Monday, December 22, 2014

There is no "hell" in the Bible

Chronologically between the books of Genesis to Malakhi, when read in Hebrew, there is no "hades".

Hades/hell is a pagan concept inherited from Greek and Persian religions.

There is a she-ol [שאול].

[שאול] is the passive participle/gerund/verbal-noun of sha-al [שאל].
[שאל] sha-al means question, to ask.

Therefore, she-ol, the passive verbal-noun means the "unknown". What Job and King David said was not hell/hades, but

  • into the "darkness of the unknown", 
  • where "no human I've ever met will meet me again."

Even the name of Saul in Hebrew Shaul, is the same spelling as she-ol, but different inflection. Saul's name means "being asked".

There is no gehenna between the books of Genesis to Malakhi, except the gai hinnom [גיע הינום], the valley of Hinnom, the place where people sacrificed their children to their gods, praying to their dead children to intercede on their behalf to mitigate for their transgressions against their gods.

Daniel 12: 2 says
ורבים מישני אדמת עפר Then many from sleep of soil of ground
יקיצו אלה לחיי עולם shall arise those to life eternal
ואלה לחרפות לדראון עולם and those to be condemned to eternal contempt-oblivion

those who are spited to eternal contempted-oblivion will never arise. They will be forgotten in shame. There is no eternal damnation.

Daniel 12:2 is mistranslated by people who try to force the verse to say some will arise to suffer eternal damnation.

Eccl 9: 5 says
כי החיים יודעים שימתו as the living know that they will die
והמתים אינם יודעים מאומה and the dead they know not anything
ואין עוד להם שכר and no more to them recompense/wages
כי נשכח זכרם because forgotten is their memory

Eccl 9:5 says the dead will never be punished or rewarded.

So, there is no such thing as hell. Those who resurrect shall live forever. The rest will not suffer in eternal hell, but forgotten in shame.

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Genesis 2: There are no "Angels" in the Bible

Genesis 2 verses 1 & 2 do not say G'd finished the heavens and earth.
These two verses merely states that He enabled a purpose for the Universe. A commission.

השמים והארץ
וכל צבאם

And He completes
the heavens and earth
and all  their forces/vectors

ויכל אלהים
ביום השביעי
אשר עשה*
וישבת ביום השביעי
אשר עשה

And G'd completes
on the 7th day
His task-commitment
which He did
and rested/ceased on the 7th day
from all
His task-commitment
which He did 

Here is the meaning of the Hebrew:

לאך LAK a task 
מלאך MLAKh piel intensive-participative = to perform a task, to be committed to a task. A person committed to task.
מלאכת MLAKheT the participial of מלאך/MLAKh.
The consequence of being a מלאך/MLAKh.
מלאכי MLAKhI The gerundive act of fulfilling commitment to a task.
Also chronologically the last book of my Bible which I read in Hebrew.

צבא TsVA force 
צבאם TsVAiM masc plural - forces. Or gerund of being a force.
צבאות TsVAOT fem plural - forces. Or verbal-noun - entities that are forces.

In Genesis 2, we read in Hebrew that on the 7th/fulfillment day, G'd completes
  • the heavens and earth 
  • and all the vectors/forces therein
  • and His {מלאכת / MLAKheT} , i.e., His commitment to His task.

Of note is the word I translated as complete is {יכל / YKhoL} - meaning having all. So, G'd had completed all that He had to put into Universe, but that does not mean the Universe was finished. (Qabalah notes that humans have taken over the role of completing the Universe which is biblically accurate to the Hebrew text of Genesis 2).

When the shipmates frightened by the storm asked Jonah, most English translations say that they asked him "what is it that you do? What is your work?"

But if you read the Bible in Hebrew, his shipmates were actually asking him,
"What is your  {מלאכת = MLAKheT = commission}? What is your purpose (of your trip on the ship)?"

When Jacob returned from Lavan, he sent his henchmen {מלאכים MLAKhIM} to meet his brother Esav.

The issue here is with the word {מלאך/MLAKh} which in Hebrew means being committed to a task or someone that is committed to a task.

It is not even "messenger". This is one concept which I disagree even with certain Jewish biblical authorities. I am unable to find  evidence for the word [לאכ] that would mean "transmit message", to allow us to prefix a causative inflection to produce the word "transmitter of message". Perhaps, someone could produce archaeological evidence for this word in Phoenician or Aramaic. If {מלאך/MLAKh} did mean "messenger", then does that mean that G'd was merely a "messenger" in Genesis 2 ???

Rabbinic authority does realise that [לאכ] means "task", not "message", But out of bad habit, rabbis simply ignore the pagan significance, and persist on using the word "angel" when teaching in English, for the sake of being understood by non-Jews, or Jews contaminated by Christian pagan lingo.

But in the meantime, we cannot ignore the meaning and occurrences of word {מלאכת MLAKheT} all over the Bible, especially in Genesis where G'd is attributed to have performed {מלאכת MLAKheT} . Unless we reinterpret the meaning of {מלאכת MLAKheT} , so that G'd did not do any creation "work" - I urge Jews and especially rabbis to stop using the pagan term "angels".

Therefore, {מלאך MLAKh}(erroneously "angel") actually means someone commissioned towards His fulfilling-task.  {מלאך MLAKh} grammatically would be "participating in fulfilling a task".

So then, why do English translations translate {מלאך/MLAKh}  as "angel", Why do Greek translations have מלאך as "anggelos" ?

Angels are of pagan origins
"Angel", Greek {anggelos  ἄγγελος} is actually from Greeko-Persian paganism - horse mounted messenger demigods. "Angels" are of pagan origin. There are no "angels" in he Hebrew text of rhe Bible, but "persons committed to tasks" of G'd.

Therefore, what is erroneously translated as the pagan messengers. should be translated as "commissioners" of G'd. There were more suitable Greek words to translate "task commissioner", but why did the Greek translators deliberately used a pagan term to sneak in the pagan concept of messenger demigods?

Malakhi is the last chronological book of the Bible
It is accepted the Malakhi was not the actual name of the writer of the book, who was probably Ezra. Rather, {מלאכי MLAKhI} is actually the subject title of the book. Malakhi is the summary of the promises and warnings of the Bible. {מלאכי MLAKhI} means "commissioned with tasks". In Hebrew, gerundization into participles and collective verbal-nouns is performed on the plural. The commissionings are assigned, and here is the summary of the Bible, go forth and fulfill them.

If it were not assigned then it would have to be in the incomplete/exhortative/predictive state {ילאכים YLAKhIM} = commissionings that shall be assigned.

[מלאך MLAKh] being Human agents
All across the Bible (the Hebrew Bible where the last chronological book is Malakhi), {מלאך MLAKh} and its plural {מלאכים MLAKhIM} are also applied to human agents.

For example, the English hopelessly mistranslates Haggai 1:13 due to succumbing to the Hellenistic and ancient Persian pagan roles of  "anggelos" as "messengers".

The actual meaning of Haggai 1:13 is

ויאמר חגי So says Hagai
מלאך יי a commissioned agent of the LORD
במלאכות יי  in commission of the LORD
לעם לאמר to people to say
אני אתכם I Am with you.
נאם יי declares the LORD

So, Haggai was the commissioned agent of the LORD. But in your English translation, you would have to say that Haggai was an "angel" of the LORD. But of course, you people twist the Hebrew, to say that Haggai says that an "angel" of the LORD says - but the simplicity of the Hebrew does not say that. You people twist the translation of the Hebrew, to squeeze out the doctrine you want the Bible to exude.

Qabalistic Note:
  • When you place Hebrew elements together (albeit using Aramaic char set), the side effects are just as significant.

    {מלא ך} = {מלאך} = your fulfilment. The person tasked with the commission is expected to be the fulfillment of you the assigner. {מלאך MLAKh} = {מלא ך MLE Kha} = Your commissioned agents are also Your fulfilment.

