The evidence affirms that Yah’s Word was as inerrant as language allows when it was revealed to Moseh and to the Children of Yisra’el, and when it was scribed in Ancient Hebrew—mankind’s oldest existing alphabet. But God makes no claim that your human translation is inerrant, because He knows with language, such a claim would be impossible. Beyond this, insuring continual inerrancy would require Him to interfere with freewill – something He will not do.
While language is mankind’s most important tool, it is an imprecise one—especially apart from Hebrew, the language God, Himself, authored. Further, no language translates perfectly from one dialect to another, and the cultural baggage is almost always lost. And while these are issues with which we will grapple, the biggest problem with translations is that there is often very little correlation between the text of the oldest manuscripts and what is printed on the pages of the most popular “bibles.”
As a rough rule of thumb, at least with regard to the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, I have found that the text of the oldest manuscripts (those found in Qumran dating from the first, second, and third centuries BCE and first century CE) differs from that found in the Masoretic which serves as the basis of our translations (the oldest reasonably complete Masoretic Text (from masoret, which means “to be in compliance”) dates to the 11th century CE) by one word in five—especially considering the wide variety of choices which result from the rabbinic vocalization process. In places where the manuscripts agree, and where the “niquwd – dot pointing” system of diacritical signs does not alter the nature of the words themselves, another one word in five is errantly translated. Yet another one word in five is so inadequately represented in modern languages, the full meaning is lost. In other words, less than fifty percent of what you read in the “Old Testament” of an English “Bible” is reliable.
By way of proof, you may be surprised to learn that God told us His name—Yahowah—exactly 7,000 times in His Covenant Scriptures. That is an average of seven times per page when His message is formatted using today’s publishing guidelines. And yet, on each occurrence, religious men elected to copyedit the Author, replacing His name with a title of their own choosing—one associated with Lord Ba’al, better known as Satan, all seven - thousand times.
But that’s comparatively good news. The oldest extant manuscripts from Yahowsha’s Disciples, the Greek codices dating from the first to the third centuries CE, differ so substantially from one another, and so overwhelmingly from the more complete fourth - century manuscripts like the codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, there is literally no hope of accurately reconstructing the preponderance of what is errantly known as the “New Testament.”
Philip Comfort, the world’s leading authority on this subject, wrote the following indictment in his “Introduction” to the Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts: “This book provides transcriptions of sixty - nine of the earliest New Testament manuscripts . All of the manuscripts are dated from the early second century to the beginning of the fourth (A.D. 100 – 300). We chose A.D. 300 as our terminus da quem because New Testament manuscript production changed radically after the persecution under Diocletian (A.D. 303 – 305) and especially after Constantine declared Christianity to be a legal religion in the empire.”
To illustrate this point, John Mill, an Oxford scholar way back in the 17th - century, using some one - hundred manuscripts centuries older than the 13th - century codex used to create the Textus Receptus, systematically noted over 30,000 discrepancies between them. Over time, especially now that we have unearthed nearly seventy pre - Constantine manuscripts dating from the late 1st - century to the late 3rd - century, the list of discrepancies between the relatively recent, and highly - regarded, Nestle - Aland edition, and the earliest witnesses, has grown to exceed 300,000—which is almost twice the number of words contained in the text. This problem is so enormous in scope and consequence; it’s not surprising that Christian clerics sweep the evidence under the doormats of their churches, hoping that no one learns the truth. For if they did, the reliability of the “New Testament,” the dubious source of credibility underlying Christianity, would be destroyed.
Beyond this unpopular reality, that it is now impossible to accurately reconstruct the Greek text which forms the “New Testament,” we must also deal with Paul’s credibility, and the veracity of his letters, in our quest to understand what is and is not trustworthy. You must ask yourself if it is rationally possible for letters which overtly undermine Yahowah’s Torah to have been inspired by the very God whose word is demeaned therein. And for those wrestling with this issue, for those who are not aware of Paul’s criticisms of the Torah, should you not concur with my assessment of him and them, after you have read the Towrah, Covenant, Instructions, and Invitations sections of this Introduction to God, feel free to jump ahead in time and consider the recently completed first volume of Questioning Paul, called The Great Galatians Debate. In it, Paul’s letters are compared to God’s Word, so that you will be prepared to make an informed decision.
With regard to the Greek texts known as “Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, First and Second John, First and Second Peter, James, and Revelation,” virtually all “bible” translations either corrupt or change most names and titles, including all of the most important ones. This problem is further compounded by the fact that none of the seven names or titles attributed to Divinity (errantly rendered as: Lord, Jesus, Christ, God, Father, Spirit, or Son) were actually written out on any page of any of the pre - Constantine Greek manuscripts. Placeholders were uniformly used to tell us where to insert: Yahowah (God’s one and only name), Yahowsha’ (meaning Yah Saves), Ma’aseyah (which means “Implement Doing Yah’s Work”), and Set - Apart Spirit (from Ruwach Qodesh).
There are two reasons these Divine Placeholders were universally presented on every codex written by Yahowsha’s Disciples and copied by scribes during the first - to the third - centuries. Names like Yahowah and Yahowsha’ cannot be transliterated (replicating the proper pronunciation) using the Greek alphabet. And God’s titles are meaningful in their original language—where the words themselves convey important instructions.
Correctly assigning the proper names and titles God selected and communicated should not have been difficult, especially since He and His human messengers told us where to look for answers: the Torah, Prophets and Psalms. But sadly, religious men and women have conspired to hide the evidence contained therein. Further exacerbating this problem, most Christians have been misled by Paul into believing their religion serves as the replacement for the Torah’s teachings, not recognizing there is only one Covenant—not two as Paul protests.
Every name and title Yahowah chose to reveal conveys essential truths, and yet these messages are routinely ignored. “Jesus” is actually Yahowsha’. In Hebrew it means “Yah Saves.” The name “Jesus” is manmade, recent, erroneous, and meaningless at best. Yahowsha’ tells us that Yahowah manifested part of Himself corporeally, and that in the form of a man He, Himself, did what was required to save us. Yahowsha’ defines the Ma’aseyah’s identity and describes His mission. Whereas “Jesus” was named after “Gesus,” sometimes transliterated “Hesus,” the savior of the Druid religion where the “Horned One” is god.
This of course begs the question: since “Jesus” is not even remotely an accurate transliteration of any of the placeholders used to identify Yahowsha’s name, and since the proper pronunciation is provided hundreds of times in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, why did religious men conceive and promote the name “Jesus” beginning in the 17th century? What was their motivation in propagating this myth? The fact is: no one named “Jesus” lived in the first century CE, and most all pastors and priests know it. Faith in “Jesus” is therefore misplaced.
For those seeking a more in - depth analysis of Yahowsha’s name, as well as the etymology of man’s errant moniker for Him, rest assured these subjects will be revisited in the next section. After all, the crime of separating Yahowsha’ from Yahowah by changing one name and concealing the other, may well be the most devastating transgression in all of human history.
Moving on to other misnomers, “Jew” is actually Yahuwdy. It means “Yah is Abundantly Sufficient, Of Yah, From Yah, and Those Who Are Related to Yah.” While anti - Semites the world over have spawned a hatred for all things “Jewish,” the motivation which inspired this misnomer remains religious animosity for their namesake.
“Israel” is really Yisra’el, which as a compound of ‘ysh sarah ‘el, means “individuals who strive and contend with, engage and persist with, are set free and are empowered by God.” This is important in that it means that those who seek to distance themselves from the Torah cannot discount passages mindlessly, believing they were only addressed to the “Jews.”
Yisra’el encompasses every “individual who strives to engage and endure with God, who has been set free by God, and who is now empowered by God.” As such, Yisra’el includes people from all races and regions of the earth. The one thing all of the Children of Yisra’el have in common is Yahowah, their Father.
“Isaiah,” the most prolific of the prophets, is actually Yasha’yah; which can be translated: “Salvation is from Yah.” Isaiah is meaningless, while Yasha’yah reveals to us the very reason the prophetic book was inspired.
“John,” both the Apostle and the Immerser, is Yahowchanan; a name which boldly proclaims that “Yah is Merciful.” Mattanyah, errantly transliterated “Matthew,” tells us that “Yahowah is offering us a gift.”
And on and on it goes, with a lost learning opportunity encapsulated in every name. In fact, as we shall discover, there are 260 names and titles in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms which like Ma’aseyah and Yahowsha’, are based on Yahowah’s name. Collectively these affirm aspects of God’s character and purpose no less than ten thousand times. If you rely on an English translation of the “bible,” that is how many times you have been robbed of meaningful, and sometimes essential, insights.
The same is true with many of the words Yahowah selected. Men have changed them. “Holy” is actually from qodesh, meaning “set - apart and cleansing.” It is one of Scripture’s most oft repeated and revealing concepts—one applied to the Ma’aseyah, to the Spirit, to the Sabbath, to the Temple, to the Ark of the Covenant, to the Seven Called - Out Invitations to Meet with God which facilitate our salvation, and of course, to those who are saved.
In this vein, “church” is a corruption of ekklesia, meaning “called - out assembly.” It is the Greek equivalent of miqra’, the title Yahowah chose to describe His seven annual appointments with humankind. And therein lies an essential truth—one hidden by your favorite “bible” publisher.
“Cross” is a corruption of stauros, meaning “upright pole.” Its root is histemi, the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew quwm, meaning “to stand up so as to enable others to stand, establishing them and raising them up.” And interestingly, stauros was never written out in the text of any pre - Constantine Greek manuscript. It was always represented by a Divine Placeholder, signifying that the “Upright One” and the “Upright Pillar,” both of which serve as the “Doorway to Heaven,” represent God. This now hidden truth serves as the foundation of the Word and the Way.
“Angel” entered our lexicon by transliterating aggelos, meaning “messenger,” rather than translating the Greek term. As a result, most do not understand their nature or purpose.
“Gospel,” however, is without basis. The revealed term is euangelion, a compound of eu, meaning “healing and beneficial” and aggelos, “message and messenger.” The religious designation has caused most Christians to believe that there was such a thing as “the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” and that it differed from the Torah. But neither is true.
The concept of an “Old Testament” and a “New Testament” was derived from Marcion, an anti - Semitic Christian who shaped the new religion Paul had conceived. According to Yahowah, there is but one “Covenant,” one which He will “renew” upon His return. Moreover, the term “covenant,” is from beryth, which means “family relationship” and “marriage vow.” I say that because beryth is based upon beyth (commonly vocalized bayth or baiyth), meaning “home and family,” further defining the kind of relationship Yahowah is interested in establishing. And by comparison, apart from its religious legacy, a “testament” is a “document designed to determine how a person’s property would be disposed after their death.” In Christianity, their new god arose like a phoenix from the ashes of the one he had made obsolete.
The simple truth is: Yahowah did not replace Judaism with Christianity, Jews with Gentiles, nor Israel with the Church. He has consistently described and facilitated the relationship He originally established with Abraham and developed through Moseh.
While we are on the subject of “Gospel,” “Old” and “New Testament,” you should know that the title “Bible” was derived from the name of a pagan sun goddess. While I will prove this in the next section, suffice it to say for now, neither Yahowah nor Yahowsha’ ever referred to their Word as “the Bible.”
This Introduction to God does not claim that every obfuscation of the truth was purposeful, yet each publisher’s reluctance to correct their “bibles” serves as an indictment against them. Furthermore, at times the comparison between the oldest manuscripts and today’s revisions will leave us with no alternative but to assume these copyedits were purposeful. And since these deceptions have been willfully and knowingly advanced by pastors and priests. Clerics are complicit in the corruption—coconspirators if you will. Hopefully, this realization will lead you to the place Yahowah wants you to be—trusting Him and not men.
At their best, translations are a compromise between attempts at word - for - word literalism and loose thought - for - thought interpolations. Either way, much of the intended message is lost or misrepresented for the sake of readability, brevity, or familiarity. So we will dig for truth the hard way. We’re going to work for it. The key words in most passages will be amplified from the original languages. Amplification is a process whereby many words are used to properly convey the full meaning and nuances of the original term as it was known and used in its time, context, and culture. If a Hebrew or Greek word requires a paragraph to adequately communicate its meaning, as histemi does for example, you will find the required background, etymology, and shadings. In other words, we are going to scratch well below the surface. This will require you to read most passages several times to fully appreciate what Yahowah and Yahowsha’ are saying. To understand God’s perspective, you are going to have to want to know it.
When it comes to translations, my goal is to accurately communicate the totality of the message Yahowah intended. But that does not necessarily make the translations literal for the following reasons. First, like most ancient languages, there was no capitalization or punctuation in Ancient, Paleo, or Babylonian Hebrew. This problem however, at least relative to the start of a new sentence, was usually remedied by the inclusion of a conjunction, typically “wa – and,” which designates an additional or related thought. Using this as a guide, we can apply English grammar rules to capitalize the first word in a sentence and add a period or question mark to designate its completion. We may also capitalize the initial letter of proper names, titles, and places in our quest to bridge the gap between ancient practices and modern expectations.
As it relates to this issue, those who protest by suggesting that since pronouns for God were not capitalized in the original language, they should not be capitalized in our translations, are dealing in half truths. There simply was no distinction between lower and uppercase forms.
Second, speaking of conjunctions (and, but, so, yet, nor, or, for), in Hebrew they are usually attached to a noun or verb, as opposed to being rendered independently. This is also the case with articles (a, an, the), prepositions (in, by, with, of, on, to, from) and pronouns (I, me, we, us, you, she, he, they, them). For example, the opening line of the book of Qara’ / He Called Out / Leviticus 1:1 reads: “wyqara’ ויקרא ‘elmosehאל־משׁה wydabar וידבר Yahowahיהוה ‘elywאליו mw‘ohelמאהל mow’edמועד la‘amar לאמר ,” which says: “And He (wa y) called out (qara’) to (‘el) Moseh (moseh) , and He (wa y) , Yahowah (yahowah) spoke (dabar) to him (‘elyw) from (min) the shining shelter of (‘ohel) the appointed meeting time (mow’ed) to (la) say (‘amar) : ”
In this regard, you’ll notice that the transliterated sound of each Hebrew word set within the parenthetical was written without reference to conjunctions, articles, prepositions, or pronouns. Had I not done this, you would not have been able to verify the meaning of the Hebrew words for yourself. While you can look up qara’, Moseh, Yahowah, dabar, min, ‘ohel, mow’ed, and ‘amar in any Hebrew lexicon, you will not find the prefixed and suffixed forms, such as wyqara’, ‘elmoseh, wydabar, mw’ohel, or la’amar.
The reason that I’ve taken the time to convey the Hebrew basis of each sentence is because verification is an essential component of discovery. Questioning leads to understanding. So by presenting the Hebrew for your consideration, your search for answers becomes better directed and more readily enabled. And while we are on this topic, you will find I routinely demonstrate that the a’ sound in words like qara’, the ‘o in ‘ohel, the ‘e in mow’ed, and the ‘a pronunciation in words like ‘amar were derived from the Hebrew letters Aleph (א) and Aiyn (ע), which were depicted using apostrophes. Similarly, while Torah and Towrah are pronounced the same way, and are thus both acceptable transliterated spellings, the advantage of Towrah is that it properly discloses the four letters which comprise the title while also providing the basis for the word’s pronunciation.
This brings us to a third challenge: completeness. Qara’, which was translated “called out” in this passage, also means “to summon, to invite, to recite, and to read,” in addition “to welcome, to greet, and to meet.” Therefore, in this context, it would have been equally correct to say that Yah “summoned” Moseh, thereby conveying a judicial, authoritarian, and commanding connotation. It would also have been within the definition of qara’ to say: Yah “invited” Moseh to listen to what He had to say, which would have provided a sense of choice, longing, and relationship. Similarly, it would not have been improper to write: He “read and recited something (qara’)” to Moseh,” because He, Yahowah, spoke the Word (dabar) to him. Moreover, it would have been perfectly appropriate to write that God “welcomed” Moseh, that He “greeted” him, and that He “met with” him. The fact is, all of these things are true.
The fourth challenge to providing an accurate and complete translation is symbolism. For example, ‘ohel, in the previous passage, could simply have been translated “tent.” But had I done so, you would have missed the fact that ‘ohel is also “a covering, a home, a shelter, and a protected place suited for living.” And yet, those symbolic implications are just the beginning. ‘Ohel is based upon, and in the text is written identically to, ‘ahal, which means “to shine brightly, clearly reflecting light.” It even means: “to pitch a tent so as to provide a moveable residence.”
Collectively then, rather than a nondescript “tent,” the ‘ohel / ‘ahal represent a “protective enclosure of radiant light,” a “shining shelter,” a “covering which is conducive to life,” and a “home” associated with “Yahowah, Himself,” by way of His “mow’ed – appointed meeting times.” As such, this “radiant shelter” is symbolic of the Set - Apart Spirit’s Garment of Light which makes us appear perfect in God’s eyes, enabling us to enter His presence and campout with Him on the Mow’ed Miqra’ of Sukah – Shelters. And thus, in the examination and amplification of a word, we come to understand Yahowah’s purpose and the means to achieve it. So then the question becomes: how much of this can we expect to process and understand before the sheer quantity of information becomes confusing and disorienting?
This leads us to the fifth challenge where we are compelled to consider every reasonable vocalization of each word. The diacritic markings, or vowel points, in the Masoretic Text, are the product of Rabbinical interpretations. This was highlighted by our discussion of ‘ohel versus ‘ahal, where the meanings were different, albeit complementary.
In that vocalization influences most every word in the text, it is important that you realize that the Rabbinical choices were often reasonable, but at times arbitrary, and sometimes purposefully misleading. For example, the Masoretes chose to vocalize every word and name in the passage we just read, save one: Yahowah’s name. And yet, it was written using the same twenty - two letter alphabet in which every other name, title, and word was conveyed as it would have been spoken. The fact is, these rabbis didn’t want you or anyone else to know, much less call upon, or proclaim Yahowah’s name.
While we are on the subject of vocalization, there is but one hard and fast rule in this realm of approximations where the variant means to phonetically convey foreign words are all considered valid. Names and titles must always be transliterated (properly replicating the sound using the new alphabet) while words must always be translated (properly conveying the meaning in the new language). The pronunciation of names of the Pharaoh Ramses, Genghis Khan, Der Fuehrer Adolf Hitler, and Islamic Jihadist Osama bin Laden do not change from one language to another. Similarly, the name and title Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ should never be altered, much less substituted for something of man’s choosing.
Sixth, word order in Hebrew is less significant than it is in English and is often reversed. Rather than write “Yahowah’s Torah” or “Set - Apart Spirit,” the text reads “towrah yahowah” and “ruwach qodesh.” Also along these lines, verbs don’t always sit in the middle of the action, as is required in English, between subject and object. So in the transition from Hebrew to English, one cannot slavishly follow the word order of the original language.
Our seventh challenge to a proper translation may come as a surprise. Ancient and Paleo - Hebrew exist as an aspectual language, meaning that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending almost entirely upon the subject and context of the conversation. Hebrew tenses are instead inclusive with regard to time. So while we can almost always deduce the proper tense based upon the context of a discussion, the realization that the message itself was not limited to a certain period of time makes everything God revealed applicable for everyone throughout time.
