The US’s Descent Into Idolatrous Baalism: The Coming “Woke” American Theocracy



Authored by Simon Black via,

Over a two day period in late March of 1979, the people of Iran held a groundbreaking referendum to turn their country into a theocratic Islamic Republic where the religious leaders ruled supreme.

According to the wholeheartedly honest and incorruptible officials who counted the votes, 99.3% of the ballots were cast in favor of becoming an Islamic Republic.

(This bears a striking resemblance to Kim Jong Un winning a 2014 ‘election’ in North Korea with 100% of the vote, or when Saddam Hussein won re-election in Iraq back in 2002 with 11.4 million votes in favor, and 0 against.)

Within months, a new constitution was drafted, and Iran became a theocracy.

In a theocracy, the rules and rituals of the official state religion become pervasive in everything– politics, education, business, news, entertainment, and even your daily routine– regardless of whether or not you’re a believer… if you’re even allowed to be a non-believer.

In its own way, the United States (and much of the West) is rapidly becoming a theocracy where the woke leftist religion similarly pervades our daily lives.

We can already see it.

Just look at the education system, where schools and universities are indoctrinating young people into the virtues of Marxism, Critical Race Theory, and other woke pseudoscience topics.

Children are taught to view themselves as oppressors or victims, and to judge themselves (and others) not based on the content of their character, but on the color of their skin.

And even basic subjects are being radicalized.

The United States was founded in 1619. Biology is intolerant. 2 + 2 = 4 “reeks of white supremacist patriarchy”.

Continue reading

What Is the Gender of the Holy or Set-Apart Spirit?

For about 12 years I’ve been holding back sharing this information. Now is the time to let it out. By doing so, I’m running the risk of turning people away from reading this blog and maybe even losing some friends over it. But I don’t care. I don’t care about the praises of men, I don’t take their money, and I’m not trying to get a following and I have nothing to sell. I care about only two things: the Truth and pleasing Elohim. If you’re on board with this, then read on. If not, now is your time to bail out…blessings!

I also encourage anyone who reads this article to also read the comments section that is attached to this article. In it, readers ask questions or make comments which I then address in attempts to add (hopefully) more clarity with respect to my understanding of the nature of the Godhead.

— Natan

The Simplicity of Truth

Why do humans like to make things complicated? To the contrary, Yeshua said that unless one becomes like a little child that one would in now way enter the kingdom of heaven, for of such is the kingdom of Elohim (Mark 10:15; Luke 18:16–17). There are many valuables insights that we can away from this terse passage, but one of them is this: The basic message of the Bible is so simple that even a child can understand it. 

So what does this have to with the gender of the Holy or Set-Apart Spirit? Simply this. A basic understanding of who Elohim is should not be complicated. Let the Bible speak for itself. On the other hand, be wary of complicated philosophical theologies of men who take simple things and make them complicated. Such will likely not fall under the Yeshua rubric of a child being able to understand it.

It seems that theologians often invent complicated explanations as a way to justify their ivory-tower, super-spiritual and self-righteous existence. Those who want to become initiated into their academic inner circle country clubs and to receive their pieces of paper which confer upon the initiated titles that engender superciliousness must pay exorbitant fees and be willing to bow before and to kiss the feet (and other parts of the anatomy in the nether regions) the false gods of intellectual  pride. 

Now I’m not averse to academic training. I have paid my dues and run the gauntlet of five institutions of higher learned at home and abroad and have earned my papered credentials, and can view it all objectively. The fact is that there were only several formerly trained academicians in Scripture, and none of this got the recipients any closer to Elohim. In fact, Paul, the most learned of all, referred to his academic training as dung (Phil 3:8). Facts are facts and are stubborn things that are hard to ignore.