  • Note that if you remove the alif [א] from [מלאך] malakh,
    you would get [מלך] (melekh) king.

    That is, if you remove the purpose from the commissioned agent, you get a king.

    The messiah cannot be a king. A messiah who is a king has no purpose but to destroy. 1 Samuel 8 says that, G'd was displeased with Israel for wanting an anointed king, like the rest of the nations around them. G'd warned them through Samuel that a king would oppress the people and ultimately destroy Israel.

    The kingdom of G'd does not require a human king. The kingdom of G'd is meant to follow Jethro's (father-in-law of Moses) enunciation of representative democracy. Reading the Hebrew text of Exodus 18:20-21, Jethro actually told Moses, "warn the people of the judgments and laws in whatever they do, and expect from them righteous representatives." The English/Greek translations may say "Jethro asked Moses to appoint representatives", but the actual Hebrew says Jethro told Moses to take steps towards expecting the people to properly choose their representatives.

    The kingdom of G'd, according to Jethro, is a representative democracy. Actually it is not a "kingdom", but an administration or government.

Monday, November 17, 2014

Faith [אמונה] (emunah)

There is no such thing as good vs evil. One religion's good is another religion's evil.

Good too has been defined by Islamic terrorists and Christian Inquisitionists is "true" good.

Who defines right vs wrong?

There is no humanly way possible to define "true" good and evil. Because I don't believe in Jesus, or Buddha or Krishna, and therefore, neither Jesus, Mohammed, Hare Krishna, Gandhi nor Stalin is qualified to define good or evil for me. They may offer some helpful suggestions, but they are way way not qualified.

The only possible explanation, is purity vs impurity, desirable vs undesirable, alignment vs misalignment.

Purity is also a hard to define term, unless we define the qualities that we want. Such that in a mixture, if we want lead, and gold is considered impurity, then we will melt and refine a piece of rock to get rid of all the gold to get the lead.

Our life is a centrifugal purifier. Life in the Universe is a percolator, to evolutionarily percolate the best to the top, to be separated from the slag.

But then who is qualified to define what is purity and what is slag? We ourselves the human race is qualified to define "truth", "righteousness", "good", etc.

Let me illustrate it with Hebrew, since I am familiar with Hebrew. I am sure other primeval languages like Chinese or Sanskrit would have similar predispositions. We can't depend on English, Greek or Latin because they are abstract languages that have lost all their connections to primitive humans.

[אב] = father
[א]head of [ב]enclosure/house

[אם] = [אמ] = mother
[א]head of [מ]flow of water

[אם] = [אמ] = possibility, what-if, discovery
[אמת] (emet) = truth
[אמן] = [אמנ] (amein) = agreement to a communal truth
[אמונה] emunah = trust, faith.
passive participle of [אמן].
having a communal agreement between the parties involved.

Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew draws from the same Phoenician roots. That means the primitive peoples of the middle-east already honestly accept that "truth" is due to the collective agreement of a community.

That is what Evolution is about. Evolution is about the ability of a group to formulate a unifying framework. The framework that is able to unite a larger group will defeat the groups whose ideologies have low unification tendencies.

Islamist groups are like the Ebola virus. It kills its own carriers. Islamism, the Crusaders, the Inquisitionists, anti-gay proponents are like Ebola virus. They turn on their own. They kill their own carriers, and creating a huge empty crater devoid of life.

Evolution is said to be the survival of the fittest. That is not an adequate definition. Evolution is the survival of the most liberally diverse group that is able to put aside our disagreement and help one another to survive the percolation and centrifugation taking place in the universe. Diversity in unity is strength because it will ensure survival of a group when an enemy attacks one subgroup, the rest of the main group survives.

In this way, according to the primeval origins of Hebrew, "TRUTH" is defined by the largest and most liberally diverse group.

So this Universe is merely a self-defining baking oven to bake a multi-flavoured pie, and those ideologies who refuse to cooperate in the survival of the human race will be burnt to a crisp.

This is the ingenuity of G'd the Creator. The self-defining human race.

[אמונה] (emunah) is the word translated in English as "faith".
It is from the word [אמן] (amen), which means agree.
Emunah means trust and confidence.

In engineering, we build confidence by deploying doubt. Doubt is the scaffold of quality confidence.

But the English word "faith" is not so much as meaningless but is an aliased word.

Aliasing is a term in signal engineering to describe a situation where a message masquerades other messages by imitating their characteristic shadow.

People use the word "faith" liberally in ways that do not reflect the actual Hebrew meaning.

In engineering, we do not place that kind of faith. We build confidence. In the financial and business realms, we do not place faith. We build relationships and confidence in those relationships.

You cannot have confidence unless you have a relationship. You cannot have a relationship unless you have spent time building that relationship.

Like a stranger would come to a woman and says "trust me, marry me now so that we have a relationship." You cannot simply say a silly prayer of confession of sins and then claim to have a relationship due to faith.

You and the other party must actively build that relationship from the time both of you accept the relationship. Without works there is no faith. Faith alone cannot save you.

Confidence will save you. Confidence = faith + work.

Emunah/Confidence is a two-way street. You have as much trust in G'd as G'd trusts in you. Does G'd trust you?

In order to have emunah-faith confidence, you need to have a relationship. In order to have a relationship, you need to build that relationship. You cannot have emunah-faith unless you work at building that relationship.

Therefore, "faith" without works is meaningless. It's like getting a electricity bill without using the electricity. You cannot be "saved" by "faith" alone, because it is meaningless.

"Truth" emet in Hebrew is an agreement, a collective amen.

So when you invoke the word "truth" it sounds empty. Because unless I am in agreement with you, "truth" is an empty meaningless word.

Therefore, Romans and Pauline concepts are totally out of alignment with the Hebrew scriptures and Hebrew grammar concerning the word Emunah.

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Zechariah 12 - Example of subjunctive vav

In biblical Hebrew there isn't any past or present tense.

Rather it is
  • completed action, or
  • non-finite state
There are a few theories about the vav-inversion aka vav-conversion when a verb is prefixed with a vav-adjunct.

In the prevalent theory, prefixing a verb with a vav would invert its state. So that
  •  a non-finite would be inverted to become grounded as completed-action
  •  a completed-action would be freed from its commitment to become non-finite.

But that theory is on shaky foundations, because they are trying to squeeze Hebrew into a Romance language mold. Biblical Hebrew is primeval language where you make inferences thro the primeval elements and events of the surroundings rather than trying to fit it into an abstract Latin mold.

There is a minority theory which I subscribe to, where the vav-adjunct actually converts the verb to subjunctive or propositional, dependent on the original state of the verb. So that
  • a vav-adjuncted completed action is actually a subjunctive.
  • a vav-adjuncted non-finite is a propositional or propositional-imperative.

Let us use Zechariah 12v10 as example.
ושפכתי על בית דויד and I would pour on house of david
ועל יושב ירושלם and upon those residing jerusalem
רוח חן ותחנונים spirit of favour and request-for-favour
והביטו אלי And they would look towards me
את אשר דקרו at whom they stab
וספדו עליו and would mourn over him
כמספד על היחיד like as mourning over an only begotten
והמר עליו and shall be embittered over him
כהמר על הבכור like as embittered over a firstborn
The phrase does not say,
And they would look towards me והביטו אלי 
whom they stabאשר דקרו 

But the phrase says
And they would look towards me והביטו אלי
at whom they stabאת אשר דקרו 

[הביטו] piel completed action of 3rd person plural.

Qal = active root. Piel = active participative. Hifil = active causative.

[והביטו] completed action with vav adjunct = subjunctive.

