1Observations
Understanding
1
Sodom | Scorched
Life in Sodom & Gomorrah…
We have found the answers we initially sought, but there is still much to learn about Satan’s influence on religion and government. Having asserted himself from the beginning, this is a situation that has only grown worse over time.
As we near the time of Yahowah’s return, the creation’s preference for the Lord of religion over the God of the Covenant will become so extreme we will find ourselves back in Sodom and Gomorrah. The signs attesting to this prophetic reality have become pervasive and undeniable.
Yah has adroitly affirmed the connections between Satan and Babel | Babylon, between ‘Ashuwr and the Queen of Heaven and Mother of God, and especially between Sha’uwl and She’owl, the Plague of Death that Pauline Christianity has become and the Black Hole which will incarcerate its proponents. He has exposed and condemned human governance and military adventurism.
Not surprisingly, each time He has done so we have seen flashes of Hylel ben Shachar along the way. And Sha’uwl has been right there with him, becoming more infamous and menacing than Akiba, Hadrian, Constantine, Theodosius, Muhammad, Maimonides, and Hitler combined.
While it is advantageous to know one’s adversary, the primary purpose of our search has been and remains to provide the proper perspective for those seeking to engage 2in a relationship with Yahowah, especially as we approach His return. All the while, Yahowah remains the God of deliverance, of liberation and freedom, while Ha Satan and his cadre of capricious characters become ever more controlling and conniving.
As I edited Observations for its fifth printing in the Spring of 2020, I saw the world change overnight. We had gone from a pretense of freedom and productivity to having both denied by overreaching politicians who sought to combat a virus by killing businesses and constraining independence. The rapidity and universality at which governments imposed such counterproductive and authoritarian measures, and their utter disdain for enterprise and liberty, was so sudden and shocking, it was stupefying. Humanity does not realize what it forfeited for a fleeting extension of life.
Now, in the Fall of 2024, only nine years from Yahowah’s return, as economies continue to collapse and constitutions to crumble, the world is spinning into chaos – bringing out the worst in man’s nature. The will of many has been constrained to the will of the worst. In a matter of years, it will be the will of one, as Satan guides humankind back to the cesspools of Sodom and Gomorrah.
To this end, we have discovered that a banner will be unfurled. Yahowah will raise it for the world to see, especially for the benefit of His people – Yisra’el and Yahuwdah. This Nes | Banner scribed by the Nakry | Observant Foreigner and Choter | Secondary Stem will feature the words of Yahowah’s prophets so that God can warn His children and call His family home.
Whether these words are on that banner or simply point to it, it is time to press forward in the realization that by concluding the 5th volume of Observations, Understanding, with the 18th chapter of Yasha’yah | Isaiah, those who read on will know what to expect as time draws 3nigh. But more than this, with every word the observant will find irrefutable affirmation that the prophetic testimony we are considering was inspired by none less than the Creator of the Universe. As such, you and I can trust and rely on what He revealed.
It is amazing how much information Yahowah has shared regarding what is going to transpire politically, religiously, economically, culturally, and militarily between now and His return with His Son, Dowd, on Yowm Kipurym in year 6000 Yah – at sunset on October 2nd, 2033. So now, by studying the continuing revelations found in Yasha’yah / Salvation and Freedom are from Yahowah / Isaiah, our investigations will lead us to both alarming and wondrous discoveries. Knowing the outcome, and realizing that the Light is returning, will be sufficient to get us through these dark days.
As we consider the names of the ancient towns throughout the Middle East, we will learn a great deal about the places mankind calls home today. In this way, Yahowah provides us with a linguistic treasure each time He walks us through the historic principalities like Mow’ab.
This tiny, long-extinct kingdom was once wedged between the desolate mountains opposite Yahuwdah on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea and the Arabian Desert. Flanked by the Arnon and Zered Rivers on its north and south, Mow’ab’s location seems to play an insignificant role in the tongue-lashing it is about to receive. Nevertheless, this sparsely occupied wilderness of roaming Bedouins has the unique distinction of being featured in multiple prophecies that play out during the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles.
This realization becomes abundantly clear when we consider the fact that God’s upcoming prophetic warning is set in the midst of end-time events, as are the other 4references to Mow’ab in Dany’el / Daniel 11, ‘Amows / Amos 2, Tsaphanyah / Zephaniah 2, and Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 48. As a result, we are left with a single viable option. The lone reason for this much attention being focused on an all but meaningless and long-defunct and vanished fiefdom is that Mow’ab is indicative of something God finds appalling and pervasive today.
After all, if not for the trade routes through the mountain passes in Syria and Anatolia connecting Egypt with Mesopotamia, the capricious interactions with Yisra’el 2,800 to 3,000 years ago would not have left more than a footprint or two in history. In this regard, the Mow’abites are similar to the Philistines, in that these now-extinct people are being used to describe cultures that are similar to them – many of them reprehensible.
In our quest to identify the essence of Mow’ab today, it is indeed telling that it was on Mount Nebo in Mow’ab that Moseh – the voice of the Towrah – died. The man given the great distinction of revealing Yahowah’s Towrah | Guidance to humankind, the man given the opportunity to liberate Yahowah’s family from the crucible of religious, political, economic, and military oppression in Mitsraym | Egypt, the man chosen to lead God’s children to the ‘Erets ‘Amar | Promised Land, the lone voice of Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy was only allowed to look into Yisra’el from the vantage point of Mow’ab | Who Is Your Father, but not allowed to enter.
The temporal restriction was the consequence of something that had occurred thirty-three years earlier, when Moseh | the One Who Draws Out improvised on Yah’s instruction and struck a rock, not once but twice, rather than speak to it when attempting to quench the people’s thirst. This serves as a warning to Jews, Christians, and Muslims, with their continuing religious propensity to massively alter Yahowah’s instructions, to a far more egregious extent than Moseh had done. And yet, 5his minor indiscretion nonetheless prevented his entry into the Promised Land. This is akin to Jews and Christians being able to see Heaven from the perspective of the “Old Testament” and yet be kept out as a result of their Talmuds and New Testaments – their perversions which grossly altered Yahowah’s Towrah teachings.
In this regard, Mow’ab is quite simply and profoundly where we are confronted with the consequence of changing God’s Word. It is, therefore, reminiscent, and in fact prophetic, of the places where the Towrah’s message would be muted: Akiba’s Talmud, Maimonides’ Mishnah Torah, the Pauline Epistles of the Christian New Testament, and Muhammad’s Quran.
The worst of them, especially based upon its hellish treatment of God’s people, is Christianity. It is the religion which sought to replace Jews with Gentiles. So, should Yahowah be principally speaking of Sha’uwl | Question Him, the Father of the most pervasive anti-Semitic cult in human history, in the midst of this exposé on Mow’ab, we will have all the affirmation we need to realize that Mow’ab serves as a metaphor for the place Yahowah’s Towrah Guidance was disregarded and His voice silenced through Christianity.
This perspective becomes especially plausible in light of Yahowah’s reaffirmation of His Covenant with Yisra’el in Mow’ab before God’s People crossed into the Promised Land (Dabarym / Deuteronomy 29). Further, having studied Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 31, we know that Yahowah will restore His Covenant one last time upon His return, doing so once again with Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, placing His Towrah | Guidance within His Covenant children before camping out with us in the Promised Land during the thousand-year celebration of Sukah.
Through this transition from Mow’ab to Sukah, and from the wilderness to the Promised Land, from man’s 6realm to God’s, the abusive and religious nature of what is presently indicative of Mow’ab will be exposed and expunged along the way. These insights demonstrate that Sha’uwl / Question Him / Paul was dead wrong when he misrepresented, nullified, and then replaced Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching and Moseh’s Dabarym | Words with his “Gospel of Grace” and “but I, Paul, say….”