So now back to the subject at hand. What does all of this have to do with the gender of the Elohim’s Spirit? Much in every way. Read the Bible and let the facts speak for themselves. If the theologies of men line up with the Word of Elohim, then keep them. It not, toss them into the garbage can labeled “vanity of vanities and the traditions of men by which the Word of Elohim is made of none effect” (Mark 7:9, 13). Elohim, the Truth and one person still make a majority regardless of how many theologians, academicians, popes, “rabbis”, pastors, Bible teachers, lay people, churches or denominations say otherwise. 

And now on to our subject of the gender of the Spirit of Elohim. If you are a truth seeker at all costs and willing to let Scripture speak for itself, then read on. If not, then change the channel now.

The Dishonesty of the Bible Translators 

There are several examples in the New Testament where the Bible translators have read their own biases into the Scriptures and mistranslated the gender of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 8:16, Romans 8:16, 26–27 and 1 Corinthians 12:11 are examples of this. Here the translators refer to the Spirit in the masculine gender when the word Spirit, which is the antecedent, is the Greek word, which pneuma, is a noun in the neuter gender. To be honest, the translators should have said it instead of he. There is no grammatical justification for this mistranslation. This is biased translating to substantiate the idea that the gender of the Spirit of Elohim is male when the Scriptures do not say this.

So Is the Holy or Set-Apart Spirit Masculine or Feminine?

In the Christian doctrine of the trinity, the Father, the Son and the Set-Apart Spirit are said to be all masculine in gender. Is this a biblical way to view the “Godhead” or is this simply a tradition of man that has been passed on down for so long that now no one dares question it? What is the biblical truth on this matter? Are the Father, Son and Spirit all masculine Beings?

One thing we know from the Bible is that the Father is a father and is masculine. Likewise, the Son is the also masculine. What about the Set-Apart Spirit? Masculine or feminine? Who are we going to listen? Men’s traditions or the Bible? Hold that thought; we will come back to this later.

In Genesis 1:27 we find an interesting verse.

So Elohim created man in his own image, in the image of Elohim created he him; male and female created he them. (See also Gen 5:1–2.)

From this passage, we find that Elohim (plural) has both male and female components. We know that the Father and the Son aren’t female, so what’s left? Obviously by process of elimination and through logical deduction all that we have left is the Holy or the Set-Apart Spirit of Elohim. The femininity of the Spirit is substantiated by the fact that the Hebrew word for spirit (ruach) is in the feminine gender. This is interesting!

Does the Bible anywhere ascribe a masculine gender to the Spirit of Elohim? Well, sort of, but not in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). This is to be found in the Greek New Testament in only four places.

In Yeshua’s final instructions to his disciples before he went to the cross, he promised to send the Spirit of Elohim whom he referred to in four places as “the Comforter” or “Helper” (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7).  In Greek, the word of Comforter is paracletos, which in Koine Greek is in the masculine gender. On the other hand, the Greek word for spirit in reference to the Holy or Set-Apart Spirit is pneuma, which is in the neuter gender. The word pneuma in reference to the Set-Apart Spirit is to be found in the Greek New Testament more than 200 times. 

So, based on the evidence found in the Scriptures, we have verses that can be used to prove that the Spirit of Elohim is a he, she and an it. The Tanakh (or Old Testament) indicates that the Elohim has a female component and Spirit as in the Spirit of Elohim is in the female gender.  On the other hand, the Greek New Testament, which often proceeds from or comes out of the revelation of the Hebrew Tanakh and, in some cases, is a translation of passages therefrom, refers to the Spirit by both the masculine and neuter genders. When translating the Greek New Testament, the Christian translators were faced with a dilemma. They could take the neuter word pneuma and follow the Hebrew gender of the word ruach and refer to the Spirit by the pronouns she and her, but this wouldn’t be a proper translation of the neuter gender Greek word pneuma. The pronouns relating to this word would be it or its. The other option for the translators was to land on the Greek word paracletos, which is in the masculine gender, and refer to the Spirit as he or him. It seems that this is what they did, even though the preponderance of biblical evidence shows us that the Spirit of Elohim is neither in masculine nor the neuter gender, which leaves us with only one option: the feminine gender.

