The birthplace of Jesus “Bethlehem” mean “house of bread”.
Ancient commentators on that interpret it as a prefiguring of the Eucharist.
Jesus came to earth in the “house of bread”, and comes to us in the form of Living Bread every time we receive Him under the forms of unleavened bread and wine in that blessed sacrament.
(From the Our Sunday Visitor)
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred

Thanks that is interesting.

N0help4u,
You're welcome.
Merry Holy Christmas.
Fred

Thanks for sharing that with us arcura . I had no idea it meant that

Merry christmas

The birthplace of Jesus “Bethlehem” mean “house of bread”.
Ancient commentators on that interpret it as a prefiguring of the Eucharist.
Jesus came to earth in the “house of bread”, and comes to us in the form of Living Bread every time we receive Him under the forms of unleavened bread and wine in that blessed sacrament.
(From the Our Sunday Visitor)
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred


I didn’t know that, Interesting isn’t it? So, we have “the Bread of Life” who comes from the House of Bread. It seems that the Hebrews had a prophetic knack for naming things appropriately.

Good job,

JoeT

ironsheik7 and JoeT.
Glad to be of service.
Have a Merry and Holy Christ'smass
Fred

More about the word "lehem":

------------------------------------------------------
What can you say about a culture that uses the same root — Hebrew (lamed, het, mem) — for both bread Hebrew (lehem, accent on the first syllable) and war, Hebrew(milhama)? Do Hebrew (lehem) and Hebrew (milhama) really come from the same root? It's a good question, and to answer it one must invoke a third use of the root. It seems that Hebrew (laham) means not only "he did battle" and "he ate bread" but also "he joined together."

Using this third meaning, Ludwig Koehler, in his 1953 Dictionary of the Hebrew Old Testament, opines that our root originally had the connotation of "to be closely packed together" and that that meaning is the common denominator. In war, says Koehler, soldiers often engage in hand-to-hand combat in close quarters. Voilà for war, Hebrew (milhama). Bread, he adds, suggesting perhaps that it is considered highly nutritious, is "compact food." Voilà for bread, Hebrew(lehem).
(Source: JHOM - Bread - Hebrew (http://www.jhom.com/topics/bread/hebrew.html))
----------------------------------------------------------

Interesting.
Fred

More about the word "lehem":

------------------------------------------------------
What can you say about a culture that uses the same root — Hebrew (lamed, het, mem) — for both bread Hebrew (lehem, accent on the first syllable) and war, Hebrew(milhama)? Do Hebrew (lehem) and Hebrew (milhama) really come from the same root? It's a good question, and to answer it one must invoke a third use of the root. It seems that Hebrew (laham) means not only "he did battle" and "he ate bread" but also "he joined together."

Using this third meaning, Ludwig Koehler, in his 1953 Dictionary of the Hebrew Old Testament, opines that our root originally had the connotation of "to be closely packed together" and that that meaning is the common denominator. In war, says Koehler, soldiers often engage in hand-to-hand combat in close quarters. Voilà for war, Hebrew (milhama). Bread, he adds, suggesting perhaps that it is considered highly nutritious, is "compact food." Voilà for bread, Hebrew(lehem).

(Source: JHOM - Bread - Hebrew (http://www.jhom.com/topics/bread/hebrew.html))
----------------------------------------------------------


WetBlanket:

Quoted from the same referenced web page is the following part of a discussion regarding the Book of Ruth:

"Elimelech's family left Bethlehem because of a famine,[3] and arrived in the fields of Moab.[4] One cannot but sense the irony in this passage. They leave Bethlehem (beit lehem in Hebrew means literally "house of bread") during a famine, hinting to the reader that they had made a tragic mistake — leaving a literal "house of bread" during times of famine to go to the fields of Moab. A house denotes a warm environment, as opposed to a field that lies open and unprotected. In biblical writings, the empty field is an image that often precedes tragedy."


Source: Jewish Heritage Online Magazine (http://www.jhom.com/calendar/sivan/symbolism.htm)

Now who would know how to speak in Hebrew better than a Jew; - unless maybe we forgot about Tj3!

JoeT

JoeT777
LOL

WetBlanket:

Quoted from the same referenced web page is the following part of a discussion regarding the Book of Ruth:

"Elimelech's family left Bethlehem because of a famine,[3] and arrived in the fields of Moab.[4] One cannot but sense the irony in this passage. They leave Bethlehem (beit lehem in Hebrew means literally "house of bread") during a famine, hinting to the reader that they had made a tragic mistake — leaving a literal "house of bread" during times of famine to go to the fields of Moab. A house denotes a warm environment, as opposed to a field that lies open and unprotected. In biblical writings, the empty field is an image that often precedes tragedy."


