upon using would be translated.

    He lied when he referenced Isaiah as speaking repeatedly of Lucifer 'falling from the heights,' when that appears exactly once in the whole book.

    He lied when he referenced the particular passage in Isaiah as supporting his translation for 'heavens' or 'heights,' when a scant two verses earlier a virtual clone of the [translated into English] phrase is found -- which may even be the intended reference in Luke -- yet the "Bama" word is not used.

    He lied when he stated that the verse he cited discussed Lucifer's fall at all, since that particular verse rather speaks of Lucifer ascending, above the clouds.

    He lied when he intentionally omitted the word used in Luke for "falling," which does appear in Isaiah 14:12 -- so clearly a Hebrew speaker would have used a term to depict "falling" as appears in Luke's Greek.

    Lastly, Dan has lied by omission, for refusing to admit that this bullshit fabrication is exactly that, even to the point of claiming that it "sure give evidence [that Obama may be the Antichrist], no matter how slight," after all of the factual errors have been exposed.

    Dan, you are guilty not only by association, but by your actions. Admit your guilt.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  51. Zilch,

    Yes I read it but like I said before the video addressed the first video not the revised one so many of the complaints were addressed.

    Doesn't this rather go against what you are always telling us is the way to understand Scripture, with "plain reading"? 

    Yes, possibly. Sometimes we go too far in reading into what was being said. In this case I thought it was funny and posted it because it fit my presuppositions about Obama.

    Did Jesus really mean Obama?

    Meh, I doubt it.

    Would I be surprised if He did?

    Nope.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Stan,

    Not only did this douchebag start with the result he wished to find, and seek something that sounds vaguely like it somewhere in the bible, but he failed to do so.  

    Yea, much like evolutionists do. Moving on.

    ReplyDelete
  53. "Yea, much like evolutionists do."

    Sorry Dan, you should know by now thats not how science works. The difference between you and others here who have said this about the person who made the video, is that they have produced a lot of evidence that backs their claim. You Dan, are just doing more hand waving once again.

    Dan, You still haven't answered my question, "Dan, let me make sure I understand you correctly, you are hopeful that Obama is the Anti-Christ, and cheering for the 'End of Days' to begin?!"

    I look forward to your response.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  54. Chimp,

    To make things clear, yes I hope the end days are upon us and I will indeed cheer. I believe they are here. Plus, I could care less if Obama is the antichrist, as long as someone is...soon. Remember tribulation is not wrath so we will be here for the tribulation and the revelation of the Antichrist but we will be raptured before the wrath of God falls upon the earth. You still have time, but not too much.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Dan- how much time do we have? Until the end of this year? Care to make a friendly wager?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Oh, and a P.S. to Glen20: I just checked out that "Kenyan Birth Certificate", and it's a gas. What will those madcap conservatives come up with next? It would be even funnier if stuff like this didn't sucker millions of people who are unaccountably allowed to vote, and do so against their best interests...

    ReplyDelete
  57. Hey Dan, you can stop using WND now, since even the boobs at RaptureReady disavow it... I mean, if that group of fruitcakes says something is disreputable...

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  58. Fine Stan, I will just stick with Earned Media. If same story is covered then fair game. Agreed then.

    ReplyDelete
  59. If you don't have heart trouble I urge you to Google "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty" and "Famous Rapture Watchers - Addendum." They can do a number on a person!

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>