And yet, there may be other reasons. What about the fact that Mow’ab was born to Lowt’s | Lot’s eldest daughter as a result of inebriated incest following their escape from Sodom and ‘Amorah? Could this be the lesson of Mow’ab that Yahowah is now teaching?
For ‘Abraham’s benefit, God had spared this man and his family, only to reveal that as a result of the society in which they were indoctrinated, they remained as corrupt as the place in which they had lived. Lowt, his wife, and daughters were reluctant to leave Sodom. And when they were finally prodded into fleeing, his wife was dead within minutes and shortly thereafter, Lowt committed incest with his daughters, giving rise to Mow’ab.
Think about it for a moment. The youngest daughter gets her father drunk such that he has sex with her sister. She gets pregnant and names her bastard child “Mow’ab | Moab | Who Is Your Questionable Father,” creating a constant reminder of what she had done, almost as if she were proud of the incestuous relationship in which Mow’ab was conceived. It is as if they were thumbing their noses at God for having saved them, for having taken their family out of Sodom. It is like Christians taunting Yahowah by not only naming their savior, “Jesus Christ” while denying Dowd’s role as the Passover Lamb, all while bowing down before their Dead and Tortured God on a Stick. It is like Orthodox Jews celebrating the historicity of Passover without capitalizing upon its purpose and then ignoring Matsah, all while denying their fulfillment by the Zarowa’ and Mashyach.
7While mankind has had a propensity to be sexually twisted, humanity has hit an all-time low today, especially in the West. Mow’ab, therefore, remains an exemplar of sexual perversion, of the recurring influence of Sodom and Gomorrah, and is thus indicative of the purpose and effect of Political Correctness – the moral code of Socialist Secular Humanism.
The grotesquely depraved culture corrupting Lowt and his daughters was overtly adversarial to God’s message and contrary to His plan – not unlike Socialist Secular Humanists and Multiculturalists today as they rally in favor of LBGTQIA – Lesbians, Bisexuals, Gays, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual Allegiances. Classifications that would have been celebrated in Sodom are a source of pride once again. In fact, sixty-seven percent of Americans approve and support the agenda of LBGTQIA, with eighty-five percent of those who identify with them voting for the most politically progressive and socialist candidate. Mow’ab indeed. Mind you, neither I nor God care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, so long as it doesn’t involve bestiality, pedophilia, or incest, but the politicization of sexuality is an anathema to God.
We also find analogous strokes in religion, because, in similar fashion to the Christian New Testament and the Islamic Quran, even the Talmud, the foundation of the Mow’abite religion was the Hebrew text, words they twisted to suit their agenda. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all claim that the Hebrew witness of the “Old Testament” was not only inspired by their god but also pretend that it legitimizes their religion. The fact that Yahowah’s testimony condemns all three will be lost on the adherents until these prophecies regarding Mow’ab play out against its modern incarnations in the coming years.
8Similar to most popular human schemes, whether it be Judaism, Christianity, Islam, or Socialist Secular Humanism, they have a well-documented history of capricious relations with Yisra’el and Yisra’elites. At times, they are seen admiring them, even envying them, and yet at others, they are maneuvering to destroy and replace them.
Such was the case with the Mow’abites. They had a convoluted, albeit mostly adversarial, relationship with the Promised Land and Chosen People. We might call them “frenemies.”
This may be the simplest and most direct answer of all. As we study what Yahowah has to say about Mow’ab | Who Is Your Father, the principality is defined by people who at times appear through their rhetoric to support Israel, while actually being clandestinely adversarial to Yahuwdym | Jews. As such, we may surmise that the current manifestation of Mow’ab is represented by America, as well as Protestant Christians, by academics, and by political elitists, including Socialist Secular Humanists, although the latter, while fathered by Jews, remains universally hostile to their origins.
Even the name, Mow’ab | Who and What is your Father, or Questionable Father, is a not-so-subtle reminder that Lowt’s | Lot’s descendants were fathered inappropriately. Play that idea forward to today and we find the majority of children are born out of wedlock and many have no relationship whatsoever with their fathers. This too is a product of Socialist Secular Humanism.
In this vein, “Mow’ab – Questionable Father” also points an accusatory finger at Akiba, the dubious father of Rabbinic Judaism, Muhammad, the perverted father of Islam, and especially toward Sha’uwl | Paul, the appalling progenitor of biblical Christianity. The answer to the question Mow’ab poses: who were the men who fathered 9the world’s leading political and religious schemes: false prophets and deceivers.
Beyond this, Adam Weishaupt, who advanced the cause of Political Correctness and Socialist Secular Humanism, by way of his Illuminist war against the rule of Catholic clerics and kings, was a man the world would be wise to question – especially those who share an allegiance to his legacy. In today’s vernacular, and speaking of someone who is controlled by another, the victor will taunt the loser, saying “Who’s your daddy?”
As a result of these factors, and cognizant of how condemning the next two chapters of Yasha’yah / Isaiah will be of Sha’uwl | Paul, we will find ourselves migrating to this depiction of what Mow’ab represents today: those whom Political Correctness, Socialist Secular Humanism, Multiculturalism, and Pauline Christianity have Caused to have Questionable Allegiances.
Expanded further, we will come to add: Mow’ab…Who is Your Father other than the embodiment of Lowt’s son, one conceived through his daughter, representing an unthinking, warlike, immoral, and multicultural religious and political culture born of incest after being indoctrinated in the immoral cesspool of Sodom, misled by a religion which twisted and intermixed Hebrew writings with pagan lore, as would later be the case with Christianity and Islam, and therefore analogous to the place where the Towrah’s voice died.
While the indications are few and far between today, the existence of ancient Mow’ab | Moab has been affirmed four times over outside of the Towrah and Naby’. It happened once as a result of an archeological dig in Jordan, once more in Egyptian hieroglyphics found on display in Luxor, and twice by inscriptions written by Assyrian kings. The foremost among these, the Mesha Stele, reveals how the Mow’abite King Mesha tried to save face, presenting 10the destruction of his kingdom as a “victory” over the king of Yisra’el (Melekym / 2 Kings 3). It was unearthed in Jordan in 1868 and is particularly fascinating because it was written by the Mow’abites using the second earliest example of the paleo-Hebrew alphabet and language.
That in itself is intriguing. Born of Lowt, ‘Abraham’s nephew, Mow’ab was as “Jewish” as Yitschaq and Ya’aqob. And yet, they were hostile to Yisra’el. This is reminiscent of another Jew, Sha’uwl | Paul, conceiving Christianity to oppose and replace Yahuwdym and Yisra’el.
The second affirmation of the otherwise insignificant ancient kingdom was found in the religious enclave of Egypt, where the name was engraved on a colossal statue in Luxor erected by the pharaoh, Ramesses II, in the 13th century BCE. The Egyptian king lists “Mu’ab” among a cadre of places he subdued during a campaign.
The Nimrud clay inscription of Tiglath-Pileser III (circa 745-727 BCE) reveals that the Mow’abite King Shalman (who is said to have sacked Beth-Arbel in Howsha’) was a tributary to Assyria, which indicates that the kingdom was no longer autonomous by this time. Sargon II (721-705 BCE) also mentions the region, revealing that he had suppressed an uprising in the territories of Mow’ab, Pelesheth, and ‘Edowm.
Additionally, on the Taylor Prism, which recounts the expedition against Hezekiah, we read: “Chemosh-Nadab, king of Mow’ab, brings tribute to Sargon as his suzerain.” And that is to say, by the time Yasha’yah and Yirma’yah wrote their prophecies against Mow’ab, depicting her ultimate destruction, there was very little if anything left of the otherwise insignificant kingdom.
