I'm with you Regent!

"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but chosen, precious to God"

 

OOOPPPSSS!!! Three times for emphasis. The so-called predictor is not only a false prophet, but a false scientist. His so-called calculations are wrong. Well, according to him, not exactly wrong. He mystically turned into a politician. “The world is not ending, but the world as we know it is ending,” “A major part of the world will not be the same the beginning of October.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...saturday-said-isnt-actually-ending/692907001/

 

Let's give the man a little credit for saying "The world is not ending, but the world as we know it it is ending." but that does not happen only from the 23 rd of this month, but from Adam to God Knows When. Ec 1:4 The world as we know it is ending, true never the same people in it. Regent

 

Hi Regent,
I’m LOL. A good analogy. His statement that world “The world is not ending, but the world as we know it is ending,” That’s a political/philosophic, cop-out, statement. In that sense, the world as we know it is ending every second. If it didn’t, we would be stuck in a time warp. OK, I give him 1 star, for tricking language.

 

There are those who think that because the Jewish tradition, and a few quotations from non-canonical writings by some apostles makes them authentic, these books must be OK.

“First Book of Enoch (1 Enoch), also called Ethiopic Book Of Enoch, pseudepigraphal work (not included in any canon of scripture) whose only complete extant version is an Ethiopic translation of a previous Greek translation made in Palestine from the original Hebrew or Aramaic.” (Encyclopedia Britannica)

“Enoch, the seventh patriarch in the book of Genesis, was the subject of abundant apocryphal literature, especially during the Hellenistic period of Judaism (3rd century bc to 3rd century ad). At first revered only for his piety, he was later believed to be the recipient of secret knowledge from God. This portrait of Enoch as visionary was influenced by the Babylonian tradition of the 7th antediluvian king, Enmenduranna, who was linked to the sun god and received divine revelations. The story of Enoch reflects many such features of the Babylonian myth.” (Encyclopedia Britannica)

“No Hebrew version is known to have survived. It is asserted in the book itself that its author was Enoch, before the Biblical Flood.” (Wikipedia) If you wish to question the authenticity of the Bible and wonder why certain other writings are not included, listen to what Jesus said when questioned by the so-called religious leaders of his day, who accepted such writings. “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” “And by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition.” (Mt 15:3b, 6b NASB)

Do not be sucked into this trap.

 

The topic of Jewish beliefs during the Second Temple period was touched on in a separate thread, so I'm not going to repeat everything here. I will say that the your statement is grossly oversimplified and conveys a mistaken assertion that extra-Biblical writings were viewed as inspired canon which was never the case outside of those Christian groups who included the writings as part of their canonized Bible.

It also places the burden on you to account for why the writer of Jude, writing under inspiration of holy spirit, was moved to quote from what is, in your estimation, a worthless pile of parchments, in order to make his point.

The "authenticity" of said writings aren't contested by the writer of Jude— they are accepted by him. That, to me, is hardly insignificant.

Since this dilemma creates such concern and repugnance, perhaps it would be better if we strike the references/quotes from our Bible?

The assertion was a common practice during that time period, as can be verified through even the most rudimentary of research on one's part.

Besides, neither do we have a single copy of any writing included in the Bible in its original language, so arguing that since there isn't a known copy of Enoch in Hebrew in existence this somehow proves it's "fake news" must be applied equally to any writing for which we do not have an original copy, whether in our canonized Bible or not.

pseudonymity
It became a convention in the period between OT and NT that works should be published under the authorship of a fictitious name, such as Moses or Enoch, or the sons of Jacob. Such a name imparted a certain authority to the writing. In the OT the book of Daniel is pseudonymous, and in the NT it is widely held that 2 Peter and Jude are pseudonymous, and also the Pastoral Epistles. Literary standards of the time did not necessarily condemn pseudonymity as deceitful. (Nevertheless Tertullian (c. 220 CE) reports that a presbyter found to have falsely attributed a work to Paul was forced to resign.) Disciples of Paul who remembered his teaching would have collected and developed the oral tradition. As representatives of Paul it was natural to use his name for the published works.— Oxford Biblical Studies Online

{See also: Pseudonymity and the New Testament, Pseudonymity as Rhetoric.}
​

As can be demonstrated from simply doing some brief research, this "tradition" Jesus is referring to cannot include the Jewish apocalyptic writings, since the Pharisees patently rejected writings such as the Enochian literature. Rather, these "traditions" were those the Pharisees had developed as a sect to set themselves apart from the rest of the Jews. The traditions eventually came to be Rabbinic Judaism, as I recall.

