#$21B for future reference

[takesuhigher]

Very specific synch. Even my brother was a little stunned 😂

[generouspersonamano]

"Water will flow from His buckets, and His seed will be by many waters, and His king shall be higher than Agag, and His kingdom shall be exalted. God brings Him out of Egypt, He is for Him like the horns of the wild ox. He will devour the nations who are His adversaries, and will crush their bones in pieces, and shatter them with His arrows. He couches, He lies down as a lion, and as a lion, who dares rouse Him? Blessed is everyone who blesses you, and cursed is everyone who curses you." Numbers 24:7-9

Regarding Messianic prophecy, Numbers 24:7-9 is likely the least-known yet most important Messianic prophecy in the entire Hebrew Bible! It is not known because many people assume Balaam is speaking about Israel and her exodus from Egypt in this passage. This, in large part, is because Numbers 24:8 is almost identical to Balaam's words about Israel's exodus in the previous discourse: "God brings THEM out of Egypt, He is for them like the horns of the wild ox" (Num 23:22). But there is a slight difference that makes all the difference in the world. Numbers 23:22 refers to a plural direct object: God brings THEM out of Egypt. Numbers 24:8 refers to a singular direct object: God brings HIM out of Egypt. Why does Balaam use "THEM" in the second discourse and "HIM" in the third?

The reason for this difference becomes clear when we carefully compare Balaam's second and third discourses. In Balaam's second discourse, Balaam speaks about two grammatically singular subjects in verse 21: Israel (Num 23:21a) and a king (presumably Moses) in Israel's midst (Num 23:21b): "He has not observed misfortune in Jacob; nor has He seen trouble in Israel; the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among him." The two "him" are potentially confusing. To make clear Balaam is speaking about Israel and her king collectively, Balaam must use a plural pronoun ("them"): God brings THEM (Israel and her king) out of Egypt (Num 23:22). It is obvious, therefore, that Balaam's second discourse refers to God's redemption of Israel from Egypt in the past.

In the third discourse (Num 24:7-9), however, Balaam is no longer speaking about the past but about the future (that is why he calls the third discourse an "oracle" [24:3-4] and a "vision" [24:4]). In Numbers 24:5, Balaam refers to Israel/Jacob, and in Numbers 24:7, he refers to Israel's future king. To make sure we understand this time, Balaam is speaking specifically about Israel's king in Numbers 24:8, rather than about Israel collectively, he uses a singular direct object: "God brings HIM (Israel's future Messianic King) out of Egypt" (v. 8).

Why is this prophecy such a big deal? First, because Balaam's Messianic prophecy demonstrates his familiarity with another Messianic prophesy, namely Jacob's in Genesis 49 (compare Gen 49:9 with Num 24:9). Second, Balaam tells us that God's promise to Abraham will ultimately be fulfilled through Israel's Messiah: "Blessed is everyone who blesses you" (Num 24:9b; see Ps 72:17; Gal 3:16). Third, because Balaam's prophecy is supernaturally specific: God will bring Israel's Messiah out of Egypt. Therefore, the specificity of Balaam's prophecy has only one possible address: Jesus the Messiah!

"Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, 'Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is going to search for the Child to destroy Him.' So Joseph got up and took the Child and His mother while it was still night, and left for Egypt. He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: 'OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON'" (Matt 2:13-15).

[imperiumallaboveall]

Watch "Digital Design & Computer Arch. - Lecture 21b: Memory Hierarchy and Caches (ETH Zürich, Spring 2020)" on YouTube

Benchmark

Shorter means less surface area search for parallel parameters ranged linear equations and shadowing.

Artificial intelligence shadowing neural network. Private NFT Shadowing is future marker for reference for consolidation points.

[reedreadsgreek]

Romans 10:18–19

18 ἀ��λὰ λέγω, μὴ οὐκ ἤκουσαν; μενοῦνγε· εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ἐξῆλθεν ὁ φθόγγος αὐτῶν καὶ εἰς τὰ πέρατα τῆς οἰκουμένης τὰ ῥήματα αὐτῶν.

19 ἀλλὰ λέγω, μὴ Ἰσραὴλ οὐκ ἔγνω; πρῶτος Μωϋσῆς λέγει· ἐγὼ παραζηλώσω ὑμᾶς ἐπʼ οὐκ ἔθνει, ἐπʼ ἔθνει ἀσυνέτῳ παροργιῶ ὑμᾶς.

My translation:

18 But I say, didn’t they not hear? Indeed: “Into all the land their sound went out, and their words into the limits of the inhabited world.”

19 But I say, didn’t Israel not know? Moses, first, says: “I will provoke you to jealousy on the basis of what is not a nation, on the basis of a senseless nation I will provoke you to anger.”

Notes:

10:18

In this verse and the next, Paul introduces two rhetorical questions by ἀλλὰ λέγω (NRSV, NIV: “But I ask”).