About the size of Yahuwdah | Judah, and on the opposite side of the Dead Sea, the tiny principality is presented in conflict and at peace with Yisra’el. The 11plateau upon which it was located rises 4,000 feet above the Dead Sea and is surrounded by rugged, mountainous, and desolate terrain. Today, it is littered with ruins from the Roman and Byzantine periods and is chiefly occupied by Bedouin tribes. As it sits, circa 2024 there is nothing about Mow’ab | Moab that would warrant prophetic exposure of the kind it is about to receive in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 15 and 16.
The first mention of Mow’ab is found at the conclusion of one of the Towrah’s most tantalizing and scandalous stories. More than anything else, the narrative recorded in Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis19 will help us appreciate the conception and evolution of Mow’ab from God’s perspective. This account, the one depicting life in Sodom and Gomorrah, is something I have previously shunned because it is the antithesis of everything Yahowah was building with ‘Abraham through the Covenant. And yet now, to present man’s alternative, it has become especially relevant.
From its tawdry beginning to its unsavory conclusion, it appears to tarnish every aspect of the familial relationship God intended. And yet, it was interjected between the presentation of the Covenant’s final condition (circumcision) and Yitschaq’s impending birth in Bare’syth 17 and the confirmation of the Covenant with ‘Abraham and Yitschaq in Bare’syth 22. As such, it is evocative of choices and consequences, presenting the full spectrum of options that are afforded to us.
Whether this is the first or the twenty-fifth book that I’ve had the pleasure of composing over these many years that you have read, you and I have had the privilege of seeing God as few have before. We have come to know 12who He is, realize what He is offering, and reflect upon what He expects in return. Along this journey, we have been exposed to many thousands of marvelously enlightening insights, many of which were unseen over the millennia. And now, I think we are on the cusp of something equally extraordinary.
Beneath the searing blue light and pungent smell of burning sulfur, well past the pillar of salt, a story of a father allegedly offering up his virgin daughters to be gang raped to protect the invincible, only to impregnate both in an intoxicated and incestuous stupor, may actually be a referendum between man’s way – institutionalized babel – and God’s Way: the Towrah’s beryth – Family. Perhaps, this horrific portrayal of societal and familial corruption is our Heavenly Father’s way of making certain that we appreciate exactly what He is asking us to walk away from before we affirm our desire to be with Him.
This story of corruption and perversion begins…
“The two spiritual messengers (wa shanaym ha mal’ak – so a pair of supernatural envoys) came to (bow’ – arrived to pursue) Sodom (Sodom – Scorched and Burning) in the evening (ba ha ‘arab – during the time light and darkness are mixed and joined together creating a grayish interwoven fabric at dusk as the world grows darker) while (wa) Lowt | Enveloped and Intertwined (Lowt – Lot, the one wrapped too tightly who was encircled, encased, and entangled) sat (yashab – settled down, inhabiting and remaining, establishing his dwelling place) in the doorway (ba sha’ar – within the gateway, entrance, and opening) of Sodom (Sodom – Scorched and Burned).”
Right when we needed it, Yahowah’s name for Lowt leads us toward what may be the essential lesson of this story. Yes, he had goodness in him. And yes, he was expecting favorable treatment from God based upon his 13relationship with ‘Abraham – as is the case with Judaism, Christianity, and to a lesser degree, Islam. But as is also the case with the proponents of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, he remained enveloped in the mire and muck of man’s corruptions.
Lowt | Lot remained way too wrapped up and tangled in religious, political, social, and even familial norms, to have that tenuous relationship with ‘Abraham prevail. He knew that Sodom was evil; he just didn’t realize how much he was ensnared and entangled in the Sodomite web. He hadn’t left on his own initiative and was content to live in the darkness of hell’s doorway. But keep in mind, Lowt chose this place, when ‘Abraham offered his nephew the option of where to live.
“When (wa) Lowt | the one wrapped too tightly who was encircled, encased, and tangled up (Lowt – Lot, the Enveloped and Intertwined) saw them (ra’ah – looked at them), he arose, standing up (quwm – he established himself in a standing position) to meet them (qara’ hem – to greet and engage with them, to invite and summon them, to encounter them).
Then on his own initiative, he made an announcement, explaining himself (wa chawah – and he verbally informed them, making his intentions known to them (histafel hitpael imperfect – this mood makes it clear that Lowt was acting on his own initiative and that he was not being guided, controlled, or influenced by anyone else)), because indeed, he was also opposed to the material realm (‘aph ‘erets – because surely there was a lot to say, as he too was extremely frustrated with this place).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:1)
While ‘aph, the second to last word in the opening statement, can be translated as “anger, frustration, nose, or nostril,” it is most often deployed to convey that there is “more to the story, something additional that needs to be 14said, which is indeed important and valid.” This realization is informative in this context because the primary meaning of the word preceding it, chawah, is “to make an announcement, explaining oneself.”
Biblical scholars agree, that is unless the verb is scribed in the histafel stem, where they do an about-face and change a verbal declaration regarding one’s intent to “bowing down and prostrating oneself.” But since the histafel confirms that no one is acting upon, controlling, or influencing the subject, that stem alone should have reinforced the opposite conclusion.
Such an individual would be standing up against the societal norm, not bowing down to it. But if you prefer scholarly interpretations to evidence and reason, after standing up to greet the mal’ak, “Lot bowed down and prostrated himself, worshiping them” with his “‘aph ‘erets – nostrils to the ground.”
The difference between “making an announcement on one’s own initiative and explaining one’s intentions such that they are known” in concert with qara’, and “prostrating oneself in worship” is in itself a referendum between God’s Way and man’s way. Religious scholars would have you imitate their version of Lot and bow down in religious worship. Yahowah, on the other hand, would have us stand up to greet Him or His representatives, and then make our intentions known, expressing ourselves in words regarding qara’.
Correctly rendered on this occasion, ‘aph actually provides the proper vantage point from which to view everything that follows. There was a lot to share because while Lowt was still mired in the muck of a society quite similar to ours today, he knew it was wrong. On his own initiative, uniquely distinct from the rest of the community, he wanted Yahowah’s mal’ak / messengers to realize right 15at the beginning, that he, too, was opposed to everything this place represented.
But should you not concur, and should you prefer to see ‘aph rendered as “nostrils,” feel free to place your nose in the dirt. If you do, however, it’s going to get dirty, and with your eyes downcast, you won’t be able to read what follows.
Before we proceed, please keep in mind that Lowt was not present during any of the seven meetings between Yahowah and ‘Abraham. While he and his uncle may have spoken on occasion, Lowt did not know all of what we have come to know. Upon seeing the mal’ak, he realizes that they are not like mortal men and that they, therefore, were sent by the Almighty. But, tarnished by Sodom, he not only addresses them inappropriately and errantly positions himself relative to them, but he also inaccurately ascribes volition to individuals devoid of it…
“He said (wa ‘amar), ‘Behold (hineh – pay attention), I beg you (na’ – I implore you) my lords (‘adonym – dear sirs), please (na’ – as an exhortation and entreaty now) you should of your own volition change direction and come away from the immoral debauchery and fraudulent perversions (suwr – go, turning from this degenerate corruption (qal imperative – a genuine and unnuanced expression of second-person volition)) toward (‘el – unto) your servant’s (‘ebed ‘atah – your official advisor’s and coworker’s) house (beyth – family and home) and choose to pass the night (wa luwn – and decide to stay overnight, wanting to lodge (qal imperative)), washing your feet (wa rachats regel ‘atem – and desire to cleanse and bathe your feet and legs).
Then (wa) you may rise early (shakam ‘atah – you can get up in the morning) and go on your way (wa halak derek – and walk, conducting life your way).’