In any case, I'd be curious who here has been insisting that the extra-Biblical writings should be given the same weight and authority as the canonized Bible we rely on for the core and structure of our understanding, rather than a supplementary place much like a worldly encyclopedia, dictionary, or what-not, that helps illuminate the views and beliefs of the Second Temple period, whether among the Jews proper, or the Jewish followers of Jesus.

~~Earthbound

 

Tsaphah,

Enjoying your new supercharged zeal! Keep going!

You asked.... 'What is the good news, in one simple sentence?'

I submit;


Acts 2:38New Living Translation (NLT)
38 Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

My first thought about answering your questions about the “book of Enoch”, was the warning given by
Paul’s instructions to Timothy (1 Tim 6:4), (2 Tim 2:23), and similar thoughts written to Titus. (Titus 3:9)

I’ve looked at comments by other bible scholars and teachers about the apocryphal "Book of Enoch,".
The first thing to consider before acceptance of this so-called book.
1. Who was Jude writing to, and for what purpose?
2. Was his comment dealing with acceptance of the book?

We don’t know if Jude wrote this letter to be distributed to all of the existing churches/congregations, or a specific one. His message was specific, to the problems of those false teachers who “have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” (Jude 3) It's kind of like here, that's why I am here.

“These evil persons were the reasons for Jude's writing this letter. Just how he came to have this information is not specified; but presumably, he had received either some letter regarding it, or had been visited by one who knew the facts. It would appear that such people were apostate Christians, rather than rank outsiders. ‘In New Testament times, many of the enemies of the church were an emergence from within, rather than an intrusion from without.’” (Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament)

Jude likens them to those who turned away after being saved out of Egypt, angels who didn’t keep there right position, Sodom and Gomorrah. He compared them to unthinking animals. His use of a paraphrase from Enoch was not an acceptance of the book being authentic. This book was obviously known by the audience. As Coffman continues, “These heretics are here indicted in four charges: (1) they entered secretly; (2) they were prophetically consigned to doom; (3) they are ungodly; and (4) they deny Christ. As Wallace said, ‘To deny is positively to disbelieve what Christ testified about himself.’” Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament)

Coffman comments on Jude 14 as; “Well, here at last we have ‘Enoch.’ This is the first and only reference to him in this letter, and this verse is the only thing in Jude that may fairly be connected with him. Jude's use of Enoch's prophecy stamps that prophecy as the gospel truth, but it does absolutely nothing for the apocryphal ‘Book of Enoch,’ rightfully rejected as having no canonical value, and being quite ridiculous, fanciful, and false. As the footnote in the Catholic Bible says, ‘The Book of Enoch is apocryphal. St. Jude does not here approve the entire book, but only this prophecy.’ The false book of Enoch was widely known in apostolic times, and it was quite natural that Jude would have referred to the famous prophecy allegedly made by Enoch. It could be that Jude, by singling out this prophecy as true, meant that the Biblical character Enoch indeed uttered it, which for all anyone knows may be the truth; but that meaning is not at all mandatory. It was likely merely the manner of identifying the prophecy, which Jude attributed to its alleged source, instead of reference to a book of so many errors.” (Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament)

Another example is how Paul, having knowledge of Greek philosophy, used a saying borrowed from Plato; “a shadow of the reality” from the “allegory of the cave” in his work Republic. (Heb 8:5 and 10:1) That didn’t mean that Paul was saying Plato’s philosophy was inspired, or correct.