A subjunctive is an action that is dependant on another event. (In modern languages subjunctive also includes what-if you could travel back in time, or what-if you could be someone you are not).

Therefore, a day will come. And dependent on that event, such an such would happen.

[דקרו] (stabbed) simple completed action. Without vav adjunct.

The contention here would be should I have translated it as

- presume vav-adjunct: They would look towards me at whom they would stab
or - simple completed action: They would look towards me at whom they had stabbed

If the speaker had meant subjunctive, there would be no way to put a vav-adjunct on "stab", because biblical Hebrew does not have a systematic paradigm like greek to freely assign subjunctive to a verb.

The action of the vav in biblical Hebrew is more like ...
> My daughter wants to be a lawyer. And so this is what would happen. And-scored well in her SAT. And-graduated she from college. Propositional:and-has-she a boyfriend, and-shall-propose-we her that idea. The day will come and-graduated-she from law school whose exams passed-she.

Notice that I cannot write
>from law school whose exams and-passed-she, because it does not make logical sense to have conjunction there.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Avinu Malkeinu

Our Father our King
hear our cries
אבינו מלכנו
שמע קולנו
Our Father our King
our sins before you
our short-comings are in front of you
אבינו מלכנו
חטאנו לפניך
Our Father our King
let mercy be upon us
and upon all begotten of us
 and of our children
אבינו מלכנו
חמול עלינו
ועל עוללנו וטפינו
Our Father our King
terminate plague and sword/famine
חרב (noun=sword, verb=being arid)
and hunger from among us
אבינו מלכנו
כלה דבר וחרב
ורעב מעלינו
Our Father our King
terminate all oppression
and persecution from us
צר literally = strait/narrow
idiomatically means oppression
אבינו מלכנו
כלה כל צר
ומשטין מעלינו
Our Father our King
let us be inscribed
in the book of good life
אבינו מלכנו
בספר חיים טובים
Our Father our King
renew upon us
a good change/year
אבינו מלכנו
חדש עלינו
שנה טובה
Our Father our King
pardon us and answer us
אבינו מלכנו
חננו ועננו
For we are not accomplished
in any of our deeds
כי אין בנו מעשים
Perform upon us עשה עמנו
charity and kindness צדקה וחסד
and cause us to be saved והושענו

Sunday, September 21, 2014

קדיש (Qadish) - Jewish prayer of resurrection

Ancient/medieval Aramaic Jewish liturgy.
1 Magnified and sanctified is His great name Yitgaddal veyitqaddash shmeh rabba יִתְגַּדַּל וְיִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא.
2 In the Universe which He incarnated to His will Beʻalma di vra khir'uteh בְּעָלְמָא דִּי בְרָא כִרְעוּתֵהּ
3 As He establishes His kingdom veyamlikh malkhuteh וְיַמְלִיךְ מַלְכוּתֵהּ
4 As His salvation blossoms and nigh is His anointed [veyatzmaX purqaneh viqarev (qetz) meshiXeh] וְיַצְמַח פֻּרְקָנֵהּ וִיקָרֵב(קיץ) מְשִׁיחֵהּ
5 During your lifetime and during your days beXayekhon uvyomekhon בְּחַיֵּיכוֹן וּבְיוֹמֵיכוֹן
6 and during the lifetimes of all the House of Israel uvXaye dekhol bet yisrael וּבְחַיֵּי דְכָל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל
7 expeditiously and time nigh. beʻagala uvizman qariv בַּעֲגָלָא וּבִזְמַן קָרִיב.
And we agree v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
8 His great name to be blessed yehe shmeh rabba mevarakh יְהֵא שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא מְבָרַךְ
9 forever, and to all eternity leʻalam ulʻalme ʻalmaya לְעָלַם וּלְעָלְמֵי עָלְמַיָּא
10 Blessed and praised, glorified and exalted, Yitbarakh veyishtabbaX veyitpaar veyitromam יִתְבָּרַךְ וְיִשְׁתַּבַּח וְיִתְפָּאַר וְיִתְרוֹמַם
11 extolled and honoured, adored and lauded veyitnasse veyithaddar veyitʻalleh veyithallal וְיִתְנַשֵּׂא וְיִתְהַדָּר וְיִתְעַלֶּה וְיִתְהַלָּל
12 the Name of the Holy One, blessed is He shmeh dequdsha berikh hu. שְׁמֵהּ דְקֻדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא.
13 above and beyond all the blessings, leʻella (lʻella mikkol) min kol birkhata לְעֵלָּא (לְעֵלָּא מִכָּל) מִן כָּל בִּרְכָתָא
14 hymns, praises and consolations veshirata tushbeXata veneXemata וְשִׁירָתָא תֻּשְׁבְּחָתָא וְנֶחֱמָתָא
15 that are uttered in the world. daamiran beʻalma דַּאֲמִירָן בְּעָלְמָא.
So say Amen v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
16 It shall be the prayers and supplications Titqabbal tzelotehon uvaʻutehon תִּתְקַבַּל צְלוֹתְהוֹן וּבָעוּתְהוֹן
17 of all Israel d'khol bet yisrael דְכָל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל
18 accepted by their Father in Heaven. qodam avuhon di bishmayya קֳדָם אֲבוּהוֹן דִּי בִשְׁמַיָּא
So say Amen v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
19 To Israel, to the Rabbis and their disciples ʻal yisrael veʻal rabbanan veʻal talmidehon עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְעַל רַבָּנָן וְעַל תַּלְמִידֵיהוֹן
20 to the disciples of their disciples, v'ʻal kol talmidey talmidehon וְעַל כָּל תַּלְמִידֵי תַלְמִידֵיהוֹן.
21 and to all those who engage in thestudy of the Torah veʻal kol man deʻos'qin b'orayta וְעַל כָּל מָאן דְּעָסְקִין בְּאוֹרַיְתָא.
22 in this [holy] place di b'atra [qadisha] haden דִּי בְאַתְרָא [קַדִישָא] הָדֵין
23 or in any other place, vedi bekhol atar v'atar וְדִי בְּכָל אֲתַר וַאֲתַר.
24 may there come abundant peace, y'he lehon ul'khon sh'lama rabba יְהֵא לְהוֹן וּלְכוֹן שְׁלָמָא רַבָּא
25 grace, loving-kindness and compassion, long life Xinna v'Xisda v'raXamey v'Xayye arikhe חִנָּא וְחִסְדָּא וְרַחֲמֵי וְחַיֵּי אֲרִיכֵי
26 ample sustenance and salvation um'zone r'viXe ufurqana וּמְזוֹנֵי רְוִיחֵי וּפוְּרְקָנָא
27 from the Father who is in heaven (and earth). min qodam avuhon di vishmayya [v'ʼarʻa] מִן קֳדָם אֲבוּהוּן דְבִשְׁמַיָּא [וְאַרְעָא]
So say Amen v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
28 There shall be abundant peace from heaven, Yehe shelama rabba min shemayya יְהֵא שְׁלָמָה רַבָּא מִן שְׁמַיָּא,
29 [and] [good] life [ve]Xayyim [tovim] [וְ]חַיִּים [טוֹבִים]
30 satisfaction, help, comfort, refuge, vesava vishuʻa veneXama veshezava וְשָֹבָע וִישׁוּעָה וְנֶחָמָה וְשֵׁיזָבָה
31 healing, redemption, forgiveness,atonement, urfuʼa ugʼulla usliXa v'khappara וּרְפוּאָה וּגְאֻלָּה וּסְלִיחָה וְכַפָּרָה,
32 relief and salvation verevaX vehatzala וְרֵוַח וְהַצָּלָה
33 for us and for all his people [upon us and upon all] Israel. lanu ulkhol ʻammo [ʻalainu v'al kol] yisrael v'ʼimru amen לָנוּ וּלְכָל עַמּוֹ [עׇלֵינוּ וְעַל כׇּל] יִשְֹרָאֵל.
So say Amen v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
34 He makes peace in His high places ʻoseh shalom bimromav עוֹשֶֹה שָׁלוֹם בִּמְרוֹמָיו,
35 who [in his mercy] shall make peace upon us hu [beraXamav] yaʻase shalom ʻalenu הוּא [בְּרַחֲמָיו] יַעֲשֶֹה שָׁלוֹם עָלֵינוּ,
36 and upon all [his nation] Israel. v'ʻal kol [ammo] yisra'el. וְעַל כָּל [עַמּוֹ] יִשְֹרָאֵל.
So say Amen v'ʼimru amen וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן

Sunday, August 31, 2014

Satan does not exist

The pervasiveness of "the satan"

  • Satan does not exist as a distinct person in the Hebrew text of the Bible.
  • In Numbers 22:22 satan was good divine agent.
  • [שטן = satan] is a Hebrew verb/gerund that means obstruct, obstruction.