Source: Jewish Heritage Online Magazine (http://www.jhom.com/calendar/sivan/symbolism.htm)

Now who would know how to speak in Hebrew better than a Jew; - unless maybe we forgot about Tj3!

JoeT

Joe what is your problem? Do you think that only you can choose who can post and who cannot? You think that it is okay for your to quote this source, but I cannot? Do you consider the day lost if you don't post abuse against me?

Grow up.

Do you consider the day lost if you...

Putting aside all my complaints TJ, Merry Christmas.

And Merry Christmas to all!


JoeT

Putting aside all my complaints TJ, Merry Christmas.

And Merry Christmas to all!


Merry Christmas, Joe.

I hope that after you've had a good rest at Christmas, maybe we can have more amiable discussions.

The birthplace of Jesus “Bethlehem” mean “house of bread”.
Ancient commentators on that interpret it as a prefiguring of the Eucharist.
Jesus came to earth in the “house of bread”, and comes to us in the form of Living Bread every time we receive Him under the forms of unleavened bread and wine in that blessed sacrament.
(From the Our Sunday Visitor)
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred

It is wonderful and it is no coincidence. And the Holy Infant was placed in a "manger" a feeding trough where grains, the component of bread are placed. What does the word "manger" mean in the original language:

Manger Look up manger at Dictionary.com
c.1315, from O.Fr. Mangeure (Fr. Mangeoire), from mangier "to eat" (see mange) + -oire, common suffix for implements and receptacles.
Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=manger)

Thanks Fred, another excellent question!

Merry Christmas, Joe.

I hope that after you've had a good rest at Christmas, maybe we can have more amiable discussions.
Our discussions have always been friendly on this end; a bit lively and pointed at times, but always friendly.

JoeT

Our discussions have always been friendly on this end; a bit lively and pointed at times, but always friendly.

JoeT

Your input to me has been abusive much of the time. I am hoping that will change.

De Maria.
Thanks for that bit about the manger
Peace and kindness,
Fred

JoeT.
I agree.
You have always been friendly.
Sometimes with a bit of humor.
Fred

Tj3,
Have you ever stopped to wonder why it is that you are the only one here who complains that others are attacking you?
When someone tells a truth and prove you wrong that you don't like you complain about abuse. The only one who does that also.
With all due respect manybe you should consider some behavior counseling.
May you get and receive Peace and Kindness always,
Fred

Tj3,
Have you ever stopped to wonder why it is that you are the only one here who complains that others are attacking you?

Fred, no it is not just me. But there are a few folk who seems to have problems with those who disagree. The same few folk who had the same problem on other boards. The rest of us prefer to engage in respectful discussions.



When someone tells a truth and prove you wrong that you don't like you complain about abuse.

So name-calling, false accusations and other forms of abuse are, to you, simply "truths" and acceptable in civilized discussion? Does your "faith" teach that? Is this included in the "works" that you feel are necessary for salvation?

Tj3,
As I recall recently on a thread that was shut down because of it you were the one who was accusing others of lying.
I stand by what I said for I do not recall anyone but you accusing others of attacking or abusing them.
If you know of some who did please inform me of the post number and the thread where that did that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Tj3,
As I recall recently on a thread that was shut down because of it you were the one who was accusing others of lying.

You mean where your friend Joe was claiming that I wrote articles on a website that he claimed that I owned, that I have nothing to do with? And continued to do so even after the proof to the contrary was provided? And when the proof was provided, he ignored it and refused to even acknowledge that he made a mistake, but rather repeated the same false accusations?

That is lying and are you saying that that is acceptable? By anyone? By those who profess to be Christians?

Is that consistent with your "faith"? Why do you defend such behaviour?


If you know of some who did please inform me of the post number and the thread where that did that.

Fred,

Unlike you, I don't go gathering information like that. I would rather focus on respectful discussions. It seems to be you and your small group that likes to turn threads into attacks against individuals (like this one).


Peace and kindness,

"Peace and kindness" should be more than words that you add to the bottom of a message.

Tj3,
I don't go gathering information like that either so that was a false accusation on your part.
And Joe was just making a mistake as I have done with your promotion of the discern site.
I always assumed that you were the author because you promote it so much.
I did not ever hit the home button for fear that it would just produce more distortions and bigotry about Catholicism and other faiths.
That is my explanation.
Now let's get back to the subject of this thread.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

You mean where your friend Joe was claiming that I wrote articles on a website that he claimed that I owned, that I have nothing to do with? And continued to do so even after the proof to the contrary was provided? And when the proof was provided, he ignored it and refused to even acknowledge that he made a mistake, but rather repeated the same false accusations?