One thing is sure, the “book of Enoch”, like the “book of Mormon” are not writings inspired by Jehovah God. Their only inspiration I can see is by Satan, to cause confusion. Of course there are “these” (false teachers) and those, who will follow to their own destruction as spoken of by Paul and Jude.

 

I suspect they stopped printing it because Franz uncoverd too much and it was noted we were teaching wrong doctrines and it was said it would take decades to undo ..the false teachings....I still have mine...

 

I came to the conclusion it was inspir d of demons as well...and I read it twice...the main reason is that ....when Joshua and Kaleb went into clean out the lands of false gods after their long stint in the wilderness....they were to destroy all the false Gods and images...and amongst his own people....THE NAMES OF THE FALSE GODS WERE NOT TO BE EVEN MENTIONED...
Yet in the book of Enoch the fallen angels are named...individually and exactly what each fallen angel thought mankind...it's like each had a speciality to give to men....
Now why would Jehovah name them...or even go into detail of their corruptive ways....
He just wouldn't do that...he only names two of his own spirit angels.....Michael And Gabriel..why on earth would he name so many fallen angels...
I wanted to beleive it at one stage in my journey..but no where does any scripture support the current book known as The book of Enoch ...
If any one follows it or believes it to belong in the scriptures..Then Satan has clerverly deceived them..
They can use and state 90 percent truth....and then taint it with 10 percent poison...that's how they make it sound so convincing....thus seducing the reader...

 

In speaking of that 10%; If someone offered you a drink and said, "It's good for you! It only has 1% of ethelyne glycol. It will taste a little sweet, but it's OK!" Would you drink it? If you did, you would suffer a long excruciating painful death.

 

English words which are spelled/spelt the same but have very different meanings can be confusing.

Wound = injury, hurt, pronounced woond. “Don’t worry darling, it’s only a flesh wound!”
Wound = past participle of wind (wynd) bring to a close. “The project wound down.”

Wind = Air in motion. “The wind is blowing at 12 miles an hour.”
Wind = twist, turn around. “Don’t overwind the wire.” “Oh no, I wound it too tight.”

We can say the same about other languages, especially Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Greek:
Pneuma = a movement of air, breath, wind, an angel, a spirit, the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, etc.

Hebrew, Aramaic:
Ruwach = a movement of air, breath, wind, an angel, a spirit, the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, Spirit of God, etc.
“and the earth being without form and empty, and darkness on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moving gently on the face of the waters,” (Gen 1:2 LITV)

“And they went in to Noah and to the ark, two and two of all flesh, in which is the breath of life.” (Gen 7:15 LITV)

“And the king said to them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.” (Dan 2:3 LITV)

“One slow to anger is of great understanding, but he who is short of spirit exalts folly.” (Pr 14:29 LITV)

“When they stood still, these stood still. And when they rose up, these also lifted up. For the spirit of the living creature was in them.” (Ezek 10:17 LITV)

Ruwach: (Hiphil) to smell, scent, perceive odour, accept
a. of horse
b. of delight (metaph)

“And he came near and kissed him. And he smelled the smell of his clothes. And he blessed him, and said, See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field which Jehovah has blessed.” (Gen 27:27 LITV) The air moving through the nose.

Translations of ruwach to English and other languages as: Spirit, air, anger, blast, breath, breathless, cool, courage, despondency, exposed, grief, heart, inspired, mind, motives, points, quick-tempered, side, sides, spirit, spirits, strength, temper, thoughts, trustworthy, wind, winds, windy, wrath.

All of these words are depending on sentence structure and subject matter.

 

Let me throw this thought out. I actually laughed to myself, when the thought came to mind. Thought: Maybe Trump is the modern day Nebuchadnezzar. He will go crazy and live with the animals for seven years.

Nebuchadnezzar or Nebuchadrezzar = “may Nebo protect the crown”.

Nebo: a Babylonian deity who presided over learning and letters; corresponds to Greek Hermes, Latin Mercury, and Egyptian Thoth.