  1.  [השטן / ha-satan]

    Every occurrence
    of "satan" in the book of Job is ha-satan [השטן]. The definite article in Hebrew is more focused than in English.
    • "Ha-yom" [היום] does not mean "the day", but it means "this day". This particular day, today among other days.
    • "Ha-melekh" [המלך] the-this king, among other kings.
    • Therefore "ha-satan" = this particular impediment/hindrance, among other hindrances.
    • If ha-satan is the name of a person, then every time the Bible mentions ha-melekh that would mean all the kings mentioned in the Bible is actually the same person !! ? Or when the Bible says ha-yom, it would actually mean the name of a special day ???
    • You can't willy nilly adjust the grammar of the Hebrew to concoct your demonology doctrine.
  2. Zechariah 3:1
    The same ha-satan occurs in this verse. Joshua the high priest was a satan/hindrance to the agent of Hashem. And then Hashem reproofs the high priest for becoming a hindrance to the agent of Hashem, asking him "you who chose Jerusalem, don't you realise this is a brand salvaged from the fire.

    Then Hashem orders the high priest be rid of his dirty garments. And then the agent testifies to the high priest that Hashem says "that if you walk in my ways ..." Obviously the high priest was not behaving appropriately and got rebuked a few times. Telling him of the corners stone the establishment had rejected, the branch that will come forth.

    I mean if you twist and turn the sentence construction to translate in a way to include a Satan, rather than Joshua being the satan/hindrance, it would sound really odd.
    • ויראני את־יהושע הכהן הגדול עמד לפני מלאך יי והשטן עמד על־ימינו לשטנו
      And he then-shows me of Joshua the high priest standing before the agent of Hashem and the-this satan/hinderer stood upon his right to hinder him.
    • ויאמר יי אל־השטן יגער יהוה בך השטן ויגער יהוה בך הבחר בירושלם הלוא זה אוד מצל מאש
      And then says Hashem to the-this satan/hinderer,
      Hashem reproofs in you the-this satan/hinderer.
      Hashem reproofs in you the chooser of Jerusalem
      Is this not a brand salvage from the fire.
  3. Numbers 22, agent of G'd became satan
    In Numbers 22 in Hebrew, when Balaam acquiesced to the bribes and threats of the god-king Balak to accuse the chosen people, you would read that the Hebrew text of the Bible says,

    and he inflamed the anger of G’d
    because he went

    then positions himself agent of the LORD
    in his way to be satan to him

    and those riding on the donkey
    his two boys with him
    ויחר אף אלהים
    כי הולך הוא

    ויתיצב מלאך יי
    בדרך לשטן לו

    והוא רכב על אתנו
    ושני נעריו עמו

    Hey believers of the existence of the demon Satan, why then in Numbers 22:22 is a good person?

    Did you want to say that there was a good satan who fell? But, doesn't your doctrine also says a demon satan fell before the time of Adam, whereas Numbers is during the time of Moses.
  4. Occurrences of [שטןsatan not translated as satan
    There are 5 cases in the Hebrew text of the Bible where [שטן](satan) is not prefixed with the definite article. Four of which, even the Christian translations agree in translating those occurrences to describe humans or situations being hindrance/impediment.
    • 1 Kings 5:4 (Jewish enum 5:18) - Solomon writes to Hiram that there is no [שטן satan impediment] against him to build the temple.
    • 1 Kings 11:14 - The LORD placed Hadad as [שטן satan impediment] for Solomon and general Yoav to destroy.
    • 1 Kings 11:23, 25 - G'd placed Rzon ben Elada as [שטן satan impediment] against Israel.
  5. WILLY-NILLY Demonology Doctrine

    So the believers of the existence of the demon satan WILLY-NILLY decide when the word "satan" means impediment and when it refers to a superdemon?
    • Oh, they use their christian testament to justify?
    • But their christian testament is on trial here. There is a circular dependency - you can't use an accused burglar's testimony to testify to his on innocence in a burglary.
  6. 1Chron 21 = 2 Samuel 24
    There is no reference to a demon or anyone named "satan" in 1Chron 21. NONE.

    One case of the 5 cases of unprefixed-satan which is translated into English as "satan", is 1Chron 21.

    But that is a wrong translation, because it should have been translated as "hindrance/obstruction".
    • and then stood a hindrance
      upon Israel
      and then inducing David
      to account of Israel.
      ויעמד שטן
      על ישראל
      ויסת את דויד
      למנות את ישראל
  7. 2 Samuel mirrors 1Chron .

    The exact same story is told in 2 Samuel 24, but why is there no reference to "satan" in 2Samuel 24?

    Why is a person "satan" not being referenced in 2 Samuel 24? That is because the concept {hindrance} was reflected equivalenty without needing using the word {satan, hindrance}.

    Because 1Chron uses satan/hindrance whereas 2Sam uses anger for the same concept..

    then increased anger of the LORD
    to inflame in/at Israel
    and inducing David in/at them
    go account of Israel and Judah
    ויסף אף יי
    לחרות בישראל
    ויסת את דוד בהם
    לך מנה את ישראל ואת יהודה
  • Census-tax theory:
    the census-tax stood upon Israel a “hindrance/satan/שטן” and then incitement/rebellion broke out towards David’s census-tax of Israel. There is a law in Exodus 30, that when you take a census, you have to collect a tax. That tax became a hindrance/satan to Israel. And that was why Israel became incited/rebellious against David.
  • Almighty G'd became satan/hindrance - this is the theory I believe in. Since 1 Chron 21 and 2 Sam 24 are mirrors - and because 1 Chro 21 the inducer is "satan", whereas the inducer in 2 Sam 24 is Almighty Himself.
The word used in these two passages is {מנה = apportion, ration} which idiomatically derives the meanings of {count, account for}.

A rebellion broke out among Israel when David wanted to apportion/account-on Israel.

Then we read a couple verses later, his General Yoav questioned why would David persist to criminalize Israel for resisting - be satisfied with what the LORD had given already.

This is the narrative of the story: biblical Hebrew is a simplistic primeval language. What the passages intend to say is:
"This is how Almighty became angry with Israel/Judah. Almighty became a satan to induce David to take accounting-taxation of Israel, becoming a satan?hindrance to Israel/Judah. And a rebellion ensued. And then David begged Almighty for forgiveness for Israel's rebellion because he had deviated from his task."

Demons and spirits?

You know, Hellenistic Jews that ultimately became Christianity, they imported all sorts of pagan ideologies in their Greek translations, that they could not find in the Hebrew text of the Bible. Like the "spirit of god" as an person.

So grammatically, is "anger of god" also another person. A {רוח / ruaX} of Hashem means His presence or influence breezing by. Otherwise, there would be so many more "persons of god" could be derived and squeezed out of the Hebrew text of the Bible.

