can anyone describe  the Deuteronomic  circle in full?
366969
The Deuteronomic Code is the name given, by academics, to the law code within Deuteronomy, except for the portion discussing the Ethical Decalogue, which is usually treated separately. This separate treatment stems not from any concern over authorship, but merely because the Ethical Decalogue is, academically, a subject in its own right. Almost the entirity of Deuteronomy is presented as the last few speeches of Moses, beginning with an historical introduction as well as a second introduction which expands on the Ethical Decalogue, and ending with horatory speeches and final words of encouragement. Between these is found the law code, at Deuteronomy 12-26. In critical scholarship, this portion, as well as the majority of the remainder of Deuteronomy, was written by the Deuteronomist.
741739
I know I am certainly looking forward to the time when this is fulfilled 100% earthwide.\n\nOf course I am enjoying this condition now in the Spiritual paradise God's people enjoy today, just as prophesied to occur IN THE FINAL PART OF THE DAYS mention in the first couple of verses of that chapter.\n\n"And it must occur in the final part of the days that the mountain of the house of Jehovah will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, and it will certainly be lifted up above the hills; and to it peoples must stream. And many nations will certainly go and say: “Come, you people, and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will instruct us about his ways, and we will walk in his paths.” For out of Zion law will go forth, and the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem." - Micah 4:1, 2; Isaiah 2:2, 3.
462603
Writing "G_d" is a practice based on the 3rd commandment ("You shall not take the name of YHWH [probably to be pronounced 'Yahweh,' traditionally ' translated as 'the LORD'] your God in vain.") But why and how did this PARTICULAR way of trying to keep the commandment come about?\n\n(In its original context the command likely had, first of all, to not dishonoring God by such behavior as lightly taking OATHS in his name and not keeping them, by extension to speaking or acting "in his name," whether claiming to speak for him, as his representative, or by claiming to follow him, but living in a way that brings dishonor to\nhim.)\n\nBut one significant expression of attempting to guard and honor the sanctity of the divine name (sometimes called the "tetragrammaton" after its four letters: Y-H-W-H) that we find many expressions of after the Babylonian Exile (6th century BC) is in special treatment of the spoken and written name(s) of God, beginning with "YHWH", and at times extending to other names and titles.\n\nWe see it in how the name was written in the scrolls of the Hebrew Bible, as well as in their early Greek translations. After the Babylonian Exile the Jews adopted the Aramaic letter forms in place of their own earlier forms. But among the Dead Sea Scrolls we find Scriptures written in the Aramaic letters, but with the divine name (which in English may be rendered YHWH) written in the older "paleo-Hebrew" script. Many early Greek translations (some as late as the 4th century AD) have the divine name written either in the Hebrew letters, or using Greek letters that LOOK like the Hebrew word. (If read as Greek one would say "Pipi", but there is no evidence such a pronunciation was ever intended.)\n\nAnother way of honoring the name YHWH that grew up at the same time was to avoid SAYING the name by substituting another Hebrew word (for Greek speakers it might be the Greek equivalent). For example, we find references to "the Name". This was at times extended to other divine names. So, for instance, in place of "God" one might say "heaven". We find some reflections of this in the NT, esp. in the gospel of Matthew, who (writing chiefly to JEWISH Christians) ordinarily speaks of the "kingdom of heaven" where other gospels use "kingdom of God".\n\nThe most important substitute was that of the word for "Lord" in place of the name YHWH. The Hebrew word was "ADONAI", Greek speakers used their equivalent, "KYRIOS". In fact, the NT throughout uses "Lord" (kyrios) when quoting OT passages that use the divine name YHWH. (This is important in connection with the claim of Christians that Jesus is divine -- calling him "Lord" was not just honoring him as "Master" but applying the divine name to him.) This practice has continued to be followed in most Scripture translations from the Hebrew, including the use of "the LORD" in most English translations. (Usually small caps are used to indicate that the original used "YHWH" not "Adonay".)\n\nEvidence for the Jewish practice is found in the customs of the Masoretes -- Hebrew scribes who carefully preserved the Hebrew text of Scripture, and added a system of markings, including accents and vowel-markings, to preserve the traditional understanding of the text. In the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible the name YHWH is marked with an unusual set of vowels, which if we tried to pronounce them would yield "Yehowah' [in later English, Jehovah"]. But that is not what they intended. Rather they marked the word with the vowels from "Adonay" to indicate that THIS was the word to be spoken when you came to the divine name.\n\nThe form "G_d" imitates this scribal practice of leaving out the original vowel sounds (to indicate what one is NOT s