Mr. Trump said he has a better mind (IQ) and, better use of language (bigly) than anyone else. Well Nebotrump, let’s see what happens. “Let his mind be changed from that of a man and let a beast’s mind be given to him, and let seven periods of time pass over him. This sentence is by the decree of the angelic watchers and the decision is a command of the holy ones, in order that the living may know that the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom He wishes and sets over it the lowliest of men.”* ( Dan 4:16-17 NASB ) Remember what Trump said about his mind and use of language? Nebo!

Babel was the beginning of civilization: laws and rules by man. It was one of the first acts of disobedience against Jehovah. (Gen 9:7) But, as time continued, they said; “Come! Let us build a city for ourselves and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a celebrated name for ourselves, so that we will not be scattered over the entire face of the earth.” (Gen 11:4 NWT) The city of the beginning of man ruling over man was called Babel = confusion. Not only were their languages confused, so were their minds. They thought they could rule themselves better then God could.

* I have found that the NWT’s translation is more correct than NASB/KJV/etc. Why? There is only the single for “watcher” and “holy one”, not plural. The use here is misinterpreted as “an angel” and “a holy one”, indicating two individuals. The word “and” is what can change the meaning. It should be correctly understood and translated as, “a watcher, a holy one”.

“As I viewed the visions of my head while on my bed, I saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from the heavens.” ( Dan 4:13 NWT ) This coincides with verse 4:23. There is one individual watcher/holy one speaking, not two. “And the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from the heavens, who was saying:”

The word hermeneutic; to make clear, interpret, comes from the Greek god of languages; Hermês. This is especially needed here when it ties in with Babylon, where confusion of all languages took place. SO . . ., Mr. Nebotrump is like Nebuchadnezzar in having the same attitude of power, high minded, and language skills. Maybe we will see him next, eating grass on the White House lawn.

 

Oh yes! I'm always in awe that these people (the cradle of civilization) continue to be big headed. Self induldged!
I have spent some time reading and studying the History of the Church. Here is some important information to think about when studying the bible and certain religious authorities.

THE FIRST TWO CENTURIES​

“The first thing, therefore, that should be naturally treated in the internal history of the church, is the history of its ministers,rulers,and form of government. When we look back to the commencement of the Christian church, we find its government administered jointly by the pastors and the people. But, in process of time, the scene changes, and we see these pastors affecting an air of pre-eminence and superiority, trampling upon the rights and privileges of the community, and assuming to themselves a supreme authority both in civil and religious matters. This invasion of the rights of the people was at length carried to such a height, that a single man administered, or at feast pretended a right to administer, the affairs of the whole church with an unlimited sway. Among the teachers of these early times, there were some who acquired, by their learned labors, a shining reputation, and an universal influence; they were regarded as oracles; their decisions were handed down to posterity as sacred rules of faith and practice; and they thus deserve to be mentioned, with particular distinction, among the governors of the church, though no part of its public administration was actually in their hands.”
( Mosheim’s Church History, pp. 9-10, 1847 )

“Those who undertake to write the history of the christian church are exposed to receive a bias from three different sources, from times, persons, and opinions. The times, in which we live, have often so great an influence, on our manner of judging, as to make us consider the events which happen in our days, as a rule by which we are to estimate the probability or evidence of those that are recorded in the history of past ages. The persons, on whose testimonies we think we have reason to depend, acquire an imperceptible authority over our sentiments, that too frequently seduces us to adopt their errors, especially if these persons have been distinguished by eminent degrees of sanctity and virtue. And an attachment to favorite opinions leads authors sometimes to pervert, or at least to modify, facts in favor of those who have embraced these opinions, or to the disadvantage of such as have opposed them. These kinds of seduction are so much the more dangerous, as those whom they deceive are, in innumerable cases, insensible of their delusion, and of the false representations of things to which it leads them. It is not necessary to observe the solemn obligations that bind an historian to guard against these three sources of error with the most delicate circumspection, and the most scrupulous attention.” ( Mosheim’s Church History, pg. 14, 1847 )

Always check the resource for the background, influences, opinions, thinking of the times, and even cultural background. All of these have an effect on the information. Remember what Jesus and the apostles taught us, people of the world will hate us. They will want to kill us.