What fucking "holy spirit"?

Similarly in 1Sam 16:14.

And the presence/influence of Hashem left Shaul, and a bad presence/influence FROM Hashem came upon him. Hashem inflicted Shaul with psychopathic disease. There are instances where Hashem performs {רע / bad} upon {רע / bad} people. {רוח רע } means bad presence/influence.

I DON'T CARE what those Christian documents say, Christians who have tormented Jews and twisted our texts for 2000 years. You have to read the Hebrew text as-is, uninfluenced by pagan demonology, uninfluenced by the spirit/influence of Hellenistic ideologies.


Baal in Hebrew means master. In fact in traditional Jewish homes, a wife addresses her husband as Baal. In fact, in Hosea 2, a verse says that the LORD says
and it will be in that day
declares the LORD
you will call me my husband (ishi)
and not call me any more
my master (baali)
והיה ביום ההוא
נאם יי
תקראי אישי
ולא תקראי לי עוד

"Adversary" is a theological projection from the effects of being an "impediment". Like a linebacker or quarterback being an adverse impediment, is the ultimate adversary faced by the opposing team. He is the "satan". Like a good quality control engineer, who is often referred to as "the satan" and perceived as "adversary" to irresponsible production folks.

What king of god ???
"Kingdom of god" is a wicked pagan concept, says 1Sam 8.

While Yoav the righteous loyal general dissuades David. For all the righteous impediments that Yoav to prevent David from destroying himself, the rascal king David upon his death bed having forgotten his promise to his wife BatSheva, but also in wickedness ordered Solomon murder Yoav. And that began the downfall of the Israeli empire.

That is why in 1Sam 8, Almighty consoles Samuel because Israel wanted a king like other nations, to reject Almighty's system of govt - saying such a govt due to a king would be brutal and would bring the downfall of Israel.

There is no "kingdom of god" in the Hebrew text of the Bible, but there is the system of govt of G'd.

Yithro, father-in-law of Moses, introduced representative democracy which is the system of govt of G'd. The messiah is not a king, but would introduce the world back to Yithro's representative

Monday, August 25, 2014

Bible translators’ penchant for disparaging humankind

I do not understand why Bible translators feel the need to dumb down the Hebrew of the Bible when translating the Bible. They are gripped with a motivation to ensure humans are not portrayed in Bible as worthy to be like G'd, so they corrupt the translation to hide the actual Hebrew words of the Bible.

The following are examples where I show the plain and simple Hebrew. But, compare them to the English translations and you will notice translators dumbing down the status of humankind.

Psalm 17v15 when read as normal Hebrew says ...

in righteousness of grasping your face
I fulfill
in the edge of
your likeness
בצדק אחזה פניך
If the psalmist had wanted to say "behold" he could have used [רואה] or any of other words that meant looking, seeing or beholding. But the psalmist chose to use a physically intense word that meant grabbing and grasping.

[שבע] = seven = implies perfection or fulfillment
[אשבעה] = I perfect/fulfill

[הקיץ] actually means = "bring to the edge of"
which could idiomatically mean being placed within the vicinity so as to be aware of
or could plainly, simply and literally mean being at the edge of
For this verse, would you choose the idiomatic or the literal meaning ?

In my other postings in this blog, you will find the same deliberate dumbing down of the innate worthiness of humankind or the dumbing down of intensity of actual Hebrew words by Bible translators.

Psalm 23 v6:
actually says,
but goodness and mercy
will pursue/harass me
אך טוב וחסד
Psalm 8:
Who is humankind that we are in your mind and the son of adam/man that you empower us?
You lessen him a little from G'd and adorned him with glory and honour.
מה אנוש כי תזכרנו ובן אדם כי תפקדנו
ותחסרהו מעט מאלֹהים וכבוד והדר תעטרהו

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Nazirite vs Nazarene

I am regurgitating a well-known offensive question Jews place on Christians. It is not offensive as in vulgar-offensive, but offensive as in a (American) football player playing offensive positions. This offensive is even documented in Wikipedia about the town of Nazareth.

OK, you cute bumbling KJV lovers, let me quote Numbers 6 in the KJV:
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate [themselves] to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate [themselves] unto the LORD …

In the Hebrew of the Bible the word translated as Nazarite is [נזיר](NZIR) intonated as nazir, an active intensive of the root word [נזר](NZR). [נזר](NZR) is used as a verb over various parts of Numbers 6, to instruct the means in fulfilling the [נזיר](NZIR).

[נזר](NZR) means consecrated-dedicated, separated from the rest. Rather than as Nazarite, it should have been translated as Nazirite. Especially with the presence of yod, would have compelled translators to transliterate it as NaZIR not NaZaR.

Perhaps if they had transliterated it as NaZIR, then they would lose the link they try to make with the town of Nazareth.

But the problem is the town of Nazareth is spelled in Hebrew as [נצרת](NTsRT) NaTseReT. They may sound nearly the same but linguistically, there is a gulf of difference between a Zayin and a Tsadi.

In Hebrew, Christians are called [נצרי](NTsRI), but Christianity had been deceptively trying to pass this 1st century error as [נזרי](NZRI), in their European language bibles. Deceptively trying to pass [נצר](NTsR) as the [נזיר](NZIR) in Judg 13:5.

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Amos 5:24 - Let justice roll as a mighty stream?

Martin Luther King was influenced by the imprecisely translated Amos 5:24 in the KJV.

There are more modern translations that now translate the verse more accurately. Let me present more modern and acceptable translation of this verse.

Note that I interpret the vav conversive as subjunctive.

In Amos 5:24, the Hebrew says
ויגל כמים משפט וצדקה כנחל איתן

should roll (as in waves)
like water
and righteousness
like a river/stream

Judgment sentencing should roll like waves of water, and righteousness like a steadfast steady river.

This verse, in Hebrew says that,
Why does it mean that Judgment should be sentenced like rolling waves?

It might take a mighty force, or it might take a small still voice in the face of impeding adversity, to be a steady flowing river or stream.

What might interest you are the words [משפט] and [צדקה].

[משפט] actually means a linguistic sentence, or verbalisation.
This is another of the English words that had been influenced by the Hebrew of the Bible. To sentence a legal judgment, is to verbalize the judgment in succinct comprehensive language.

[צדקה](tsedakah) being righteousness, is also often used to imbue charity to the poor. Therefore, our tax dollars used for helping the poor in sustenance and furnishing them with education is a commanded righteousness.

Sedakah in Arabic, which has the same meaning as in Hebrew, also uses the word righteousness in similar manner. When you move among Arabs or Muslims, you would also often find them using the word sedakah sloganeering for contributions to the impoverished. Apparently therefore, Jews, Arabs and Muslims share the same concept on righteousness.

You might also take note that [איתן](eithan) is the origin of the English name Ethan - steadfast.

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Hebrew name of the messiah

I had dedicated this blog to expounding the Hebrew in the Jewish Bible. This post is not worthy of this blog because it infringes on the grounds on another religion.

But then there are videos deceptively alleging that a Qabalah rabbi had confessed that he had dreamed about the messiah having the name [יהושוע] Yehoshua. So here goes …

  1. First, how many Jews have the name יהושוע (Yehoshua) and who were in Israel at the time of the rabbi's observation? How many Yehoshuas were there at that time?

    Christians who criticize Jewish Qabalah as satanic and the Talmud as evil, but yet I am trying to understand why the same people would often extract Qabalah and Talmud sources to say how Jewish traditions support their concept of salvation. Two-headed snakes.
  2. The Hebrew name of Jesus had always been [ישוע] (Y'shua). And all of a sudden now, his name was Yehoshua?
  3. The root word is [ישע] = [help, rescue, salvage]

    The pual (with collective-intensity passive) conjugate is [ישוע] Y'shua. Which means, participating in needing help. Needing to be rescued. Needing intervention.