583270
Ancient Hebrew teachings said that the Bible (specificially the Torah, first five books of the Old Testament) could be understood on four levels.  These four levels are known by the acronym PaRDeS.  Pardes means "Garden" as in The Garden of Eden.  The four levels are:\n\nPashat - The first level of understanding is PASHAT (simple).  The Pashat is the literal meaning.\n\nRemez - The next level of understanding is called in Hebrew REMEZ (hint). This is the implied meaning of the text. Peculiarities in the text are regarded as hinting at a deeper truth than that conveyed by its PASHAT. \n\nDrash - Another level of understanding the Scriptures is called in Hebrew "drash" meaning "search", this is the allegorical, typological or homiletical application of the text. Creativity is used to search the text in relation to the rest of the Scriptures, other literature, or life itself in order to develop an allegorical, typological or homiletical application of the text. This process involves eisogesis (reading of the text) of the text.\n\nSod - The final level of understanding the Scriptures is called in Hebrew "SOD" meaning "hidden". This understanding is the hidden, secret or mystic meaning of a text. This process often involves returning the letters of a word to their prime-material state and giving them new form in order to reveal a hidden meaning.  One cannot learn this without a teacher and the texts of Kabbalah.\n\nSo to answer your question... studying Kabbalah reveals the DEEPER levels of the Bible (The Sod).  You will have a FULLER UNDERSTANDING of the Bible.  It's not so much about the "true meaning" but you will have a more complete understanding.  In knowing the Torah in a more complete way, we "recreate PaRDes - the Garden of Eden."  It assists us in reentering Paradise.
47675
Yes and no.  The Torah sometimes refers to the five books known as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. It is also used to refer to the entire body of Jewish religious writings. \n\nSee the website below for more details.
500018
I find it very helpful, plenty of notes, references, defintions - it taught me a lot. \n\nIt does rabbit trail some. If there is something you disagree on in the side notes, just put the idea on the shelf and go on. There is an abundance of information in those annotations. \n\nI recently found out he put together the "Zondervan Expanded Concordance" that I want to buy and check out. \nI think it was from the 70's.\n\nAlso check out http://www.dakebible.com \nit has other books and such, and also a new biography about him is out now.
1027408
Biblical times, G-d, Israel
971717
hold on... i've seen places where you can read some midrashim online... gotta find it though\n\nhere:\nhttp://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/tmm/index.htm\n\napparently adam and chava looked 20 when they were created :)
268897
"Exodus 33: 'evil tidings' from LORD? Moses talked face to face with LORD, but only saw 'back' parts of LORD?"\n\nAre you trying to reconcile Exodus 33 with the Kabbalistic concept of Qlippoth?\n\nWhile its quite normal in most mythological systems for deities to tell humans that they won't survive gazing upon the deity's awesome visage, Qlippoth does make an interesting question here.  Perhaps the suggestion would be that while we try to look YHVH in the face, we are unable to really conceive of it and can only glimpse the "back", the Qlippoth, ie the stuff we don't like so much.  Interesting how akin it is to the way children think of their parents when they're young. Maybe someday humans will mature and be able to see YHVH in a more wholistic fashion.\n\n"Could there be two LORDS to consider, sort out, if there's also mention of the LORD of 'LORDS'?"\n\nIn the translation I'm looking at right now, I don't see the phrase "Lord of Lords" used in Ex 33.  However, when it does come up its referring to one or both of two things: The supremacy of YHVH in the pre-Abrahamic Judaic pantheon (before Abraham made his covenant with YHVH, the Jews were polytheistic and YHVH was one deity among many), and/or the supremacy of YHVH as a heavenly Lord to earthly Lords.\n\n"Which 'things' are an 'allegory' and 'mystery'."\n\nThere's no allegory in this chapter.  And, for me at least, the Bible in its entirety can be understood as a Mystery if one chooses to see it that way.\n\n"Why did story of Noah's Ark mention God and LORD, who notably gave Noah contradicting commandments?"\n\nThe commands aren't really contradictory: They don't "undo" each other.  So its not like there are two entities here giving opposite commands to Noah and using him as a pawn in some secret hidden war.  God doesn't say "save the animals" only to have Lord come back and say "don't save the animals."  There's just a confusion over number, which I consider being a result of bad editing - something that's bound to happen when a text is scribed, re-scribed, redacted, translated, etc. ad nauseum over the course of roughly 6000 years.