That is lying and are you saying that that is acceptable? By anyone? By those who profess to be Christians?

Is that consistent with your "faith"? Why do you defend such behaviour?



Fred,

Unlike you, I don't go gathering information like that. I would rather focus on respectful discussions. It seems to be you and your small group that likes to turn threads into attacks against individuals (like this one).



"Peace and kindness" should be more than words that you add to the bottom of a message.

Yeah, all seriousness aside, the CIA sent me a report that indicated the site was keeping Weapons against Catholic for Mass agents of Distortions WaC for MaD. So, I sent in the Marines as a preemptive counterattack. And in this case, the CIA was right-this time! In all seriousness, you should be ashamed of that stuff - half of it is very distorted; the other half is plain simple wrong.

Semper Fi

JoeT

JoeT777,
The leather neck Will have their day.
They always do.
That from a former Army SFC: me.
Fred

In all seriousness, you should be ashamed of that stuff - half of it is very distorted.

Are you making more false accusations, Joe?

Are you still falsely trying to suggest that is my website of that I wrote the articles? Joe, you should be ashamed of yourself. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of truth, not of lies.

Are you making more false accusations, Joe?

Old Chinese proverb: Read post first – the joke may be on you --"all seriousness aside" - Life is way too hard to leave our sense of humor at home.

JoeT

Are you making more false accusations, Joe?

Are you still falsely trying to suggest that is my website of that I wrote the articles? Joe, you should be ashamed of yourself. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of truth, not of lies.

Well Ok, lets trot it out and we'll discuss it.

Tj3,
And Joe was just making a mistake as I have done with your promotion of the discern site.

If he was, you would not have kept repeating the accusation over and over after the evidence was presented. That was deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. And he is suggesting that same false accusations again in this thread.

And you defend this type of behaviour?



I always assumed that you were the author because you promote it so much.

I promote what site so much? Are you into false accusations also, Fred?


Now let's get back to the subject of this thread.

Yes, why don't you?

Well Ok, lets trot it out and we'll discuss it.

Trot what out? You were shown the facts and you chose to continue to mis-represent the truth. What I would expect of a man of integrity who had made such mis-representations would be shame and an apology. Not a repeat of the same lies.

Old Chinese proverb: Read post first – the joke may be on you --"all seriousness aside" - Life is way too hard to leave our sense of humor at home.

JoeT

Joe, I responded to the part where you said "In all seriousness". Are you trying to avoid responsibility for your actions? I would not expect men of integrity to make light of false accusations.

Tj3,
No false accusations from me, just the thruth.
LOOK AT YOUR LAST POST HERE AND ALL HERE AND ON OTHER BOARDS.
Every one of then PROMOTES the discern site.
The evidence is clear that what I said IS true.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
NOW back to the subject.

Tj3,
No false accusations from me, just the thruth.
LOOK AT YOUR LAST POST HERE AND ALL HERE AND ON OTHER BOARDS.
Every one of then PROMOTES the discern site.

The discern site is mine. The site that Joe was referring to is not.

Apparently you don't even know what you are defending. Perhaps before you start defending falsehoods, you ought to get your facts straight. I trust that now that you know that, that you will perhaps choose to stop defending Joe's false accusations and get back on topic.

BTW, Fred, it was not me who took this off topic. Go back and have a look. You can start posting on topic any time you please!

The birthplace of Jesus “Bethlehem” mean “house of bread”.
Ancient commentators on that interpret it as a prefiguring of the Eucharist.
Jesus came to earth in the “house of bread”, and comes to us in the form of Living Bread every time we receive Him under the forms of unleavened bread and wine in that blessed sacrament.
(From the Our Sunday Visitor)
Peace and kindness,
Fred

More about the word "lehem":

------------------------------------------------------
What can you say about a culture that uses the same root — Hebrew (lamed, het, mem) — for both bread Hebrew (lehem, accent on the first syllable) and war, Hebrew(milhama)? Do Hebrew (lehem) and Hebrew (milhama) really come from the same root? It's a good question, and to answer it one must invoke a third use of the root. It seems that Hebrew (laham) means not only "he did battle" and "he ate bread" but also "he joined together."

Using this third meaning, Ludwig Koehler, in his 1953 Dictionary of the Hebrew Old Testament, opines that our root originally had the connotation of "to be closely packed together" and that that meaning is the common denominator. In war, says Koehler, soldiers often engage in hand-to-hand combat in close quarters. Voilà for war, Hebrew (milhama). Bread, he adds, suggesting perhaps that it is considered highly nutritious, is "compact food." Voilà for bread, Hebrew(lehem).
(Source: JHOM - Bread - Hebrew)
----------------------------------------------------------

Trot what out? You were shown the facts and you chose to continue to mis-represent the truth. What I would expect of a man of integrity who had made such mis-representations would be shame and an apology. Not a repeat of the same lies.

