Numbers 35:30 Whoever kills <nakah> any person, the murderer <ratsach> shall be murdered <ratsach> by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.

The penalty for murder<ratsach> is being murdered<ratsach>. That should settle the definition, right? As long as 2 or 3 agree, then murder is OK. But the commandment says you shall not ratsach.

Does Green believe the Lord kills people? Well I think so too. But to say someone that kills is a murderer -- then I think you missed out on some points made in this discussion.

Well, if you read exactly how the death sentenced is conducted for a murderer; it is not by stoning as the majority if not all other death sentences. A murderer(ratsach) is not stoned by the congregation but handed to the avenger of blood. It is the avenger of blood that murders the murderer.

That's what I pointed out at the beginning of the discussion. The avenger of blood (ga'al) is the same word(individual) as the redeemer of blood (ga'al) -- thus this points to Jesus somehow. I don't claim that I know how. But like Green rightly said, we are going ahead of ourself. We should properly define what is ratsach - a murderer first.

Any other god is a false god, which, if he seems to offer satisfaction, is the same one who deceived Eve, and is deceiving you.


Could this be the reason for all this questionable doctrine that you are posting about here?

Blessings Elle,

I have to say "No" to your question. I am so glad you have repented of that and have chosen to seek the face of Jesus.

But, it is very important to remember, There is only one God, and that is the Godhead! No other god even exist!

So, any satisfaction you may have experienced came from Satan, my sister. Do not be deceived on this point.

Only the One, True God can give love and mercy is return for our filthy rags. Only the Father, Son and Holy Spirit can do the work we unworthy sinners need to have eternal life.

I love you Elle, so, don't look anywhere else at such a time as this.

I'm glad you spot my confession. The questionable doctrines came after I repented serving Baal of Peor.

Do you know who is Baal of Peor?

Maybe you know him and serve him without knowing you are serving him.

Thank you for your kind words Alchemy. Very brotherly of you. I appreciate your support!

I will ask you [and others here] the same question I ask Daryl.

Do you know who is Baal of Peor?

Maybe you know him and serve him without knowing you are serving him.

The reason I brought up Baal of Peor is because now that I know who he is (you may differ); I now can see that many is worshiping him unknowingly like I did for 45+ years. He's a big powerful and very popular [hidden-secret because people don't see him or know him with that name] god that gets in the way of knowing the Lord (or His language-words) as He is.

I've brought him up because to my perception he's in the way of our quest to find the Biblical definition of words.

Sorry to sidetrack the discussion from the word ratsach as we still need to do some more work to really nail that one down. BTW, ratsach is one those very challenging word I ever encountered. In a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the most difficult) I think he is a 10.

Sorry for not given you the answer of who is Baalpeor. This is a word I have studied in the past and of course I had plenty of time to chew(meditate) on it for many years. So I don't expect anyone to just understand or accept who he is quickly.

So to know who he is you need to look up the Hebrew word-definition of Baalpeor(kjv) h1187. If someone could spell out how Strong or other scholars has defined him would be helpful. Also, the Lord has defined him (this word) in 1 of those 5 occurrences found in the Bible. Can anyone find this text and bring it here for everyone to read? I think these two things should nail this word down. I think this word is more straightforward than ratsach. I would rate this word only a 3 in the difficulty level.

Green, why do you keep on doing this? (And your tables fall short of anything. As was pointed out in the past which you refused to accept. Nothing given for distinguishing anything. But I do realize you had fun doing something else others aren't allowed to.)

A "murderer" does NOT get that classification after being witnessed against by at least two persons.

A "murderer" gets murdered after being witnessed against by at least two persons.

Read the sentence again. You say things are clear, but then the clearest things you have trouble with?

You are mixing the definition with the punishment. Otherwise, you are saying that if only one person sees you murder someone else, you are not a murderer. But that is not what the verse says. The verse says you can't be murdered for murdering someone based upon one witness.

Actually I was referring to the verse, Numbers 35:30, rather than points attempted in the discussion. To say as long as 2 or 3 agree, then murder is OK, is not a definition, but an example of majority opinion.

If 2 or 3 people agree that black is white, does that make it so?

If you believe that there should never have been such an agreement, you need to find scriptural support for why God established this system and why God made a mistake in doing so--or why it wasn't a mistake.

In other words, where is your plain "thus saith the LORD" to support your anti-biblical view? God established the law of two or three witnesses. If you disagree with it, on what basis can you support your view?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.