George Brooks
Fri, 21 Jun 2002 14:48:59 -0700
David, I find the lack of details in your refutation to be as important as the intolerance of your refutation.
Using the very Hebrew term for "Angel" that you suggested I used, I found a perfectly interesting definition (from a resource with no axe to grind) which SPECIFICALLY links the term "Angel" to "guarding/watching" (and not just to waking/watching as you suggested), as well as to a reference to Israelites. And thus we have a DOUBLE correlation with the related terms for "Samaritan" and "Watcher". The key to a valid refutation is to show how the published Hebrew definitions you would prefer to use propose DIFFERENT meanings for the terms. I will patiently wait for you or someone else to provide this. My "method", as you would call it, is no different from what others would do with the same information. All 3 words are phonetically identical (or virtually identical), and so the "word play" potential with these words is evident. What else would you have me do? Totally ignore such AMAZING correlations? I think you overstate the case that "in the process I discover nothing." Perhaps you will be more interesting in helping to explore these correlations on another day. Until then, the members of the list will have to contemplate the way these different ideas keep coming together around the Jewish Enochian theme of "the Watchers". George Brooks Tampa, FL For private reply, e-mail to George Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: "unsubscribe Orion." Archives are on the Orion Web site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il. (PLEASE REMOVE THIS TRAILOR BEFORE REPLYING TO THE MESSAGE)