In fact, Christian Bible translators have been so intent on forcing the concept of a masculine Spirit, thus upholding the cherished all male trinity doctrine, that in at least three places (discussed below), they use the male pronoun he when referring to the neuter word pneuma. In these instances, to be honest to they should they should have used the pronoun it. This is dishonest translating, which upholds a non-biblical tradition of men!


Let My People Think—Rightly Dividing Scripture According to the Hebraic Rules of Biblical Interpretation (part 2)

(Author’s note: This is the updated and rewritten version of an article that I wrote in the early 2000s. The information contained therein is based largely on the booklet entitled, Hermeneutics: How to Understand the Scriptures by James Scott Trimm [ or], although I have added many of my own fresh insights and some new information to the original material.)

The “Science” of Argumentation

Throughout Scripture one finds arguments used to prove theological points. An argument in Scripture is not referring to a heated discussion between two parties, but rather to the putting forth of series of points which lead to a conclusion, which is the point the author is trying to make or prove. 

An argument generally has two parts: the premise and the conclusion. A premise is a proposition (i.e. the point to be discussed or maintained in the argument, usually stated in sentence form near the outset of the argument) antecedently supposed or proven as a basis of argument or inference. It is something assumed to be true or taken for granted. Sometimes an argument can be simple with one or two points leading to a conclusion. Other times an argument is a complex series of steps often containing points and subpoints or mini-arguments (as in some of Paul’s writings) eventually leading to the conclusion. These can be hard for the untrained mind to follow. Paul was a theological lawyer and formulated some pretty complex arguments which, as Peter noted, were hard to follow and easy for unlearned individuals to twist or distort (2 Pet 3:16).

An argument can usually be laid out laid out in an “if-then” format. If the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true. In scriptural argument, the words if and then are not always used. 

Some of other words that have the same meaning as if are since, because, for, as, in as much and for the reason that. Words that have the same meaning as then would include therefore, hence, so, consequently, it follows that, we may infer that or we may conclude that.

All arguments are either deductive or inductive. Deduction is deriving a conclusion by reasoning, or inference in which the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. James Trimm gives the following example to illustrate this point:

  • All prophets spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:20–21).
  • Enoch was a prophet (Jude 1:14).
  • Therefore, Enoch was moved by the Holy Spirit.

­Induction is the act of bringing forward or adducing a proposition (i.e. the point to be discussed or maintained in an argument, usually stated in sentence form near the outset of the argument), or the process of reasoning from a part to a whole, from particulars to generals, from the individual to the universal. Trimm gives the following example of an inductive argument where the reader is lead to a conclusion through inference:

  • Abel obtained a good report by faith (Heb 11:4).
  • Enoch obtained a good report by faith (Heb 11:5).
  • Noah obtained a good report by faith (Heb 11:7).
  • Abraham obtained a good report by faith (Heb 11:8).
  • Therefore, all of the elders of the Tanakh (i.e. the Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament obtained a good report by faith (Heb 11:2, 39).

A proposition, usually stated in sentence form near the outset of the argument, which is widely accepted on its intrinsic merit as self-evident truth, Trimm writes, is called an axiom. In biblical interpretation (or hermeneutics), any proposition that comes directly from the text of the Scripture is called a proof text. One utilizes a proof text or axiom as the premise for an argument. If the proof text is in context and is a valid axiom (and is therefore regarded as true), and if the argument made is valid, then the argument (or exegesis) is sound and the conclusion is therefore true. Using a valid proof text to formulate an argument and prooftexting are two different things. We shall discuss prooftexting below in the section Examples of Common Logic Errors.

When formulating arguments or interpretations from Scripture, Trimm gives the following pointers:

  • Don’t sacrifice objective understanding to make your point.
  • Superficial study can be worse than no study.
  • Spiritualizing and allegorizing should be avoided. When the allegorizing of Scripture should be used to illustrate a point from the objective meaning of that passage and be confirmed by the objective meaning of one or more other passages as well.
  • When studying Scripture, keep in mind the Rule of First Reference. This refers to a concept or term in the Scriptures where it is defined by its earliest usage and that definition is then applied to later readings.