For example, in the Instructions section we will consider the preamble Yahowah wrote to His Seven Instructions. “I am Yahowah your God who relationally brought you out and delivered you from the realm of the crucible of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” And while it is true that He personally engaged in human history and performed this miracle on behalf of the Children of Yisra’el nearly 3,500 years ago, it is also true He re - engaged 1,500 years later to deliver all who are willing from human oppression and spiritual judgment. Yahowah has always been, and will always be, ready, willing, and able to save those who are receptive to relying upon Him. It should therefore be noted that Yahowah’s Word, like Yahowah, Himself, is always true, regardless of time or place. So in this way, the lack of tenses serves to affirm the eternal reliability of God’s testimony.
To develop this further, in the Glossary of Morpho - Syntactic Terminology for Hebrew, we learn that in the Scriptural form of the language: “verbs convey perspective” and “they reflect the kind of action being preformed,” but do so “without respect to the time of the action,” and thus “do not reflect chronological processes.” They report: “The Hebrew perfect, for example, is not a tense, a grammatical term that speaks of the time of the verb’s action (past, present, future, etc.). Scriptural Hebrew does not have tenses like English or Greek (time of the action is conveyed by context). The perfective aspect refers to a kind of action, not the time of the action. An action in Hebrew may be viewed or conceived as entire even if that action has not yet taken place.”
Then, describing the imperfect prefixed conjugation, the GMST states: “It views the action of the verb from the ‘inside’ or from the perspective of the action’s unfolding. This imperfective aspect can speak of (depending on context) habitual actions, actions in progress, or even completed actions that have unfolding, ongoing results. The term ‘imperfective’ does not refer to tense though, because Scriptural Hebrew does not have tenses which convey timing. An action can be viewed in process in the past (‘was walking’), the present (‘is walking’), or even the future (‘will be walking’). The only possible exception to this rule is the imperfect waw consecutive, known as the ‘preterite’ form, which at times is construed to convey a previous action.”
While you do not need this Introduction to God to include a thesis on Hebrew grammar, a slightly more comprehensive overview might serve as a helpful handrail as we proceed. In this light, the most important thing to remember is that we are translating a conversation out of a language which was specifically created and perfectly designed to communicate God’s Word accurately, and then into one which is considerably less adequate.
Relative to the verbs, the issues are considerable. The fact that Hebrew verbs are temporally infinite and not stuck in time is just the beginning of our challenge, although a formidable one, because that which is in Hebrew, also was and will be. And while these conditions exist most every time a verb is deployed, if the resulting translations consistently reflected the past, past perfect, present, future, and future perfect aspect of each verb, the sentences would become so complex, they would test your patience and forestall comprehension.
The plethora of Hebrew stems adds to this complexity. They are especially challenging to reflect without adding so many words that the focus of the discussion is lost. And yet, if their relational influence is ignored, much of the meaning is lost.
Beginning with the most popular form, be aware that the qal stem encourages a literal interpretation. It tells us that the message is real, that the action has or will actually occur, and that the sentiment being expressed is genuine. And because it is by far the most common stem, it reveals how to properly interpret Scripture.
While that is simple enough, the influence of the piel, niphal, and hiphil stems is considerably more challenging to communicate in English. Each establishes a relationship between the verb and either its subject, its object, or both. With the hiphil stem, the subject causes the object of the verb to participate in the action. The hophal then becomes a more passive version of the hiphil.
By using the piel stem, the object of the verb endures the effect of the act. It thereby puts the object into play, but not necessarily as a result of the subject. The niphal, as the reflexive counterpart of the qal, is then the inverse of the piel, as it establishes a genuine relationship between the subject and the verb. Akin to this, the hafel stem is the causative form of the niphal, while the piel exposes this process. But that is just the beginning. There are two score of stems, all adding their own unique flavor to the discussion while developing the relationships between subjects, objects, and verbs.
The most common conjugations in Hebrew, the perfect and imperfect, are relatively straightforward. With the perfect, the action is to be considered total, whole, and complete, and yet without any reference to time. With the imperfect, the action is consistent, sometimes habitual, and always continuous. The imperfect conjugation speaks of something that is ongoing throughout time so as to deliver unfolding results.
If this were not sufficiently difficult, within this mix we have to consider participles, which as verbal adjectives can either modify a noun or substantiate one. Then there are verbs fashioned as infinitive constructs, whereby the word serves as both a verb and as a noun, often to convey process. Also on occasion we will come across the consecutive form, which blends the ongoing influences of the imperfect with an expression of volition.
Challenging translators all the more are the imperative, cohortative, jussive, and paragogic moods. So while the imperative can express a command, and is equally at home communicating a purpose or a request, it is always volitional. Therefore, the imperative presents the action as being the choice or desire of the verb’s subject. The cohortative then presents a first - person perspective on the exercise of freewill.
Adding to these mood indications we have the jussive, which is typically a third party expression of volition—and thus reflects a conscious choice. Also, the paragogic heh and nun suffixes typically mirror the cohortative.
Collectively then, by adding or omitting a letter, Hebrew verbs can convey a wealth of insights which require the addition of many words, including extra pronouns, conjunctions, and prepositions along with multiple tenses, to replicate in English. So, while I am being more open and honest with you than other translators, I am admittedly an inadequate guide. I say that because to properly understand the message being conveyed by Yahowah you not only have to read Hebrew, you actually have to think in Hebrew. Everything else is just a pale reflection of the genuine article.
The eighth challenge is that in Hebrew, like most all languages, words have more than one meaning. To appreciate the consequence of this reality, I’d like you to consider Yahowah’s introduction to Yowm Kippurym. In this passage, I’ve highlighted the words which convey more than one thought: “Then Yahowah declared the Word to (dabar – communicated with) Moseh, saying, ‘On the tenth of the seventh (shaby’y – from shaba’, to vow or make a solemn oath on the basis of seven) month (chodesh – time of renewal) is the Day of Reconciliations (yowm kippurym – the day of pardons and forgiveness) . This exists as (hayah – this was, is, and will be) a set - apart and cleansing (qodesh) Called - Out Invitation to Meet (miqra’ – an appointment for reading and reciting, based upon qara’, to be summoned, to be invited, to be called out, to proclaim, to welcome, to meet, and to be greeted) with you. And your soul (nepesh) shall respond and answer (‘anah – reply to the summons, making a declaration after engaging in thought, vocally communicating) , appearing before and approaching (qarab – coming and drawing near, being present with) the adoptive Mother who purifies, enlightens, and elevates (‘iseh/‘isah – the feminine manifestation of light) unto Yahowah ( - - יהוה) .” (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 23:26 - 27)
Since ‘anah and ‘onah, translated above as “shall respond and answer,” are scribed using identical alphabetic characters in the Torah, and are only distinguished today by arbitrary diacritic markings assigned by religious rabbis, we should not only consider both words, but also the various connotations of each. In particular, with ‘anah we have a variety of viable options. According to the primary definition of ‘anah found in the world’s leading lexicons, our souls can “answer a call and respond to a summons,” and they can do so “by replying and making a declaration.” Or our souls can “be afflicted, disturbed, and oppressed in a state of anxiety and distress, bending down and being miserable and wretched, being raped and violated in humility.” A third option is akin to the first: our souls can be “concerned,” which is “to be engaged in deep thought.” A fourth consideration which can be derived from the most reliable Hebrew lexicons is: our souls can “sing, vocally communicating with” God. Rendered the same way in the text, ‘onah conveys the idea of “living together in a marriage.”
Therefore, based upon the vowel pointing, there are five potential ways to translate ‘anah—four of which are similar and consistent with the theme of reconciliation, and one which is diametrically opposed to it. And since the choice as to how to render ‘anah is obvious in this context, it’s appalling that every English “bible” translation selected the lone variation that conflicts with God’s purpose and nature.
But these things known, there are two potential reasons behind the existence of such radically divergent definitions—one human and one divine—which I’d like you to consider. Rabbis and priests in the process of turning Yahowah’s merciful message of redemption into the mean - spirited legalistic rant of a fearsome god, may have redefined ‘anah somewhere along the way to serve their oppressive religions. After all, if God can be made to say that He wants us to oppress ourselves, what could be so bad about enduring religious oppression?
Or, it is possible, even likely, that the dual connotations were intended to provide an essential insight. You see, on the Mow’ed Miqra’ey / Called - Out Invitations to Meet with God on Pesach / Passover and Matsah / Unleavened Bread, Yahowah voluntarily “afflicted” His soul in the worst sense of the word, so that we might “engage in deep thought and carefully consider” His sacrifice, and as a result “answer His invitation” and “respond to His summons” on this day so as to be “reconciled.” This contrast thereby provides us with an explanation of what God did on our behalf, all so that we wouldn’t endure the same fate. But to upend this profound and merciful act, and by afflicting ourselves, we not only display our utter contempt for Yahowah’s sacrifice, we are inferring that by making a meaningless sacrifice ourselves, we somehow believe that we can contribute to our own salvation.
The ninth challenge to conveying a correct and complete translation is also manifest in this Towrah passage. It is apparent, at least to me, that time and religion have conspired to rob us of the intended meanings of many words, specifically ‘iseh/‘isah, which was translated “the adoptive Mother who purifies, enlightens, and elevates” in the Qara’ / Leviticus passage. Sometimes transliterated ‘isseh or ‘ishshah, this word is almost always rendered “burnt offering” or “an offering made by fire” in English bibles because it is indistinguishable in the text from the feminine noun for fire, ‘eseh. However, neither ‘iseh nor ’eseh has an etymological connection with any Hebrew word even remotely associated with “making an offering.”
But ‘iseh / ‘isah is used repeatedly in the Towrah to describe Yahowah’s personal appearance before the Children of Yisra’el on Mount Horeb. So God is obviously comfortable using fire to describe His light, His radiant energy, and His ability to enlighten. It is one of the many ways He has revealed Himself to us and one of the devices He has deployed in His meetings with us.
Further, “fire,” is used throughout Scripture as a metaphor for judgment, which is the separation of good from bad. It represents purification in the sense that gold is separated from the dross in a crucible. Fire is symbolic of light and enlightenment, and it conveys the concepts of warmth and comfort. And with regard to the Miqra’ey, fire is used to express the idea of something which elevates and uplifts—a reference to the primary direction a fire’s smoke and energy travel.
But there is more to ‘iseh than this. Based upon its Aleph - Shin - He (ה ש א) composition, the word Yahowah selected could well have been ‘isah, meaning “a female individual, a wife, woman, and non - biological adoptive Mother.” It is the feminine version of ‘ish, which designates “a male individual.” Yahowah referred to Himself and His associates as ‘ish in His meeting with Abraham. Yahowsha’ calls Himself an ‘ish during Ya’aqob’s transition to ‘Yisra’el—Individual - Who - Strives - With - God.
And again, other than context, there is literally no way to distinguish between ‘eseh or ‘iseh in the Torah because the three Hebrew letters which comprise these words are identical. But yet it makes no sense to “appear before and approach” a “feminine fire” or a human “wife or woman” in the context of a Miqra’ dedicated to reconciliation with God. So, rather than investigate what ‘iseh/‘isah might actually and originally have meant, most translators followed the rabbinical lead and changed qarab to “present,” as opposed to reflecting its actual meaning which is “to approach and draw near,” and then they rendered ‘iseh as “an offering made by fire,” even though there is no support for “offering” or “made” in the Hebrew term. Moreover, there is a perfectly good and common Hebrew word to convey the idea of a burnt offering: ‘olah. It is deployed 286 times in this context to convey this specific thought, which is one of many reasons why I was unwilling to render ‘isheh exactly the same way.
Since it is obvious that religious clerics over the ages have robbed many words of their original meanings, and that they have changed many others to suit their oppressive agendas, I have found that the best way to properly translate a corrupted term, and return to God’s intended meaning, is to consider how it was used the first time the word appears in the Towrah. And for the first use of ‘iseh, we turn to the Towrah, where we find: “And (wa) you shall render as smoke (qatar – you should turn into and send up as smoke, you should become enveloped and transformed, and become one with) , accordingly and in proximity to (‘eth) , the entire (kol ha – all of the) lamb (‘ayl – the strong, mighty, young, clean, and protective, male sacrificial lamb who serves as the wooden doorway) upon the altar (ha mizbeah – the place of sacrifice) . It (huw’ – or more accurately “he” speaking of the lamb) rises up (‘olah – as a burnt offering which is acceptable and elevates, from ‘alah,meaning ascends) toward (la – according to and in the direction of) Yahowah ( - - יהוה – Yahowah) as the spirit of soothing acceptance (reyach – that which is satisfactory and facilitates approval, authorization, and acceptance, based upon ruwach – meaning Spirit) . The adoptive Mother who purifies, enlightens, and elevates (‘iseh/‘isah) serves as a counselor, reconciling the relationship, bringing appeasement (nyhoah – bringing acceptance, winning us over, resolving and settling outstanding issues) for us on behalf of (la huw’ – concerning us in relation to) Yahowah ( - - יהוה) .” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 29:18)
When we look closely we find that, qatar, which was translated “render as smoke,” conveys the idea of “transforming a physical entity so that it rises up to the heavens as radiant energy.” We also learn that this is actually an extrapolation of qatar’s primary meaning, which is: “to enclose, to envelop, to join, and to become one with.” As such, qatar is invocative of the work of Yahowah’s Set - Apart Spirit, who transforms us from physical to spiritual beings by enclosing and enveloping us in Her Garment of Light (which is a form of radiant energy) so that we become perfect, enlightened, and one with God.
But there is more. Qatar was scribed in the hiphil stem, which tells us that there is a relationship between the verb’s subject, in this case “you,” and the verb’s action, which is the process of transforming you from a physical being to a spiritual one, of enabling you to rise up from this world to God’s. The hiphil stem is also causative, whereby the subject of the verb, “you,” causes the subject of the verb, “the sacrificial lamb,” to participate in the action, which is transforming us so that we rise up to God. That is to say, our willingness to do what Yahowah has asked of us causes Yahowah to respond, and do as He has promised.
And that, my friends, is especially humbling because qatar was prefixed in the second person singular, meaning “you as an individual,” telling us that God is prepared and willing to honor this promise even if only one of us chooses to engage with Him in this way.
Also relevant, qatar was scribed in the perfect conjugation. This means that this transformation is whole and complete, and that it is uninterrupted and indivisible throughout the whole of time. It even conveys a sense of reality, communicating the idea that our transformation is not only real, but that we can count on it actually occurring.
‘Ayl, which was translated simply as “lamb,” is a much richer word. It is equally comfortable being rendered “strong, mighty, young, clean, protective, wooden, or doorway.” ‘Ayl, therefore, is invocative of Yahowsha’, who is the “perfect and mighty, male sacrificial lamb” of God, who “protects” us by serving as the “doorway” to Heaven, becoming a “portal and gate” comprised of the “wooden” upright pillar upon which He was hung to fulfill Passover.
So in the context of being transformed and rising up to Yahowah by way of our interaction with this sacrificial lamb, of a reconciling counselor who provides the soothing spirit of acceptance, “the adoptive Mother who purifies, enlightens, and elevates” is a perfectly appropriate rendering of ‘iseh. It defines the specific role the Set - Apart Spirit plays in resolving the issues which separate us from our Heavenly Father, which is why the root of reyach is ruwach—“Spirit.” And it is why nyhoah is related to nuwach, and means “to settle down and rest as a beneficiary of amnesty.” It is why nyhoah speaks of a “conciliatory counselor who makes us compliant” with God.
When we convey the full meaning of ‘iseh and ‘isah in a manner consistent with forgiveness, and in the context of “your soul shall respond, appearing before and approaching, being present with, the ‘iseh,” it becomes obvious that it was used to convey the purpose of God’s Spirit vis - à - vis our soul. Yahowah’s Set - Apart Spirit is our Adoptive Mother. Those of us who are born anew from above have Her to thank. According to God, She covers us in a Garment of Light which makes us appear perfect in Yahowah’s eyes. She purifies us, nurtures us, comforts us, enlightens us, protects us, empowers us, and acts as our advocate before God. The Set - Apart Spirit not only embodies every metaphor associated with fire in Scripture, Her primary function is to provide us with access to our Heavenly Father, raising us up to heaven. Those who do not respond to Her call are disqualified from being in Yahowah’s presence. To become God’s children we must be born anew spiritually, just as Yahowsha’ was at pains to explain to the Pharisee, Nicodemus, in Yahowchanan / John 3:1 - 21.
Also keep in mind that the Hebrew word used for Yahowah’s Spirit, ruwach, is feminine. And the Spirit’s responsibilities are all maternal. And by way of further confirmation, ‘isah also means “to make relations friendly”—the principle function of the Spirit and a central ingredient in reconciliation.
The moral of this story is that spiritual insights are available to those who seek them. The truth can be known if only we are willing to invest the time to closely observe the Torah, and if we do so with an open mind.
Unfortunately, due to religious malfeasance, to learn the truth, you are going to have to work for it. That is not to say your salvation comes at a cost, but that engaging in an interactive relationship with Yahowah requires effort on your behalf. As evidence of this, I’d like you to consider two English translations of this passage, where all of the relevant spiritual insights were squandered.
Keep in mind, Yahowah said: “And (wa) you shall render as smoke, becoming enveloped and transformed (qatar) , accordingly and in proximity to (‘eth) , the entire (kol ha) lamb (‘ayl) upon the altar (ha mizbeah) . It (huw’) rises up (‘olah) toward (la) Yahowah ( - - יהוה) as the spirit of soothing acceptance (reyach) . The adoptive Mother who purifies, enlightens, and elevates (‘iseh/‘isah) serves as a counselor, reconciling the relationship, bringing appeasement (nyhoah) for us on behalf of (la huw’) Yahowah (YaHoWaH) .” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 29:18)
So why do you suppose the King James Version published this, as if it represented the Word of God? “And thou shalt burn the whole ram upon the altar: it [is] a burnt offering unto the LORD: it [is] a sweet savour, an offering made by fire unto the LORD.” Qatar does not mean “burn.” ‘Olah means “rises up,” not “burnt offering.” There is no basis in the text for “the LORD” once, much less twice. “Sweet savour” misses the entire point of nyhoah, and suggests that Yahowah is more interested in “smells” than “reconciliation.” And while we have already addressed the issue of properly rendering ‘iseh/‘isah, even in this passage which illustrates its meaning, the occultists who supervised the publication of the KJV remained clueless.
And yet while this stilted translation is rife with errors, let’s not be unfair. After all, the King James was conceived to be nothing more than a politically inspired revision of the Geneva Bible, which by its own admission served to update the Bishop Bible, which was a revision two times over of John Wycliffe’s translation of the Latin Vulgate, which in turn was a translation of the Septuagint, itself a translation of the Hebrew text. So the KJV was filtered through five revisions and four languages (The revealed Hebrew text was translated into Greek in the Septuagint, into Latin in the Vulgate, and then into English by John Wycliffe, which was in turn revised many times over).