Questions introduced with μὴ expect a “No” answer, but here μὴ is followed by οὐκ. The double negative οὐ μή is an emphatic negative, but here we have ‘μή appearing first and employed as an interrogative particle and with οὐ following, used as the negative of the verb’ (NIGTC). Thus the expected answer is an emphatic, “Yes [they have heard]”. The unexpressed subject of the aorist ἤκουσαν (from ἀκούω) is the Israelites.

For μενοῦνγε, see note on 9:20. The particle could either confirm (“indeed”, NRSV) or deny (“on the contrary”, NASB); NIV: “Of course they did”.

The following is a word-for-word quotation from the LXX of Psalm 18:5 (19:4 MT).

ὁ φθόγγος (2x) refers to a “sound” or “tone”; in the context of speech, “voice” (most translations). The spatial prepositional phrase εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν (“to/into all the earth”, most translations) modifies the aorist ἐξῆλθεν (from ἐξέρχομαι), of which ὁ φθόγγος is the subject. The genitive αὐτῶν is subjective or a genitive of source; in Psalm 18 (LXX), the antecedent of αὐτῶν is οἱ οὐρανοὶ ... τὸ στερέωμα ... ἡμέρα ... καὶ νὺξ “the heavens ... the sky ... day ... and night”. The context is creation proclaiming the glory of God.

καὶ introduces a clause synonymously parallel to the first.

τό πέρας (4x) is, “end, limit, boundary” (BDAG; cf. πέραν, “beyond, the other side”).

The noun ἡ οἰκουμένη (15x) is technically the present passive participle from οἰκέω “I dwell”, and refers to “the inhabited world” (HCSB); most other translations, “world”. The genitive τῆς οἰκουμένης modifying τὰ πέρατα is partitive. The prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ πέρατα modifies an implied ἐξῆλθεν, of which τὰ ῥήματα is the subject. The genitive αὐτῶν is subjective or a genitive of source.

10:19

For ἀλλὰ λέγω, see note on verse 18.

For μὴ followed by οὐκ, see note on verse 18. Ἰσραὴλ is the subject of the aorist ἔγνω (from γινώσκω).

Paul may have used πρῶτος here in anticipation of using δεύτερος later, in verse 20, but the second word did not materialize. If πρῶτος were functioning adverbially, we would have instead expected the neuter accusative πρῶτον. Some nonetheless take it adverbially, although it may be better to take it as predicate with Moses (i.e., “Moses is the first witness to the fact that Israel has indeed known”, Cranfield). ICC takes it relatively: “Even as early in Israel’s history as Moses”. Μωϋσῆς is the subject of the present λέγει (from λέγω). The following quotation is word-for-word from the LXX of Deuteronomy 32:21b, except for changing the pronouns αὐτοὺς to ὑμᾶς.

παραζηλόω (4x) is, “provoke to jealousy, make jealous” (BDAG), from παρά + ζηλόω “I am jealous”; the παρα- prefix in this verb and the next make them causative. ἐγὼ is the emphatic pronoun of the future παραζηλώσω, and ὑμᾶς the direct object. ἐπί + dative denotes basis. The object of the preposition is οὐκ ἔθνει, literally “not-a-nation” or “not-a-people”, i.e., “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation” (NRSV, HCSB; sim. most other translations).

ἀσυνέτῳ (“senseless, foolish”; see note on 1:21) is attributive with ἔθνει.

παροργίζω (2x) is, “I make angry” (BDAG), from παρά + ὀργίζω “I am angry”. The prepositional phrase ἐπʼ ἔθνει modifies the future παροργιῶ. Many -ίζω verbs in the NT (including παροργίζω here) have “Attic futures” which lack the sigma tense formative (Mounce §43.7b). ὑμᾶς is the direct object of the verb.

[whittlebaggett8]

Narendra Modi’s Radar Gaffe Reveals Dangerous, Clouded National Security Judgement

The Indian primary minister’s the latest “radar” gaffe is revealing of his leadership tendencies.

At any time since the February 26 Indian airstrikes on an alleged terrorist base in Balakot, Pakistan, analysts have questioned probing thoughts about their timing as properly as efficacy. Lots of have argued that the airstrikes – in reaction to a suicide bombing of an Indian paramilitary convoy in Kashmir in mid-February – have led to a surge in Key Pinister Narendra Modi’s acceptance in the operate-up to the ongoing typical elections in the nation. Other people have – contra the official situation of the Indian govt – questioned regardless of whether Indian ordnance indeed ruined the supposed targets. New Delhi has not produced any imagery to aid its assert that it did so.

However, the latest news reports counsel that had the Indian Air Pressure (IAF) deployed the Israeli-made Popeye air-to-floor missiles (AGMs) as a substitute – which the Indian jets used in the Balakot strikes were being also equipped with – it would have been capable to furnish definitive proof that the terror camps in Balakot were strike. The fireplace-and-update/tv method in the Popeye missiles, referred to in India as “Crystal Maze,” capabilities by a video uplink which would have enabled the IAF to accumulate irrefutable visible fight damage assessment (BDA) details.

