Hu It stems from ‘hue’ meaning colour or appearance. Thus, ‘hue-man’ implies “colour-man” or “man of colour”, therefore being “not-man.”
It’s similar to the word “alive” being mistakenly used interchangably with “live”. They are in fact as dissimilar as “theist” and “atheist.”
The implications of this with regards to Law are profound, since man is made in the image of God, according to the Lore/Law of Genesis. To say one is “human” is to disavow that you were made in God’s image and that therefore you are not entitled to any “God-given rights”. Dana
This is how 'they' deceived us all. One may not agree with these words, but feel free to examine and determine the ' spoken/written laws of governments v the spoken/written laws of God.
They refer to us as human, as not allow us any rights.
God has other plans for man who believes in Him.
2 Thessalonians 2:10-11
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.
Some links for those new to this 🐇 hole.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eysF9sPaozg
https://m.youtube.com/@WARCASTLES
In case you’re unaware, the current version of the bible was translated from Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Old English before reaching the King James version of today. So looking at language is pointless, it’s all arbitrary.
Why does King James say new wine into bottles, instead of new wine into old wineskins?
That's got me baffled.
Edit: typo
Because it was translated multiple times over multiple generations.
The point is that differences in wording doesn’t mean anything.
I don't agree, language has great meaning and power, to say that its pointless is to miss the point (sic)
Its being used to cast spells onto man, to decieve and mislead, along with adverts, psychology, film and TV.
The KJV isn't modern, I would advise not reading the 1917 version but the older KJV. The Doay-Rheims Bible is even better!
You do realize that books and art have existed since the dawn of time, right?
Were cave paintings a form of deception? Was Picasso casting spells when he painted Guernica? Was Da Vinci deceiving people when he studied anatomy? We’re creative beings, it’s always been a natural part of life. Film and TV is just another extension of that.
You’re making broad generalizations about art being “deceptive” without knowing anything about it. Read a book that’s not the Bible for once, you might learn something.
Art has nothing to do with my post, and books are a recent invention.