Moreover, by the time Jerome began his translation on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church, the Septuagint had been corrupted to the point it was highly unreliable. And with respect to the King James, the only credible manuscript of the Masoretic Text, the Codex Leningradis, would not be published for two hundred years. So even if they had Hebrew scholars at their disposal, which they didn’t, it wouldn’t have mattered. Furthermore, the Dead Seas Scrolls, from which our translations will be derived, wouldn’t be unearthed for another three centuries.
But alas, time and evidence would not matter because religious perceptions die hard. Among the most recent attempts to convey the Divine Writ comes to us in the form of the New Living Translation. They elected to write something novel: “Then burn the entire animal on the altar. This is a burnt offering to the LORD; it is a pleasing aroma, a special gift presented to the LORD.” They plagiarized all of the mistakes found in the King James, and then added some of their own. They transformed the ‘ayl into a common, nondescript, animal as if the word defied definition. And speaking of defying definition, there is no justification whatsoever in the text for “a special gift presented to the LORD.” None.
Therefore, let this one example among countless others serve as evidence that understanding comes only to those who search diligently for it. To know Yahowah, and to appreciate the remedies He has provided, you will have to be willing to closely observe and carefully consider what He revealed. This is one of many reasons that Yahowsha’ told us to “search.” He realized that if we did so diligently, we would find Him.
The tenth challenge to providing a complete and accurate translation lies in determining when enough is enough. The more completely each word is defined, the more nuances and shadings which are conveyed, the more difficult each sentence becomes to read and comprehend. After a while, it all becomes information overload. So, when the number of relevant insights exceeds our ability to process them within the context of a sentence, and still retain the flow and substance of each discussion, we will color Yah’s linguistic palette in subsequent paragraphs. Also in this regard, recognizing the difficulty of processing such an enormous amount of new information, I will endeavor to introduce Scriptural passages in such a way that you are grounded by the associated context.
In this light, I want you to know that if you invest the time using these tools and insights to translate these passages yourself, you will learn much more than you will by simply reading my translations and commentary. The more engaged you are in the process, the closer you will draw to the Author of these words. Not only will you understand and retain more of what He has to say, you will find Yah’s words positively influencing your thinking and every aspect of your life.
The eleventh consideration is also surprising. Many of the best lexicons were published by the very institutions which have brought us such horribly errant translations. And while lexicons, interlinears, and dictionaries bearing titles such as the New American Standard Hebrew - Aramaic and Greek Dictionariesand The ESV English - Hebrew Reverse Interlinear Old Testamentoften provide the best window into the etymology of the Hebrew words themselves, if their definitions are correct, the NASB and ESV translations are not.
Along these lines, a dependence on one, or even two lexicons, dictionaries, or interlinears will produce unreliable results, as they are individually filled with errors. Strong’s Lexicon is a valuable tool, especially in helping to identify word roots, but yet it exists in large part to justify the King James Version. Many hundreds of their definitions were religiously inspired, and are not the result of scholastic etymology.
Making a different mistake, the Brown - Driver - Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon uses Arabic to define Hebrew terms, not recognizing that written Hebrew existed 2,500 years before the first Arabic word was penned. And the Gesenius Hebrew - Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament is filled with theological opinions, most of which are invalid. Moreover, every Hebrew lexicon and interlinear is synced with the Masoretic Text and their vocalizations, which are often wrong.
The twelfth challenge to translation is unlike the others. An accurate rendering of Yahowah’s testimony is so radically different from what is found in popular English bibles (all of which profess to be “the Word of God”), the translations found throughout Yada Yahand this Introduction to God will be hard for many people to accept. “How is it,” some will ask, “that an individual without professed qualifications could be right, and every other translation be wrong?”
Mind you, no one who has actually studied the Scriptural citations in the Introduction to God, Yada’ Yah, and Questioning Paul, and checked them for themselves, has ever asked this question. Properly translated, God’s Testimony so clearly stated, so magnificently worded, so majestically interwoven, so brilliant conceived, so accurately attested, so irrefutably proven, and so generously enabled, the only informed and rational response is to fall in love with the Author. And frankly, eventually everyone who has read these presentations of Yahowah’s Word comes to test the translations along the way, but not because they have doubts, instead because by verifying them they not only come to know Yah better, they become more effective witnesses.
It may surprise you to know that none of those who ask this question have ever tested these translations, even though I consistently encourage everyone to do so. They never determine for themselves if they are reliable. Just as they spurn and discard evidence which lampoons their faith, they are more than willing to dismiss the witness God has provided on the basis that they don’t have the time to learn the language of revelation. And as such, they have made themselves easy prey for those eager to reinforce their beliefs. Moreover, since Hebrew is the only language spoken in Heaven, why go if you won’t be able to communicate with anyone?
These things known, the most direct answer to the question posed by superficial critics is “motivation.” The more English bibles differ from what Christians have become comfortable hearing, the harder they are to sell. So, rather than losing money publishing new translations based upon the oldest Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and NLT admittedly only provide modest revisions of their own translations, most of which are simply revisions of the King James Version, which itself was a revision five times over of a translation of the Latin Vulgate, which was conceived as an amalgamation of wildly variant Old Latin texts which were translations two times over of the original text. And with each subsequent translation from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English, the message became amalgamated and ever the more distanced from the original. Then, from this point forward, all subsequent translations became nothing more than revisions. Specifically, the King James Version was a revision of the Bishop Bible, which was a revision of the Great Bible, which was a revision of the Cloverdale Bible, which was a revision of John Wycliffe’s translation of the Latin Vulgate, which was a blend of Old Latin texts, which were translations of the Greek Septuagint, which was a translation of the Hebrew text. It’s like playing the children’s game of telephone or Chinese whispers where each child in a chain tries to repeat the message the previous child has told, but this time with each successive child speaking a different language.
Also, the bottom line in marketing anything, and especially religious texts, is that familiarity sells. As a result, every popular modern bible translation is similar to every other popular bible translation, because had they not been similar, they would not have become popular.
If you are still prone to cling to the myth that the conglomeration of English bible translations are accurate and reliable, you may want to jump ahead in time 1,500 years from this discussion of the Torah to a review of Paul’s Epistles. In Questioning Paul, you will confront just how divergent our translations are from the oldest Greek codices, because I have taken the time to consistently juxtapose a literal rendering of Parchment 46 (a late first - , early second - century codex of Paul’s epistles) against the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate (the longest surviving and most influential bible translation), the Nestle Aland (the most highly acclaimed synthesis of Greek manuscripts), the King James Bible (the most influential English translation), and the extraordinarily popular New Living Translation. Their collective variances from the earliest witness of what Paul wrote, along with the similarities manifest between them, will prove my point beyond any reasonable doubt to anyone with an open mind.
Some will dismiss the translations found this Introduction to God as well as in Yada Yahwith “I can’t believe God would allow His Bible to be corrupted.” This says in essence, the translation they prefer is perfect. But to hold this view, one enormously popular throughout Christendom, a person must ignore a mountain of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Moreover, God, Himself, predicted that men would pervert His testimony. He even revealed the consequence of these corruptions for our consideration.
But, should you choose not to believe Him, what about the evidence? For this religious myth to be plausible, there would be no divergent parchments among the 215 Scriptural texts found in the cliffs above Qumran, collectively known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (dating from 250 BCE to 68 CE), and yet significant disparities exist. Septuagint copies (with fragments dating from the 2nd - century BCE to the 5th - century CE) would not differ so wildly that in the 3rd - century CE, Origen, one of the few early theologians to study Hebrew, was compelled to dedicate most of his life to resolving the overwhelming conflicts between them, creating his Hexapla (which unfortunately has been lost to time). If God had intervened to keep His Scriptures from being corrupted, the Masoretic Text (dating to the 11th - century CE) would have mirrored the Dead Sea Scrolls, in addition to reading identically to surviving Septuagint manuscripts, and yet this is not what the evidence reveals. These texts differ by as much as twenty percent.
Turning to the Greek texts, the situation only gets worse—much worse—which is catastrophic to the Christian myth of “Godly protection and inerrancy.” The sixty - nine pre - Constantine codices which have now been unearthed differ substantially. This variance then becomes mind numbing as these first - through third - century textual witnesses are compared to those scribed in the wake of Catholicism in the fourth - century (to the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus). And yet, the biggest divergence of all exists between these old manuscripts and the vaunted Textus Receptus—which was acclaimed as being “without error” by the religious community in the 16th - century even though the known disagreements between them have now been shown to exceed 300,000 words in a 182,000 word text. Further, for the “always accurate” myth to be valid, the long - revered Textus Receptus would have had to have been word for word identical to the more scholarly and modern textual blend known as the Nestle Aland, but they differ almost as much as they agree. And these inconsistencies still don’t take into consideration a myriad of religious copyedits or countless invalid translation choices.
So for you Christians who are still murmuring: “I can’t believe God would allow anyone to corrupt His message,” for your faith to be grounded in something remotely credible, at some point you will have to deal with the fact that the Masoretic differs significantly from the text found in the one - thousand - two - hundred - year - older Dead Sea Scrolls. You will have to account for the fact that the 16th - century Textus Receptus and the 20th - century Nestle Aland differ materially and significantly from the now extant sixty - nine first - through third - century manuscripts of the text they purport to present.
Therefore, if your current “Bible” is by happenstance accurate, it means that every prior witness to the text was inaccurate. As a result, the question now becomes: was the Christian god unable or unwilling to protect His message from human corruption, because the notion that “God would not allow anyone to corrupt His message” requires complete ignorance of the textual evidence to the contrary. It requires faith in that which is not true, completely undermining the value of religious belief.
Moreover, for those who are fixated on believing that God would not allow anyone to corrupt His Word, take a moment and read the second and third chapters of Genesis. There you will find that Satan confused Chawah (the actual name of Adam’s wife, meaning “source of life,” whereas Eve is the name of a pagan mother earth goddess) by corrupting Yahowah’s instructions. Since the Adversary did this very thing in the confines of the Garden of Eden, God, whose diminished manifestation was present within His protective enclosure, obviously allowed it. And should you wonder why, the answer is that the Covenant relationship necessitates choice. For our participation in this relationship to be meaningful, there has to be a credible alternative.
When dealing with the myth of inerrancy, we must face the issue of Roman Catholicism and Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, which served as the only “bible” for most of the world for over one thousand years. As a blend of divergent Old Latin manuscripts which were free translations of wildly divergent copies of the Septuagint, which were themselves highly variant translations of the Hebrew text, the Vulgate is predictably in substantial conflict with the five - centuries - older Qumran parchments. But yet inexplicably, it is eerily similar to today’s most popular English translations, which casts a dark shadow on their validity. Equally damaging, for over one thousand years, no one outside of Roman Catholic clerics could read the Latin text, effectively preventing any layman from knowing God’s Word, even if it had been preserved without corruption. The Roman Catholic Church, by way of their marriage of cleric and king, made it a crime punishable by death to own a translation of the Vulgate. And to make matters worse, in the rare case that someone would attempt a translation into a language which could be read and understood, as was the case with John Wycliffe in 1384, the perpetrator and their resulting translation were labeled heretical and burned.
Simply stated: none of these variations or eventualities would have been possible if God had intervened and refused to allow His Word to be corrupted by man. So since He obviously allowed it, isn’t it incumbent upon us to understand why He did so, and then strive to discover what He actually revealed?
Considering therefore, the complexity of these many challenges, none of which are properly conveyed in other translations, we will not rely upon the Latin Vulgate, KJV, NKJV, ASB, NASB, IV, NIV, NLT, or any other popular Scriptural rendition. All English translations vary from poor to horrible. There aren’t any worth recommending.
In that the biggest obstacle to knowing the truth about God is the inaccuracy of today’s Bible translations, I’d like to linger here a bit longer, even at the risk of being repetitive. The reason that most, if not all, translations are errant and inadequate is that the popular ones come from the same polluted well, because in business, familiarity sells. A careful comparison proves that every mainstream English Bible is actually a revision, five or more times over, of a translation of the Roman Catholic Vulgate, which was itself a translation of Hebrew Scripture and Aramaic conversations by way of Greek and then Old Latin, regardless of the protestations publishers have made to the contrary—something which is conclusively demonstrated in Questioning Paul.
Jerome’s Latin text, collected on behalf of his pope, was admittedly a blend of Old Latin manuscripts which were so varied they had lost their credibility, as well as an amalgamation of wildly divergent renderings of Septuagint translations of the Hebrew Scriptures. This blending of manuscripts served as “The Holy Bible” for one - thousand years. Then in 1384, John Wycliffe created the first common language rendition for the European community by translating the Latin Vulgate into a primitive variation of English. The King James Bible is nothing more than a politically - inspired revision five times over of that text.
The Geneva Bible, which had become popular at the time, used marginal notes to highlight passages which demonstrated that God had not anointed any king with the right to rule. Since this was contrary to the claims made by all kings, including King Iames (as he was known at the time), it became politically expedient to produce a new bible, whereby the marginal notes were removed, the translations tweaked to please the king, and where Paul’s letter to the Romans could be recast in the thirteenth - chapter to reclaim the Divine Sanction. So Iames hired the era’s most acclaimed secular humanist, Rosicrucian, and occultist, Sir Francis Bacon, to create a more accommodating rendition of Catholicism’s Vulgate. That is hardly reassuring, but it is the truth.
Until quite recently, the Textus Receptus was touted as the foundation of English translations of the Greek text errantly called “the New Testament,” and yet it was little more than an intellectual fraud and financial hoax. In October of 1515 CE, a Dutch secular humanist, Desiderius Erasmus, and Johann Froben, a publisher of low repute, took five months to mark up, adding and taking away from, a mix of highly flawed 12th - century Medieval Byzantine Greek manuscripts and Erasmus’s own translation of the Latin Vulgate, and they set their type directly from his arbitrary comingling of the texts. In the places where they couldn’t find a passage in the Greek text, they filled in the blanks by translating the Latin Vulgate back into Greek.
Worse, when Roman Catholic clerics protested that some of their pet passages weren’t included, to quiet their critics, Erasmus and Froben added them without any legitimate basis. An example of such is the story of “Jesus and the adulterous woman” recounted in John 8:1 - 11, whereby the “one without sin was told to cast the first stone.” This, the most famous and often quoted “New Testament” abstract is a complete hoax. It did not occur. The alleged discussion, which if true would have Yahowsha’ disavowing the Torah, is not found in any manuscript prior to the 8th century CE. Similarly, you will not find the ending of Mark, chapter 16 verses 9 - 20 (which speak of the resurrection), in any pre - Constantine manuscript, nor even in the 4th - century Codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus.
But in the absence of a viable competitor, Erasmus’s and Froben’s highly errant rendering was said to be “a text received by all in which we have nothing changed or corrupted.” This myth was thus rendered “the Textus Receptus.” And while the proof is overwhelming that the King James Bible, which was first printed in 1609, was actually a revision of a Latin translation, its authors attributed their text to this very same and highly flawed Textus Receptus. The KJV in turn became so popular, no English translation has yet been offered which dares to correct its familiar phrasing of the most memorable passages.
It wasn’t until 1707 that the Textus Receptus was challenged—effectively undermining the basis of the Reformation and Protestantism. John Mill, a fellow of Queens College in Oxford, invested 30 years comparing the Textus Receptus to some one hundred much older Greek manuscripts in his possession. In so doing, he discovered and documented 30,000 variations between them. And even this was just the tip of the iceberg. Known variations between the oldest manuscripts of the Greek text, and those which publishers now claim serve as the basis for their translations, may actually exceed 300,000.
Even though some improvements were made in the later Westcott and Hort (1881) and Nestle - Aland Greek New Testament (1898 (also known as Novum Testamentum Graece)), both texts, while differing substantially from the Textus Receptus, remain more in sync with it than with the earliest extant (and recently discovered and published) Greek manuscripts from the first - through third - centuries CE. So while Christian pastors hold up their favorite English translation of their “Bible” and proclaim that it is “the inerrant word of God,” factually, the book they are touting isn’t even remotely consistent with the earliest witnesses.
Some of these same issues exist with the Hebrew text—although to a lesser degree. All English “Bible” translations of the “Old Testament” claim to be based upon the Masoretic Text, an 11th century vocalization of Babylonian Hebrew (itself a pseudo - translation of ancient and paleo - Hebrew) composed by politically inspired and religiously minded rabbis. Their copyedits of Yahowah’s Word are now legend, revealed for all to see courtesy of the 3rd - century BCE through 1st - century CE Dead Sea Scrolls. As evidence of this, in the Great Isaiah Scroll in which the entire text has been preserved, we find that the oldest witness from Qumran and the Masoretic Text differ by 14% with regard to the textual root of the words alone. To this we must add innumerable errant vocalizations which significantly alter the meanings of much of the vocabulary Yahowah selected.
As is the case with the 69 first - , second - , and third - century manuscripts which have been discovered of the Greek eyewitness accounts, translators have universally ignored what the Qumran Scrolls reveal because they are bad for business. As every good marketing person knows, profits are a function of familiarity. And truth has seldom been popular. There simply isn’t any possibility of getting a publisher to print an accurate rendering of Scripture, because as businessmen they recognize something this unfamiliar wouldn’t be accepted, and thus would not sell in sufficient quantities to justify the costs. Moreover, just as was the case with the King James Version, they recognize that accurate translations would undermine the authority of their religious establishments, and thus completely invalidate their businesses.
So while God’s words in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, and Yahowsha’s testimony properly translated and accurately retained in the eyewitness accounts, were inspired, and while much of what they revealed has been preserved in old manuscripts and thus can be known, translations are strictly human affairs. As such, I do not claim that my Scriptural presentations are perfect, only that they are as accurate and complete as I can render them using the oldest manuscripts and best research tools. For this purpose I have relied upon:
The Dead Seas Scrolls Bible
Enhanced Brown - Driver - Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon
The Hebrew & Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament
Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Hebrew
Gesenius’ Hebrew - Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament
A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament
New American Standard Hebrew - Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar
The Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament
The Complete Word Study Guide of the Old Testament
The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament
The ESV English - Hebrew Reverse Interlinear Old Testament
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia; Werkgroep Informatica, Vrije Morphology
The Lexham Hebrew - English Interlinear Bible
Zondervan’s Hebrew - English Old Testament Interlinear
Logos Scholar’s Platinum Edition Software
The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts
Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament
The Complete Word Study Dictionary, New Testament
Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Greek
The Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament
The Greek - English Dictionary of the New Testament
Greek - English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Christian Literature
Greek - English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains
A Greek - English Lexicon of the Septuagint, Revised Edition
The New American Standard Greek Dictionary
The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible
An Intermediate Greek - English Lexicon
The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
The Complete Word Study Guide of the New Testament
Synonyms of the New Testament
Wuest’s Word Studies in the Greek New Testament
The New International Greek Testament Commentary
Word Studies in the New Testament
The ESV English - Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament
The NRSV English - Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament
Nestle - Aland Greek New Testament, with McReynolds English Interlinear
Marshall’s Parallel New Testament in Greek and English
Merriam - Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
Throughout this Introduction to God and Yada Yah, you will find a complete transliteration and translation of each Hebrew and Greek word, all rendered in accordance with the definitions and synonyms provided by the world’s most distinguished linguistic scholars. I most always have a dozen or more scholastic tomes open, surrounding me on revolving Jeffersonian carousels, and another score of research tools electronically linked to the text via Logos interactive software.
