Political Crossfire Forums

[John]

Quote: look earlier to the reference to Manoach, there it is solitary oneness, and Echad is used.

Seems like an example of numerical oneness to me. *shrug*

[Mailech]

John wrote: Quote: look earlier to the reference to Manoach, there it is solitary oneness, and Echad is used.

Seems like an example of numerical oneness to me. *shrug*

So an only child is a special singular oneness, and a single person named Manoach, is only numerical oneness????? :roll:

[John]

Mailech wrote: John wrote: Quote: look earlier to the reference to Manoach, there it is solitary oneness, and Echad is used.

Seems like an example of numerical oneness to me. *shrug*

So an only child is a special singular oneness, and a single person named Manoach, is only numerical oneness????? :roll:

This is what I got.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/3/1131465686-9742.html

Do you have a reference I can use?

[Mailech]

John wrote: Why did Moses Maimonides use the word "yachid" instead of "echad"? Especially since the use of "yachid" in reference to God can't be found in the scriptures.

Uh John, I may be wrong on this, but I think that this comes from the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah, which he actually wrote in Arabic, so in reality I don't think he wrote Yachid or Echad.

[John]

Mailech wrote: John wrote: Why did Moses Maimonides use the word "yachid" instead of "echad"? Especially since the use of "yachid" in reference to God can't be found in the scriptures.

Uh John, I may be wrong on this, but I think that this comes from the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah, which he actually wrote in Arabic, so in reality I don't think he wrote Yachid or Echad.

You sure about that?

[Duchifas]

John wrote: Mailech wrote: John wrote: Why did Moses Maimonides use the word "yachid" instead of "echad"? Especially since the use of "yachid" in reference to God can't be found in the scriptures.

Uh John, I may be wrong on this, but I think that this comes from the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah, which he actually wrote in Arabic, so in reality I don't think he wrote Yachid or Echad.

You sure about that?

Yes.

Quote: The Commentary on the Mishna, written in Arabic. This text was one of the first commentaries of its kind; its introductory sections are widely-quoted. See Mishnah Commentaries for details;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides

The sentence you pasted (incorrectly and incompletely) is one of the 13 principles of faith found in the commentary on the mishna.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides#The_13_principles_of_faith

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

[Duchifas]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

So why is John bringing sources that were written in Arabic?

[John]

Mailech wrote: John wrote: Why did Moses Maimonides use the word "yachid" instead of "echad"? Especially since the use of "yachid" in reference to God can't be found in the scriptures.

Uh John, I may be wrong on this, but I think that this comes from the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah, which he actually wrote in Arabic, so in reality I don't think he wrote Yachid or Echad.

What does your Hebrew translation say? Yachid...right?

[cap'n queasy]

Duchifas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

So why is John bringing sources that were written in Arabic?

Because the content is just as valid in English, Arabic, or Swahili etc as if it is written in Hebrew.

The concept is the same in any language. Writing it in Hebrew does not magically confer any special significance to a concept.

The fact is the word means collective unity and is used to describe an attribute of God.

[Duchifas]

cap'n queasy wrote: Duchifas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

So why is John bringing sources that were written in Arabic?

Because the content is just as valid in English, Arabic, or Swahili etc as if it is written in Hebrew.

The content in Swahili is valid to one who knows Swahili.

Be honest cap'n, wouldn't you laugh if I was conversing with you some day, and to prove my point started quoting Swahili verses, and explaining to you the intricacies of Swahili? And you know I don't know Swahili. Wouldn't you laugh? Sure you would. You'd be rolling on the floor dying of laughter, while I would be peppering you with Swahili verses and semantical differences between Swahili adjectives.

Yet, that is PRECISELY what is happening here. Without knowing or speaking Hebrew, John is giving lectures on the intricacies of Hebrew to 1) an Israeli Jew who is a native Hebrew speaker, 2) a Jew who has been using Hebrew DAILY since probably the age of 4 or 5 and 3) a Jew who has also been using Hebrew, although to a somewhat lesser extent, since childhood.

I don't know about others, but for me, this has long ago turned into pure comedy.

[Mailech]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

But John, is implying that the Rambam should be using only exact phrases that are found in the Torah, I have so such problem. If the Rambam wished to write in Mandarin, more power to him.

[John]

Duchifas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Duchifas wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: I don't know John, why do you write in English, no English is found in scriptures.

Neither is Arabic.

So why is John bringing sources that were written in Arabic?

Because the content is just as valid in English, Arabic, or Swahili etc as if it is written in Hebrew.

The content in Swahili is valid to one who knows Swahili.

Be honest cap'n, wouldn't you laugh if I was conversing with you some day, and to prove my point started quoting Swahili verses, and explaining to you the intricacies of Swahili? And you know I don't know Swahili. Wouldn't you laugh? Sure you would. You'd be rolling on the floor dying of laughter, while I would be peppering you with Swahili verses and semantical differences between Swahili adjectives.

Yet, that is PRECISELY what is happening here. Without knowing or speaking Hebrew, John is giving lectures on the intricacies of Hebrew to 1) an Israeli Jew who is a native Hebrew speaker, 2) a Jew who has been using Hebrew DAILY since probably the age of 4 or 5 and 3) a Jew who has also been using Hebrew, although to a somewhat lesser extent, since childhood.

I don't know about others, but for me, this has long ago turned into pure comedy.

I must be asking some pretty good questions in order to get that kind of response.

[Duchifas]

John wrote: I must be asking some pretty good questions in order to get that kind of response.

Oh, I am sure you are. But I haven't seen any in this topic. :)

[Duchifas]

double