    The term for this state of salvation is [ישועה] Y'shuah - the case of collective needing help, needing rescue.

  4. As accounted in the book of Numbers, Moses had renamed Joshua from [הושע] (Hosea) to  [יהושע] (Yehoshua).

    [הושע] (Hosea) is hufal - effective intensity perfected conjugate of the root word [ישע].
    Hufal is the passive counterpart of hifil conjugate [השיע](Hishia).

    The hifil form [השיע](Hishia) is active intensive but never used in the Bible.
    The hifil would refer to the subject as effective in providing collective help.

    The hufal [הושע] (Hosea) would refer to the subject effecting/coordinating the collective receiving of help.

    So Joshua was initially a coordinator/effector in receiving help, but Moses renamed him to [יהושע] - The LORD Coordinator/Provider to collective receiving of help.

  5. In either case, Salvation is people being in the need of help.

    The case of Jesus' name yshua - being in the collective of needing of help.

    The case of Joshua's names - someone providing/effecting work and effort towards solving the collective state of needing help.

    That is why Pauline theology says of humans needing help but cannot do anything about it. All you could do is to have faith hoping that something would drop out of the sky.

    But the theology behind Joshua's names is - that we realising being in the state of needing help, someone effectively coordinating the receiving of help, and subsequently G'd providing for that collective need of help/rescue.

    Having faith is not enough to participate in salvation.

    There is no such thing as personal salvation, otherwise the personal nifal passive form would have been used for salvation.

    Regardless that he is not the messiah spoken in the Bible, even the name of Jesus connotates a collective in need of help, not an individual needing help.

  6. Jesus' name tells you how helpless you are collectively, but doesn't tell you what to do.

    Joshua's names OTOH, tells you that you have a collective part to play in salvation and that G'd will provide for that collective need.

    Therefore, the Hebrew semantics of the word reveals that, even though G'd does provide for the help needed, Salvation does not originate from G'd. It originates from those of us needing help. You do not receive salvation. You participate in salvation. You are part of the solution in effecting salvation.

  7. The difference is
    • are you participating in Yehoshua's coordinating the receiving of help 
    • or participating in Yshua's hapless helpless needing help?

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Micah 5:1,2,3 ... messianism or warning to worshippers of a false god?

Micah 5:1,2 (Jewish enumeration)
ואתה בית לחם אפרתה צעיר להיות באלפי יהודה ממך לי יצא להיות מושל בישראל ומוצאתיו מקדם מימי עולם ב לכן יתנם עד עת יולדה ילדה ויתר אחיו ישובון על בני ישראל

Phrase literal translation:

and you
בית לחם
BeT L'χeM
אפרתה צעיר
Efratah minor
להיות באלפי יהודה
to-be in thousands of Judah
from/than you
לי יצא
my exiting /going forth
להיות מושל בישראל
to-be governor in Israel
and his exiting / exile / expedition 
from old/early/enlightened-ones
מימי עולם
of/from days eternal/infinite/

  1. and you BeT L'χeM, Efratah minor, to-be among thousands of Judah, from you I who will exit, to be governor in Israel. and his ancient exit from days eternal.

  2. and you BeT L'χeM, Efratah minor, to-be among thousands of Judah, from you I who will exit, to-be governor in Israel. and his early exit since days eternal.

  3. and you House of god Lakhamu of Efratah minor, to-be among thousands of Judah, from you I who will exit, to be governor in Israel. and his ancient exile from days eternal.

  4. and you House of minor god Lakhamu of Efratah to-be among thousands of Judah, (rather) than you (it is) I who will go to-be governor in Israel. and his exile early from days eternal.

  5. and you House of minor god Lakhamu of Efratah to-be among thousands of Judah, (rather) than you (it is) I who will go to-be governor in Israel. and his exile from enlightened-ones of days of eternity.

My take:
The speaker is using comparative sarcasm here, playing on the word [יצא] - While you go forth to be exiled, I go-forth to govern. You deceptive puny little god of Efratah.

Whereas you House of minor god Lakhamu of Efratah to-be among thousands in Judah from you. My expedition to-be governor in Israel. While his expedition to-be exiled earlier-on from days of eternity.

The verse that follows goes on:
לכן יתנם עד עת יולדה ילדה ויתר אחיו ישובון על בני ישראל

Thus I shall put-them-aside until when an expectant mother gives birth and the rest of his brothers return to the children of Israel.

Thus I shall put-them-aside until the era of pangs of birth and the rest of his brothers return to the children of Israel.

Is this actually the Bible predicting the exiling/rejection of the mythical false god Jesus? And those who converted to worshipping this false god will return to the children of Israel, at the era of the pangs of rebirth of nation of Israel.

Still, if you do not agree with the Lakhamu god theory, your best bet is either #1 or #2.

This is a very unusual construct:
ממך לי יצא
  • from you, I who exit
  • rather than you, I who exit

If you choose to twist the grammar to make it a prophecy of Jesus, than you would also be able to prove that Dostoyevsky's Brothers Karamazov prophesied about Barack Obama and GW Bush.

Isaiah 9:6,7 messianism or rhetoric pep talk?

Isaiah 9:6,7
כי ילד ילד לנו בן נתן לנו ותהי המשרה על שכמו ויקרא שמו פלא יועץ אל גבור אביעד שר שלום

Christian Bible translators had decided to interpret the preposition [אל] (el =toward) as the short form of addressing G'd.

The following is the phrase literal translation

כי ילד
that a child
ילד לנו
shall be born to us
בן נתן לנו
a son given to us
ותהי המשרה
the government would be
על שכמו
upon his shoulder
ויקרא שמו
his name would be called
פלא יועץ
wonder(ful) who be in counsel
a hero/warrior of
אבי עד
eternal father
שר שלום 
authority/prince of peace
Let me reproduce my interpretation and translation which I had posted elsewhere.

I compare this to Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech. This passage has to be read together with the surrounding text, not just picked out awkwardly by itself.

Let's say a politician or orator gives the following speech in an extremely poor black neighbourhood in the 1980s ...

I have a vision.
Despite all the adversity we face.
Despite all the poverty.
Despite the low rates of high school graduation.
A son will be born.
He will have an education.
He will excel in school.
He will be an engineer, a doctor, a scientist.
He will be the President.
He will be a hero blessed by G'd

Which is simply a rhetoric about a singular envisioned child as the example of any other child having a good education and becoming a respected member of society and even becoming the President.

I'm afraid that one day, in a thousand years', someone would pick up MLK's speech and turn it into a prophetic declaration about a pair of black and white kids who grew up together being the prophesied saviours of the world.

We Jews are oppressed.
We constantly lose our battles.
It seems we are not fit to have our own govt.
But people now in darkness see a light at the end of the tunnel.
That a child would be born.
A son given to us
He will have the respect and honour.
Heck, he would even be the gov'nor
And rub shoulders with a warrior of the Eternal Father.
And would be admired to bring peace.

The biblical orator of this passage believed that Jewish children would one day be heroes again, exemplified by a singular case - as in MLK's speech.

It is said that Hebrew does not have subjunctive mood. I dispute that. We should revisit that. I believe the conversive vav should actually be called a subjunctive vav, the writers of the Bible had used for setting the subjunctive mood.

Sunday, March 23, 2014

Psalm 8 mistranslation

Disclaimer: if you are a ufonut, please don't press on the stale issue of elohim being plural.

