The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The uneducated fukwit thinks this is a documentary.... So we've established that the phrase "Israel in Egypt" was acceptable 250+ years ago. Where, exactly, do you take issue with me? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 His side win 8-1 to go 6 points clear at the top of the table, with a goal difference of +27 more than the second placed team, and he's on here getting wound up about biblical analogies! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) So at what point in history can one use the term 'Israel' to describe that nation? I'll go for 1948 , when Israel became a nation. OK so not the 1700s when Handel wrote his oratorio? Not post 1611 when the King James bible was produced in English? Edited January 19, 2016 by The_Kincardine 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 OK so not the 1700s when Handel wrote his oratorio? Not post 1611 when the King James bible was translated in to English? The King James bible was never translated into English. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Is the theory that people in power can act towards shared agendas really that original for you? I gave you a let-out by suggesting it was simply inertia. Another poster, rightly, described it as laziness. You started to say it wasn't a conspiracy then tried to soften it by saying the parties worked in concert. Neither are true. The Football authorities, the press and the police do not collaborate in any way shape or form here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) The King James bible was never translated into English. That's a level of nitpicking that is even beneath me but I will amend my post accordingly. Edited January 19, 2016 by The_Kincardine 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The King James bible was never translated into English. "This is the word of God!" "Whit's this? King James' Version? Where's King Billy's Version?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) So we've established that the phrase "Israel in Egypt" was acceptable 250+ years ago. Where, exactly, do you take issue with me?No one questioned that.We're just laughing at your "Israel in Egypyt" being used to describe "captive tribes" Edited January 19, 2016 by THE KING 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The King James bible was never translated into English. Here's the start of the preface (to the King James version) - Epistle and Dedicatorie To the most high and mightie Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith , &c. The translators of The Bible,wish Grace, Mercie, and Peace, through Jesus Christ our Lord 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 We're just laughing at your "Israel in Egypyt" being used to describe "captive tribes" Spelling aside, 'Israel' certainly existed before 1948 and was a common term. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Here's the start of the preface (to the King James version) - Epistle and Dedicatorie To the most high and mightie Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith , &c. The translators of The Bible,wish Grace, Mercie, and Peace, through Jesus Christ our Lord I think Strychnine was right - The KJV was never translated in to English as it was an English translation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 As I've said, we don't have a conspiracy in the true sense of the word. When people with shared interests act at the same time, sometimes by overlapping however, we can get effects that are not unlike those achieved by a more organised, single movement. I really don't know what you're getting at. It's not a conspiracy then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The_Kincarcrash makes as much sense as someone saying Jesus was black because Madonna sung like a prayer.. Handle, Cecil B Deville...ffs! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Second Andy Goram Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Hullo Hullo We are the Billy Boyzzzz Hullo Hullo You'll know us by our noise We're up to our knees in EBT's but we didnae die 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The_Kincarcrash makes as much sense as someone saying Jesus was black because Madonna sung like a prayer.. Handle, Cecil B Deville...ffs! Better to stick to your line that we can't refer to Israel before 1948. Makes so much more sense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Spelling aside, 'Israel' certainly existed before 1948 and was a common term.No doubt it did , like many others, but the first time it was internationally recognised was 1948.But remind us what this has to do with your imaginary tribes called Israel in the time Moses who were captive? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Better to stick to your line that we can't refer to Israel before 1948. Makes so much more sense. Or less nonsensical than most of his other statements. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 No doubt it did , like many others, but the first time it was internationally recognised was 1948. 'Israel' was a well-recognised term centuries before 1948. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I gave you a let-out by suggesting it was simply inertia. Another poster, rightly, described it as laziness. You started to say it wasn't a conspiracy then tried to soften it by saying the parties worked in concert. Neither are true. The Football authorities, the press and the police do not collaborate in any way shape or form here. From the very outset, I only described it as a "sort of conspiracy". At times, the OF and the press have certainly worked in concert. That's what the whole 'succulent lamb' thing is such a clear example of. To that end, there has certainly been a degree of collaboration. Do you wish to deny my assertion that when bodies pursue shared ideas, it can have a similar impact to that of a conspiracy? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 'Israel' was a well-recognised term centuries before 1948.Yer jokin! Was it!wow!Again remind us of those tribes called "Israel in Egypyt " Ps who weren't Israelites. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.