Examples of Common Logic Errors


When one starts with a conclusion (i.e. one owns opinion about something) and searches for “proof texts” to support that conclusion or opinion, this is an eisegetical interpretation. 

Here is an example of prooftexting that occurs in mainstream Christianity: 

Conclusion: According to the mainstream church, Sunday, the first day of the week, and not the Sabbath or seventh day of the week, is now the day that the New Testament declares is the day of worship and rest for Christians.

The following prooftexts are used by many Christians to support this (unbiblical and false) conclusion: 

Act 15:20 — Christians no longer have to observe the seventh day Sabbath since there is no mention of Shabbat here as being a requirement upon New Testament believers.

Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. (Acts 15:19–20)

Colossians 2:16–17—This scripture proves the Sabbath is no longer obligatory upon Christians.

So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. (Col 2:16–17)

Romans 14:4–6—Christians can keep any day of the week as a rest day that they like.

Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. (Rom 14:4–5)

Matthew 28:1 and Mark 16:1—This proves that Jesus rose on Sunday making it the “Lord’s Day,” and thus is another “proof” that Sunday has replaced the Sabbath.

Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. (Matt 28:1)

None of these Scriptures actually state that Sunday has replaced the seventh day Sabbath or that the Testimony of Yeshua (or New Testament) in any way invalidate the numerous commands in the Torah for the saints of Elohim to observe the Sabbath, even though this is what mainstream Christianity teaches.

Here is another example of prooftexting that occurs in mainstream Christianity: 

Conclusion: Christians are no longer obligated to follow the biblical dietary laws as outlines in Leviticus 11.

Many Christian use the following prooftexts to support this (false) conclusion: 

Mark 7:19—When he declared that all foods are clean, Yeshua freed Christians from having to keep the Old Testament food laws.

Thus He declared all foods clean. (Mark 7:19, NASB)

Luke 10:8—Yeshua freed his disciples from having to observe the Old Testament food laws when traveling.

And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you. (Luke 10:8)

Acts 10:15—Elohim has now freed his disciples from having to observe the Mosaic food laws.

And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. (Acts 10:15)

Romans 14:14—The Bible no longer considers any food to be unclean. 

I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. (Rom 14:14)

1 Timothy 4:4—The Old Testament dietary laws are no longer a requirement for New Testament believers.

For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving. (1 Tim 4:4)

1 Titus 1:15—New Testament Christians can now eat whatever food they want.

Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. (Tit 1:15)

After a casual reading, these scriptures verses may appear to invalidate the Torah’s dietary laws pertaining to the eating of clean and unclean meats. However, when they are read in context of their surrounding verses as well as the context of biblical linguistics and against the backdrop of the Hebraic culture of the day as well as against the contextual backdrop of the entirety of Scripture, they in no way annul the biblical dietary laws.

Continue reading

Let My People Think—Rightly Dividing Scripture According to the Hebraic Rules of Biblical Interpretation (part 1)

(Author’s note: This is the updated and completely rewritten version of an article that I wrote in the early 2000s. The information contained therein is based largely on the booklet entitled, Hermeneutics: How to Understand the Scriptures by James Scott Trimm [ or], although I have added many of my own insights and new information to the original material.)

When reading the Bible, how do we properly interpret it, so that we arrive at the author’s intended meaning? This has proven to be a daunting task for both Christians and religious Jews. There is a saying: Put three Jews in a room will have five opinions. The same could also be said of Christians. Perhaps the fundamental principles of biblical interpretation as laid out in this article, if followed, will help to bring some unanimity among truth-seeking Bible believers. Who knows?

Over the millennia, differing views on the meaning of many Bible verses have resulted in countless church splits and the founding of thousands of religious denominations. This is a problem than can be mitigated if not largely alleviated if YHVH’s people learn to follow Paul instructions to the young Timothy to “study to shew thyself approved unto Elohim, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim 2:15, emphasis added). How do we do this? This will be the subject of discussion below.