There is a mysterious preference of translation of a certain portion of Psalm 8.
In Hebrew:
מה אנוש כי תזכרנו ובן אדם כי תפקדנו
ותחסרהו מעט מאלֹהים וכבוד והדר תעטרהו

Let me transliterate the literal translation:

מה אנוש who/what is humankind
כי תזכרנו that You think about us
ובן אדם and son of adam/man
כי תפקדנו that You empower us
ותחסרהו מעט You lessen him a little
מאלֹהים than/from G'd
וכבוד והדר and glory and honour
תעטרהו you adorn him

Let me give you the direct translation uncontaminated by doctrinal bias:
Who is humankind that we are in your mind and the son of adam/man that you empower us?
You have him a little lesser than G'd and adorned him with glory and honour.

That is the way the American Standard Version translated it.

But many bibles translate that certain portion with
That you have him a little lesser than angels.

where they translate
as angels, rather than from G'd.

Let me tell you two reasons why the American Standard Version is the correct one.
  1. Let's presume
    should be translated as angels.Then the passage should be
    you have him as little angels.
    Without the preposition than/from.

  2. All other places in the Bible, מאלֹהים is translated as
    from G'd.
Compare with Hosea 2
והיה ביום ההוא נאם יי And is on that day declares Hashem
תקראי אישי ולא תקראי לי עוד בעלי shall you call me my-husband-peer and no longer call me my-husband-master

  1. The Hebrew word translated as sacrifice in the Bible is קורבן (QURVaN), from the root word קרב, which means be-near/in-proximity. קורב (QURVaN) is the pual conjugation of the word, which is passive - to be brought close/near. And then in Hebrew, we would turn a verb into participle/noun, by suffixes. In this case, we suffix the word with a feminine plural 3rd person - thus  קורבן (QURVaN).[1]
  2. Any occurrence of the word  קורבן (QURVaN) found in the Bible mistranslated as sacrifice, should be replaced with the meaning of Evolution towards being like G'd, that such so-called "sacrifice" are meant to illustrate our gradual evolution towards being nearly like G'd, that we would have the authority to either recklessly torture, punish or forgive the animals beneath us.
  3. Do you think G'd really needs us to burn up those animals for Him. For the two previous temples destroyed one after another, because we had failed to understand the actual implication of  קורבן (QURVaN), which is to remind us to continuously take steps in our billion years journey to become nearly like G'd. So that one day, in 10 billion years' time, humankind would evolve to become a matching eternal collective spouse of G'd.  קורבן (QURVaN) being a collective 3rd person Feminine.
  4. In the new temple of Ezekiel which we are to build, we would have the  קורבן (QURVaN) of a red heifer. We all know there is no such thing in nature as a red heifer. But we will be able to use bio-genetic engineering to produce one. We will have a red heifer for  קורבן (QURVaN).[2]
    Numbers 19:2 did not command us to sacrifice a red heifer.
  5. When the new temple of Ezekiel is built, we would present ourselves as yet having taken another step towards our Evolutionary journey towards being nearly like G'd. We would have successfully genetically engineered a red heifer. We will present this red heifer, take a sample of her blood, and prove that her DNA is genuinely artificial. We will also demonstrate our being more godlike by forgiving the heifer by setting her free. That would demonstrate that we have taken yet another step to fulfill Psalm 8.
  6. People believe that  קורבן (QURVaN) necessitates the killing of humans and animals to appease our G'd, as a substitute for our punishment have a completely screwed-up relationship with G'd.

[1]Please don't use Google translate to look up this word, because modern colloquial Hebrew has totally screwed up the meaning and sacredness of this word. Another example how Jews allowed Hebrew to be screwed up by acquiescing to Christian mistranslation and misconception of biblical words.
[2]Christian sources tell us that the red heifer is actually a common brown cow. That's pure BS, pun intended. Red heifers do not exist in nature, currently. It can only be produced through biogenetic engineering.

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Does the Bible forbid gay sex?

The two verses people use to decide if the Bible forbids gay sex are Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

Both verses are similar.

Leviticus 18:22 in Hebrew:
ואת זכר לא תשכב משכבי אשּה תועבה הוא

  1. Word literal translation:
    and with / to / at
    no / do-not
    shall you sleep / lie-down
    beds of
    is he/it

  2. Phrase literal translation:

    ואת זכר
    and with male
    לא תשכב
    shall you not sleep/lie-down
    משכבי אשּה
    a woman's beds
    תועבה הוא
    it is an abomination

  3. Raw translation:

    You should not lie-down/sleep a woman's bed with a male. It's an abomination.

  4. Grammatically conservative translation, contextual with passage:

    You should not sleep with a man on a woman's beds. It's an abomination.

  5. Interpretive (translation of passage subject to dogma/doctrines not found in the passage)

    • Cultural conservative:
      You should not sleep with a man as you would a woman. It's an abomination.

    • Liberal:
      You should not sleep with your male spouse on your female spouse's bed. It's an abomination.

    • Creative:
      You should not have sex with your male spouse the same way as you would your female spouse. It's gross. Use different techniques.

Also there is a list of punitive and severe curses in Deut 27. Severe curse against sleeping with your father's or brother's woman, against sleeping with your sister, against sleeping with animals, against subverting the rights of immigrants, against conspiring to murder your associate, and YET not a single curse against homosexuality !

A more sensible interpretation

Leviticus commands us to regulate homosexuality to prevent inhumane activities among those who practice it, as much as we are commanded to regulate to prevent the boiling of the meat of a kid in its mother's milk. In this interpretation, it would be an abomination to refuse to allow gay marriage to regulate it.

Other occurrences of the word

The word [משכבי] has other occurrences in the Bible, and all of them are translated as [beds of]:

Gen 49:4, Job 7:13, Prov 7:17, Song 3:1, Dan 4:5, Dan 4:10, Dan 4:13 are the only verses where [משכבי] is found the Bible, besides the two verses in Leviticus.

All these verses translate [משכבי] as [beds-of]. Why should Leviticus be any different?

Why would you cherry-pick these two cases and twist the grammar to translate it differently?

Wicked abominable willful translations, arrogantly over-riding the Word of G'd with your own defective common-sense.

Further grammatical analysis

There are too many people who want to deceptively translate
[משכבי אשּה]
[like sleeping with a woman]

That would require badly twisting the Hebrew grammar.

The biblical Hebrew preposition for [as/like] is [כ], which is found too frequently all over the Bible. There is not a single occurrence of the preposition [כ] in these two verses.

The phrase [as lying] is found in 1King 1v21 and Prov 23v34. Therefore, the phrase [like/as sleeping with a woman] according to the grammar used in these two verses would be
[כשכב את אשה]
which would be way clearer. If [like sleeping with a woman] is actually meant, then why would Leviticus not use the clear and distinct phrase [כשכב את אשה]?

There is a plural possessive connective yod[י], which is impossible to be explained away.

[משכב] is an active participle, which would merely make [משכבי אשּה]

ways, places or positions in which a woman sleeps.

It would be an extreme stretch to turn the phrase into

like sleeping with a woman

as there are more direct ways to express such in biblical Hebrew.

Passive vs Active

[משכבי] is not a passive participle/gerund/verbal-noun.

Example of passive participle can be found in Ezek 2v10.
[והיא כתובה פנים ואחור] = And its written face and backside.
[כתובה פנים] = face's being written
[והיא כתובה פנים ואחור] = its face's and its back-side's being written on.
Here the adjoining plural possessive character is [ה]hey rather than a [י]yod because writings are considered feminine.
[כתבה] = active participle.

Look at Daniel 5v7, v15, (regardless that the verses are mixed with aramaic grammar/words)
[כתבה דנה] = this active-writing.
The king was seeing something writing on the wall. He was not saying, "what is this being written", but "what is this writing".
The difference is the [ו]vav:
[כתבה] vs [כתובה]

In essence, Lev 20v13 and 18v22:
[משכבי אשּה] = the active verbal-noun belongs to the woman and not to the two guys wanting to sleep with each other.