16But they said (wa ‘amar), ‘No (lo’ – by no means, permanently negating the notion), instead (ky – indeed rather) we will stay the night (luwn – overnight remaining in the darkness (qal imperfect – demonstrating that they would not be acting upon freewill or of their own volition, but that their statement was unnuanced and ongoing)) in the wide, broad, and open way, in the limitless, pretentious, and public streets (ba ha rachob – within the gaping living places which are agreeable and without preexisting limits, opportunistic and expansive albeit improper and ostentatious paths of those who boast their confidence in that which is selfish).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:2)
Lowt was clearly embarrassed by Sodom, as we should be of our own communities. He did not want Yahowah’s representatives to witness the fraudulent perversions and immoral debauchery lurking in the darkness of this place. By contrast, he viewed his home, as should we, as a respite from man’s perversions, as a place reflecting the Covenant’s values. In his home, the mal’ak would be sheltered from man’s darkness and cleansed of his corruptions, such that they would rise with the light and go on their way.
These mal’ak | messengers had been dispatched to do a job, which was to remove Lowt from Sodom before torching the place. Saving him had been at ‘Abraham’s request and Yahowah’s behest. Curious as to what they would be destroying, or perhaps trying to understand the reasons God had thought it best to remove this blight from His land, they had intended to spend the night observing the broad and open way that leads to death and destruction. There may have even been an inference to Passover, the alternative to the darkness of death, in the verb “luwn – pass the night.”
Since mal’ak are spiritual, not material beings, they do not need to eat or drink. As light, and thus without 17darkness, there would be no purpose for washing their feet. So perhaps, with the mention of matsah, of a feast, and being protected by washing man’s corruptions away, and in the context of Lowt sitting in the doorway out of man’s world and into Yah’s home, what follows may be the Towrah’s initial introduction to Pesach and Matsah – the Door to Life and Means to Perfection. It would not only explain why Lowt was so insistent that they enter his home, but it would also explain why the mal’ak were so readily persuaded.
“But (wa) he insisted (patsar ba hem – he persuaded them by pressuring and compelling them, pressing and pushing their buttons) to such an aggressive extent (me’od – so overwhelmingly and to such a degree) that they turned around and came (suwr – they reversed course and moved in the opposite direction) to him (‘el huw’) and arrived at his house (wa bow’ ‘el beyth huw’ – so as to enter into his home).
And (wa) he made (‘asah – acted and engaged to fashion and create) a feast for them (la hem mishtheh – a banquet with food and drink for them) and baked (‘aphah – cooked in an oven at this moment in time (qal perfect)) Matsah | UnYeasted Bread (matsah – bread without yeast) and they ate (wa ‘akal – so they continually consumed it with ongoing consequences (qal imperfect)).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:3)
Yahowah was not, as Christians muse, using this situation with Lot to foretell the “Rapture,” whereby a righteous individual and his family were spared from the destruction of the world. He was instead using it to explain that even the worst of us can be saved when we observe His Towrah’s Instructions to partake in Pesach and Matsah. By consuming the unyeasted bread, Lowt and his family were seen as removing the pervasive fungus of religious, political, and societal corruption from their souls. How’s that for foreshadowing?
18Similarly, Christians are wont to suggest that God is negotiable, thereby inferring that He would accept the massive alterations they made to His plan of salvation with their New Testament’s Gospel of Grace. In fact, ‘Abraham did not change Yahowah’s mind or His response to Sodom, or even to Lowt. He had heard their perverse screams and had decided that He could not tolerate this malignant infection to fester and grow within the Promised Land. The people and place would be and were destroyed. And through Lowt, the one who was entangled in all of this, Yahowah would reveal one of the most vividly painted pictures ever portrayed of human nature.
Since the “mal’ak – spiritual implements and messengers” are especially germane to this story, should you be curious as to how an energy-based being could eat or want to lie down, the answer is found in Einstein’s equation, whereby energy can become matter when greatly reduced. As spiritual beings, they were capable, as the Covenant’s children will one day be, of reentering the ordinary flow of time to celebrate the Miqra’ey, eating, drinking, singing, and sharing.
Similarly, mal’ak do not need sleep. They are pure energy, and as such fatigue and time are irrelevant to them. Therefore, the following reference was designed to convey that the onslaught of humanity would arrive after dusk but well before dawn.
“Even before (terem – prior to the time) they laid down (shakab), men of the city (wa ‘ysh ha ‘iyr – people of this place, those from the shrines and temples who engender fear, terrorizing the people like asses), individuals from Sodom (‘ysh Sadom / Sodom – scorched people), surrounded (sabab – encircled) the house (‘al ha beyth), including (min) young boys (na’ar – adolescents and teenagers) and (wa) perpetually predatory (‘ad) old men (zaqen – elder statesmen, religious clerics, and community leaders), all the people (kol ha ‘am) to the last 19(min qatsah – to the end, the very limit and conclusion of things, addressing that which is very distant and remote).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:4)
This is to say that mankind’s means of corrupting people – religious, political, societal, and familial – are pervasive. Often, as was the case here in Sodom, only three people would be spared, and even with them, they were never able to fully extricate themselves from this morass of human perversions.
Everyone else, right down to the children, and of course, including the seasoned citizens, especially the perpetually predatory elder statesmen, religious clerics, and community leaders, all of them, were rotten. And with Sodom serving as a metaphor for today’s societies, for our Mow’ab, the people’s political, religious, societal, familial, and moral beliefs, this malignant condition affecting humankind, would remain through the end of time – to the last. They would, and will, all die as a result.
You will note, however, that on this occasion, as will be the case during the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles, the entire community was outside wanting in. They had encircled the home which had just celebrated UnYeasted Bread, and they wanted to know and become familiar with the spiritual beings inside, but they were precluded from entering. Lowt would open the door and then shut it behind him. It was the door to life, the Door to God’s Home, representing Pesach.
Before we press on, I was wondering why two messengers were sent to Sadom | Sodom. And the answer was suddenly reverberating in my ears. Sodom and Mow’ab are indistinguishable, and they both represent today’s religious, political, societal, familial, and moral perversions. Just as this entire story foreshadows what is to come, six years from now, in 2030, two Witnesses will 20arrive to convict a world all too similar to the one God destroyed.
While they did not know it, the answer is always found in qara’, Yahowah’s invitations to be called out and meet with Him…
“And (wa) they called out (qara’ – they summoned) to (‘el) Lowt | the one wrapped too tightly who was encircled, encased, and entangled (Lowt – Lot, the Enveloped and Intertwined), and they said to him (wa ‘amar la huw’), ‘Where are (‘ayeh) the individuals (ha ‘ysh) who to show the way to the relationship (‘asher – to reveal the correct and narrow path through life to benefit and be blessed) came (bow’ – arrived, traveling) to you (‘el ‘atah) this night (ha laylah – during the darkness)?
Choose to bring them out to us (yatsa’ hem ‘el ‘anachnuw – produce them for us (hifil imperative)) such that we can fulfill our desire to become acquainted with them (wa yada’ ‘eth hem – so we can choose to become familiar with them, to understand them, to discover what can be known about them, even to make ourselves known to them with ongoing implications (qal cohortative imperfect – a genuine statement with consequences over time based upon individual choices)).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:5)
Qara’ forms the basis of Miqra’, the title God chose to describe His seven annual feasts, encouraging us to contemplate the “who, what, why, when, where, and how” of His “invitations to be called out and meet, to be welcomed by reading and reciting” His Towrah. So here, qara’ is reflecting mankind’s voice, and his invitation to participate in his ways. As such, they were encouraging Lowt to be like them, to engage with them, and to see things their way.