If there is a right way to divide the word of truth as 2 Timothy 2:15 states, then it follows logically that there must also be a wrong way to do it. As a matter of fact, we actually have biblical record of this occurring among the first-century believers. In 2 Peter 3:16 we read, “As also in all [Paul’s] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest [or twist], as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” In this case, some believers were twisting Paul’s writings to say something other than what the author meant. Sadly, this practice still goes on today. Whole denominations, sects and even cults have been founded on the twisting of scriptures resulting in countless biblical heresies and millions of people being deceived. 

Twisting or improperly interpreting Scripture can lead to one’s spiritual ruination if the result is a false “salvation” or the loss of one’s salvation. This is no small matter! Over the years, there have been whole denominations that claim to justify through their erroneous biblical interpretation such heinous abominations and sinful practices as abortion, homosexuality (sodomy), torture and even genocide. Scripture warns very clearly that “no prophecy [or divinely inspired utterance] of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” YHVH Elohim will judge false teachers severely!

But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive [or damnable, KJV] heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction…and their destruction does not slumber. (2 Pet 2:1, 3)

So with all these warnings and admonitions in mind how can we insure that we will not fall into the trap of misinterpreting Scripture and coming up with the “damnable heresies” and false teachings as we read about in 2 Peter 2:1–3 that lead many people astray? This now brings us to our study of the rules of biblical interpretation that were extant in the first century during the time of Yeshua and the apostles, as well as the universal rules of simple logic that every honest scholar and truth seeker follows.

As we shall discover below, during the first-century there were specific rules of scriptural interpretation that were taught and well-known among Bible students and scholars. These had been developed over the centuries by leading learned Jewish biblical sages to ensure that false teachings and twisting of Scripture would not occur. We can learn from the wisdom of those who have gone before us.

As Bible student seeking to reconnect ourselves with the Hebraic roots of our Christian faith, we realize that much twisting of Scripture has occurred from the time of the last apostle until now in Christian theology. Grossly aberrant teachings have been promoted in churchianity where, for example, it is taught that Messiah Yeshua and Paul came to “do away with” the Torah-law. Sabbath has been changed to Sunday and Passover to Easter. Christmas, Lent, Halloween and other Christian holidays have replaced YHVH’s commanded and blessed feasts. Moreover, the church has set aside many biblical standards of holiness such as the Torah’s dietary laws and now permits the eating of what the Bible refers to as abominable things (e.g. pork and shellfish). In these lasts days as the saints prepare to be the spotless or sin-free bride of Yeshua in anticipation of his second coming, it is time for us all to awake from our spiritual sleep and to repent of our errant ways and return to scriptural Truth. It is time that YHVH’s people search out the Truth and come into alignment with it. This involves learning how to properly interpret Scripture, so that we will have the tools to separate the spiritual wheat of Truth from the chaff of unbiblical doctrines and traditions of men. Currently, YHVH is raising up a spiritual priesthood who is learning to separate the holy from the profane, the precious from the vile (Jer 15:19; Ezek 22:26; 44:23), as his saints extricate themselves from the spiritual Babylon of religious confusion in which they find themselves (Rev 18:4). For too long YHVH’s people have been feeding from the serpent’s tree of the knowledge of good and evil instead of from the tree of life. The former is contains the evil the doctrines and traditions of men that have made of none-effect the Word of Elohim (Mark 7:9, 13). “Come out of her my people” and “be separate, do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you,” is YHVH-Yeshua’s cry to his end time saints (Rev 18:4; 2 Cor 5:17), who love him and keep his commandments (John 14:15, 21; Rev 12:17; 14:12).