It’s a lot of information, so recognize that in the quest to be thorough and accurate, fluidity will suffer. Scripture will not roll off the tongue in familiar word patterns. But if you question, verify, and study the words Yahowah revealed, you will come to know the truth—as God revealed it.
And yet, this will not come without considerable consternation. Surprisingly, there is a substantial difference between the definitions rendered in the lexicons which bear the names of popular bible translations, and the translations themselves. So as I mentioned previously, if their word definitions are accurate, their translations are not. And in this way, serious students of God’s Word quickly come to appreciate the Achilles’ heel of their bible. If believers questioned the texts they were reading, if they did their homework, they would reject their bibles, their pastors, their church, and their religion.
That is not to say that we cannot know what God revealed. But it is to say that our quest to understand Him will not be easy. And that, you may be surprised to learn, is exactly as Yahowah wants it to be—at least between now and His Yowm Kippurym return in 2033. He wants all of us to value knowing Him sufficiently that we are willing to prioritize this endeavor. And that is why Yahowah constantly asks us to “shamar – diligently observe, closely examine, carefully consider, and thoughtfully evaluate” His Torah. He wants us to “keep our eyes focused on it.” Understanding comes to those who study His Word, and not to those who merely read it, especially as it is inadequately and improperly translated into another language.
One such example which serves to demonstrate Yahowah’s willingness to reward those who diligently search for the truth, when God introduces a new term, one that seems to defy normal translation, we will find answers in other verses where the same word is used, especially in those where a new concept is initially introduced. Illustrating this point, the singular Hebrew noun, zarow’a, is usually translated as “arms,” and yet Scripture suggests it means “sacrificial lamb.” Considering the context where zarow’a is used, ascertaining this meaning becomes profoundly important as we will discover.
At other times, we will find that a good translation just isn’t possible. In that case the word will be transliterated in the text and then explained in subsequent paragraphs. Nesamah,whose best analog is “conscience,” is such a term, one we will investigate at the end of the “Chay – Life” chapter. In this regard, I will try to be consistent: transliterating names (rendering the pronunciation accurately) while translating words (properly conveying their meaning). Titles often require both, and will be treated thusly.
Also, as I’ve mentioned before, the genitive case (scrubbed of pronouns and conjunctions) of the actual Hebrew and Greek words found in Hebrew Scripture and in the Greek eyewitness accounts will be italicized and set inside parentheses within the text itself. These will be routinely presented in their most generic forms so that you will be able to look them up in Greek or Hebrew lexicons. I have also done this so that you might gradually become familiar with God’s most commonly used terms. In addition, this format will serve to minimize confusion over the variants for first, second, or third person, singular or plural, masculine or feminine, in the presentation of the foreign words, while still rendering them accurately in English.
Understanding is based upon evidence and reason. And the best source of information, at least as it relates to the existence of God and the means to salvation, is a complete and accurate translation of God’s testimony—replete with a comprehensive evaluation of the words He selected to communicate to us. That is why this book is dedicated to Yahowah’s predictions and instructions, not mine—or anyone else’s. This is a conversation with God, not with me. All I have attempted to do is provide a handrail, an augmentation, a running commentary, and a contextual framework for considering and connecting His insights so that they are as revealing as possible. Hopefully, this will encourage you to reflect upon the significance of His words.
To maintain a clear distinction between my observations and Yahowah’s, Scripture is printed in a bold font. Yahowah’s words (correctly translated) can be trusted. Mine are only there because I want you to think about His. I do not purport to have all the answers—but fortunately I don’t have to because He does, and He has told us where to find them. Revealing them, and where to find them, is the intent of His testimony and thus of this book.
While my opinions are mostly irrelevant, I think that it’s useful for you to know that I am of the belief that Yahowah’s Scripture was without error, so far as imprecise language makes that possible, as the inspired writers of the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms (everything from Genesis through Malachi) put quill to parchment two - thousand - five - hundred to three - thousand - five - hundred years ago. But as time passed, occasional scribal errors, a considerable onslaught of less than judicious religious editing, and changes in language and customs, conspired to rob us of the message which originally permeated the divine texts. These problems were multiplied when the Hebrew manuscripts were translated into Greek, then Latin, en route to being rendered in English. And this problem was exacerbated by political and religious agendas—all designed to make the flock easier to control and fleece. The result today is that English bible translations are grossly inaccurate and untrustworthy.
In rendering Yahowah’s Word in English as completely and accurately as possible, I have favored the preferred meanings of the Hebrew terms unless a different vocalization of the text or a secondary definition provide a better, more consistent fit within the context. Etymological roots will be our principle guide as we explore. If a phrase still begs for elucidation, we’ll consider colloquialism, and will always be attuned to metaphors. I would characterize this approach as literalistic, with an eye for symbolism.
Hebrew provided a rich linguistic palette—especially for its day, and especially for subjects related to human nature and relationships, things Yahowah cares deeply about and about which He had a lot to say. It speaks to mind and soul. But we must also understand that when looking to the future, the prophets had no words to describe technologies that are now commonplace. “Television,” “atomic bomb,” and “airplane,” weren’t concepts at all familiar to them. Consider how one would describe the worldwide broadcast of a nuclear holocaust to a culture in which electricity, explosions, and mechanization were unknown. But since the prophets did this very thing, sometimes we will have to extrapolate.
Some say that there may be a deeper, mystical meaning to passages, some esoteric code latent in Gematria and Equidistant Letter Sequences. While there may be merit to these claims, no matter what’s buried between the words, their plain meaning, and the mental pictures they provide, is primarily what God intended for us to understand.
Since words comprise the totality of Scripture, and thus prophecy, and since God calls Himself “the Word,” it’s important that we render His correctly. Words are Yahowah’s most important symbols. His Scripture represents Him, His Word defines Him; it explains His purpose and plan.
That shouldn’t be surprising. Words are the basis of almost everything: communication, thought, consciousness, relationships, and causality. It is even possible that a communication medium lies at the heart of what we consider matter and energy—the very stuff of creation. We think in words. Without language, virtually nothing can be known and nothing happens. There are no meaningful relationships without words. Written language is considered man’s greatest invention and our most important tool. So when it comes to the Word of God, we will examine His thoughts closely.
The reason I have chosen to focus on prophetic Scripture is because these passages provide assurance of divine inspiration. Foretelling the future is how God proves that He authored His Scriptures. Only a Spirit who exists beyond the constraints of time can know what will happen in the distant future. When events play out precisely as He said they would, historical reality demonstrates that what He revealed is trustworthy and true. Faith is replaced by logic, probability, and reason. For example, during this study, I have grown from believing God exists to yada’ Yahowah—to knowing Him. Hopefully you will too.
Proving that His Word is reliable, and thus worthy of our consideration, is one of three ways our Creator uses prophecy. He also uses it to reveal His nature, His plan, and His instructions. Most every prediction is designed to teach us something. So in these volumes, we will dissect fulfilled prophecies not only to validate the authority of future predictions, but to better understand Yahowah’s message. Then we will examine yet unfulfilled prophecy not only to understand what lies in our future, but more importantly, so that we may be prepared to help others deal with what’s coming. All along the way, we will analyze the profound lessons attached to God’s prophetic proclamations so that more souls will come to yada’Yah, and be inclined to enjoy an honest and open conversation with God.
The third purpose of divine prediction is to let us know how the whole story fits together from Adam to Armageddon, from the first family to the eternal one. Prophecy provides us with the skeleton upon which to flesh out the body of information Yahowah has given us regarding our redemption—past, present, and future. There is virtually nothing of consequence that can be effectively understood without tying prediction to fulfillment, dress rehearsal to final enactment. The Covenant is a hollow promise without the Ma’aseyah’s fulfillments, just as Yahowsha’s words and deeds have no merit or basis without the Torah, which provides His foundation and defines His purpose.
These aren’t different aspects of a relationship, but instead one unified message. Therefore, our principle textbook in this voyage of discovery will be the totality of Yahowah’s Covenant Writings, augmented and explained as they were by the eyewitness accounts of Yahowsha’s words and deeds. Outside sources will only be consulted when they are necessary to appreciate the historical or scientific implications of a passage.
Beginning at the beginning, you will soon discover that Genesis One lies at the intersection of prophecy, history, and science. It tells three stories in one, all designed to reveal God’s purpose and plan. Yahowah’s opening salvo provides the framework upon which all significant prophetic events are fulfilled. It is accurate scientifically, right down to the specifics. It is also a precise accounting of the order things were manifest, as well as how they were unfurled over the course of six days from the perspective of the Creator. It even provides us with an overview of mankind’s history—past, present, and future. More important still, each verse is laden with guidance, essential insights for continued and better living.
In this regard, Scripture itself quickly dispels the misconception that the earth is 6,000 years old—a myth that is held by the majority of Christians. As a result, the debate between science and creation should never have existed. The first three chapters of the In the Beginning Volume of Yada Yahdemonstrate that both are correct. The universe is around 15 billion years old and it took God exactly six days to create it. Properly translated and understood, Genesis 1 is more accurate than any science textbook, and yet the errant Christian interpretations of it make God appear foolish.
So it should be apparent by now that this Introduction to God is not going to tickle your ears nor shy away from controversy to win friends and influence people. You will find its commentary as blunt as God’s Word.
If one passage seems to contradict another, we will examine both without reservation. We will trust God to resolve the apparent inconsistency. When Yahowah says something that is contrary to established religious teaching, we will stop what we were doing long enough to evaluate a sufficient quantity of related passages to understand what is actually being revealed. And if what we find undermines the teachings and credibility of religious and political institutions, so be it. I do not belong to any organization, and I am not advocating any human institution. My only concern is what Yahowah has to say.
We are going to give God the credit He deserves. If He is providing multiple insights in a single account, we will examine all of them (at least as many of them as my feeble mind can grasp). When God decides to ascribe teaching to His predictions, as He most often does, we will contemplate His advice. When God broaches a new subject in a prediction, we are going to follow His lead and study related passages to better appreciate His prescriptions.
That leads us to another delightful challenge, one that has caused these volumes to expand in length and complexity. We will not rest until we understand the essential lessons of Scripture. Consider this example: a score of verses say that some souls, upon death, will experience eternal life in the company of God. Half that number say that some souls will end up in the abyss, where they will experience perpetual anguish. Yet hundreds of passages reveal that most souls will simply cease to exist. That is to say, when they die, such souls will dissipate into nothingness.
How can this be? Rabbis, priests, and imams all teach that there are only two eternal destinations: heaven and hell. Yet eternal anguish is a completely different result than death and destruction. Therefore, for Scripture to be trustworthy (and for God to be lovable), there must be three options—eternal life with God, eternal separation from Him, and the option to fritter away one’s soul, wastefully squandering it. This is one of many profound insights you will find in these pages and perhaps nowhere else.
The same is true with the concept of worship. There are a score of verses which seem to suggest that God wants to be worshiped and hundreds that say otherwise—that He wants us on our feet, not on our knees. The truth in this regard is essential to our understanding of the Covenant where we are asked to walk and talk with God—to be upright with Him. This perspective lies at the heart of the debate between Yahowah wanting to enjoy a familial relationship with us as opposed to imposing a submissive religion.
Similarly, our translations tell us that God wants to be feared, and yet in Isaiah, Yahowah states that “the fear of God is a manmade tradition.” Moreover, one cannot love that which one fears.
Some passages seem to say that we can’t know the timing of things, such as the date Yahowsha’ will return. Yet Scripture begins by detailing Yahowah’s chronology and timeline, something Yahowsha’s testimony in the Olivet Discourse and in Revelation amplifies and affirms. If prophetic timing is unknowable, why did God provide a specific timeline and a thousand revealing clues?
I suspect that my willingness to date Yahowah’s prophetic fulfillments—past, present, and future—will be one of the most contentious aspects of this Introduction to God. I’m going to tell you exactly when Yah is going to fulfill His prophecies, because He told us. All I had to do was contemplate the Scriptural evidence and then connect the data He has provided. As for the warning “no one knows the day,” rest assured we’ll examine the Olivet Discourse from many perspectives to conclusively demonstrate that God was not saying that we wouldn’t be able to figure this out.
Another point of contention may arise because I am opposed to quoting or commenting on any verse out of context. So if you write to me and ask how one verse or another fits within the universal truths contained in the whole, I’ll tell you to read these books. The practice of referencing isolated phrases leads to false assumptions which in turn lead to incomplete and errant thinking. For example, if we want to understand why Yahowsha’ spoke of His upcoming Passover sacrifice in the context of Jonah’s “three days and three nights in the belly of the whale” (when the eyewitnesses say that the Ma’aseyah was only tormented two days and two nights), we will find ourselves reviewing the historic context of Yahowsha’s discussion with the religious leaders which led to this comparison, and then we will find ourselves on board the ship with Yownah to see what really happened that stormy day. In the process, we will resolve the apparent contradiction, demystify the reference to the whale, learn a great deal about how God communicates with us, and come to appreciate the Creator’s sense of humor.
Quoting passages out of context is what led to the doctrines of heaven or hell, to the three persons of the Trinity, to replacement theology, to the impossible notion that the Ma’aseyah is completely God and completely man, to the diminished relevance of the Torah, to Sunday worship, and to disputes over the timing and existence of the harvest of souls known to Christians as “the rapture.” And speaking of this tidbit of Pauline Doctrine, quoting snippets of Scripture out of context is the principal means Paul deployed to craft his assault on the Torah. So while an errant theological position can be supported with isolated verses, for a conclusion to be valid, no passage should be able to refute it.
There are a few more things you need to know at the outset. I’m nobody special, at least among men. I’m just a regular guy, albeit more passionate and flawed than most. Although I’m not hard to find, you may have noticed that I haven’t ascribed my name to this mission. My only qualification for compiling this witness to expose deception and proclaim the truth was my willingness to engage when Yahowah asked.
If that is not sufficient for you, if you are more interested in the messenger than the message, if you are impressed with accomplishments and credentials, find a book written by someone in the religious or political establishment. Such authors will gladly exchange your money for a confirmation of what you have already been led to believe.
As we approach our study of the ancient Hebrew language and its alphabet, we must go back in time and dig well beneath the surface. Understanding Hebrew requires us to examine the roots of the letters themselves. Each alphabetic character was originally drawn as a picture—one which conveyed the symbol’s primary connotation. And it was by combining these forms that each letter supplied additional meaning to the words they were forming.
A 3,500-year-old cup was recently unearthed in Yisra’el depicting in alphabetic order all twenty - two Hebrew letters. As the oldest proof of a phonetic conveyance, it serves to support the idea that Ancient Hebrew is the world’s oldest alphabet. Archeologists have also discovered that each character not only featured a name which conveyed something important, but more critically, by design they each represented a specific phonetic sound.
For your edification, the following chart has been designed to present the evolution of each of the twenty - two letters which comprise the Hebrew alphabet. It reveals how they were first drawn circa 2,000 BCE in Ancient Hebrew. Their progression to a Paleo - Hebrew script is presented next, followed by the images most commonly seen on the Dead Sea Scrolls. The presentation of Hebrew nomenclature then concludes with the Modern Hebrew form. Each letter’s English equivalent and phonetic, or transliterated, sound is depicted in addition to the character’s current name. The last column describes the image revealed by the original letter.
|W||o u w||Wah||tent peg|
The first two letter variations, Ancient and Paleo Hebrew, predate the earliest Babylonian script by more than one - thousand years. This substantially different lettering style first emerged circa 500 BCE during the Babylonian captivity. A variation of it is found on the Great Isaiah Scroll found in the hills above Qumran. The best we can tell, the Ancient Script, also called “Early Semitic” and “Proto - Sinaitic,” dates to around 2000 BCE. It is in all likelihood the alphabet used to scribe the initial autograph of the Towrah. And I suspect that Yahowah used Ancient Hebrew to engrave the two tablets of stone.
However, it is also possible that both were written using Paleo Hebrew, in that it first appeared around 1500 BCE. This form is often called “Proto - Phoenician,” which isn’t surprising since these people lived adjacent to the Hebrews. Some scholars refer to Paleo Hebrew as “Moabite Stone.”
This Late Semitic script is perhaps a millennia older than its Babylonian replacement, and the pictographic form precedes it by as much as five centuries. And then in the progression of things, it wasn’t until one - thousand - five - hundred years later, around 500 CE, that diacritical signs associated with the Masoretes were first used to depict vowel sounds—ignoring the fact that there were five vowels among the original twenty - two characters. These dots initially appeared in manuscripts of the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms scribed and edited by rabbis circa 1000 CE. Modern Hebrew publications use yet another system, one known as “full spelling.”
While there is some redundancy, the next chart is designed to present the meaning behind each Hebrew character as it was originally scribed nearly 4,000 years ago. In addition to reinforcing the imagery associated with the Ancient pictographic form, you will find the letter’s original name juxtaposed against its current name. I’ve repeated the most common transliteration, or phonetic sound, for each symbol. This is followed by a description of what the Ancient Hebrew character was designed to depict. In this chart I’ve added each letter’s numerical value, as well as the meaning behind the original drawing – which is the primary purpose of the second presentation. You will also find a transliteration and translation of the character.
As you might expect, countless changes have been made along the way, many of which serve to corrupt the original pronunciations and meanings of many of the most important Scriptural names, titles, and words. So in our quest to understand the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, we will have to be observant, circumspect, and discerning—especially as we seek to understand what God actually revealed. So here for your consideration is the linguistic pallet Yahowah deployed.
Form & Name
|Ancient-Hebrew Pictograph Description / Number Value||Ancient-Hebrew Pictograph
Primary Image Meaning
|al||Aleph||a e||ox / ram’s head 1||strength, power, might, authority||‘al – Almighty God|
|bet||Beyt||b||tent shelter home 2||ba – in a family, home, shelter||beyth – family home|
|gam||Gimal||g||foot walking 3||to walk, carry, gather together||gam – add emphasize|
|dal||Dalet||d||doorway 4||entranceway, doorway||dalet – door|
|hey||Hey||ah eh||man reaching up 5||ha – reveal, observe, man, notice||hey – behold greatness|
|waw||Wah||ow u||secure tent peg 6||wa – to secure, increase, add||wa – and to add|
|zan||Zayin||z||plow 7||food, nourishment, harvest, cut||zan – to sort by kind|
|hets||Chet||ch||tent wall 8||to separate, protect||chets – wall|
|thet||Theth||t th||basket container 9||to surround, enclose, store||equivalent to taw|
|yad||Yowd||y i||arm and hand 10||authority, ability, power, work||yad – hand|
|kaph||Kaph||k||open palm 20||to open, welcome, allow||kaph – palm of hand|
|lam||Lamed||l||shepherd staff 30||la – to lead, direct, teach, protect||la – to move toward|
|mah||Mem||m||waves of water 40||water, life, cleansing||mah – water (mayim)|
|nun||Nun||n||sprouting seed 50||son, heir, continuance, generation||nuwn – to continue|
|sin||Samech||s||thorn 60||pierce, sharp, grab, shield||same as Sin of Shin|
|ayn||Ayin||e a||eye 70||to observe, see, know, perceive||ayn – eye and sight|
|pey||Peh||p ph||mouth 80||to speak, communicate, language||peh – mouth and blow|
|tsad||Tsade||ts||man lying down 90||to wait, rest, be revived, renewed||tsad – side|
|quph||Qoph||q||sun on horizon 100||time and light||qowah – wait and hope|
|resh||Rosh||r||head of a man||top, first, beginning, best||re’sh – first, head, top|
|shin||Shin||sh||teeth||language, nourishment||shin – tooth|
|taw||Taw||t||pole and beam||doorway, sign, mark, signature||tow – signature, mark|
Should you be interested, there are five English letters without an equivalent in Ancient, Paleo, or Babylonian Hebrew. Therefore, there were no Scriptural Hebrew words containing the sounds made by the English characters: c (apart from ch), f (apart from ph), j, v, or x. And while an f can be approximated by the ph pronunciation of Peh, every English variant of Hebrew names, like “Jehovah,” containing the letters j, v, or both, is irrefutably inaccurate.