Also, while there is the implication that the Sodomites wanted to “rape the angels,” the verb, yada’, means “to 21know, to become familiar with, to acknowledge, and to understand.” There is no sexual aspect of it in this context. Previously, when the worst of men wanted to procreate with the best of women, the verb bow’ was used to say: “come” into them. This point is reinforced later in this same story when bow’ is used by Lowt’s daughters.
Let’s be clear: the intent of the Sodomites was to engage the mal’ak in conversation. And while their lips said, “We want to become acquainted with them to know and understand them,” those who are prone to group-speak, to shouting, are seldom open to listening or learning. Given the opportunity, these men would have tried to persuade the mal’ak such that they would accept and embrace their viewpoints and faith, their conspiracies and philosophies, their values and merit.
“And so (wa) Lowt | the Enveloped and Entangled (Lowt – Lot, the one wrapped too tightly who was encircled and encased) went out to them (yatsa’ ‘el hem – came out to them) at the doorway (ha pathach – at the entrance), shutting the door after him (wa ha deleth sagar ‘achar huw’), (19:6) and (wa) said (‘amar),
‘Please, no, certainly not, I beg you (‘al na’), my brothers (‘ach ‘any), this is bad (ra’a – this is disturbing and distressful, troubling and harmful, ruinous and destructive, wrong and invalid).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:7)
Their approach was entirely wrong, completely invalid, and, indeed, ruinous and destructive. And that is because they wanted to do things their way, not God’s way. While Lowt had been inside celebrating Matsah, the Sodomites were out in pursuit of fulfilling their desires. And that is why the door to Lowt’s home, the doorway for those being saved by God, indeed representing the doorway to Yahowah’s Covenant Home, was shut.
22There is a mythical parallel to this in the musings of Luke, who in Acts 21:30 tried to present Paul as the second coming of Lot. He made up a story of how the Yahuwdym in Yaruwshalaim were in an uproar, with people coming from all directions to seize Paul and drag him from the Temple, closing its doors. In reality, Sha’uwl, wanting to express his own way and distinguish it from God’s way, is said to have willfully and belligerently violated Yahowah’s Towrah Instructions and brought an uncircumcised Greek man past the courtyard into the Temple, defiling it.
Paul got the door to Yahowah’s Home slammed in his face, just like the men of Sodom. And the only reason, at least according to the mythology, that Sha’uwl / Question Him was not beaten to death by the Yisra’elites was that after flaunting his Roman citizenship (another blot on his soul), a Roman soldier (rather than God) protected him!
Now what appears to the uninitiated to be another highly questionable father, perhaps setting a new low in parenting, Lowt presented the contrast between the way of man and the message of God by using his daughters as a comparison.
“‘Now I beg you, please (hineh na’ – behold, I implore and even pray regarding you, heightening the sense of urgency, pay attention), for contrast consider my (la ‘any – for the purpose of comparison, accordingly, and to make a point, contemplate my) two daughters (shanaym bath) who, to reveal the way, have not known a man and are unfamiliar and unacquainted with ignorant men (‘asher lo’ yada ‘ysh – who, to reveal the proper and narrow, restrictive path to walk through life to engage in a beneficial relationship do not respect nor acknowledge, are not concerned with, nor do they know or choose, thereby remaining unresponsive, preferring the ignorant revelations of mankind).
23I want to bring them out (yatsa’ – of my own volition, it is my desire to produce and extend them to bring this to an end and to finish it (hifil imperfect cohortative – engaging them in such a manner they both participate and become alike with ongoing implications based upon my freewill)), right now (na’ – raw and in the flesh as an exhortation and way of making a point by heightening the sense of urgency), with them livening the narrative and calling attention to the details (‘eth henah – with them, accordingly, right here and now providing a reference to behold) for you (‘el ‘atem – concerning you and against your god).
Do to them, engaging and acting as you desire (wa ‘asah la henah – do whatever you’d like concerning them (qal imperative)), consistent with (ka – according to) whatever you find good, moral, and beneficial in your eyes (ha towb ba ‘ayn – what you find productive, useful, and decent in your sight, pleasing, pleasant, effective, and generous from your perspective, even desirable and virtuous based upon your viewpoint).
Only and exclusively (raq – applying a single restriction and prerequisite, making and exception, nevertheless with one distinction), regarding these individuals, to them (la ha ‘ysh ha ‘el – by approaching and concerning these individuals and their God) do not act nor engage (‘al ‘asah – do nothing, perform no acts) by speaking, by making a statement, or communicating a message (dabar – by saying something, speaking, making a pronouncement, offering an account or declaration) because (ky – strengthening this statement and making a contrast), and for the express reason (‘al ken – it just so happens (previously used in conjunction with Babel (Genesis 11:9))) they have come (bow’ – they have actually for a time entered (qal perfect)) into the shadow (ba tsel – within the shade and thus by implication protection; serving as the basis of tselem – image and 24likeness) of my support structure (qowrah ‘any – of my beams, thick planks of wood, and major weight-bearing rafters and joists used in the construction of my home, including timberworks, thick planks, sturdy poles, and upright pillars of my house).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:8)
I’ve long enjoyed the quip: “I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.” In this case, it’s likely that Lowt said one thing and the Sodomites heard another. But in the light of day, without being embroiled in the passion of the moment, and with all the time in the world to plumb the depths of each potential nuance, and with an eye on the prize, we are in a position to understand why he made this provocative declaration.
He was not offering his daughters up to be raped but instead to present a contrast between these perverts and Yahowah’s message. His daughters “were unfamiliar and unacquainted with man’s ignorant ways, having chosen to remain unresponsive to the uninformed beliefs of humankind.” As such, they served as an embodiment of the lone prerequisite of the Covenant – disassociating from the babel of man. Lowt’s offer was extended to liven the narrative, bringing our attention to these details.
The choice then for the marauding masses of morons was to have their way with the women (which wasn’t going to happen) or listen to Yahowah’s messengers (of which they had no interest). If they chose the former, they not only would get neither, but they would not even be allowed to speak to the latter.
Since it is unconscionable that a father would sacrifice his virgin daughters to be gang raped by an unruly mob, and would even beg them to do so, especially on behalf of two mal’ak, neither of whom he knew and both of whom could easily have fended off the weasels at the door as 25evidenced by the fact that they were about to obliterate the entire town, there has to be a reason why these words came from Lowt’s mouth. And there has to be a reason the religious translations of this story are so misleading. I’d like to continue to offer my shekel or two.
Not only was Lowt not responsible for Yahowah’s mal’ak / messengers, but they were actually responsible for him – there to protect him and his family – not the other way around. As spiritual beings, mal’ak are immortal and cannot be harmed, only controlled. There was nothing Lowt could do that would have been of any benefit to the mal’ak, not inviting them into his home, not feeding them UnYeasted Bread, nor offering to protect them. Moreover, had they been human and vulnerable, what could one man and the door to his home do to stave off every man in an entire city?
Just as ‘Abraham knew that Yahowah, as His Heavenly Father, loved Yitschaq even more than he did, and therefore wasn’t about to let anyone take the life of the first child of the Covenant, Lowt, as a member of ‘Abraham’s family, knew that with Yahowah’s “mal’ak – spiritual implements” in his home, his daughters were safe. As such, just as Yahowah would have ‘Abraham and Yitschaq act out Pesach | Passover on our behalf, directing our attention to the Miqra’ in conjunction with the Covenant immediately after these events would transpire in Sadom | Sodom, the would-be “sacrifice” of Lowt’s daughters was designed to convey an equally important message. God was revealing the nature and manifestations of what we are being spared from when we rely upon Him.
Our first clue in the process from moving past the implausible and to the sublime was Lowt’s initial rebuff to the onslaught of corrupt humanity: “‘Please, no, certainly not, I beg you (‘al na’), my brothers (‘ach ‘any), this is bad (ra’a – this is disturbing and distressful, troubling and harmful, ruinous and destructive).’”