Objectivity Versus Subjectivity 

The first rule in proper Scriptural interpretation is to know the difference between objectivity and subjectivity. The word objective means “to exist outside of or independent of the mind, something which is observable or verifiable by facts, not by emotions or feelings of the individual.” By contrast, the word subjective means “something relating to the mind of the individual as the subject of experience.” James Trimm states succinctly that objective means “existing independent of the mind,” while subjective means “that which comes from a person’s point of view.” Facts are objective while opinions are subjective. Trimm goes on to say that many in Christendom, however, have developed a “do-it-yourself, do-your-own-thing” approach to biblical interpretation. Christians will often have Bible studies in which they ask, “What does this verse mean to you?” In response, many Christians will often say, “To me this verse means….” By contrast, the truth-seeking approach is to ask, “Okay, so if you were not here what would this verse mean?”

Exegesis Versus Eisegesis

These complicated sounding terms relate to the idea of subjectivity versus objectivity. ­Eisegesis (subjectivity) is interpreting a text by reading one’s own ideas into the text and pulling out a subjective meaning. Exegesis (objectivity), on the other hand, is an explanation or critical interpretation of a text by drawing the author’s intended message out of the text, and letting the text speak to you. The former approach is an inaccurate reading of a text and misses the author’s message, while the latter approach is an accurate reading of the text and catches the author’s message correctly. Many biblical examples can be given of how both mainstream Christian and Jewish religious systems have interpreted various Bible passages subjectively (or using an eisegetic approach). Here are some examples of this:

  • In Matthew 5:17, Yeshua said, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” To the modern Christian, this statement means that the Torah-law or law of Moses is largely no longer binding upon the New Testament Christian, since Yeshua did it or fulfilled it for us, even thought the context of the passage (especially the following several verses) say exactly the opposite thing.
  • In Romans 10:4 we read, “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (NKJV). To most Christians, this means that the necessity to adhere to the laws of the Torah terminated with the death of Messiah, even though in the context of the surrounding verses Paul, the author, is actually teaching that the law is binding upon Christians even as it was upon the Israelites under Moses.
  • Romans 14:5–6 states, “One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind” (NKJV). To most Christians this verse is proof that the seventh day Sabbath is no longer a required observance, and that Scripture now allows one to rest on any day of the week, even though the Sabbath is not what Paul is even referring to in this passage of Scripture.
  • Yeshua says in Revelation 3:20, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.” Christians typically apply this verse to unsaved, non-Christians, when in reality it is referring to the saints who are already saved but who are asleep spiritually and lukewarm in their faith. 
  • Modern religious Jews apply the Messianic suffering servant figure of Isaiah 53 to the modern Jewish people and the State of Israel, when this prophecy is clearly referring to a singular individual who dies atoning for the sins of YHVH’s people and then resurrects to life again.
  • One of the most famous verses in modern American Christendom is 2 Chronicles 7:14 which says, “if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” The context of this verse, however, is Solomon praying in Jerusalem at the temple’s dedication and the land of Israel is being referred and not America. Not only that, most modern readers fail to understand why YHVH would allow the land of his people to come under judgment. It was because they had forsaken his Torah commandments (the law of Moses, see vv. 17, 19). Only if they would return to his Torah would YHVH heal their land. The typical modern reader misses both of these points.
  • Many Christians quote Hosea 4:6 which reads, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me….” However, they fail to read the rest of the verse, which explains why YHVH has rejected his people. It is “because you have forgotten the Torah-law of your Elohim, I also will forget your children.”
  • 1 Timothy 4:4 reads, “For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving” (NKJV). Most Christians read this verse and stop there. They take it to mean that the biblical dietary laws of Leviticus 11 have been done away with and that it is now permissible to eat pork and other unkosher foods. Yet they fail to read the next verse, which says that not only prayer, but the Word of Elohim (i.e. Lev 11) sanctifies or determines the kind if meat that the saints are to eat.
  • Ezekiel:15–28 contains the well-known “Two Sticks Prophecy.” Many modern Bible teachers declare that this prophecy has already been fulfilled by the Jews returning to the modern State of Israel, when in reality, there are major aspects of it that will not be fulfilled until after the second coming of Yeshua.