 

The meaning of words through the ages. “A rich collection of metaphors with ideas as edibles and minds as the cooking pots.” - Lynne Murphy

She was speaking of the word “mull”, and it’s meaning over the ages. Often, it is necessary to study a word’s historical uses, in order to grasp the present day meaning. This is especially important when reading the Bible. Let’s begin by looking at the word, “metaphor”.

metaphor (n.)
late 15c., from Middle French metaphore (Old French metafore, 13c.), and directly from Latin metaphora, from Greek metaphora “a transfer,” especially of the sense of one word to a different word, literally “a carrying over,” from metapherein “transfer, carry over; change, alter; to use a word in a strange sense,” from meta “over, across” (see meta-) + pherein “to carry, bear,” from PIE root *bher- (1) “to carry,” also “to bear children.” PIE = Proto-Indo-European.

*bher- (1) Proto-Indo-European root meaning “to carry,” also “to bear children.”
It is the hypothetical source of/evidence for its existence is provided by: Sanskrit bharati “he carries, brings,” bhrtih “a bringing, maintenance;” Avestan baraiti “carries;” Old Persian barantiy “they carry;” Armenian berem “I carry;” Greek pherein “to carry,” pherne “dowry;” Latin ferre “to bear, carry,” fors (genitive fortis) “chance, luck,” perhaps fur “a thief;” Old Irish beru/berim “I catch, I bring forth,” beirid “to carry;” Old Welsh beryt “to flow;” Gothic bairan “to carry;” Old English and Old High German beran, Old Norse bera “barrow;” Old Church Slavonic birati “to take;” Russian brat’ “to take,” bremya “a burden,” beremennaya “pregnant.”

In the Greek scriptures the closest word is metaschematizo (met-askh-ay-mat-id’-zo) = to change the figure of, to transform. Meta = with, after, behind. Schema = the habitus, as comprising everything in a person which strikes the senses, the figure, bearing, discourse, actions, manner of life etc. “... and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away.” ( 1 Co 7:31 NASB )

Here is where it is important to gain the true understanding of the meaning, by reading all scriptures that use this word.
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.” (1 Co 4:6 NASB )

“For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds.” (2 Co 11:13-15 NASB )

“For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who will transform the body of our humble state into conformity with the body of His glory, by the exertion of the power that He has even to subject all things to Himself.” ( Ph 3:22-21 NASB )

There was a recently published report from a “known” psychologist who studied young children who were spanked for bad behavior. In the study it was determined that those who were spanked proved to go on to worse behavior. Their conclusion was to “spare the rod”, and the child would likely turn out good. Like many so called “psychological studies”, there were many unanswered questions about alternative methods of necessary discipline. This study concluded that the old saying; “Spare the rod, spoil the child”, was proved to be wrong. This thought goes directly against the biblical teaching; “He who withholds his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently.” ( Pr 13:24 NASB ) The specific meaning here can have several interpretations; as a measure of discipline, as a measure of accepted conduct, and when to use switch on the backside.

“Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.” ( Ps 23:4 NASB )

“What do YOU want? Shall I come to YOU with a rod, or with love and mildness of spirit?” ( Co 4:21 NWT ) Rod, used here, in Greek is; rhabdos (hrab'-dos) a staff, a walking stick, a twig, rod, branch, a rod with which one is beaten. When applied to kings, with a rod of iron, indicates the severest, most rigorous rule. (Rev 2:27, 19:15)

What is the basic meaning of these original Hebrew and Greek words which are translated into the English word “rod”? Specifically, in Pr 13:24 and Ps 23:4, the Hebrew word is shebet (shay'-bet) from an unused root probably meaning to branch off. It has some of the following meanings according to Strong’s translation of: shebet
1. rod, staff, branch, offshoot, club, sceptre, tribe
a. rod, staff
b. shaft (of spear, dart)
c. club (of shepherd's implement)
d. truncheon, sceptre (mark of authority)
e. clan, tribe

In the mentioned scriptures it is translated as “rod” and “staff”. In the book of Joshua it is always translated, 29 times, as “half-tribe, tribe, and tribes”. This is where the original meaning of a branch of tribe is from. By using other sources such as Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, we can gain a more detailed hermeneutic understanding that expands the base meaning “to branch off”.
“The scepter * shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff * from between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.” (Gen 49:10 NASB ) *shebet

From this particular scripture is the promise of the coming of Jesus Christ, or the anointed, which is spelled shiyloh; pronounced shee-lo’, and meaning: he whose it is, that which belongs to him, tranquillity.