26Having their way with his daughters was man’s way, and Lowt knew that man’s way was evil. Further, he was aware, and so should we, that man’s way is reflected in his religious beliefs, political views, societal conditioning, and family values. These things were all on display this dark night in the broad and open way.
Our second clue is found within the preposition la, which in this case must be rendered as “consider by way of contrast” rather than the more typical, “draw near and approach.”
The third insight is related to the first, because Lowt, knowing that they would not listen to reason, realizing that they wouldn’t recognize the truth if it was presented on a silver platter, offered them a mirror: “‘asher lo’ yada’ ‘ysh – revealing the way of man by presenting individuals who were equally naive, unfamiliar, and unaware, indeed, ignorant.” Beyond this comparison, there was also the stunning contrast, recognizing that ‘asher lo’ yada’ ‘ysh also infers that Lowt’s daughters had rejected the ways of men, that they were unacquainted with their stupidity, and that they were unresponsive to the revelations of humankind.
Our fourth insight comes from the verb “yatsa’ – bring out,” which indicates Lowt wasn’t actually offering his daughters up to the crowd or “nathan – giving” his girls to them. They were being extended as a means to facilitate the comparison and bring this sorry situation to a close.
Fifth, Lowt used eth henah to “liven this narrative, calling everyone’s attention to the details.” He is encouraging us to do what we are doing – doing something that has not been done in the past three thousand years. Observing, closely examining and carefully considering every possible explanation of every single word. Truth is found in the details.
27Sixth, the presentation was to encourage the riotous and unruly rubbish ruminating outside his home to be introspective, to think about what they wanted before they acted. Moreover, he put constraints on them, limiting their engagement to that which was towb, the Hebrew word for “good,” not bad.
Even though it was “ba ‘ayn – in their sight and from their viewpoint,” their interactions had to be “towb – moral and beneficial, productive and decent, useful and effective, generous and pleasing, even virtuous.” Even today’s scum know that gang-raping virgins is a bad idea – with the exception of fundamentalist Islamic jihadists and Catholic priests, of course. (Just keeping it real.)
Seventh, this offer “raq – would be limited because there would be a restriction.” The most valuable and important offer ever made is “raq – extraordinarily exclusive because there is a prerequisite” one in a million men like those surrounding Lowt’s home are willing to accept. Further, raq is an adverb, indicating that it is modifying the action, or in this case, the inaction, which follows Lowt’s lone restriction.
This leads us to our eighth clue, which was the negation of ‘asah, “do nothing.” When addressing a relationship or agreement, as is the case here, it means: “do not engage in it” and “do not act upon it.” Since ‘asah was nullified regarding the “mal’ak – spiritual messengers,” Sodom’s depraved souls were thereby excluded from acting upon the agreement proposed by the One who sent them and precluded from engaging in a relationship with Him. God simply didn’t want these religious buffoons as part of His Family.
In this regard, our ninth insight is very subtle. It is found in the string of prepositions (ba, la and ‘el), definite articles (ha), nouns (‘ysh), and pronouns (‘el) which precede and follow Lowt’s adverb and verb. Lowt is being 28abnormally careful in identifying what can or cannot be done and to whom.
The tenth clue is the one virtually everyone misses because it is hideously twisted and misrepresented in English Bible translations. The lustful libertines were not being prevented from “raping” the mal’ak / messengers. They were precluded from speaking to them! There is absolutely nothing about dabar that means “sex.” Dabar is not only the Hebrew word for “word,” it means: “to speak, to make a statement, to communicate a message, to convey an idea, to dictate an order, or to issue a pronouncement.”
Lowt did not want Sodom’s mental midgets blathering any aspect of their idiotic conspiratorial ideas, political platitudes, religious beliefs, societal customs, familial values, or moral mantras to the mal’ak. He didn’t want to hear it, they didn’t want to hear it, and God didn’t want to hear it. He wanted them to shut up and appear stupid rather than open their mouths and remove all doubt.
This isn’t a debate. God’s not looking for our input on how to make a better world, how to conceive a better plan of salvation, or what’s good or bad. He is not interested in our religion, our politics, our country, our troops, our family, our friends, our enemies, our health, our job, our financial status, or our favorite sports.
Your opinions, your morals, your conspiracies, your love interests, and your sexual disorientation range from utterly meaningless to putridly perverse to God. It is well past time that we learn to shut up and listen.
This is fundamental to understanding Yahowah and our place relative to Him. The human propensity to do as Sha’uwl | Paul incessantly did, which preachers and politicians do with reckless abandon, as the faithful due with their pathetic prayers, this compulsion to talk to God prior to and instead of listening to Him is not only “lo’ yada’ – stupid,” it is blatantly disrespectful.
29There is nothing whatsoever man estranged from God has to say that is of any interest to the Almighty – and most of it would have the stench of rotting flesh. Moreover, even when we come to know Yah, we are best served when we shama’ and shamar rather than dabar.
I may be a tad smarter than the average mutt, but I’m infinitely dumber than God. Our relationship works best when I listen intently before I respond enthusiastically. And truthfully, my response to what Yahowah is telling us is almost always found in these words – words that celebrate His words. I shama’ and shamar His dabarym then after I come to yada’ and byn His message, I ‘amar about His dabarym.
Yes, I realize that I’m bordering on hypocritical here in that I have a propensity to be verbose, but my comments are prolific largely because His testimony is so enlightening and enriching, so expansive and revealing. And my motivation is to share the insights I have derived by being a good listener, by being especially observant, such that Yahowah’s testimony resonates and inspires all who care to listen.
That said, the point that Yahowah is making here through Lowt is that the combined wisdom of Sodom, its collective voice, the sum of all their opinions and ideals, the full variety of their religious beliefs, the totality of their conspiratorial notions, the expansive array of their political, military, and economic aspirations, was not only of no interest whatsoever to Yahowah, and thus His messengers, they would have been an annoyance, both disgusting and hurtful. It’s not that God doesn’t care about the ways of man, it’s that He is overtly and demonstrably hostile to them.
If I’m correct in my calculus: Sadom = Mow’ab = Tebel ‘Adam 6000 Yah (Man’s World today as it is influenced by Progressives and Pauline Christianity). And 30this propensity to babel incessantly about one’s faith or lack thereof is occurring at the very moment the human voice is the most omnipresent and obnoxious. Yahowah is encouraging us to stop talking to Him and to His spiritual messengers and start listening.
Human jabbering is at an all-time high. Mankind has produced a seemingly endless number of television channels and radio stations – most conveying nonsense. There are more smartphones than smart people, with very little said that has any merit. The internet is almost everywhere, enabling social media sites the likes of Facebook, WhatsApp, WeChat, QQ, QZone, Tumblr, Instagram, Twitter (Now X), G+, Linkedin, Vimeo, Skype, Flickr, Viber, Line, Snapchat, YY, Telegram, Reddit – all exceeding 100 million users worldwide.
There are countless churches, mosques, and temples, innumerable political rostrums, and seven billion bozos babbling B.S. It’s little wonder God has had more than enough of our opinions. Unless it is to accept the five terms and conditions of His Beryth | Covenant, to accept His seven Miqra’ey | Invitations to Meet, or to express our appreciation for His Towrah | Guidance, zip it.
The eleventh and twelfth insights require some serious thought. Tsel means “shadow,” and yet this was occurring during the middle of the night. But that does not mean that we are being left out in the dark, because the moment ‘Adam is introduced, we are told that with a nepesh / consciousness and a neshamah / conscience, he was created in Yahowah’s “tselem – image.”