27 Lessons From the Book of Jonah on Ministry, the Prophetic, Sin and Divine Judgment

Before reading this article, it would be helpful to review quickly the book of Jonah, so that the following will make sense.

  1. When YHVH gives you some specific and direct marching orders, don’t disobey him no matter how difficult or distasteful they may seem to you. If you disobey, you may not be pleased with the unexpected consequences of your disobedient actions. Jonah found this out the hard way.
  2. Before pointing our fingers at Jonah for declining the mission YHVH had given him, how many of us have done the same no matter how small or large the assignment?
  3. When we disobey YHVH (i.e. sin), we take ourselves out of his will for our lives and the result is the loss of peace and tranquility. Sometimes, in an attempt to get our attention and bring us back to him, YHVH brings turmoil and “storms” into our lives to redirect us back to him. If and when this happens, we would do well to ask YHVH for wisdom and understanding as to why we are experiencing what we are (Jas 1:1–8, 12–15).
  4. When YHVH tells us to do one thing, and we want to do something else, we, at this time, Scripture instructs us to bring every thought of ours (that is not of YHVH) captive into obedient compliance to our Messiah (2 Cor 10:5).
  5. When we rebel against fulfilling a divine mission, YHVH will pursue us to get us back in line with his perfect will for our lives. 
  6. Sin and rebellion puts us into a spiritual state of sleep, so that we’re oblivious to the consequences of our actions upon us and those around us. When this happens, we come under spiritual delusion in thinking that we are doing the will when, in reality, we are walking in accordance with our own mind, will and emotions as dictated by the world, the flesh and devil (Eph 2:1–3; Jas 3:15).
  7. We cannot hide or run away from our sin and rebellion. It will be exposed, even if YHVH has to use heathens and strange circumstances to do so. 
  8. Only when we humbly confess our sins and repent will the “storms” of YHVH’s judgment cease and the sea of life made calm in our lives.
  9. Jonah, to his credit, owned his sin and took full personal responsibility for it without blaming others or making excuses. He didn’t want others to suffer for his folly. He was willing to accept the consequences of his sin. Because of this, YHVH showed him favor, prepared a fish to swallow him, and then gave Jonah three days in the fish’s belly to ponder his errant ways.
  10. When in a place of trouble and distress, Jonah prayed and expressed his faith in YHVH. When facing distresses in our own lives, how often do we fail to cry out humbly to our merciful Father in heaven?
  11. The eyes of YHVH are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their cry. (Ps 34:15)
  12. The righteous cry out, and YHVH hears, and delivers them out of all their troubles. YHVH is near to those who have a broken heart, and saves such as have a contrite spirit. Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but YHVH delivers him out of them all. (Ps 34:17–19)
  13. We should be ready and willing to pray anywhere at anytime. Jonah prayed in the belly of a fish. What excuse do we have for not praying no matter when or where we may find ourselves in our time of distress?
  14. Jonah was a spiritual backslider, yet he repented and YHVH heard and accepted his prayer. Jonah’s example should be an encouragement to any backslider no matter how grave the sins he has committed against the Creator.
  15. As Jonah’s three-day tenure in the fish’s belly was prophetic of Yeshua’s time in the grave, so Jonah’s “resurrection” from the depths of the sea points to the resurrection of our Messiah as Yeshua himself so declares in Matthew 12:40. Jonah’s faith in the Creator along with his “death” and “resurrection” points sinners to the Messiah who alone can save us from the sting of sin which is death. Our only hope of victory over death and the grave is through Messiah and the resurrection from the dead he promises to those who are his. 
  16. Upon repenting of his backsliding and being mercifully delivered from certain death, Jonah humbly submitted to YHVH’s mission to preach repentance to the people of Nineveh. Jonah had to repent of his own sin before he was meat for the Master’s use. Jonah accepted the yoke of his mission, and fulfilled his mission with great boldness. Similarly, when YHVH gives us a mission, we must be bold to fulfill it faithfully and without hesitation. We must be willing to go when, where and to whom he tells us. We must faithfully do exactly as he has commissioned us, to proclaim what he has commanded us and nothing more or less.