?Did the verses write?
[משכובה אשּה] woman's passive-being-slept-with

The verses simply and grammatically say,
If you two guys want to sleep together please don't sleep the woman's active-participle-sleeping. Don't sleep together on her beds, or where she sleeps. 
The verses do not say
Two guys do not sleep a woman's passive-participle-being-slept-with.
For readers who may find it difficult to visualize active vs passive participles, using phrases in English as illustration of the difference between active and passive:
  • Do not photograph her (active)painting
  • Do not photograph her (passive)being painted.

Monday, February 17, 2014

Psalms 46:10, 11 - Be Still

The verse is enumerated as Psalms 46:11 in Jewish Bibles and as Psalms 46:10 in Christian ones.

The Hebrew in its original is

הרפו ודעו כי אנכי אלהים

which translates to

Relax, loosen up and know because I am G`d.
Which actually means,
Relax, be at ease, don't worry! And know because I am G`d. Its root is רפה which is to relax, loosen, be limpid and not be tense.הרפה is the active causative (היפעל) form, which means release one's grip, let it be, don't bother, relax and don't be tense.

In Hebrew, this verse actually says that G`d wants you to be at ease and stop worrying because He is G`d.

הרפו is the imperative plural "y'all should release your worries, loosen up, relax and not be tense".

דעו is the imperative plural "y'all should know".

So, whatever you are facing, relax, don't panic, be at ease, don't worry, be happy. Continue with your busy activities because you should be assured that He is G`d. As the next verse says that He, the G`d of Yakov is with us and is our fortified refuge.

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Psalm 23 - the precise translation.

I wish to provide a more precise translation of Psalm 23. This psalm is completely mistranslated in the English/Greek translations.

  1. Verse 1
    • מזמור לדוד - song-of/sung-to David
    • יי רעי - Hashem is my companion.
      • {רע} in this case actually means companion, or chaperone.
      • The word does not mean shepherd.
      • But it is used idiomatically as shepherd, because a sheep herder is expected to behave as a companion, as a friend.
    • לא אחסר - I shall not be lacking/less
      • I shall not be lesser than others. I shall not be insignificant.
      • The word חסר means less. It could be less, as being insufficient.Or less, in stature.
      • My Companion expects no less from my full abilities.
  2. Verse 2
    • בנאות דשא ירביצניin lush meadow He places/lays me
      • He places me where I will be comfortable.
    • על מי מנחות ינהלני - upon calming waters he shall usher me.

  3. Verse 3:
    • נפשי ישובב - my breath He shall restore.
    • ינחני במעגלי צדק - He confines me within encirclement of righteousness
      • {עגל} = round, circle, sphere
        • Do not confuse {עגל=round} as equiv to {גל=rolling} even though having common etymology. 1 King 7:23, 31, 35, 10:19 {עגל}=round.
        • Rolling of wheels of wagon = path. But {עגל} is around or round, not "rolling".
        • {מגל} vs {מעגל}
        • Therefore, causative/intensive (depending of vowelzation) {מעגל} = cause to be round/around or implements/implemented as being round/around.
        • Causative {מעגלי} = encirclement, surrounding
      • {נחן} = commit = a superior setting a subordinate in place
      • Therefore in this usage {נחן} = confine
    • למען שמו - due to His Name
      • {למען} actually means "in response to", "reciprocating". Used idiomatically in Hebrew as "due to".
    Verse 3 explains Numbers 15:38-39, where tassels in Hebrew is tzitzit [ציצית] that keep the garments from fraying.
    • Tzitzit [ציצית] actually means flower blossoms.
    • Psalm 119:103 How sweet are Your words to taste from honey to my mouth.
    • When you see the tzizit/beatiful blossoms encircling and tied to the garment to keep it from fraying, then you will understand My law and righteousness that I encircle you is sweet to keep your communities from fraying apart.

  4. Verse 4
    • גם כי אלך בגיא צלמות
      • also/moreover as shall I walk in a valley of shadow of death
        • This appears to be subjunctive: moreover should I walk in a valley of shadow of death
    • לא אירא רע
      • I shall not fear evil
    • כי אתה עמדי
      • as You stand with me
        • עמד = root for stand or located
    • שבטך ומשענתך המה ינחמני 
      • Your tribal-rod and your providing-support they comfort-console me.
      • i.e. Your domain-leadership and your support they assure me.
      • Notes:
        • {שבט} has dual meanings = "rod" and "tribe". There are many passages in the Bible where {שבט} is used to mean "tribe".
        • {שען} means a support.
          {משען} is to provide support
          {משענת} is the participle = the providing of support
        • {משענת} could be used idiomatically as "supporting staff".
        • Most English translators commit the error of using the idiomatic meaning, rather than its actual grammatical meaning. Both a walking stick or a super-grandiose regal looking staff can be called a [משענת]. But in this case, משענת means exactly what it means - G'd providing support.
        • {נחם} is to comfort and console. Perhaps, assure.

  5. Verse 5:
    • תערך לפני שלחן 
      • You will arrange a table before me
        • {ערך} = arrange, organise, lay-out
    • נגד צררי
      • affronting my enemies.
      • Alternatively: as I confront my troubles/adversity
    • דשנת בשמן ראשי - ravishing my head with oil.
      • Note, contrary to usual English translations, there is actually no {anointing}, but {ravishing}.
      • He will make your head luxurious and presentable.
    • כוסי רויה - my cup overflows
      • You will have more than you need.
    You hold me up in pride and honour as I confront my troubles/adversity.I will have more than I need.
  6. Verse 6
    is a vert troubling verse because of how rampantly it is mistranslated. Verse 6 is a threatening warning. The verse starts with the Hebrew word for "but" or "on the other hand". It is very important, that the verse does not begin with the calming assurance "surely". The verse is not an assurance of eternal life.
    • אך טוב וחסד ירדפוני כל ימי חיי
      • HOWEVER Goodness and mercy shall pursue/harass/stalk me all the days of my life.
        • {רדפ} means to pursue, harass, haunt, hunt down
        • If the author had really wanted to say "follow", then the word [נתב] would have been used. 
        • But the author deliberately used the word [רדף].
    • ושבתי בבית יי לארך ימים
      • and I shall stay in the house of the Hashem for prolonged days
      • and I shall prolong my stay in the house of Hashem.
        • The verse does not end with "forever".
    Verse 6 says, After all the assurances the Hashem given in the 1st 5 verses, BUT this is the warning that all that is meant to be good and merciful can and will pursue, harass and hunt me down, so that I too exhibit goodness and mercy. But goodness/mercy be required of me, as much as it is provided to me.  And therefore, I will stay in the house of the Hashem for prolonged/extended days.Many people want to say {לארך ימים} means {length of days}, which is contraindicated by Lamentations 5:20.

The full psalm
מזמור לדוד Psalm of David
יי רעי Hashem my companion
לא אחסר I shall lack not
בנאות דשא In regions of vegetation
ירביצני He will recline me
על מי מנחות By waters of relaxation
ינהלני He will direct me
נפשי ישובב My soul/breath He will restore
ינחני במעגלי צדק He will place me in surrounding/encirclement of righteousness
למען שמו for-sake-of His Name
גם כי אלך Also as I traverse
בגיא צלמות in a ravine/valley of shadow-of-death
לא אירא רע I will not fear evil
כי אתה עמדי for You stand with me
שבטך ומשענתך Your leadership/dominance and Your providing-support
המה ינחמני they will comfort-console(i.e. assure) me
תערך לפני שלחן You then arrange before me a table
נגד צררי confronting my enemies
דשנת בשמן ראשי You invigorate my head with oil
כוסי רויה My cup overfills
אך טוב וחסד ירדפוני but goodness and mercy will pursue me
כל ימי חיי all the days of my life
ושבתי בבית יי and I shall reside in the house of the LORD
לארך ימים for lengthened days