As I have mentioned, originally there were twenty - two letters in the Hebrew alphabet, just as there are today. But in both Ancient and Paleo Hebrew we find greater similarity in the presentation of the Theth and Taw than we do today, with them appearing as ט and ת. Both letters convey the same “t” and “th” sounds. So there is every indication that they were once a single letter. Further, while there has always been a Samech ( ) and Shin ( ), with the former pronounced as an “s” and the later conveying the “sh” sound, the modern Sin (שׂ) has no discernable antiquity, thereby eliminating the need to have a pointed variation of the current Shin שׁ. These facts are important because when searching for accurate word meanings, the whole truth can only be discerned when the Samech and Sin, as well as the Theth and Taw, are considered as if they were once one and the same.
While it is less important, there is also some evidence that in Ancient Hebrew, in addition to the letter Gam/Gimal, there was also a more guttural Ghah. It was depicted by way of a small head over an oval body with two short legs (appearing somewhat like the numeral 8 with an upside down u beneath it ( )). While the letter has been mostly lost to time, evidence for it is retained in Gomorrah and Gaza, whose pronunciation was retained in the Greek Septuagint, whereby the Ayin, seen today in the Masoretic Text, was transliterated using the Greek Gamma. When we compare the meanings of the parent roots of words which were originally spelled with the letter Ghah, we notice a similarity in meaning with most of these words related to darkness, storms, clouds, blindness, wickedness, goats, and that which is bad or crafty. In that the letter’s shape bears some similarity to the interwoven fibers of a rope, it also conveyed twisted, confused, and convoluted.
To clarify an earlier statement, in the Modern Hebrew alphabet, the letter Shin ש represents two different sounds: “sh” and an “s.” To differentiate between these, a dot is placed above the Shin שׁ on the right side to depict the “sh” sound, and on the left when depicting the “s” sound conveyed by Sin שׂ (thereby changing the Shin to Sin). In most cases, however, words currently spelled with the newly crafted Sin are more closely related in meaning with words which were originally written using the Samech ס. Moreover, Hebrew words currently spelled with the letter Sin are still written with a variation of the Hebrew Samech in other Semitic languages.
Now all of this is vital to our understanding because to ascertain the original meaning of the words Yahowah used to convey His Towrah – Instructions, we must remove the remnants of Masoretic and Rabbinic tampering. As I have mentioned, and will soon prove, there is overwhelming and damning evidence that these power - hungry religious clerics deliberately altered the Scriptural text, changing many words and their meanings by their diacritical marks, letter substitutions, and unorthodox vocalizations.
The greatest harm was perpetrated by the vocalization process, because it not only gave the false impression that the original alphabet lacked vowels and wasn’t pronounceable, it gave the Masoretes the ability to alter the meaning of most every word. For example, “‘edown – the upright pillar and foundation of the tabernacle,” and “‘adown – lord, master, and owner,” appear identically in the revealed text, but as a result of the Masoretic vocalization process they are as different as light is from darkness. So to reverse this damage, we will have to consider the definitions of every word written using the same characters, thereby peeling back the vocalization process.
Associated connotations were lost with the separation of the letter Sin from Samech, and with its unification with Shin. Similarly, we lose access to related word meanings with the division of the Taw into two letters, creating the Theth. An example of this is Towrah, whereby some of the reasons Yahowah added “tow” to “yarah – teaching” only become clear when words beginning with Theth and Taw are both considered.
There is yet another legacy of Rabbinical tampering which has left a stain on Scripture. Unlike Ancient and Paleo Hebrew, where all twenty - two characters were clearly differentiated from one another, in Babylonian and Modern Hebrew, the differences between the Hey ה, Chet ח, and Taw ת, are minimal. Written by hand with unrefined implements, using imperfect dyes, on uneven parchment and papyrus surfaces, the distinction between them was routinely lost as scrolls were furled and unfurled over time. One such example is the appearance of ha Mashiach in the Masoretic variation of Daniel. Since neither of the two passages in which the title appears are extant among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Rabbinic corruption of this title has replaced the one Yahowah not only chose, but also reinforced a score of times throughout His Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms. The Savior’s actual title, “ha Ma’aseyah – the Work of Yah,” not only associates Him with Yahowah, but also defines His purpose, while the Rabbinic variation disassociates Him from God and from His work. And should you be seeking proof, in the next section we will examine the evidence demonstrating Yahowah’s preference for ha Ma’aseyah over ha Mashiach, and its popular derivative the Messiah.
While it is not germane to the etymology of the words themselves, while we are on the subject of the Ancient Hebrew characters which originally comprised the Hebrew alphabet, I’d like to dispel a common myth. What we refer to as “Arabic Numerals” are actually Hebrew in origin. In their Late Semitic script, the Hebrew Aleph is written almost identically the numeral 1, especially as it is depicted in Europe with the small diagonal line at the top left. The depiction of the Hebrew Beyt is indistinguishable from the numeral 2 in the Late Semitic evolution of paleo - Hebrew. The same is true regarding the Late Semitic version of the Hebrew Gimal and our symbol for the number 3, as well as the Hebrew Dalet and the number 4. Similarly, the Late Semitic depiction of the Hebrew Hey is remarkably similar to the numeral 5.
While the Waw represents the number six in Hebrew, its Late Semitic form is the basis for the number 9. The reason for this slide is that the “ow” sound was adopted by the Greeks and Romans using a letter shaped similarly to the English “F” (our sixth letter), but this character was subsequently dropped from their alphabets.
The Late Semitic, pre - Babylonian form, of the Hebrew Zayin was written exactly as the letter Z is now depicted in English, and thus serves as the basis for the number 7. The Ancient Hebrew horizontal pictograph of the dividing wall representing the letter Hets or Chet was rotated vertically to form a straight - lined depiction of the numeral 8 in its Late Semitic form. And finally, also in its Late Semitic form, the Hebrew Theth was drawn in such a way that it was indistinguishable from our current number 6.
And please be aware, this pre - Babylonian adaptation of Hebrew preceded the formation of written Arabic by just over one thousand years. This reality thereby destroys the myth that our current representation of numbers is “Arabic Numerals.”
One last thought before we leave this discussion on the Ancient and Paleo Hebrew letterforms and their subsequent meaning. As we move through our evaluation of Yahowah’s Word, we will endeavor to deduce the meanings of God’s favorite names, titles, and words using the characters which originally comprised them.
So, in this light, let’s consider “dabar – word. The first letter, known as a Dalet (ד), was drawn as an entrance or doorway . Affirming this, even today, dalet means “door” in Hebrew.
The second letter of dabar is Beyt (ב), which was depicted to reveal the floor plan of a tent shelter or home: . As a result beyth still means “family and home.” It serves as the basis for Yahowah’s “beryth – Family - Oriented Covenant Relationship”—arguably the single most important word in the whole of God’s word.
The third and final letter of the Hebrew word for “word” is Rosh (ר). It was drawn in the shape of a human head , and conveyed the ideas of top, first, and best, in addition to firstborn, leadership, and establishing a priority. So we should not be surprised that even today, re’sh conveys all of these concepts. Further, a derivative of re’sh, namely re’shyth, is the first word in the Torah.
So collectively, by examining the pictures drawn by the characters which comprise dabar, we learn that God’s “word” serves as the “doorway” to His “home,” and to participation in His covenant “family.” Those who place Yah’s Word “above” all else, making it their “top priority,” become our Heavenly Father’s “firstborn” children.
Using this same formula, let’s see what we can learn about Yahowah’s title: ‘elohym. It is the plural of ‘el, which is the contracted form of ‘elowah.Written right to left in the Hebrew form it looks like this: . Therefore, ‘elowah begins with Aleph: (א), the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In its pictographic form it represented a ram’s head which symbolized strength, power, might, and authority.
The second letter, Lamed (ל), was drawn in the shape of a shepherd’s staff. As a result, it conveys leadership, direction, guidance, nurturing, and protection. Used commonly as a prefix, the Lamed serves as a preposition in Hebrew, communicating movement toward a goal.
The Wah (ו), which designates the “o” sound in ‘elowah, resembles a tent peg, which is important Scripturally because they were used to enlarge and secure the temporary residences of those who first heard Yahowah’s title. These study stakes also secured the Tabernacle which represented God’s permanent home among His people. Today, as then, the Wah is used as a conjunction, and conveys the ideas of increasing, connecting, adding, and enlarging.
The final letter, Hey (ה), like Wah, is also found in Yahowah’s name in addition to His title. The Hey was among the most distinctive letters, in that it was drawn in the form of a person pointing and reaching up to the heavens. It screams, pay attention, be observant, and take notice of what God has done and said. Today, hey means “behold.”
Bringing this all together, the characters which comprise ‘elowah, meaning “Almighty God,” paint a picture of God as being supremely powerful, of being a shepherd who cares for His flock, leading, nurturing, and protecting them. He is focused upon enlarging His family and protecting those who not only seek Him, but also observe His revelation and reach up to Him for assistance.
There are times in which the visual images provided by the Ancient Hebrew characters convey insights we’d be hard pressed to find elsewhere. Such is the case with ‘iseh / ‘isah, which was used as an example of a particularly challenging word to translate. If you recall, ‘iseh (אִשֶּׁה) is the feminine noun for fire, and ‘isah (אִשָּׁה) means “female individual, woman, mother, and wife.” And adding to the confusion, prior to the application of the Masoretic niquwd system of diacritical signs, these words were indistinguishable in the text.
By doing some Scriptural research, we came to realize that ‘iseh / ‘isah spoke of our Spiritual Mother, the Set - Apart Spirit. But now that we are equipped with another tool, let’s see if the characters which comprise this word agree. The first letter is an Aleph (א), which as we now know depicted a ram’s head, which symbolized strength, power, might, and authority.
The second letter in ‘iseh / ‘isah is Shin (ש), which was drawn in the shape of teeth, which were symbolic of language and words, of communication and understanding, of guidance and instruction, as well as nourishment and the breath of life.
The third and final letter is Hey (ה), which, as we have discussed, symbolized humankind with our arms reaching up and pointing to heaven, so as to say “look up, behold, observe, reach out to, and rely upon God.”
Therefore, the picture painted by ‘iseh / ‘isah, this time written in the English format of left to right, , is of the power and authority of God’s word working to nourish humankind, imbuing those who are observant and who reach out to God, with understanding and the breath of life. So the image is the same whether we use our etymological tools, do Scriptural research, or defer to the original alphabetic pictographics: we are looking at our Spiritual Mother, and the role she plays in the lives of God’s children.
In our search for the truth regarding the Word of God, it was essential that we investigated the nature of the textual evidence we will be considering—as it is the vessel upon which we will be sailing and relying. Becoming aware of the sordid history of bible translations, and the propensity of publishers to corrupt God’s message, helps clear our decks of clutter before we embark on this voyage of discovery. And an appreciation for the process of translation, especially recognizing some of these challenges, is the proper preparation for this mission.
But there is something lacking. In the process of preparing to engage, we have only considered a handful of Scriptural passages. So, I’d like to remedy this omission and review some of the more interesting references to the “dabar – word.”
As we will do again when we commence our discussion of the Covenant, we will begin where Yahowah began, by transforming Himself into the living embodiment of His “dabar – word” before Abram. But since we are just embarking on this journey, I am going to initiate the process by encouraging you to consider the passage bereft of serious amplification. “After (‘achar) these (‘el - leh) conversations (dabarym) , the Word (dabar) of Yahowah ( - - יהוה) , He came to exist as God with (hayah ‘el) ‘Abram (‘Abram) in the form of (ba) a personal, visual, and illuminating manifestation which could be seen and experienced (machazeh) to say (‘amar) : ‘Do not be awed, and be at rest while God renews you (yare’ ‘al) ‘Abram. I am (‘anoky) a defender and shield, a protective covering (magen) for you (la) , your exceedingly (ma’od) great (rabah) reward, your payment for passage, your transit fee paid by a servant, shepherd, and generous father (sakar) .’” (Bare’syth 15:1)
This modestly amplified version of this passage was presented for the express purpose of making these two rather long sentences easier to read and comprehend, and to facilitate your developing a proper perspective of the broad strokes encapsulated in this profound predictive promise. Within this framework, you’re now in a better position to appreciate the fine details hidden in etymology as we systematically dissect each message phrase by phrase. Also, if I can encourage you to consider the bold portions of each passage first, and then go back and evaluate the additional insights provided by the Hebrew words, you will find the Scriptural portions of this Introduction to God much easier to read.
This Scriptural introduction to the Word of God does a marvelous job of explaining the nature and purpose of the “dabar – word,” surrounded as it is with terms like machazeh, ‘amar, yare’, magen, ma’od, rabah, and sakar. But to more fully appreciate the insights they provide, let’s dive deeper into this revelation, deploying the full benefits of Scriptural amplification
“After (‘achar – following and pertaining to) these (‘el - leh) conversations (dabarym – communications) , the Word (dabar) of Yahowah ( ) , He came to exist with (hayah ‘el – He was, is, and will always be with) ‘Abram (‘abram – father who uplifts) in the form of (ba) a personal, visual, and illuminating manifestation which could be seen and experienced (machazeh – as a personal revelation of enlightening communication which can be beheld and visualized; as a window or aperture constructed for the purpose of flooding an area with light) to say (‘amar – promising and answering, claiming and avowing) : ‘Do not be awed (yare’ ‘al – do not be frightened or intimidated, rest and be at peace while I renew you) ‘Abram. I am (‘anoky) a defender and shield, a protective covering (magen – I am surrounding you, shielding and delivering you from harm; from ganan, to defend and protect by surrounding and covering) for you (la – on your behalf) , your exceedingly (ma’od – your ultimately empowering, energizing, facilitating, abundant, and) great (rabah – increasing and uplifting, making you more than you currently are, multiplicitous) reward (sakar – payment for passage, transit fee paid by a servant or shepherd, by a generous father and reliable doorkeeper) .’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 15:1)
God’s Word is machazeh: “personal, visual, and illuminating.” It is something which “can be seen and experienced,” especially as we read Yahowah’s Towrah. It serves as “a revelation, as enlightening communication which can be beheld and visualized.” God’s Word is “a window constructed for the purpose of flooding our lives with light”—God’s light.
As is the case throughout this Introduction to God and Yada Yah as well, the commentary surrounding the text will be extensive, because each word God chooses serves to color the overall portrait He is painting. Such is the case with “yare’ – respect and revere.” God’s Word encourages us to yare’ our Heavenly Father, and it teaches us to “lo yare’ – not fear” Him.
The “dabar – Word” of “Yahowah” serves as our “magen – defender and shield,” as our “protective covering.” It is our “ma’od rabah sakar – exceedingly great reward”—providing our “payment for passage,” our “transit fee,” which is “remunerated by” God “serving us as a shepherd,” as “a generous father,” who opens the “doorway” to heaven.
But there is even more we can learn. Of the 2,500 times dabar is found in the Covenant Scriptures, it is used as a noun (usually rendered: “word”) 1,400 times, and as a verb (describing someone “communicating through the spoken word”) 1,100 times. More amazing than this frequency, is the diversity. There are more than 120 different English words required to convey the full meaning of dabar. Some are synonyms, many are not. The only common denominator is that they all convey a sense of “communication,” because talking with and listening to God is the essence of His Covenant.
The “dabar – Word of Yahowah” is first and foremost “ha Towrah – the Source of Instruction and Teaching and the Place from which Guidance and Direction Flow: from tow – the signed, written, and enduring, towrah – way of treating people, tuwr – giving us the means to explore, to seek, to find, and to choose, yarah – the source from which instruction, teaching, guidance, and direction flow, that tuwb – provides answers that facilitate our restoration and return, even our response and reply to that which is towb – good, pleasing, joyful, beneficial, favorable, healing, and right, and that which causes us to be loved, to become acceptable, and to endure, tahowr / tohorah – purifying and cleansing us, towr – so as to provide an opportunity for us to change our thinking, attitude, and direction.” The Towrah is the book responsible for introducing and describing the Covenant. The Covenant ceases to exist and becomes utterly unknown without it.
But the “dabar – Word” of Yahowah also includes the Prophets. For example, the book known as “Ezekiel,” is comprised of “the Word (dabar) of Yahowah to Yachezq’el.”
To this, we must add the testimony of the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’, because Yahowah, in Yashayah / Isaiah 40:5, not only promised that He would put His dabar in His mouth, but also that Yahowsha’ would be the living manifestation of His “dabar – Word.” And that is why Yahowsha’ cited, affirmed, amplified, extrapolated upon, explained, enabled, and fulfilled the Covenant Scriptures with every word He spoke and every act He accomplished.
In the section devoted to Yahowah’s Instructions, we will discover that He introduces them with dabar. “And (wa) God (‘elohym) conveyed (dabar) all of (kol) these words (dabar) , providing perspective (‘eleh) in our presence (‘eth) , saying (‘amar) : ‘I am (‘anky) Yahowah ( – Yahowah) your God (‘elohym) who relationally (‘asher) brought you out and delivered you (yasa’) from the realm (min ‘erets) of the crucible of Egypt (mitsraym) , out of the house (min beyth) of slavery (‘ebed) . You shall not exist with (lo’ hayah la) other (‘aher) gods (‘elohym) in relation to (‘al) My presence (paneh) .’” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 20:1 - 3)
More fully amplified, this same introduction reads: “And (wa) God (‘elohym – the Almighty) conveyed (dabar – communicated, spoke, and wrote, provided instruction and direction with) all of (kol) these words (dabar – conversations, statements, warnings, and promises) , providing perspective (‘eleh – from a relatively close vantage point) in our presence (‘eth – in association with us and in proximity to us) , saying (‘amar – explaining, claiming, answering, counseling, warning, and promising) : ‘I am (‘anky) Yahowah ( – Yahowah) your God (‘elohym – the Mighty One (suffixed in the second person singular)) who relationally (‘asher) brought you out and delivered you (yasa’ – descended to serve, extending Myself to guide, lead, and carry you away) from the realm (min ‘erets – out of the land and region) of the crucible of Egypt (mitsraym – the smelting furnace where metals are refined and tested (a metaphor for judgment and oppression)) , out of the house (min beyth – from the home, household, family and place) of slavery (‘ebed – servitude, bondage, and worship, even work) . You shall not exist with (lo’ hayah la – you shall not have) other (‘aher – someone else’s, different, extra, or additional) gods (‘elohym) in relation to (‘al – near, before, or in proximity to, in addition to, or on account of) My presence (paneh) .’” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 20:1 - 3)
In this treatise on His Word, God began by introducing Himself, spelling out His name so that we might know it, etching “ ” in stone. He said that His Word would provide us with the perspective we would need to exist in His presence. He positioned Himself serving us, working as our savior and guide, personally leading us away from judgment and human oppression—from works - based salvation schemes. And all He asked in return—at least of those who wish to live in His presence—was to recognize that He alone is God.