Crucially, the reports counsel that lousy temperature and significant cloud include in the really early early morning of February 26 prevented the IAF from working with that munition – thereby depriving New Delhi a valuable chance to bolster its assert in particular in facial area of really serious skepticism at dwelling and overseas.

Having fun with this write-up? Click on in this article to subscribe for total access. Just $5 a thirty day period.

Just as this controversy was dying down arrived an personal-objective of epic proportions – from none other than Modi himself. In a television job interview very last weekend, the primary minister pointed out that he experienced overridden considerations of “experts” (presumably that of the IAF’s) about the temperature on the working day of the Balakot strikes – centered on his “raw wisdom” that it would have served Indian jets avoid Pakistani radar detection.

Leaving apart the inadvertent diagnostic worth of Modi’s remark for a second (in conditions of what it reveals about the working of his nationwide protection equipment about the earlier 5 a long time): Had Modi listened to his very own air power and waited for the climate to have cleared up, possibilities are the IAF would have experienced an opportunity to deploy the fireplace-and-update munitions and thereby settle the Balakot discussion as soon as and for all. It is challenging not to see the irony of it all.

Now on to what Modi’s raw wisdom truly reveals. In a tough-hitting go over story for Time last week, American author Aatish Taseer clinically dissected Modi’s tenure as key minister noting, among the other points, that he “has presided around a continual assault on the grove of academe, in which the unqualified and semiliterate have been encouraged to construct their shanties.” Distinguished Indian scientific meetings – enjoying federal government patronage – now routinely aspect talks on historic Hindu provenance of aerospace engineering and stem-mobile exploration. In 2015, Modi himself had prompt that historic Indians ended up genetic researchers.

But the assault hasn’t been on academe on your own extending, as it has, to all spheres of specialised mental exercise. In the realm of general public policy, the attack on skills has led to dramatic and questionable financial measures such as the unexpected and spectacular determination to ban 86 p.c of India’s currency notes in 2016 – dependent on a program drawn up by a Modi advisor with no formal instruction in economics.

In an atmosphere the place specialized information is considered as the maintain of the elite and for that reason positively undermined – a worldview Modi and his supporters share with other ethno-populists close to the globe – it is not a shock that an overbearing primary minister’s ‘intuition’ (if you can get in touch with it that) about weather and radars can sort the foundation of a substantial armed forces procedure with most likely serious and uncertain strategic implications.

Returning to the Balakot airstrikes, experienced poor climate just resulted in the deficiency of recorded visible BDA perhaps the situation could have been ignored. But just one information report suggested that because of the unfavorable weather conditions, a portion of the Indian jets tasked with bombing the targets in Balakot crossed the Line of Control (LoC, the de-facto border that separates India- and Pakistan-administered Kashmir) in opposition to a established rule of engagement, in get to obtain targets to fire the Crystal Maze AGMs.

Take note that this breach of the LoC by Indian jets in pretty much 50 % a century was an amazing act – some thing India scrupulously prevented during the Kargil War 20 decades back. In all chance, these a rule of engagement was established to stay clear of Indian jets currently being shot down and/or pilots captured. (Incidentally, this is exactly what occurred the future day, on February 27, when an Indian Mig-21B was downed and an Indian pilot taken prisoner for the duration of Pakistani retaliatory air action.) In other words and phrases, Modi’s “wisdom” efficiently ended up translating into needless threat-using.

His lack of basic recognition of how an air protection radar functions will become all the additional significant provided the truth that as head of the Political Council of the Nuclear Command Authority, he is the sole particular person who can order a nuclear strike. Regardless of considerable Indian progress in getting nuclear-capable missiles, “bombers continue to serve a prominent position as a flexible strike drive in India’s nuclear posture.” (Notably a variant of the Mirage 2000 jets that had been made use of for the Balakot strikes variety element of the Indian nuclear air-vector.) While I do not mean to sound unduly alarmist, it is certainly a matter of worry when the sole start authority of India’s nuclear weapons prefers to rely on his “raw wisdom” about a different nuclear power’s air defenses about the suggestions of his seasoned advisors.

This brings me to my closing place. Above the earlier five several years, Indian protection policy decision-producing has turn out to be ever more concentrated in the office of the key minister (and ipso facto that of his national safety advisors). Component of this persistent structural issue – Modi has simply accentuated a trouble that has been existing in the Indian technique considering that the country’s independence in 1947 – is the lack of reforms of bigger protection administration process such as appointment of a Chief of Defense Team. This, in flip, has bolstered the civilian facet of the equation by default. As I wrote elsewhere, “Prime Minister Modi’s 2018 defense reforms proposals have reinforced this pattern, by empowering the civilian national security advisor to act as a ‘de-facto Main of Defence Staff.’”

Narendra Modi’s radar blooper is a unhappy illustration of what happens when unchallenged authority is guided by people knowledge.

The post Narendra Modi’s Radar Gaffe Reveals Dangerous, Clouded National Security Judgement appeared first on Defence Online.

from WordPress https://defenceonline.com/2019/05/15/narendra-modis-radar-gaffe-reveals-dangerous-clouded-national-security-judgement/