If I've misrepresented the links under your acknowledgements you shouldn't have any problem bringing some of them forward. I'm willing to discuss them rationally. I grantee, I'll only address the issues that are wrong, without false accusations. Surly, you don't have any problem with that?

JoeT

If I've misrepresented the links under your acknowledgements you shouldn't have any problem bringing some of them forward. I'm willing to discuss them rationally. I grantee, I'll only address the issues that are wrong, without false accusations. Surly, you don't have any problem with that?


Joe,

What you mis-represented was a completely different website and was NOT one of those linked in my signature line. The website that you referred to was one which you falsely claimed to be mine and which you falsely claimed contained articles written by me. That website itself has more than adequate evidence to prove otherwise.

The evidence was presented to you, numerous times on that thread, so no more evidence need be provided. A man of integrity would know how to respond. Your choices are:

1) Continue to make the false accusations and mis-representations despite your knowing the truth.
2) Choose to apologize for the false accusations.
3) Or chose to move on without doing either.

Your choice will tell us something about your character. In any case, it seems to me that hijacking threads for continuing attacks against me is inappropriate.

On any case, it seems to me that once again, you and Fred have chosen to take a thread off topic for the sake of personal abuse. Didn't you say that works were necessary for salvation? Is abuse one of the works that you are hoping to help save you?

Joe,

What you mis-represented was a completely different website and was NOT one of those linked in my signature line. The website that you referred to was one which you claimed to be mine and which you claimed contained articles written by me. That website itself has more than adequate evidence to prove otherwise.

The evidence was presented to you, numerous times on that thread, so no more evidence need be provided. A man of integrity would know how to respond. Your choices are:

1) Continue to make the false accusations and mis-representations despite your knowing the truth.
2) Choose to apologize for the false accusations.
3) Or chose to move on without doing either.

Your choice will tell us something about your character. In any case, it seems to me that hijacking threads for continuing attacks against me is inappropriate.

On any case, it seems to me that once again, you and Fred have chosen to take a thread off topic for the sake of personal abuse. Didn't you say that works were necessary for salvation? Is abuse one of the works that you are hoping to help save you?


Well certainly we can clear this entire mess up by bringing forward on another thread some of the material allowing us to discuss them. Surly, there’s no harm in that - right?

Merry Christmas


JoeT

Well certainly we can clear this entire mess up by bringing forward on another thread some of the material allowing us to discuss them. Surly, there's no harm in that - right?


You mean that you are suggesting a thread to post more abusive false accusations that you already know to be lies, and were already proven to be so?

And you think somehow that is the right thing to do?

You mean that you are suggesting a thread to post more abusive false accusations that you already know to be lies?

And you think somehow that is the right thing to do?

Goodnight Tj, I'm sorry if you got upset. No, big deal here.

Merry Christmas

JoeT

Goodnight Tj, I'm sorry if you got upset. No, big deal here.


I note that you failed to apologize for the lies and abuse.

If I hijacked threads to post lies and false accusations against you night after night, ignoring the facts, ignoring the evidence I am sure that would annoy you also. It is especially interesting from a person who claims to be brother in Christ.

But you have told us something about your integrity.

Now, if, as it appears, Joe is signing off for the night, here is an attempt to get the thread back on topic:

More about the word "lehem":

------------------------------------------------------
What can you say about a culture that uses the same root — Hebrew (lamed, het, mem) — for both bread Hebrew (lehem, accent on the first syllable) and war, Hebrew(milhama)? Do Hebrew (lehem) and Hebrew (milhama) really come from the same root? It's a good question, and to answer it one must invoke a third use of the root. It seems that Hebrew (laham) means not only "he did battle" and "he ate bread" but also "he joined together."

Using this third meaning, Ludwig Koehler, in his 1953 Dictionary of the Hebrew Old Testament, opines that our root originally had the connotation of "to be closely packed together" and that that meaning is the common denominator. In war, says Koehler, soldiers often engage in hand-to-hand combat in close quarters. Voilà for war, Hebrew (milhama). Bread, he adds, suggesting perhaps that it is considered highly nutritious, is "compact food." Voilà for bread, Hebrew(lehem).
(Source: JHOM - Bread - Hebrew)
----------------------------------------------------------

>Thread Closed<
I'm sure you can all work out why.