Regarding this message, Moseh, the first to receive these words, wrote: “These are the words (dabar) Yahowah ( ) communicated, speaking (dabar) to (‘el) everyone (kol) assembled (qahal – gathered together) beside (ba) the mountain (har) , from (min) in the midst (tawek) of the fire (‘esh – radiant energy and light) and the water - laden (‘araphel) cloud (‘anan) with a great and powerful (gadowl – substantial and magnificent, important and distinguished, and glorious) voice (qowl) . He did not add anything more (lo’ yasap) . He wrote them, engraving them (y - katab - m – He inscribed them using letters and words) on (‘al) two (samaym) tablets (luwach) of stone (‘eben) and gave them (natan – prepared and bestowed them as a gift) to me.” (Dabar / Words / Deuteronomy 5:22)
Speaking of participating in Passover, Yahowah said “You shall observe (shamar – you all shall closely examine and carefully consider, keeping your eyes focused upon) this word and its message (dabar – this statement and communication) as a clearly communicated prescription of what you should do (choq – as an inscribed thought and engraved recommendation) and (wa) as a witness (‘ed) to your children (beny) forever (‘owlam) .” (Shemowth/ Names / Exodus 12:24) Yahowah’s witness and testimony, His teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance, the very Word of God, has a name: Towrah. It is filled with “choq – clearly communicated prescriptions of what we should do,” and most especially, what we as parents should share with our children, now and forever. And these choq are engraved in stone and inscribed in the written scroll of the Torah.
God’s Word and His Towrah were unified in the following declaration: “And Yahowah ( ) spoke (‘amar) as God to (‘el) Moseh, ‘Look at Me (hineh – pay attention to Me and behold) , I will send down (matar – I will provide and rain down) to you bread (lehem – food) from the heavens (shamaym) . And the family members (‘am – kin and related people) shall go out (yasa’ – extend themselves) and gather it (laqat – glean it as in a harvest) . This message (dabar – this word and the very essence of it) exists so that day in and day out I may determine (nasah – I can conduct a test to distinguish) if (‘im – whether) they walk (halak) in My Towrah (Towrah – My Instruction and Teaching, Guidance and Direction) or not (lo’) .” (Shemowth/ Names / Exodus 16:4)
This next conversation regarding Yahowah’s “dabar – word” will be dissected in the Towrah section. But because it is also enlightening relative to God’s Word, here is a sneak preview: “And Moseh’s father - in - law said to him, ‘It is not good (lo’ towb – beneficial) to share the Word (dabar – to communicate the message) as you are now doing. You will completely wither away and totally shrivel (nabel nabel – you will wear out and die) . Not only you, but also these family members (‘am – related people) who are with you. Indeed this is because from you (min – by means of you being used as an implement) , the Word (dabar – the Message) is very significant and valuable (kabed – worthy and massive, distinguished and honorable, glorified and rewarding) , and you are not able (yakol – you are not capable of continuing) to accomplish this (‘asah – engage and prevail in this) goal by yourself (bad – alone) .” (Shemowth/ Names / Exodus 18:17 - 18)
“So now then, listen to and receive this (shama’ – hear and understand this) in my voice. I am proposing a plan (ya’as – I am suggesting a course of action) whereby God will choose to continue to be with you (‘im – in a continued association with, near, and alongside you) . You represent (hayah – come to exist and be for) the people (‘am – family) before the Almighty and you come back, returning (bow’ – arriving) with God, the Almighty’s words (ha dabarym – the statements, messages, sayings, and communications) .” (18:19) “And you can warn and be a shining light (zahar – you can teach and admonish, being a beacon) among them with the clearly communicated prescriptions of what someone should do and with regard to the Towrah teachings and instructions (Towrah) . And then you will make known (yada’ – you will reveal and provide information which leads to understanding and awareness) to them the Way (ha derek – the Path (singular and absolute)) in which they should walk (halak – they should follow, travel, and go about their lives) , and the work (ha ma’aseh – the preparation, pursuits, and actions) which relationally they should pursue (‘asah – they should do, endeavor to undertake, act upon, actively engage in, celebrate, and profit from) .” (Shemowth/ Names / Exodus 18:20)
And therein lays the value and purpose of God’s Word. It reveals the Way.
The following excerpt is also from the Towrah section. But, like the previous discussion, it is equally at home in the midst of our review of the “dabar – word.” Here we discover that the Word and the Torah are synonymous. “And it came to exist (hayah) just when (ka) Moseh completely finished (kalah) writing (katab) the words (dabar) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) upon this, the Almighty’s (ha ze’th ‘al) written scroll (sepher) , successfully completing (tamam) the Eternal Witness (‘ad/‘ed) , Moseh directed (sawah) the Lewy (ha lewy) lifting up and carrying (nasa’) Yahowah’s (YaHoWaH’s) Ark (‘arown) of the Covenant (beryth) , saying (‘amar) , ‘Accept and grasp hold of (laqah) the written scroll (sepher) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) and place (sym) this alongside (‘eth min sad) Yahowah’s (YaHoWaH’s) Ark (‘arown) of the Family - Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth) . Your God (‘elohym) , He will always exist (hayah) there for you in the Eternal Witness and Enduring Testimony (‘ed/‘ad) .” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:24 - 26)
For those who would protest that the veracity of Scripture cannot be completely tested because the copy of the Towrah dictated to Moseh was lost to the ravages of time; this is good news. The original autograph of the Towrah resides to this day beside Yahowah’s Ark of the Covenant, which itself sits in the shadow of Golgotha upon Mount Mowryah in Yaruwshalaym. And rest assured, it will not only be revealed upon Yahowsha’s return, Yahowah, Himself, will write its every word upon our hearts.
This same passage, more fully amplified, reads: “And (wa) it came to exist (hayah) just when (ka) Moseh completely finished (kalah – concluded) writing (katab – inscribing using a written alphabet to communicate) the words (dabar) of the Towrah (ha Towrah – the Torah Instruction and Teaching, Guidance and Direction) upon this, the Almighty’s (ha ze’th ‘al) written scroll (sepher – engraved letter and inscribed document designed to recount, relate, rehearse, and declare) , successfully completing (tamam – totally and perfectly finishing) the Eternal Witness (‘ad / ‘ed – Enduring Testimony) , Moseh directed (sawah – instructed) the Lowy (ha lowy – those who join and unite; transliterated: Levites) lifting up and carrying (nasa’ – raising and bearing) Yahowah’s ( - - יהוה – Yahowah) Ark (‘arown – source of light, enlightenment, and choice) of the Covenant (beryth – Family - Oriented Relationship) , saying (‘amar) , ‘Accept and grasp hold of (laqah – obtain and receive) the written scroll (sepher – the written letter and inscribed document designed to recount, relate, rehearse, and declare) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) and place (sym – put) this (zeh) alongside (‘eth min sad – near, and beside) Yahowah’s ( ) Ark (‘arown – source of light, enlightenment, and choice) of the Covenant (beryth – Family - Oriented Relationship) . Your God (‘elohym) , He will always exist (hayah – He was, is, and will always be) there (sham) for you (la) in (ba) the Eternal Witness and Enduring Testimony (‘ed / ‘ad) .” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:24 - 26)
Using the Strong’s reference numbers as a guide, here is the definition of Towrah based upon the words which comprise this title: “Towrah (8451) – from tow (8420) – signed, written, and enduring, towrah (8452) – way of treating people, tuwr (8446) – giving us the means to explore, to seek, to find, and to choose, yarah (3384) – the source from which instruction, teaching, guidance, and direction flow, which tuwb (8421) – provides answers which facilitate our restoration and return, even our response and reply to that which is towb (2895) – good, pleasing, joyful, beneficial, favorable, healing, and right, and that which causes us to be loved, to become acceptable, and to endure, tahowr (2892) and tohorah (2893) – purifying and cleansing us, towr (8447) – so as to provide an opportunity to change our thinking, attitude, and direction.”
God will always exist for us in His Word, in His Towrah, in His Witness. His Enduring Testimony is in writing, and His words explain how we may go about choosing to participate in His Covenant. The words of the Towrah teach us how to become reconciled unto God through the process of receiving His purifying and protective covering. But most of all, if we look to the Towrah, we will find God.
The addition of a “New Testament” or “Oral Law” would be a violation of this instruction, as would be the “Qur’an” and the “Book of Mormon.” “You should not ever add to (lo’ yasap ‘al) the Word (ha dabar) which relationally and as a blessing (‘asher) I (‘anky) am instructing you all with (tsawah ‘eth) , and you should never subtract (wa lo’ gara’) from it (min) to properly observe (la shamar) the terms of the covenant (mitswah) of Yahowah ( ) , your God (‘elohym) , which as a favor (‘asher) I am (‘anky) directing you all with (tsawah ‘eth) .” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 4:2)
God told us all we need to know. His Word is sufficient to instruct and direct us. We are advised to observe it.
More revealing still, “sawah – guidance, instruction, teaching, and direction,” was scribed twice in this passage to proclaim what may well be the single most important lesson provided in this Introduction to God. The Almighty’s Word, His Torah, is God’s “teaching, instruction, guidance, and direction.” It is not His “law.” We are compelled to comply with laws. We are invited to consider instruction. A judge enforces laws, while a father offers guidance. One observes laws by keeping them. One observes teaching by evaluating it. If you learn nothing more from this book than that, it will have been worth the investment of your time. This reveals the proper perspective on how to approach the Torah, and indeed, Yahowah, Himself.
But Yahowah was not finished guiding us. He would go on to teach us to be concerned about our “nepesh – soul,” as opposed to our body or spirit. As we shall discover, our soul is all that matters to Yahowah, and therefore should be of great consequence to us. “Only (raq – exclusively without exception) be observant (shamar – pay attention, closely examine and carefully consider everything) as your goal. And pay very close attention to (ma’od shamar – very carefully consider and be especially aware of, caring about) your soul (nepesh – your individual consciousness) lest you forget (sakah – you overlook, ignore, or are no longer mindful, and cease to care about) the words (dabarym – written statements and testimony) which you have seen with your eyes. And lest they are removed from your heart. All of the days of your life, you shall make them known (yada’ – you shall acknowledge, respect, and reveal them) to your children and to your children’s children.” (Dabarym 4:9)
Just as the single most important thing our Heavenly Father could do for us was to reveal His Word, the most important thing we can do for our children is to share it with them. “The day which you were present, standing (‘amad – you were upright on your feet) before (paneh – and facing) Yahowah, your God, in Horeb, in which Yahowah said to me for me to summon and assemble (qahal – for me to gather and call together) the family (‘am – people who are related) so that I can have them hear (shama’ – so that I may have them listen to) the words (dabar) which relationally will cause them to learn (lamad – will teach and instruct them) to revere, respect (yare’ – admire, value) and accompany Me all of the days which as a result of the relationship they shall live (chay – shall exist) on the earth (‘adamah – ground and soil, speaking of the material realm) , and so that they might teach (lamad – share this information with and educate) their children.” (Dabarym 4:10) Had this been adhered to, the world would be like the Garden of Eden.
Our Heavenly Father revealed His Word to us because He wants us to learn about Him. He realizes that when we come to know Him as He really is, we will come to “yare’ – respect and revere” Him. Doing this, and encouraging our children to do the same, is the entire purpose of the days we spend in this material realm we call the earth.
Moseh would remind us: “And Yahowah ( ) spoke the word (dabar – communicated) as God to you (‘el) from the midst of the fire (‘esh – radiant energy and light) , words (dabarym) the sound of which (qowl – audible nature and sound waves) you heard (shama’ – you received and listened to) . But a visual form (tamuwnah – image, likeness, representation, or material manifestation) , you did not see—but only (zuwlah – exclusively) heard the sound.” (Dabarym 4:12) The Towrah is therefore the Word of God—literally: the very breath of God.
The first thing God spoke about was His Covenant. Nothing is more important to our Heavenly Father. It is the reason we exist. “And He told you all about (nagad la – He informed and reported to all of you regarding) His Family - Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth – mutual agreement based upon building a beyth – family and home) with you. Which, as a result of the relationship, He instructed and directed (sawah – He guided) you accordingly to act upon and actively engage in (‘asah la – to do and follow, to celebrate, observe, and profit from) the Ten Statements (dabar – Words) . And He wrote them (katab – He inscribed and engraved them in writing) on two tablets of stone.” (Dabarym 4:13)
According to Yahowah, His Covenant is explained in the Ten Words which were written on the two tablets of stone. By observing the words He wrote, we learn all about the relationship He is proposing.
Especially relevant, a relationship requires both parties to participate. Therefore, God has encouraged us to “‘asah – act upon” His Covenant, and to “‘asah – actively engage in it.” With regard to the Torah, this is the single most important thing we can “‘asah – do.”
This conversation concluded with these words: “And Yahowah ( ) instructed and guided (sawah – directed) me accordingly at this time (‘eth – in this context, and place) that She (hy’ – speaking of the Set - Apart Spirit, our Spiritual Mother and Counselor) would teach (lamad – provide the required information to instruct and guide) you regarding the clearly communicated prescriptions (choq – engraved thoughts and inscribed recommendations) and the means used to achieve justice and resolve disputes (mishpat – the basis upon which judgment will be exercised and sound decisions are made) so that you might celebrate, observe, and profit from them.” (Dabarym 4:14)
The “dabar – word” of God is always important, but never more so than “During the time of adversity and emotional distress (tsar – turmoil, anguish, oppression, and tribulation imposed by the Adversary and enemies) , when all of these words (ha dabar – the things included in this message) find you, especially those in the last (‘acharyth – the final and end) of days, then you will return and you will be restored (suwb – you will turn around, change, come back, recover and are reconciled) forever and eternally to Yahowah, your God.” (Dabarym 4:30)
The following is equally at home in a discussion of the Word and the Towrah. “From the heavens (ha shamaym – the spiritual abode of God) He has individually and deliberately prepared you to hear (shama’ – He has purposefully created you to use your sense of hearing to receive and process this message, this news; He actually conceived you to understand by listening to) His voice (qowl – His call, summons, and invitation) for the explicit purpose of instructing you (la yacar – with the goal of teaching, admonishing, correcting, and disciplining you) . And upon the Almighty’s earth, He enabled you to see (ra’ah – He made it possible for you to witness) His magnificent light (gadowl ‘esh – His great fire, radiant energy, and warmth) and His words (dabar – His testimony and message) which you heard (shama’ – you listen to and received) from the midst of the fire (‘esh – light and expression of radiant energy and warmth) .” (Dabarym 4:36)
Yahowah’s Word is personal, it is important; it underlies everything God has done for us. “And truthfully, underlying this is His love (‘ahab – His close, friendly, and affectionate relationship) for your fathers. And He has chosen to favor (bahar – He has selected and preferred) their descendants after them. And He has descended to serve, leading you (yasa’ – He has diminished and extended Himself to bring you) into His presence, into and with His magnificent, intense, and enormous power (gadowl – His great, important, extensive, and distinguished authority and strength, ability and might) , away from (min – out of) the Crucible of Egypt (Mitsraym – serving as a metaphor for human religious, political, economic, and military oppression and judgment) .” (Dabarym 4:37)
The best advice in the world is to “yada’ – know” what God revealed to us in His Word. “And you should acknowledge and respect (yada’ – you should be familiar with, be aware of, care about, and understand) this day, and you should return your heart to God, because indeed (ky – truthfully and reliably) Yahowah (YaHoWaH) , He is the Almighty God (huw’ ha ‘elohym) in the heavens (ha shamaym – the spiritual realm) above, and the earth (ha ‘erets – the material realm) below. There is no other.” (Dabarym 4:39)
Yahowah recognizes that our hearts must follow our minds, or else we risk falling for false deities and unreliable religious schemes. Few spiritual lessons are as important as this one: “And you should observe (shamar – you should closely examine and carefully consider, you should open your eyes, be diligently observant, and thoughtful, revering, respecting, and clinging to) His clearly communicated prescriptions of what we should do (choq – His engraved thoughts and inscribed recommendation) , and the terms and conditions of His binding contract (mitswah – His authorized directions and written instructions) , which relationally I have instructed and directed you (sawah – guided you) this day. Because, as a result of the relationship, He is good to you and beneficial for you (yatab la – He is cheerful and will make you beautiful, pleasing, better, and joyful) , and also for your children after you, for the express purpose of elongating your days.” (Dabarym 4:40) God’s Word affirms that God is good for us. His goal is to make us happy and extend our lives.
“This is (ze’th) the Towrah (ha Towrah – the Instruction and Teaching, Guidance and Direction) which as a result of the relationship He placed before Moseh (Moseh – the one who draws us away from oppression and judgment) and the Children of Yisra’el (ben Yisra’el – the children who want to live and endure, strive and persist with God) .” (Dabarym 4:44)
Speaking again of the Word of God, we read: “This is the Witness and Testimony, the clearly communicated prescriptions, the means used to achieve justice and resolve disputes, which God spoke to (dabar – communicated using words to) Moseh and the Children of Yisra’el (ben Yisra’el – to the children who want to endure and persist with God) when He led them (yasa’ – He descended and extended Himself to serve by bringing them) away from oppression and judgment (mitsraym – the crucible of Egypt) .” (Dabarym 4:45)
The words we are reading comprise Yahowah’s Witness, His Testimony, His clearly communicated prescriptions. These words provide the means God will use to decide our fate. And most important of all, these words enable us to escape oppression and judgment.
Deep within our discussion of the Towrah, we will delve into the following dissertation on the Word of God. But now I’d like you to consider this excerpt from “Dabarym – Words” in summary form, because these words are not only unequivocal, they represent the very essence of Yahowah’s written instructions.