Depending on accent marks, additional letters, and sentence subject, will change the meaning of the word. The word shebet/rod, for example can mean “An offshoot from the trunk of a tree, Genesis 30:37, Isaiah 11:1, Ezekiel 37:15-22. It also denotes a staff, used by one walking, Isaiah 3:1, Ezekiel 29:6; by a diviner, Hosea 4:12; by a surveyor, Psalms 74:2; by a shepherd, Leviticus 27:32, Zechariah 11:10-14; as an instrument of correction, Proverbs 23:13, 29:15; as a sceptre, Esther 8:4, Isaiah 14:5; and as a symbol of power, Psalms 2:9, support and direction, Psalms 23:4.

At Rev 11:1 John is given a rod for two purposes: “Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, "Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it.” By what measure will YOU be taken?

 

Do you remember, or know who said, “Religion is a Snare and a Racket!” ?

Answer: J. F. Rutherford

Religion Is A Snare And A Racket


While thinking about this statement, listening to the speech, and looking at the language’s meaning, I came across Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians. It really applies to our time as much as the times when Paul originally wrote it. Read 2 Corinthians 13:1-14!
Are we victims of a snare? Or, are we partaking of the real food and growing with it?

 

Religion: (Online Etymology Dictionary : https://www.etymonline.com)
noun
c. 1200, “state of life bound by monastic vows,” also “conduct indicating a belief in a divine power,” from Anglo-French religiun (11c.), Old French religion “piety, devotion; religious community,” and directly from Latin religionem (nominative religio) “respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods; conscientiousness, sense of right, moral obligation; fear of the gods; divine service, religious observance; a religion, a faith, a mode of worship, cult; sanctity, holiness,” in Late Latin “monastic life” (5c.).

According to Cicero derived from relegere “go through again” (in reading or in thought), from re- “again” (see re-) + legere “read” (see lecture (n.)). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (Servius, Lactantius, Augustine) and the interpretation of many modern writers connects it with religare “to bind fast” (see rely), via notion of “place an obligation on,” or “bond between humans and gods.” In that case, the re- would be intensive. Another possible origin is religiens “careful,” opposite of negligens. In English, meaning “particular system of faith” is recorded from c. 1300; sense of “recognition of and allegiance in manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers” is from 1530s.

“To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name.” [Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, 1885]

snare (n.1)
“noose for catching animals,” late Old English, from a Scandinavian source such as Old Norse snara “noose, snare,” related to soenri “twisted rope,” from Proto-Germanic *snarkho (source also of Middle Dutch snare, Dutch snaar, Old High German snare, German Schnur “noose, cord,” Old English snear “a string, cord”). Figuratively from c. 1300.

racket (n.1)
“loud noise,” 1560s, perhaps imitative. Klein compares Gaelic racaid “noise.” Meaning “dishonest activity” (1785) is perhaps from racquet, via notion of “game,” reinforced by rack-rent “extortionate rent” (1590s), from rack (n.1). But it might as well be an extended sense of “loud noise” by way of “noise or disturbance made to distract a pick-pocket’s victim.”

Religion; the word in Greek. There are 4 Greek words translated into English.

#1. deisidaimonia (dice-ee-dahee-mon-ee'-ah) or, day-see-dayo-me-ah.
1. in a good sense
a. reverencing god or the gods, pious, religious
2. in a bad sense
a. superstitious
3. religious

Used 2 times in the NASB at Acts 17:22, and Acts 25:19. Translated in the KJV at 25:19, as religious, and superstitious at Acts 17:22.