Just as a shadow is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional object between it and a source of light, we are a lesser-dimensional manifestation of the Almighty. He is seven-dimensional, and we are three-and-a-half dimensions. The gap is enormous because, rather than being halfway to Him, man is diminished by an 31infinite degree four times over. Once we become immortal and are liberated in time, we will still need to be empowered and enriched by an infinite amount times an infinite amount multiplied again by infinity.
Therefore, by using a diminutive variation of tselem with tsel, Lowt was comparing his abode with his uncle’s home, then his Uncle ‘Abraham’s dwelling with the Covenant here on Earth, and that contrasted to living with God during the Millennial Sukah Shabat, which is still but a foreshadow of life in Heaven – the 7th dimension.
And that leaves us with the final word in this compelling statement: qowrah. While it is rendered as “roof” in English Bibles, the Hebrew word for roof is actually gag. Qowrah describes the “load-bearing timberworks, beams, support structures, joists, and rafters of a home.” A qowrah can also be a “thick plank or sturdy pole used vertically in construction, especially an upright pillar holding up a roof.”
If Lowt were speaking of the Tabernacle of the Witness, the upright pillar in its center, the one carrying the entire load of the tent is an ‘edown – a term that is often used to describe Yahowah. But since this was an insignificant home in a perverse community, Lowt used qowrah to say that his house was but a tiny manifestation, a mere image or reflection, of the Covenant, and that everything he had discussed thus far served as part of its support structure.
In paleo-Hebrew, qowrah – means: for the proper perspective, one which is grounded and secure, man should be observant and thoughtful, looking, standing, and reaching up.
It was a simple equation: Sodom = man’s way and Lowt’s home = God’s Way. The “tsel – images” and “qowrah – support structures” for each were in irreconcilable and wholesale conflict.
32This is a subtlety few appreciate because the founders of the world’s most popular religions, Paul and Muhammad, created structures that supported their own deviant lives. They were not only violent, misogynist, sexual perverts, and con men, both were demon-possessed by their own admission. They conceived their religion their way, by proposing situational scriptures which served to justify whatever they desired.
Both willingly sacrificed God’s children, both Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, telling the world that they could do to them as they pleased. Rather than basing his “New Covenant” on the old family values, Paul’s would be based upon his feelings, personal desires, and guilt – so forgiveness for any crime no matter how heinous was fast and free. And with Muhammad, paradise was a place of sexual decadence, of doing to women whatever the rapist desired – so long as he died killing Yahuwdym | Jews for Allah to gain entrance.
If I may interrupt this presentation with a special announcement: Dear Homo Sapiens, Sodom isn’t the lurid story of God’s retribution against homosexuals. It is, instead, His vivid portrayal of what happens to those who reject His Towrah Guidance when it conflicts with their faith, their politics, their values, and the way they want to live their lives, and who resort to the ad hominem fallacy to demean the messenger rather than process the message.
Beyond the realization that this is what is happening here in Sodom, by referring to Lowt as someone who “shaphat – who was passing judgment” on them, my assessment of this story has been vindicated. Sodom is not a referendum on gang rape or homosexuality, but is instead an exposé on values, and on the difference between what God values and man desires.
The Sodomites wanted the opportunity to speak with Yahowah’s messengers and to share their beliefs and 33opinions with the mal’ak, but Lowt was preventing them from doing so for all of the reasons we have discussed. To the mob outside Lowt’s door, he had become an obstacle, and worse, someone they saw as trying to profit from this situation.
They viewed this episode this way because it was far easier for the Sodomites to demean and discredit the man who stood in their way, the man who had just told them that they were wrong, than it was for them to prevail on the merits of their ideas. Mentally bankrupt, they blamed Lowt for their impoverished condition rather than enriching themselves through this opportunity. Such is the way all of those who fancy their religion, politics, and conspiracies deal with those with the wherewithal to explain that they are wrong.
“So (wa), they responded (‘amar – they said, declared, and answered (qal imperfect)), ‘Step forward, because it would be best if you choose to move out of the way as you are trying to exploit us (nagash hal’ah – come forth off of there right now, even though you seem to believe you are in a position to extract a payment and cause us trouble, so therefore and henceforth of your own initiative, broaden your thinking such that it is in compliance with us, as this all pertains to a future time and a place a great distance away (qal imperative))!’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:9 in part)
This charge would be prophetic. It foreshadows the most prolific and debilitating anti-Semitic conspiracy ever promoted by man. It would serve as the inspiration for the anti-Semitic perversion known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and as the catalyst for the Holocaust: “It’s best Jews that you step out of our way because you are trying to exploit us.”
The myth, which has been repeated so shrilly and so frequently that it has become ingrained as a cancerous cell 34in Christians, Muslims, Socialists, and Conspirators, is that Jews run the world and that they do so as part of a plot to enrich themselves by exploiting everyone else.
It was the malignancy that emerged in Imperial Rome two thousand years ago and metastasized in Roman Catholicism and the Third Reich. But because to be anti-Semitic is to be against their “shem – name,” Yahuwd / Beloved of Yahowah, and their prophetic message, the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr, even the Mashyach and Yisra’el, there is no more destructive or deadly conspiracy.
From Vespasian and Titus to Hadrian and Nero, from Constantine and Theodosius to Pope Pius XII and Adolf Hitler, even running through Paul and Muhammad along the way, this would all lead to the diaspora, to expelling Jews from their homes, to expelling them from where they were taken, and to burning Jews by the millions in furnaces. The worst conspiracy man ever concocted has been laid out here for us to contemplate.
The man related by ethnicity to ‘Abraham was told: “Step forward, because it would be best if you choose to move out of the way as you are trying to exploit us. Come forth off of there right now, even though you seem to believe you are in a position to extract a payment and cause us trouble. Henceforth, broaden your thinking such that it is in compliance with us.” And with us recognizing that “this all pertains to a future time and a place a great distance away.”
“They went on to say (‘amar – they declared), ‘This one (ha ‘echad – this guy) came (bow’ – arrived) to live as a guest, as a stranger (la guwr – to dwell as an alien), and now (wa) he has become the judge, making the decisions and passing judgment (shaphat shaphat – he is the one who decides between us, who settles disputes by adjudicating matters, who litigates and governs, executing justice)!
35So now it seems appropriate that (‘atah – at this point in time, simultaneous with the narration itself, it makes sense to us that) we make you suffer (ra’a’ la ‘atah – we treat you badly, wrongly, harmfully, perpetrating upon you the opposite of towb – good (hifil imperfect – the Sodomites would cause Lowt to participate in their evil desires, making him like them with ongoing implications)) along with them (min hem – as part of them, as if you are like them, and because of them, even more than them).’
Then (wa) they insisted, applied pressure, and demanded their own way (phatsar – they sought to compel through arrogant and presumptuous behavior, pressing and pushing) against (ba) the individual (ha ‘ysh), very severely against Lowt (ba Lowt ma’od – extremely aggressively and powerfully against the one wrapped too tightly who was encircled, encased, and entangled, enveloped and intertwined) and they approached (nagash – they came forth and together) to break down (la shabar – to shatter and destroy) the door (ha deleth).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:9)
The best these mistaken imbeciles had to offer was: get out of our way, you’re not like us so you can’t judge us, and because you tried to reason with us, we are going to make you suffer. Then they rushed up to shatter the door. It’s gang mentality in the land of mental midgets.
This is exactly what I’ve experienced when I’ve exposed and condemned religious, political, military, economic, societal, and conspiratorial myths. Those who believe in them, those who define themselves by them, and especially those who promote them, begin by claiming that I have no right to judge them followed by the notion that I’m unqualified to judge them or their beliefs, even though I typically know far more about the basis of those myths than they do. Then, rather than deal with anything I’ve shared, those lost in a world of religion, politics, patriotism, 36and conspiracy, try to make me suffer – posting all manner of tripe and slander on social media.