251916
there u go: http://kodesh.snunit.k12.il/i/t/t3301.htm\nthis link is chapter 1 but you have links to all 10 chapters at the top of the page...\n\nHappy Purim! :)
624296
YES!!! "Biblical Mathematics"!!! \nAWESOME AND STAYS AWAY FROM NUMEROLOGY!!\n\nI had it but gave it to a minister who teaches College Physics. He was ecstatic! \n\nMine also came with a cassette so you could listen to it as well! \n\nHow awesome! God just brought that book to my mind today, making me feel as though I should get another one and read it again...and now you ask this? Hmmmmm
966408
It's more poetic junk in the Bible that you can really interpret to whatever you want it to be.  This bit seems to be more threats of hellfire for those outside the group.  Religion likes to use the carrot and stick approach to gaining and keeping converts.  This is one example of a stick.  On the carrot side of it, they'll talk about "God's love" and such (ignoring, of course, such contradictions as this).
1105603
Isaiah 40:22 \nEarth is a circle\nBTW, a circle is FLAT - not a ball or round therefore not a sphere\n\nIsaiah 11:12  and Revelation 7:1 \nThe Earth has four corners\nFYI: Spheres don't have corners\n\nJob 38:13 and Jeremiah 16:19 and Daniel 4:11\nThe ends of the Earth\nFYI: A sphere doesn't end\n\nMatthew 4:8 \nAstronomical bodies are spherical SO it is not possible to see the whole exterior\n\nFor the guy that said the earth is a sphere based on Isiah 40:22, then it contradicts the rest of the biblical passages I've posted.  And, either way there is a falsity somewhere about the Earth's shape.\n\nBut, I guess you still believe the earth is flat.  Or, that a sphere can have edges.
523780
It seems to be quite a fascinating study that apparently has been going on since the time of Isaac Newton[?]... But now, with the advent of computer technology, the use of a software program to decode the original Hebraic texts of the OT seems to shed more light into this theory.\n\nI caught a show on either the History or Discovery channel a few weeks ago and it depicted quite a number of bizarre and eerie revelations! Verrrry interestingg... indeed!
180572
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Dubreil.html
76409
ADDED: Oh you are talking about the Name of Gd? There are quite a few names for Gd in the TaNaCH, there is the unpronounceable y-h-v-h, there is the pronounced 'adonai' which means 'my master' or my lord, as in lords and ladies of England, there are the derivitives of El, (meaning 'power' because Gd is the Ultimate Power) like Elohim, El, Eloah, and the constructs like El Elyon, El shaddai. Shaddai, and El Shaddai are derived from the idea that other religions have to have more than one as their godhead, or as godS, but our Gd is El SHaddai, meaning 'Gd Who Is Enough.'\n\nPlease see http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm for the best, and most accurate, explanation there is on this topic!\n----\nBy 'the Jewish word' do you mean Hebrew or do you mean Yiddish, or do you mean Ladino, or do you mean any of the other languages created by the Jewish People?? As the Jews were kicked out of one Christian country to another, the first thing they did was to learn the local language. However, they wrote it in the language they knew, which was with Hebrew letters. Yiddish is a dialect of German, Ladino is a dialect of Spanish, and on and on. So, i am not sure which language you are referring to by "Jewish" word??\n\nIf you mean Hebrew, it is go-el. i do not know Yiddish or Ladino, so if it is in one of these two languages, i am sorry i cant help.
631687
Here is a site that shows it pretty easily:\n\nhttp://www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/Aleph-Bet/aleph-bet.html\n\nthe numbers above the letters are it.