#2. ethelothreskeia (eth-el-oth-race-ki'-ah) used one time in Colossians, in both KJV and NASB, but translated as: “... a shew of wisdom in will worship...”, and “... the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion ...”

#3. threskeia (thrace-ki'-ah) used 4 times in the Greek scriptures.
1. religious worship
a. esp. external, that which consists of ceremonies
1. religious discipline, religion

“. . . I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion.” (Acts 26:5)

The next scripture from Colossians 2 is very important, and it is necessary to read from verse 8, on through verse 23. The main word translated as worship is at verse 18. “. . . and the worship of the angels, . . .”

This word is also used by James in the beginning of his letter. “If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.” ( James 1:26-27 NASB )

#4 ioudaismos (ee-oo-dah-is-mos') used 2 times in Galatians, meaning faith or worship of the Jews, Judaism.
“For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it; and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions.” ( Gal 1:13-14 NASB )

The true religion does not ask for more money to keep reaching others with the “TRUTH”! Paul and the other teachers had part time jobs. The message of the TRUTH was free to all.

 

While reading the following article in the Wall Street Journal, it brought to mind how the agricultural figures of speech are borrowed. My family farmers, friends and shepherds, used these methods to identify their prime animals.

‘Earmarks’ From Lambs To Legislators
( by Ben Zimmer, WSJ )

After a seven-year absence, “earmarks” are nudging their way back into the political conversation on Capitol Hill.

When conservative Tea Party Republicans captured congressional seats in the 2010 midterm election, they made good on a campaign promise, forcing party leaders to abandon support for “earmarks”—that is, provisions in spending bills that direct funds to specific projects, typically at the behest of lawmakers seeking goodies for their home states or districts.

The official ban on earmarks came in early 2011. But recently, a group of House Republicans signaled that they were exploring ways to bring back earmarks. Earlier this month, President Donald Trump said at a White House meeting with members of Congress, “Maybe all of you should start thinking about going back to a form of earmarks.” A hearing this week indicated widespread support from both parties for an earmark revival, though not from House Speaker Paul Ryan.

The word “earmark” began quite literally as the mark on the ear of a livestock animal to identify it and its owner. The earliest known example, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, comes from a play dated to the late 15th century, in which a shepherd says of a lamb, “I know hym by the eere marke.”

By the mid-17th century, “earmark” was a verb as well, for the act of marking an animal with a cut or mark on the ear. Around 1640, a gentleman farmer in Yorkshire wrote of “a good way to earemarke lambs as they fall.”

The financial sense of “earmark” first emerged in the early 19th century. In a congressional debate in 1836, Senator Nathaniel P. Tallmadge of New York drew a parallel between budget-wrangling and raising farm animals. He dismissed a proposal to set aside money for specific items “as if, the moment an appropriation was made, an ear mark was placed upon the money,” much as “a Dutchess County farmer would select particular sheep from his whole flock by the ear marks he had previously placed on them.”

As William Safire noted in “Safire’s Political Dictionary,” the tradition of “earmarking” became popular during the Great Depression, when U.S. lawmakers sought to divvy up the appropriations of
massive relief bills.

That was also when “earmarks” became firmly associated with another livestock metaphor: “pork-barrel spending,” or “pork” for short. (”Pork barrel” first made the transition from the farm to Congress in the late 19th century as a way to describe how politicians endeavored to appease the electorate by securing funds for local projects. The folksy figure of speech stemmed from the barrels that farmers used for storing pork, seen as a key to their livelihood and a quick source of profit.)

Fiscal conservatives seeking to curb spending on pet projects—like Alaska’s notorious “bridge to
nowhere” for a thinly settled island—increasingly disparaged earmarks. The word still appears to be politically taboo: The Hill newspaper says the latest proponents of reviving earmarks have avoided using the term, instead describing such spending as “congressionally directed,” “member-directed” or “specific.”

Are you "ear marked" as one of Christ's sheep? (Joh 10:27)

 

It's always good to see you you're very knowledgeable and I trust your reasoning thank you for being here