What is the relevance of any of this to anything here?

• The Hebrew phrase yārēḵ (“under the thigh”) could literally mean the upper leg, but in this context it was a euphemism for the “loins” or testicles Matthew 5:34–37 records Jesus saying: “Do not swear an oath at all… Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one” https://services.bingapis.com/favicon?url=www.biblegateway.com
• Bible Gateway
• . He explains that oaths by heaven, earth, Jerusalem, or even one’s head are unnecessary and can be misleading.

James 5:12 echoes this: “Above all, my brothers and sisters, do not swear… Simply let your ‘Yes’ be yes and your ‘No,’ no, so that you will not fall under judgment” Which is it? The Fallen Angels swore an oath to choose wives from among the daughters of men. Enoch 6. The oath was taken on Mount Herman. Mount Hermon is Mount Sion. The same sacred mountain that Moses gave the law to the Israelites (Covenant). What is the difference between and oath/promise and a covenant? Deuteronomy 4:48 explicitly states, “from Aroer on the rim of the Arnon Valley as far as Mount Sion (that is, Hermon), Why would the God of Israel choose Mount Horeb/Hermon to form a covenant with the Israelites when that is the origin of an unholy pact? Mount Sinai (also called Mount Horeb) is traditionally identified with Jebel Musa in the southern Sinai Peninsula, Egypt, though some scholars propose other locations in the region. *What does the bible say??

• . It is the mountain where, according to the Bible, Moses received the Ten Commandments from God (Exodus 19–20; Deuteronomy 5) Who are the “Sons of God?” According to Genesis 6:4 they are the Fallen Angels aka “Watchers?” Job 1:6; Job 2:1 – Divine beings presenting themselves before God.
• Job 38:7 – Present at creation, rejoicing before any humans existed.
• Psalm 29:1; Psalm 82 – Members of the divine assembly.
• Genesis 6:1–4 – Heavenly beings taking human wives, producing the Nephilim. Ancient audiences understood these “sons of God” as divine beings.
• Enoch Chapter 6 corresponds with Genesis chapter 6. Mount Horeb/Mount Hermon.

The bible is a double-edged sword. Genesis 1:26 Come let US make man in our image and likeness: *Who is speaking? Elohim/Divine counsel/Watchers?

Truth is the only weapon we have against deception. The bible seems to play deceitful games. Good is evil and evil is good by design. IMO.

Talk to who about what?

If multiple words share every similarity except a subtle stressing of syllables, that is a major clue that those words share or once shared common contextual meaning.

No, it isn’t, Richard. That is almost always indicative of unrelated etymologies producing the homology. That’s why real linguists need more evidence than that to reach such a conclusion, so acting like you recommend instead is crank; and when there is abundant evidence against that conclusion, and you still act like this, we are then not just dealing with cranks, but grifters—outright liars.

As documented, these have completely unrelated histories and etymologies. Their homology cannot convey common meaning at all. It could convey an audible pun, but there has to be an actual pun being made, and that is not the claim being made here. So pretending it is is just more lies.

Why all the lying?

It is curious how people feel the need to actually publish lies like this. Like, you didn’t just think all these false things. You needed someone to hear them. Why? What’s your pathology?

The actual article has a perfectly sensible introduction/backstory section, a methodology section, five sections of detailed, evidence-based refutations of specific claims people are being convinced by even though they are fabricated lies generated by pseudomethodologies, and the world needs to be aware of this lest they be conned, and then a reasonably concise conclusion summarizing all this.

You have completely failed to describe the actual article you are commenting on, and instead filled your sentences with ad hominem, well poisoning, straw men, and lies of commission and omission.

Why?

If multiple words share every similarity except a subtle stressing of syllables, that is a major clue that those words share or once shared common contextual meaning. Not always, but dismissing the connection outright is not good science.

Are you 13 years old? Do you expect your audience to have the intellectual rigor of a child? This read more like a toxic exploration of the tortured mind of the author, and much less a critique of Hillman.

Then when we get to the actual “debunking” section you just lazily cite one Christian-influenced mainstream authority source for everything. Really quite embarrassing – I don’t expect any serious people who are simply looking for the truth to take you seriously. No wonder Hillman refused a debate, this is low brow.

I don’t understand why you sent two comments. And burned hundreds of words to just convolutedly say I was right. You could have just done this in two sentences.

Yes, good catch, 2.86 was the mummies. I transposed the wrong cite. The relevant one is the one I linked to.

“Cloth” is a material. Not a bandage. Bandages can be made of that “cloth.” But when it’s just the cloth alone, it refers to a sheet of the cloth (like for wrapping a mummy), not a small bandage.

Just as I said. So all this wheelspinning and we’re right back to what my article said in the first place.

There’s a lesson there.