“These are the terms and the conditions of the binding contract, the clearly communicated prescriptions, and the means used to achieve justice and resolve disputes, which as a result of the relationship, Yahowah your God, instructed you to learn and teach what should be done in the land into which you all are going to pass over into as an inheritance (6:1) for the intent and purpose that you really come to revere and respect Yahowah your God by observing all of His clearly communicated prescriptions, and terms and conditions, which I have guided you individually, your children, and your children’s children all of the days of your lives, for the purpose of elongating your days. (6:2)
And so that you listen and hear Yisra’el – those who strive and persist with God— and so that you are observant, closely scrutinizing and examining, carefully exploring and considering, thereby engaging in that which relationally is good and beneficial for you, and which will cause you to substantially increase, grow, and become exceedingly great, consistent with that which Yahowah, your God, promised and affirmed in words (dabar) to your fathers on your behalf. (6:3) Yisra’el – those who persist and endure with God— listen to and hear Yahowah, our God. Yahowah is one, certain, and unique. (6:4) You should truly and totally love Yahowah, your God, with all your heart and emotions, with all your soul, and with all your capability, to the greatest extent of your cognitive aptitude. (6:5)
And these words (dabar) which I am guiding and directing you with this day, they shall come to exist, and they should always be, on your heart, guiding your feelings. (6:6) And your goal should be to teach them by rote by reciting them to prepare and equip your children. You should consistently speak about them during your life, inside your home, and with your family, and as you walk along the Path, and when you lie down and rest, pausing to reflect, and when you stand up and are restored. (6:7) You shall closely associate yourself with them by affixing them as a sign, as proof, and as a reminder upon your hand to influence your actions, and they should come to exist between your eyes to provide perspective and enhance your thinking. (6:8) And you should write them upon the doorframes of your home, and upon the gates to your community.” (6:9)
While the words we have just read are found toward the beginning of “Dabarym – Words,” and serve as an introduction, the words we are about to read are found toward the end of the book and serve as a summation.
“The covered and concealed (satar – the sheltered and hidden [speaking of God’s children whose sins can no longer be seen because they are adorned in the Set - Apart Spirit’s Garment of Light]) belong to Yahowah (la Yahowah) , our God (‘elohym) , and those things which are revealed and made known (galah – things which are uncovered and exposed [speaking of God’s Word]) belong to us (la) , and are for (la) our children (ben) eternally and forever (‘ad ‘olam – throughout all time) , to conduct ourselves in accordance with (‘asah ‘eth – to engage in, to act upon, to benefit from, and to celebrate) all (kol) the words (dabar) of this (z’eth) , the Towrah (ha Towrah: from tow – the signed, written, and enduring, towrah – way of treating people, tuwr – giving us the means to explore, to seek, to find, and to choose, yarah – the source from which instruction, teaching, guidance, and direction flow, which tuwb – provides answers which facilitate our restoration and return, even our response and reply to that which is towb – good, pleasing, joyful, beneficial, favorable, healing, and right, and that which causes us to be loved, to become acceptable, and to endure, tahowr / tohorah – purifying and cleansing us, towr – so as to provide an opportunity to change our thinking, attitude, and direction) .” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 29:29)
“Indeed (ky – truly and surely) , you should actually listen to (shama’ ba – you should receive the message and really hear) the voice (qowl – the call, invitation, and summons) of Yahowah, your God (Yahowah ‘elohym) , for the purpose of closely examining and carefully considering (la shamar – so that you observe and thoughtfully scrutinize and study) the terms and conditions of His binding contract (mitswah – His authoritative instructions and written legal conditions) and His clearly communicated prescriptions and inscribed recommendations of what we should do in this life to live (wa chuwqah – His written rules regarding life; from choq – His shared and nourishing thoughts regarding an allocation of something from Him by way of one who is set apart which is designed to cut us in on the Covenant agreement) , which are inscribed (ha katab – that which is written, engraved, and permanently memorialized) in (ba) the written scroll (ha seper – the written document) of this (ze’th) , the Towrah (ha Towrah – the Instruction and Teaching, the Guidance and Direction) . And that is because (ky – truly and surely) you will really return and be restored (suwb – you will actually be changed and transformed, turning back) to (‘el) Yahowah, your God (Yahowah ‘elohym) , with all (ba kol) your heart (leb – your emotions and feelings) , and with all (wa ba kol) your soul (nepesh – individual consciousness) .” (Dabarym 30:10)
“For indeed (ky) , the utterly powerful and exceedingly great (ma’od – the unequivocally mighty and extraordinarily magnificent) Word (dabar) of your God (‘el) facilitates your approach and brings you near (qarowb – enables you to engage in a close and personal relationship)— ingrained in your speech (ba peh) , and in your heart (wa ba leb – influencing your feelings and emotions)— to engage with, capitalize upon, and celebrate with Him (la ‘asah – to actively associate with and benefit from Him) .” (Dabarym 30:14)
That is about as clear a depiction of Yahowah’s “ma’od – utterly powerful, exceedingly great, and extraordinarily magnificent” “dabar – Word,” as you will ever read. His dabar is the means by which God is known. His Word enables us to engage with Him. The Word is God’s means to restore us so that we can return to Him.
Thus far, every citation regarding the “dabar – word” has come from the Towrah. And that is because the Word of God and His Towrah Instructions are synonymous and inseparable. But did you know that Yahowsha’ not only recited the words of the Towrah; He completed it?
“Later (‘achar) therefore (ken) , he recited and proclaimed (qara’ – he [Yahowsha’] read aloud and called out, inviting and summoning everyone to enter the presence of and embrace) all of (kol – every one of) the words (dabar – statements and messages) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) , the blessings of peace and prosperity (ha barakah – enriching gifts and loving benefits) and also the slights and denunciations (ha qalalah – vilifications and abominations, anathemas, abhorrences, blasphemies, condemnations, curses and damnations; from qalal – to slight and trifle with, to view as unworthy and insignificant, to lightly esteem) , just as (ka) all of these things (kol) were written (katab – permanently inscribed and engraved) in (ba – within) the written scroll (seper – the inscribed documentation, the permanently engraved letter, communication, and message) of the Towrah (ha Towrah – the Instruction and Teaching, Guidance and Direction) .” (Yahowsha’ / Yah Saves / Joshua 8:34)
“There did not exist (lo’ hayah – there was not, is not, nor ever will be) a Word (dabar – statement and message) from (min) all (kol – everything) that which (‘asher – as a result of the relationship) Moseh (Moseh – the one who draws us away from oppression and judgment) had instructed and directed (sawah – had guided) which (‘asher – relationally) Yahowsha’ ( or – Yahowsha’: a compound of Yahowah and yasha’ – saves) did not (lo’) read, recite, call out, and proclaim (qara’ – provide as an invitation to meet and summons to encounter God) in a straightforward manner in the presence of (neged – directly before, face to face and in sight of) the entire (kol – whole) assembled community (qahal – gathered congregation) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – those ‘ysh – individuals, who sarah – strive and contend with, engage and persist with, are set free and are empowered by ‘el – God) , including the women (ha ‘isah – the females) and the little children (tap – young people) , as well as (wa) the foreigners (ger – visitors from different races and places) who were walking (halak – traveling) among them (ba qereb – in their midst) .” (Yahowsha’ 8:35)
“And then Yahowsha’ ( or – Yahowsha’: a compound of Yahowah and yasha’ – saves = Yahowah Providing Salvation) wrote (katab – inscribed, making an enduring and permanent record of) these (‘eleh) words (dabar – statements) in (ba) God’s (‘elohym) Towrah (Towrah – signed, written, and enduring means to search for, find, and choose instruction, teaching, guidance, and direction which provides answers that facilitate our restoration and return, which are good, pleasing, beneficial, favorable, healing, and right, even purifying and cleansing, thereby giving us the opportunity and means to change our thinking, attitude, and direction) .” (Yahowsha’ 24:26) Yahowsha’ is the Word. He is the living embodiment of the Towrah. He not only recited the words which comprise the Towrah, and wrote the words found within the Towrah, He enabled them.
While we could easily continue this discussion on the “dabar – Word” of God for the next hundred pages, I’d like to conclude by sharing what is perhaps the most often quoted passage on this topic—although I’ll do so in context. Christian pastors cite a tiny slice of what we are going to consider to infer that God has intervened to keep their bibles from being corrupted. But that isn’t what God is saying. In actuality, He will be comparing His Word to our character.
But before we consider Yahowah’s perspective on His Word, let’s listen to what He has to say about us. This presentation is found in my favorite book, one which begins: “The revelation (hazown – the divine communication) to Yasha’yahuw (Yasha’yahuw – Yahowah Saves, commonly (mis)transliterated Isaiah) , the son (ben) of Amowts (‘Amowts – the alert and bold, the strengthened and secure, commonly (mis)transliterated Amoz) , which by way of the relationship (‘asher) he received prophetic information (hazah – observed the future) regarding (‘al) Yahuwdah (Yahuwdah – Yah is Abundantly Sufficient, Of Yah, From Yah, and Those Who Are Related to Yah; commonly (mis)transliterated Judah) and Yaruwshalaym (Yaruwshalaym – the source of salvation, commonly (mis)transliterated Jerusalem) in the day (ba yowm) of Uzyahuw (‘Uzyahuw – Yahowah Strengthens, commonly (mis)transliterated Uzziah) , Yowtham (Yowtham – Yahowah Vindicates, Perfects, and Completes, commonly (mis)transliterated Jotham) , Achaz (‘Achaz – grasp hold of him and seize the opportunity) , and Yachizqyah (Yachizqyah – Grow and Prevail with Yahowah, commonly (mis)transliterated Hezekiah (this spelling of the name was derived from the Dead Sea Scrolls)) , kings (melek – rulers) of Yahuwdah (Yahuwdah) .” (Yasha’yahuw / Yahowah Saves / Isaiah 1:1) When the names are changed, as they are in every English translation, the essence of the message, and the identity of its Source is lost.
Yahowah’s prophetic testimony is grounded in time, but not limited in time. The circumstances this revelation describes were prevalent when they were recorded, just as they are now. The message was true then, just as it is today.
This prophetic document was scribed around 700 BCE, during the reign of King Yachizqyah, seven centuries before Yahowsha’ would fulfill its predictions. This king, and his (actually God’s) defeat of the Assyrians, has recently been documented in secular texts, affirming that the historicity of these words is as accurate as were the predictions they made.
Particularly interesting in this regard, there was but one complete scroll found in the Qumran caves above the Dead Sea: Yasha’yahuw – Isaiah. The Great Isaiah Scroll, as it is known, was most recently carbon - 14 dated in 1995 by the University of Arizona. They calibrated its origin to between 335 - 324 BCE. Therefore, God has provided us with a written record which predates the events He predicted by three hundred years.
In that every prediction made on this scroll has been, or soon will be, fulfilled precisely as promised, it serves to prove that Yahowah is God and that He inspired His Word. There is no other possible informed or rational conclusion. The probability of chance fulfillment of the predictions made through Yasha’yahuw exceed one in ten to the sixtieth power. That is greater than one chance in sixty billion billion billion billion billion billion. And that is why there is an entire volume of Yada Yah entitled “Salvation,” which is dedicated to these predictions.
One of the most famous prophets who ever lived, wrote: “Listen (shama’) heavens (shamaym – in the spiritual realm) , and listen (shama’) earth (‘erets – in the material realm) , for indeed (ky – surely and truly) , Yahowah ( - - יהוה – Yahowah(God’s personal and proper name, commonly replaced with Satan’s title: “the LORD”)) has spoken (dabar – communicated the word) . ‘I reared the children and caused them to grow (gadal benym – I nurtured the family and made them great) and I lifted them up to a place of honor (ruwm – I raised them, causing them to grow up) , and they (hem) rebelled against Me (pasa’ ba – revolted against and offended, were indignant and defied Me) .’” (Yasha’yahuw 1:2)
Our Heavenly Father honored His end of the Covenant, whose stated goal was to help us grow, but His children have disavowed their responsibility.
Thinking themselves wise, God’s children were actually unaware. “A bull (sowr – a cow) knows and acknowledges (yada’ – is aware of and respects) the one who caused him to be born (qanah – the one who conceived, created, and bore him, bringing him forth) , and an ass (hamowr – donkey) his lord and master (ba’al – owner who possesses and controls him) . Yisra’el (Yisra’el – individuals who contend with God) does not know or understand (lo’ yada’ – is not acquainted with and does not acknowledge, is unaware, undiscerning, and indiscriminating) , and (wa) My family (‘am – My related people and kin) does not realize or apprehend this information (lo’ byn – is not observant, does not pay attention, is not discerning, and does not understand) .’” (Yasha’yahuw 1:3)
These were loaded terms. The “bull” was Satan’s favorite guise. Its image permeates every early pagan religious cult, from Babel / Babylon to Egypt. The Children of Yisra’el had made a golden calf in honor of this false deity as the Torah was being revealed. So, Yahowah is saying, “Even Satan knows who created him.”
An “ass” is the epitome of a dumb, stubborn animal with a nasty, independent, attitude (as are far too many men). Yahowah had called Ishmael’s descendants, today’s Muslims, “wild asses of men.” Ba’al, meaning “lord and master,” is the Devil’s most prevalent Scriptural title—vastly more common than “ha Satan – the Adversary.” So, Yahowah is saying, “Even dumb asses know that Satan is their lord and master, the one who owns and controls them.”
But not Yisra’el. They were lost. But the same could be said for Christians, Muslims, and Socialist Secular Humanists. The evidence is available, as is the proof, but they are unwilling or unable to process it rationally.
And that is why this next admonition widens the scope of the audience being critiqued to include “gowy – Gentiles” in addition to Yisra’el. “Woe (howy – alas, expressing a warning, sorrow, and regret) , the people from different races and places (gowy – the Gentiles, the nation of heathens and pagans) bear blame and are guilty (hata’ – they do the wrong thing, miss the way, wander off the proper path, fail to reach the goal, and bear the consequences of their sin) . The people’s (‘am – the family’s) distortions and corruptions (‘awon (actually ‘aown) – propensity to warp, alter, and twist, perversity and depravity, iniquity and liability, wickedness and wrongdoing, guilt and punishment; from ‘awah – to bend, twist, distort, pervert, and corrupt) are numerous and significant (kabed – are burdensome, weighty, voluminous, troubling, grievous, severe, and harsh) , offspring (zera’ – seed and descendants) of those who have done wrong (ra’a’ – immoral individuals who have brought harm upon themselves and their children, troubling and mistreating them so that they suffer calamity, misfortune, and ruin) , children (benym) of those who corrupt (shahat – of those who ruin, ravage, devastate, and destroy, perverting and injuring others, causing them to decay) . They have rejected and abandoned (‘azab – left their previous association with, deserted and forsaken) Yahowah ( - יהוה – Yahowah) . They have spurned, rejected, despised, and blasphemed (na’as – they strongly dislike and feel contempt for, they revile and abhor, they have provoked, libeled, slandered, maligned, insulted, disparaged, and defamed) the Set - Apart One (qadowsh ‘eth) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – a compound of ‘ysh – individuals, who sarah – strive and contend with, engage and persist with, are set free and are empowered by ‘el – God) . They are strangers who have gone astray (zuwr – they having turned away, have become estranged and alienated, abandoning the relationship) , having turned their backs (‘ahowr – having walked backwards away from an association, hindering themselves in the process) .’” (Yasha’yahuw 1:4)
‘Awon, which more accurately is transliterated ‘aown, is from ‘awah. That is important because it describes the specific kind of wrongdoing of which the gowy and ‘am were guilty. They “distorted and corrupted, altered and twisted, Yahowah’s Word, perverting it. As proof, compare this or any passage to a modern bible translation.
What this means is that God not only allowed people to corrupt His Word, to alter and to twist it, He told us that Jews and Gentiles alike would do this very thing. Therefore, the “I can’t believe God would allow anyone to corrupt His Word,” protestation mouthed by the ignorant and irrational victims of religion is a direct contradiction of God’s Word.
The consequence of perverting Yahowah’s message is the corruption of our children and their children. Those who have rejected and spurned Yahowah breed the same response in their offspring. Indeed, the seed of distorting the Word of God is contempt for God.
I have said, and will say again, religious leaders, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim, don’t respect or revere Yahowah’s name. They despise it. And this is not my opinion, but instead Yahowah’s conclusion. To blaspheme is to bring God’s name to naught, to negate it by hiding it.
Yahowsha’ is the “qadowsh ‘eth – Set - Apart One” of Yisra’el, as He is the One who is “set - apart” from Yahowah. The Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ is not the second or third person of a Trinity, because God is One. He is part of Yahowah, set - apart from Him.
Religious Jews long for ha Mashiach who is disassociated from Yahowah, who is human, not Divine, who will conquer, not reconcile. They have spurned and continue to despise the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’, the Set - Apart One of Yisra’el. And in this way, they have gone astray.
Fortunately, Yahowah’s commitment to this relationship is far greater than our own. As evidence of this, even while His children were rebelling against Him, God announced His plan to reconcile the relationship. What follows, indeed most all of Yasha’yahuw, is devoted to not only depicting the awful mess man has made, but also to describing precisely how Yahowah will achieve His goal.
Now that introductions have been made, let’s journey deeper into this prophetic text to ascertain Yahowah’s perspective on His Word. This discussion begins: “‘Comfort and console My family and encourage My people to change their attitude, thinking, and perspective (nacham nacham ‘am – reconsider, relent, and repent My people, acknowledge that you were wrong and change your mind My family) ,’ God (‘elohym) said (‘amar – responded and declared) .” (Yasha’yahuw / Yahowah Saves / Isaiah 40:1)
The thing that Yahowah wanted His people to change their attitude, thinking, and perspective about, was His summons to them, His Way, and His Ma’aseyah. “A voice (qowl) will actually call out (qara’ – will really summon, proclaim, and recite) in the wilderness (ba ha midbar – in the place without the Word (from dabar)) , ‘Turn around, clear away the clutter, and face (panah – change direction and turn to) the Way (derek – the path, way of life, and steps) of Yahowah ( - יהוה – Yahowah) , and (wa – extant in the Dead Sea Scrolls, thereby connecting these thoughts) do and consider what is right and become upright (yashar – be straightforward and become agreeable and acceptable, in accordance with the law, and consider what is right in association with the standard) in the wasteland (ba ha ‘arabah – in desolate darkness) , a highway (macilah – a thoroughfare, a main road and causeway, be an elevated ramp, a stairway, and a walkway; from calal – be that which provides a way to lift people up (singular)) to (la) our God (‘elohym) .’” (Yasha’yahuw / Yahowah Saves / Isaiah 40:3) If this is familiar to you, it is because Yahowchanan the Immerser quoted it as Yahowsha’ was approaching the Yarden River.
It is amazing how much more revealing this passage is in Hebrew, than it is in every English bible translation. God is asking us to change our thinking, and to clear away the clutter which is disrupting our ability to recognize Him—to face Him. He wants us to acknowledge His Way—singular. And most important of all, by using His name in this context, He is telling us that He, Himself, is Yahowsha’, God in the flesh.
Central to this instruction is “panah – turn around and change direction,” which is indistinguishable in the revealed text from paneh, which speaks of “entering into God’s presence, appearing before Him, and facing Him.” To achieve this, those who have been beguiled by religion must change direction, walk away from their religion, clear their minds, hearts, and souls of its clutter, and then walk along the Way God has provided. It is only in this way that we are prepared to enter Yahowah’s presence, and gaze upon His face.
Further, Yahowah is reinforcing one of the pillars of the Covenant, that He wants us to stand upright in His presence, not bow down, to be straightforward as opposed to feigning faith or praise, and to be in accord with His standard, the Towrah. If we do these things, we become a thoroughfare to God – our witness and example serving as an elevated path from earth to heaven.
Reinforcing this, yashar, translated “do and consider what is right and become upright,” in this verse, was scribed in the piel imperative. The piel stem conveys the grammatical voice of relationships, and tells us that the object of the verb (and that would be us in this case), is influenced and affected by the verb’s action, meaning that by considering what is right, and doing what is right, we will become upright and agreeable in God’s presence. Further, the imperative mood of the verb expresses a command or exhortation which encourages volition. That is to say, God is instructing and inspiring us in the hope that we choose to do the right thing.
