Exodus 32:14

And the lord repented [changed his mind]- of the

>>> Evil <<< that ""he"" >> thought<<< to DO unto " HIS PEOPLE "

He's only human afterall!!

Quelle Shock!!!

A ... a .... a.... contradictory statement?

He .... CHANGED his mind????


.... or is this a cunning ploy to cause an argument

I think its just evidence that we have a manic-depressive sociopath for a space-daddy.

Me argue??? why you must be mistaken me for someone else Mr. B.

i'm merely asking someone to explain this is all

curious minds want to know.


just a cup of tea and some light religious chat would suffice - beautiful day my friend, how is it there?

Repent means to feel remorse or regret

I don't know how ytou got that God "changed his mind"

Lets assume you are correct and god didnt change his mind.

Why would he feel remorse or regret.

He is god. He never makes mistakes.

He is perfect.

Obviously not if he starts to feel sorry for a screw up!

sorry - i was told that repent meant to change ones mind in the book but that has been sometime ago - it had to do with one repenting of their sins - changing their minds about the sins they commit - if it does not mean that then i stand corrected but even if it is as you state - if one feels remorse or regret would that not mean you changed your mind about how you had felt before? - just asking? anyway belushi brings up a valid point also.

The New American Standard Bible reflects the most accurate translation which is:

So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Its 915am, the sun has risen and has warmed the air to 26 degC.
It will be 40degC by lunchtime.

The blue water and the soft sandy beaches beckon, however, I must go and look for gainful employment.

But from one end of town to the other on a bicycle will take me an hour.

After that .... MOVE OVER BIKINI CLAD BEAUTIES .... Belushi is on the beach!

(no mention of japanese whaling fleets, or rolling me back into the water to keep my skin wet, will be entertained)

Do you honestly think that you will get a resolution to this?

Spider will come in and throw his knowledge about, Abra will refer to pantheism, Wouldee will get his handbag out and dust off his hankie with Abra, JB will get us all beamed to Alpha Centuri and I will make snide comments about how all christians are sheep.

Same old, same old ....

situation normal

sounds like a wonderful plan man, oh you know its just something to ponder about here at 2:20 am in ohio, maybe this will be a surprise and tuen out to be a wonderful discussion of intellects and comradery, wouldn't that be wonderful?

ahhhh!!! i see, it's take the least offensive word that it could mean and apply it so that it makes god look better?? Now i understand exigesis much better.

so we will let - evil,wicked, bad,injury, calamity, wrong, and the rest go - ok if thats what you like. harm still means to hurt something in some way.

there you go - > changed his mind< im not wrong after all it looks like.

It's not about taking the least offensive word. It's about accurate translation. You can choose to either go with the newer, correct translation or you can go with an older, less accurate one. That's your choice.

Still boils down too the same thing - G*O*D wanted to smite his children as a petulant child would smite playmates, or a drunken father would smite over active kids.

Because, even though JHWH worked through Moses to speak for him as JHWH delivered the people from Egypt, (since they cried out to JHWH for such deliverance from Egypt),the people once delivered from that bondage by JHWH then turned to other gods and delclare them gods of the people because they were disgruntled with their transient estate nomadically experienced with no end to it in sight.

Consequently, since Moses was the one with "the witness of JHWH", Moses was advised of the intent as one of remedying the vanity of the deliverance as evidenced in the people's minds; meaning, they were ungrateful after all and would return to their former bondages for the lack of perceived staples necessary for daily living in this delkiverance they were given.

Vanity, because JHWH had been moved to answer the prayer of the people ; and that the people of Isra-el (as the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,)and as well to that also the people of Egypt were become witnesses of JHWH.
(terrible sentence structure, i know.It breaks rules LOL)



And if the witnesses be only the deficited Egyptians for havind suffered loss of their "workforce" for no good to come of the deliverance, then arbitrarily, JHWH has the witness of the Eyptian being spoiled without the witness of Isra-el being the better for it in posterity. As the people of Isra-el had chosen to ignore JHWH's deliverance as a problem for them and not as part of the solution sought of JHWH in prayer, after the fact.

As friendly, Moses and JHWH, the conversation is about the witness besmerching the good will and intentions of JHWH, to the hurt of the Egyptians and not to the benefit of Isra-el. The witness JHWH purposes to give Moses is of consequence to futher rebellion and ingratitude, in justifying and recompensing the hurt suffered by Egypt for JHWH's deliverance of Isra-el from Egypt's hand and provision.

Now, if yo are still with me, and not against where I am going, hear me out further.

Egypt is due more than loss for their insolence if Isra-el repents. Therfore, the LORD, JHWH, repents equal to Isra-el whom he helped, faithfully. meaning, that Isra-el must not prosper at all, for having not further prospered Egypt, now suffering hurt.

This does not preclude JHWH from benefitting Egypt, since Pharoah's prophets acknowledged that they were fighting the "FINGER OF GOD". Exodus 8:19.

In so saying to pharoah, and in Pharoah so capitulating and acceeding to JHWH, he was then also a witness of JHWH, to the good. Potentially.


BUT BUT BUT!!!!!!