It is so brilliantly written we’d be well-served to linger here a while longer – especially within the context of trying to understand Mow’ab. The common denominator between Multicultural Socialist Secular Humanism and Pauline Christianity is an aversion to being judged and their adverse response should it occur – underscoring the realization that this text was inspired and prophetic.
Immediately prior to the American and French revolutions, a German Jew named Adam Weishaupt (read: Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism by Barruel) quietly fought and won the battle to sever the connection between church and State, undermining the Roman Catholic Church’s ability to crown kings and to impose their will on the masses. But knowing that men and women were religious creatures, Weishaupt advanced the Pauline notions of what we know today as Socialist Secular Humanism, along with its new moral code which has come to be called “Political Correctness.”
Using a Machiavellian approach where less-than-appropriate means were justified to achieve the end result and realizing that his agenda was as selfish and flawed as the one he sought to replace, Weishaupt advanced Paul’s plan to obfuscate criticism by punishing and ostracizing those who dared do so, making being judgmental the ultimate crime.
His dream was realized. Today, in our Multicultural Socialist Secular Humanist societies in the West, should a politician, cleric, educator, businessperson, or celebrity say anything that runs afoul of what either Paul wrote or what is considered Politically Correct, they will be stripped of their job in the process of being publicly disgraced. There is no defense, no evidence or reason, not even truth, and there is no forgiveness. More than anything else, this is the 37reason our world today has come to mirror what we are witnessing in Sodom.
Focusing a moment longer on Christianity, rather than address those who would expose their faith as unworthy of their souls, the faithful universally resort to character assassination, deploying the ad hominem fallacy – as was the case with Paul. Some will cite Paul’s letters, while others will hide behind a universally errant rendering of “judge not lest you be judged,” ignorant of the realization that God is calling us to be judgmental. But it hasn’t always been this way with Christians, because prior to the modern era, prior to the influence of the secular society, the Church broke down the doors to their homes, incarcerated, and then tortured its critics to silence their voice and dissuade others from following their example.
It all began with Paul’s first epistle to the Galatians, when after he condemned Peter and then denounced the Torah, he undermined the Chosen People’s ability to criticize him in return. Many of Paul’s Epistles open with the false prophet demeaning and harassing an entire community for challenging the absurdity of his claims, including Galatia, Corinth, Thessalonica, and Ephesus.
As a result, the political and the religious, the patriotic and those who support their military, the conspiratorialists, and those who are politically correct are universally resistant to being judged. Truth is deflected, as are evidence and reason. And it’s not just the fact that the religious and the political, the conspiratorial and politically correct, the patriotic and promilitary are averse to being openly assessed and evaluated, they universally attack and demean those with the comprehension, compassion, and courage to do what Lowt was doing.
Words articulated truthfully, supported by evidence and reason, are the Achilles heel of all manner of human contrivances, which is why those who promote religious 38beliefs, political ideals, conspiracy theories, patriotic platitudes, economic policies, military appreciation, or multicultural agendas are so universally opposed to the likes of Lowt. They will collectively assure that those who dare exercise good judgment to expose the truth, the fact that a person has to be ignorant, irrational, and unGodly to embrace any of these human edifices, is immediately attacked and scared away.
The reaction is always swift and inclusive, just as it was here in Sodom. The citizens of Sodom immediately rose up to silence Lowt and sought to move him out of the way, break down his door, get what they wanted, and make everyone who stood in their way suffer.
If we were to distill all that we have learned over these past twenty-three years together into a single thought, it might well be that we have to think our way to God. He is unknowable and unapproachable to those unwilling or unable to exercise good judgment. This is the problem with Sodom.
Worse, after hypocritically and irrationally condemning Lowt for the very thing they were doing, the Sodomites proceeded such that their way, and only their way, would be considered acceptable. In Sodom, as in the case with Christians and Socialist Secularists, truth is unacceptable as are those who convey it.
What they missed, of course, in all of this was the opportunity to learn, to grow, to know God. They even missed the thing very few men find: the doors. They have been the focus of this story all along. Lowt’s home represents the Covenant, the only family Yahowah was concerned about inside the amoral morass of Sodom. And you can count them with me. There were seven of them.
The first one, sha’ar, was in 19:1, where we find Lowt sitting in Sodom’s doorway and eager to engage Yahowah’s mal’ak. I suspect that it represents the portal 39out of Sodom and into the Promised Land. Let’s call it Sukah.
There were two in 19:7, where Lowt went out of the pathach of his home and then shut the deleth behind him, telling the Sodomites that they were wrong. Since it appears that the doorways were presented in reverse order for the backward perspective of those lost in the Mow’ab of Multiculturalism and Christianity, the door (pathach) which was opened was Taruw’ah, because it is always appropriate to expose errant thinking. However, the opportunity for Reconciliations had been closed on them (deleth).
The deleth the Sodomites attempted to break down in 19:9 represents Shabuw’ah. They would not receive the enlightenment or emancipation they sought. That’s practically germane for those seeking to find Mow’ab in this story. Weishaupt claimed enlightenment was the path to empowerment for Socialist Secular Humanists. And Christians have claimed every one of the Covenant’s enriching benefits for themselves.
The final three are presented in this next statement, with one found in 19:10 and two in 19:11. The deleth through which they could not pass, the pethach which they could not perceive, and the pathach which was impossible for them to find or attain represent Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym. It is also telling that there were three distinctly different words used for “door,” just as the Miqra’ey are celebrated three times each year.
And so (wa) the individuals (spiritual messengers) (ha ‘ysh – personas plural (speaking of the two mal’ak)) reached out (shalach – stretched out) with their hands (‘eth yad hem – using their ability and influence) and brought Lowt back inside the house and to them (wa bow’ ‘eth Lowt ‘el hem ha beyth – so that they could go out and return back in the home with the Enveloped and 40Entangled, bringing him to them within the home) and shut the door (wa ha deleth sagar – then closed and secured the door). (19:10)
“And (wa) the men who were at the entrance doorway to the house (‘eth ha ‘ysh ‘asher petach ha beyth) they struck with blindness (nakah ba ha canowbym – they afflicted with visual deprivation), both insignificant simpletons (min qaton – those who know very little, the small, and the young) all the way up to those who were older, with status, who were deemed powerful and important (wa ‘ad gadowl – including those considered honorable, recognizable, and esteemed) such that (wa) they became weary without the capacity (la’ah – unable to function, they wore themselves out and grew impatient) to find (matsa’ – to discover, uncover, locate, attain, or experience) the door (ha pathach).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 19:11)
Mankind’s ability to see, even the most obvious things, has been so occluded by societal and familial customs, so warped by politics and religion, so truncated with indoctrination replacing education, and so incapacitated today with political correctness and socialist secular humanist conditioning, 99.9999% of the people drawing breath on this planet are blind to the things of God and couldn’t find Passover, the Doorway to Life, even if they ran smack into it and did a nose plant. In other words, in the story of Sodom, we see the World of Man today.
If you or those you love are among them, you now know that the Door to Life, the Door to the Covenant, the Door from Pesach to Sukah, has been closed on everyone, from young to old, the powerful and insignificant, the ignorant and important. When it comes to leaving this planet with one’s soul intact and free, it matters not if one was a victim, just going along with the crowd, or the one manipulating the masses. These people were not divided into good or bad, charitable or selfish, moral or decadent, 41religious or agnostic, smart or dumb, young or old, leaders or followers, rich or poor, with regard to their blindness or exclusion.
The family of man is badly fractured and broken. It is far worse than we are aware of because most people do not share their personal anguish.
I suspect that this is why the lone prerequisite of the Covenant not only includes walking away from our country, from the religious and political influence of Babel, and from societal corruption, but also from “our father’s house.”