Before we move on, and especially because this section is devoted to God’s Word, it’s important that we confront a very troubling, albeit irrefutable fact. Recognizing that I’ve translated this passage as it appears in the Great Isaiah Scroll, it is essential that we compare what we have just read to what we find in the Christian “New Testament.”
Once again, Yahowah inspired: “A voice (qowl) will actually call out (qara’) in the wilderness (ba ha midbar) , ‘Turn around, clear away the clutter, and face (panah) the Way (derek) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH) , and (wa) do and consider what is right and be upright (yashar) in the wasteland (ba ha ‘arabah) , a highway (macilah) to (la) our God (‘elohym) .”
“This (outos) for (gar) is (estin) the (o) word having been spoken (lego) through (dia) Esaias (Esaias – a rather pathetic attempt to transliterate Yasha’yahuw) , the (tou) prophet (prophetes) , saying, ‘A voice (phone) crying out (boao) in (en) the (te) uninhabited (eremos) , “Prepare (hetoimazo) the (ten) way (hodos) of ΚΥ (ΚΥ – used as a Divine Placeholder) , straight (euthys) make (poieomai) the (tas) paths (tribos) of Him (autos) .”’” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 3:3)
Esaias (Ἠσαΐας) isn’t a credible transliteration of Yasha’yahuw. “Calling out” and “crying out,” are not the same thing. There is no pain or anguish associated with qara’, and yet that is the primary connotation of boao.
“Eremos – uninhabited” and “midbar – wilderness” are somewhat related, but hardly identical. The Hebrew panah is focused on “turning around and facing” someone, and on “removing obstacles to facilitate entering their presence.” It is a far cry from “hetoimazo – prepare.”
Since Yahowah cannot be transliterated using the Greek alphabet, a system of placeholders was deployed. So while we cannot fault the Greek translator of Mattanyah for not scribing Yahowah’s name, the KY placeholder was a poor substitution because it is based upon kurios, which means “lord, master, and owner.” But since inaccuracy is currently the issue, let’s table this discussion until the next section.
God asked us to “yashar – do and consider the right thing, and become upright” and yet Mattanyah wrote “euthys poieomai – straight make.” Once again, these are very different concepts. But it gets worse, because Mattanyah completely left out the parallelism of “‘arabah – in the wasteland.” Worse still, “tribos – paths” is plural in the Greek text, which is not only in conflict with the singular derek and macilah, but also incorrectly suggests that there is more than one way to God.
But that’s not the last of the serious issues. Yahowah, as a result of summoning us in the wilderness, of us turning around, clearing away the clutter, and preparing to face the Way to Yahowah, and becoming right and upright, wants us to be “macilah la ‘elohym – a highway to our God.” But Mattanyah’s account has been corrupted to the point that this instruction was changed to “euthys poieomai tas tribos autos – straight make the paths of Him.” These thoughts bear no resemblance whatsoever.
Taken collectively, these deviations from Yahowah’s Word lead to a sobering conclusion. What Mattanyah wrote is not reliable. Either it was not inspired by God, or what he wrote has been so badly corrupted by subsequent scribes that it no longer resembles the original. Either way, what we have today is not the Word of God.
In the book ascribed to Mark, we find the same errant citation of Yahsa’yahuw 40:3. “A voice (phone) crying out (boao) in (en) the (te) uninhabited (eremos) , ‘Prepare (hetoimazo) the (ten) way (hodos) of ΚΥ (ΚΥ) , straight (euthys) make (poieomai) the (tas) paths (tribos) of Him (autos) .’” (Mark 1:3)
To a large extent, the reason that these differ in identical ways to the statement Yahowah made in Yasha’yahuw, is that they were quoted out of the Septuagint—proving that it was also unreliable. Further, Christian scribes had a bad habit of unifying texts, and removing differences which called the testimony of these witnesses into question.
The letter which bears Luke’s name repeats all of the same mistakes. But Yahowchanan’s testimony is a little different because the quotation was put in Yahowchanan the Immerser’s voice. So the Disciple wrote: “He declared (phemi) , ‘I am (ego) a voice (phone) crying out (boao) in (en) the (te) uninhabited (eremos) , ‘Make (poieomai) straight (euthys) the way (hodos) of ΚΥ (ΚΥ) , just as (kathos) said (lego) Esaias (Esaias) , the (tou) prophet (prophetes) .’” (Yahowchanan / John 1:23) And while it is good that multiple paths were constrained to a singular way, this is not “kathos – just as” Yahowah dictated this prophecy to Yasha’yahuw.
Beyond recognizing and acknowledging the obvious, that God did not inspire these words found in the books named Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, where does this evidence leave us? At the very least, it means that we must question the veracity of everything we find in the Greek text. And it means that apart from Yahowsha’s own words, we must consider the remaining commentary and chronologies found in the so - called “New Testament” to be the product of human recollections. And even with Yahowsha’s testimony, it is only reliable to the extent that it has been accurately translated out of Hebrew and Aramaic and into Greek, to the extent that it has been accurately maintained, to the extent that we possess early witnesses of His statements from the first or second centuries, and to the extent these manuscripts are accurately translated into a modern language like English. And, sadly, a thorough investigation of the evidence reveals that most of these things seldom occurred.
I wish we had an original autograph scribed in Hebrew and Aramaic from the hand of Mattanyah and Yahowchanan upon which we could rely. But we don’t have anything even remotely close to this. So it is long past time we all deal with the facts: The Word of God is limited to the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. Yahowah proved that He inspired them. Men demonstrated that they inspired everything else.
So as a good rule of thumb, unless what you read in the “New Testament,” can be verified in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, don’t believe it. Do not base your understanding of God, the relationship He established, or the path of salvation He delineated, on anything apart from that which is affirmed in His Word.
Speaking of Yahowsha’, the 5th verse of the 40th chapter of Yahsa’yahuw proclaims: “Then (wa) He shall reveal (galah) the glorious presence and manifestation of power (kabowd – the glory, attribution, status, and gift) of Yahowah ( ) . And all (kol) living creatures (basar – humans and animals, the physical nature of living beings) , they will see (ra’ah – they will be shown) Yahdow – the Unity of Yah (Yahdow – the Oneness of Yahowah (יַחְדָּו)) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:5) Yahowsha’ is the corporeal manifestation of Yahowah. He is one with Him in that He is set - apart from Him. Nothing more. Nothing less.
So that you better appreciate what is being said here, it is helpful to know that God experiences all of time at the same time. For Him, the past, present, and future exist simultaneously. To reinforce this, He often juxtaposes His most recent arrival, the one heralded in the third verse, with His next visit to the earth, which will be His glorious return. They are often presented side by side—just as they are in the famed 9th chapter of Yasha’yahuw, and again here in this verse. Here, God is speaking about what will occur on the Day of Reconciliations, when He will return so brilliantly, He will look like the stars. On that day, those who survive to witness His return will know what you will soon discover, that Yahowsha’ is part of Yahowah, set apart from Him to serve us in our material realm. They will see Yahdow—the Unity of Yahowah.
Since it is germane to this discussion, please do not miss the fact that “basar – living creatures” will coexist in the presence of God. Flesh will see Him, but not in heaven, instead on earth. What’s happening here, and indeed with all of the references to a physical human existence in proximity to God, is that the entire Earth will become like the Garden of Eden during the Millennial Sabbath. For one thousand years, the relationship God intended between Himself and Adam will be enjoyed by all of those who populate the final Sukah – who are privileged to Campout with God.
Along these lines, it is also interesting to note, that if we were to take God’s Valley of Dry Bones illustration literally, and not just symbolically, the Children of Yisra’el who relied upon the Way Yahowah provided, will be physically resurrected, so that they can walk in the Promised Land side by side with their God during the thousand - year celebration of the Shabat.
Affirming that Yahowsha’ is “the Word of God in the flesh,” although seven hundred years before Yahowchanan (meaning Yahowah is Merciful, but commonly (mis)transliterated John) drafted the opening lines of his eyewitness account, Yasha’yahuw was inspired to scribe the same thing: “Indeed (ky) , He is the Word (ha dabar – He [speaking of Yahowsha’] is the spoken and written Word (scribed in the piel perfect, indicating the relationship is whole and complete throughout time; in the third person, masculine singular, identifying the pronoun He) is) , the verbal spokesman (peh – literally: the mouth) of Yahowah ( - יהוה) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:5)
The Word of Yahowah would become flesh and tabernacle (indicating that He would arrive on the Called - Out Assembly Meeting of Shelters) with us. The Author of these words, and the Divine manifestation of the Word, would campout with mankind. Therefore, we should not be surprised that Yahowsha’ not only observed the Torah, and affirmed every jot and tittle scribed within its words, His life and sacrifice served to announce the Way, He, Himself, becoming the stairway from our physical mortal existence to Yahowah’s eternal and spiritual realm.
This is followed by something which establishes a contrast between our character and God’s, between our physical mortality and the enduring existence of His Word. “A voice (qowl) is saying (‘amar) , ‘Call out (qara’ – summon and invite, read and recite, proclaim and announce the news, and arrange a meeting) !’ So (wa) I asked (‘amar – I questioned (as it is presented in the Dead Sea Scrolls where the query is from Yasha’yahuw, but not the Masoretic Text were “he,” as in the manifestation of God, is asking)) , ‘What (mah) shall I announce (qara’ – shall I call out and summon people to encounter) ?’ ‘All (kol) humankind (basar – living creatures, human and animal nature, flesh) is grass (chasyr – a common plant which spreads out, lives for a while, and then becomes food for other animals) , and the totality of (kol) his loyalty and love (chesed – his unfailing kindness, goodness, faithfulness, devotion, and mercy) is akin to (ka – can be compared to) the flower (sys – the blossom of a plant) of the field (sadeh – cultivated ground) . The grass (chasyr) withers (yabes – dries up and is gone) , and the flower (sys – blossom of the plant) fades away (nabel – shrivels, decays, and is senseless) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:6 - 7)
This is an apt depiction of our brief mortality, as well as the fate of our flesh. But more than this, it is a hauntingly accurate portrayal of our character. Our mortal souls are not any more reliable or durable than our bodies. Most will wither and fade away, because our soul, our consciousness and character, is neither loyal nor loving, faithful nor devoted to God.
But there is hope. There is a way to transcend our mortal existence. There is a means to avoid fading away, to prevent our souls from dissipating into nothingness and ceasing to exist. “But indeed (ky – however by contrast, truthfully and reliably this is very important) , the Spirit (ruwach – the eternal, and thus not mortal or material, presence and power, the maternal manifestation (a feminine noun)) of Yahowah ( - יהוה – Yahowah) , She is actually dispersed (nashab – She is exhaled as breath and is blown (scribed in the qal perfect, indicating a relationship which is totally real, and one which is whole and complete, without interruption, throughout time, with the third person, feminine, singular suffix, identifying She)) truthfully and reliably (‘aken – indeed and in fact, surely and truly, this is important) in him (baw – inside of him) who is surely of (‘aken – who is indeed of) the family (ha ‘am – of the related people) of grass (chasyr) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:7) Once again, to translate this passage correctly, we must turn to the 2,300 - year - old Great Isaiah Scroll. The Masoretic Text isn’t even remotely reliable when the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ is the subject of the discussion.
In our mortal and material bodies we may be nothing more than grass, as common as a plant which spreads out, lives for a while, and then becomes food for other living things when it withers and decays. But, and this is the most important contrast in all of creation: the Spirit of Yahowah, when She is dispersed truthfully and reliably in him, such grass becomes family.
Also interesting, as Yahowsha’, Yahowah set apart part of Himself to become human. This diminished manifestation of God, known as the Son of God, was not only part of God’s family, but also embraced the limitations of grass, and became one with the grass for a time. So since the pronoun “He” has been associated with Yahowsha’ throughout this discussion, God is predicting that His Spirit would be blown upon Yahowsha’ as He approached His symbolic immersion in the Yarden.
Even Yahowsha’s body withered on the upright pole of Passover and faded away. But His soul endured the separation of Unleavened Bread, and was reunited with His Spirit, so that the Word of God would stand once again on FirstFruits, thereby enabling us to stand forever with Him. That is not my opinion, but instead Yahowah’s prediction
“The grass (chasyr – the common plant which spread out, lives for a while, and then becomes food for other animals) withers (yabes – dries up and is gone) , and the flower (sys – blossom of the plant) fades away (nabel – shrivels, decays, and becomes senseless) , but (wa) the Word (dabar) of our God Almighty (‘elohym) stands, establishes, uplifts, and endures (quwm – He and it is upright, fulfills, confirms, restores, rises up, uplifts, and validates (scribed in the qal imperfect, speaking of an unfolding relationship, and in the third person masculine singular, depicting the pronoun: He) forever (la ‘owlam – into infinity, time immemorial) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:8)
We have arrived at our destination; the reason we turned to this passage. The Word of our God endures forever. So, if rather than withering and decaying, you want your soul to endure forever, to be established, restored, and to be lifted up to heaven, trust and rely upon the eternal Word of God—the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms.
The religion of Christianity dies with this verse, so it is a wonder that so many preachers cite it, although out of context and errantly translated. God’s Word, His Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, endures forever. A “New Testament” did not replace an “Old Testament.” The Torah has not been annulled; its usefulness has not come to an end, as Paul would have Christians believe. The “dabar ‘elohym – Word of God” is the power of God to save us, now and forever. It is manifest in the flesh by Yahowsha’ and in the spirit by the Ruwach of Yahowah.
And what are we to do with this information: “Ascend (‘alah – climb up) unto God’s (‘al – upon the Almighty’s) exalted and high (gaboah – official and lofty) mountain (har) to proclaim the good news (la basar – to herald and announce a favorable message, to bring glad tidings) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:9)
Basar is a play on words. The same three Hebrew letters we have been translating “basar (בָּשָׂר) – humankind, human nature, and the flesh” can be pointed to mean: “baser (בָּשַׂר) – proclaim and herald the good news.” In other words, as mortal beings, as flesh, we can deliver a message which will cause those who receive it with an open mind, who come to trust it and rely upon it, to become immortal. That is good news indeed.
Even in this mortal and material realm of rotting flesh, we can become a “sign” which directs people along the path which leads to immortality. “Lift up (ruwm) Zion (Tsyown – the sign and the signpost in the desert, the memorial, the monument, the marker on the Way) in the power and strength (koah – the physical and muscular capability) of your voice (qowl – the physical sound of your speech) , proclaiming the good news (basar – bringing and announcing the favorable and agreeable message and greeting) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:9)
The “Tsyown – Sign” is the Word of God, which “tsyown – marks the way” to God. The “Tsyown – Signpost” is Passover’s Upright Pillar upon which the Lamb of God was nailed, making this “tsyown – monument and marker” the Doorway to Heaven.
Tsyown, of course, is in: “Yaruwshalaym (yaruwshalaym – the source from which salvation flows) be uplifted (ruwm) . Do not be intimidated (lo’ yare’ – do not fear or be afraid) . Say (‘amar) to the inhabitants (‘uyr – the population) of Yahuwdah (yahuwdah – Yah is Abundantly Sufficient, Of Yah, From Yah, and Those Who Are Related to Yah) , ‘Behold, look here, now, and see (hineh – observe and listen, pay attention to every detail) your God (‘elohym) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:9)
This is where Yahowah affirmed God’s Word and enabled its promises on Passover, Unleavened Bread, and FirstFruits in 33CE (year 4000 Yah). And this is where He will return to fulfill the Day of Reconciliations and Shelters forty Yowbel (meaning Yahowah’s Lamb is God, but known as Jubilees) later, as the sun sets on October 2nd, 2033 (year 6000 Yah).
And speaking of Yahowah, our Foundation and Upright Pillar, Yasha’yahuw told us that He, Himself, is the Passover Lamb, the Sacrificial Lamb of God, our Savior and Redeemer. Therefore, it is Yahowah who is returning. “Look and see (hineh – pay attention, observe and behold) Yahowah ( - יהוה – Yahowah) , our Upright One (‘edownay – our Foundation and Upright Pillar of the Tabernacle [a.k.a., the Tsyown – Signpost]) , who arrives (bow’ – comes and returns) with the blast of a trumpet (ba hazaq – in might, power, and authority) .
He is the Sacrificial Lamb (zarow’a – the shoulder of a lamb, from zera’, the seed who sacrificially shoulders our burdens (scribed with the third person masculine singular suffix, designating the pronoun He) . He is the Proverb and the Parable (law masal – He is the picture of the Word which is vivid, easy to see, and easy to remember, He is the One with Authority and Dominion) .
Behold (hineh – look and see) Him, our recompense and fare for the passage (sakar – He is the offering, the payment of the voucher for transporting us by way of a service rendered which provided a just payment and ransom, and these rewards) are associated with Him (‘ethow) . He does the work to pay our debt (pa’ulah – He performs the labor which is required to provide recompense, to make amends, and to compensate for us so as to spare us from injury and loss) to clear the way to appear before His presence (la paneh – to turn around, to approach, and to see His face) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:10)
This is the Good News! God has done everything which was required to pay our debts so that we might live in His presence. Therefore, it isn’t per chance that a masal is both a “visual portrait or word picture, a proverb, and a parable.” It is the identity and the explanation of the Word. And it is why there never was any need for a “New Testament.”
Further describing Yahowsha’, the physical manifestation of Yahowah, and His Word, the prophet Yasha’yahuw was inspired to write: “As a Shepherd (ka ra’ah – as a friend and companion) shepherds, leads, protects, and feeds His flock (ra’ah ‘eder) , the Sacrificial Lamb (zarow’a – the One who shoulders our burdens) will gather (qabas – assemble and collect) His sheep (tala’ym) .
And in His chest (ba cheyq – garment, bosom, and midst) , He will lift them up (nasa’ – carry them away, forgiving them by removing their guilt) , nursing, nurturing (‘uwl – feeding the young children) and guiding them (nahal – leading, directing, and sustaining them, helping them by caring for them) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:11)
God has a great deal more to say about this harvest of saved souls, of His return, and about His renewed relationship with His children. But as we move from the Word to the Name, we would be remiss if we didn’t consider the conclusion and result of this work.
“And those who wait for and place their trust in (qawah – who look forward with confidence, awaiting and anticipating the benefits of) Yahowah ( - יהוה – Yahowah) , they move on, are renewed, and grow (halap – they are changed, transformed, adorned anew, and pass over the obstacles and through the doorway) . Empowered and strengthened (koah – invigorated and enriched, enabled and authorized) , they ascend (‘alah – are lifted up and rise) as with (ka) the wings of eagles (‘eber – having the freedom of flight) , quickly darting about (ruwsh – rapidly moving from one place to another) , and they do not grow weary (lo’ yaga’ – they do not expend our energy to accomplish the task of) moving about (halak – walking or traveling) nor (lo’) fall or fail (ya’ep – never tripping, fainting, being destroyed or decaying) .” (Yasha’yahuw 40:31) We will become spiritual beings, with all of the rights, privileges, and power inherent therein. We become God’s children.