Moses is also a witness and his witness of Egypt, remember that Moses WAS Egypt in office,is that Phoroah would call this work of destroying Isra-el a work of MISCHIEF, (Exodus 32:12) not knowing that Isra-el had rebelled to turn to other gods in the wilderness after their deliverance from provisional care under Pharoah and Egypt, by extension, in the hand of JHWH, the FINGER OF GOD.(according to how Egypt preceived JHWH to be by works)

As a side note, Jesus also used this phrase once in Luke 11:20, and nowhere else in scripture is this phrase used, except for Exodus 8:19, and Exo. 31:18(writing the Law)and repeated in Deut.9:10 about the Law.


So you do not have to look in Luke, "But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the Kingdom of God is come upon you" See deliverance here? OK. I am done with my aside.....




That is a mingled witness and JHWH hates mingling and trifling in vanity.

Since Moses held a witness that JHWH was without fault, Moses asked, in intercession for Isra-el, things not known to Isra-el that would be to their further hurt because such a devestation to happen upon Isra-el from JHWH would not be seen as purposed to remove mischief from their hearts. They know nothing of this covnversqtion between Moses and JHWH at this point. You see?

Now then, if you are still open minded and can follow me, then I will go on.

JHWH, the "guiding light " of Isra-el ,( by definition to English), noiw repents, or turns away from his own intentions because the witness of JHWH, Moses, is not concurrent. It is the witness of JHWH that has the grace and mercy and extreme unction with prejudice for good, from JHWH, in all things witnessed of JHWH, directly.




This is repentance of JHWH's is why the LAW was given to the children of Isra-el, not the whole world!!!!!!!!!! Beause of their rebellion and due them for the LORD, JHWH , repenting of justice being served them for their abrogation of the effective witness of God, JHWH. Reciprocation breached. promise delivered but ungratefully received. Integrity afforded and not respected.

Judgement without justice being executed upon a false witness perpetrated in ignorance upon the house of Pharoah.


It is this same impudence that led Isra-el into the captivity to Nebachadnezzar for similar rebellion against JHWH at a much later date after the unified kingdoms of Isra-el and Judah were to be no more when the last King of Judah rebelled against the JHWH, as the witness of JHWH in the House of David, in defiance of the promise to the House of David that there should always be a king in Judah before JHWH, as JHWG haD PROMISED dAVID, SO LONG AS THE KING of Judah served JHWH as a witness of JHWH.


This is all about the witness of JHWH and about that witness beiing of a faithful, honorable, truthful "guiding light" of a people.

It is about righteousness and trust.

It is about that being reciprocal.

and where it has proved not to be reciprocal is in the hearts of the children of Isra-el , though unlike the heart of their father Abraham to whom the promises of JHWH were given in perpetuity. You see?

But to convince any of this, or persuade any of this, one must see this virtue of JHWH's in the chronology of the history of Isra-el and the same history of their "guiding light" which is JHWH, himself, and made flesh and dwelling among his own, Jesus. John 1: 1-14.

The Living Word of God.

This is all about the witness of JHWH and about that witness beiing of a faithful, honorable, truthful "guiding light" of a people.

It is about righteousness and trust.

It is about that being reciprocal.

and where it has proved not to be reciprocal is in the hearts of the children of Isra-el , though unlike the heart of their father Abraham to whom the promises of JHWH were given in perpetuity.

But to convince any of this, or persuade any of this, one must see this virtue of JHWH's in the chronology of the history of Isra-el and the same history of their "guiding light" which is JHWH, himself, and made flesh and dwelling among his own, Jesus. John 1: 1-14.

The Living Word of God.

Less accurate? for almost 2000 yrs it was concidered accurate - HMM? was not the interpreter's of the word supposed to be being led by the spirit of god in fixing the words?

If so, then how can >later< "translations" be more accurate that the original? Wouldn't it be more correct to take the original [ that which is closest to the time and understanding of what god intended for the reader to understand], than what later man further from that written at the beginning now decides is more correct?

Is that not anything more than modern man tampering with what is supposed to be "spirit breathed" information from god himself?

How can something said and written and interpreted by men lead by the spirit of god hold true for 2000 yrs, and then someone decide recently that these men lead by god and inspired to write the information down are now wrong?

is this the old HYCAEIT standard again?

The KJV is 2000 years old? So the KJV existed before the English language existed? You admit this and still don't believe in God?

The KJV is 400 years old. English has changed a lot in those years. NASB is the most accurate translation from the original texts into modern English. KJV is still very good, but you HAVE to research the definitions of many words so that you are sure you are getting the accurate meaning.

i meant the word evil spidey, it was in the first printed bible GUTTENBERG and all the rest that followed bishops bible and the ones before and after - it was also from what i read the original meaning of the coyne greek - in aramaic im not sure. still even if you take it to mean - HARM- it still is an evil concept/thought, concidering the context of the placement where god is about to destroy his own chosen people, correct?

any way, my point is that god is not supposed to be evil and jesus himself says for one to think of doing evil is sin - correct?

so how is this explained?

Exodus 32:14

And the lord repented [changed his mind]- of the

>>> Evil <<< [or harm] that >>""he""<< >> thought<<< to >>DO<< ""unto"" ""HIS PEOPLE""