  17. When YHVH gives you a prophetic word for someone, don’t let your personal emotions cloud your perspective. Don’t forget that you’re merely YHVH’s spiritual mailman who is delivering his mail, not yours. Period. Jonah let his anger for Nineveh (Israel’s mortal enemy) cloud his judgment.
  18. A prophet must accept his divine mission without any preconditioned biases against the message’s recipient, and he must remain as emotionally neutral and unbiased as possible. He should focus only on fulfilling his mission as YHVH wishes and remain impartial and personally emotionally detached, so as not to pollute the purity of the divine message.
  19. No matter how many miraculous things YHVH does in a prophet’s life, and no matter the magnitude of the message, the greatness of the recipient of the prophetic word, or the importance of the mission, a prophet needs to stay humble (small in his own eyes) before YHVH.
  20. Prophetic words of judgment are always conditional upon the recipient’s response. If they refuse to repent, the word will come to pass. If they repent, YHVH will relent and the judgment will pass.
  21. The Ninevites wholeheartedly fasted, prayed and repented of their sin, and YHVH in his mercy spared them. This is the key to averting YHVH’s well-deserved judgment upon individual sinners and a sinful nation.
  22. Don’t wish harm on others no matter how evil you think they are or how much you think they deserve YHVH’s judgment. At all times, orientate your heart and thoughts to that of the Father. He is merciful, gracious, patient and longsuffering and so should we be. When repentance occurs, his mercy triumphs over his judgment.
  23. Don’t wish judgment or destruction on your enemies. If you do, YHVH might spare your enemies and bring judgment on you just to teach you humility. We all deserve YHVH’s judgment, and were it not for his merciful grace, where would any of us be? Instead, we must seek the well-being of our enemies through their repentance and salvation. The missionary of YHVH must pursue his divinely inspired endeavors with a heart of love and mercy that overshadows any personal feelings he may have to the contrary. This is getting in tune with and acting out the heart of our Heavenly Father.
  24. Jonah, in not being pleased over the Ninevites’ repentance and YHVH sparing them judgment, evidenced his own self-righteous pride toward the heathens. After all, YHVH had miraculously and mercifully delivered him when he was a backslidden sinner. For Jonah not to show the same grace to the Ninevites that YHVH had shown to him was a manifestation of prideful hypocrisy. We must be quick to extend the same mercy and grace to others that YHVH has shown to us. After all, YHVH loved us all while we were yet sinners (Rom 5:8)!
  25. The conversion of sinners should bring the saint great joy, not sullen anger as occurred with Jonah. In this situation, he manifested a despicably carnal and rotten attitude! 
  26. There are few things as repugnant as a saint who falls prey to his base and carnal passions. In this case, Jonah was acting like pouting, puerile prophet who instead of being joyful at the salvation of sinners wished ill on them. Yeshua declares that the angels in heaven rejoice at the salvation of one lost sinner, yet all Jonah could do was to manifest a vindictive spirit. 
  27. Jonah was a conflicted prophet who spewed both sweet and bitter waters from his mouth. He was a true prophet of Elohim who manifested some truly noble and saintly character traits, to be sure, but he was conflicted in that he had not conquered some of his most carnal and base passions. Such prophets are a liability to the kingdom of Elohim. When in tune with YHVH’s Spirit, they are capable of much good, but when under the control of their own perverse, moody and sinful nature, they are perhaps a greater liability to the kingdom of heaven then they are an asset to it.

What is the meaning of 666?

Recently in the comments section of this blog, someone wrote the following about the 666 reference Revelation 13:18,

The 666 is incorrect. It can’t be these numbers by Hebrew standards. The Aramaic proves this too. There are many teachings available to this regard. One being by [I deleted the name of a prominent Hebrew roots teacher].

This was my response:

With all due respect, simply making a statement why you disagree is not helpful to our discussion of the subject. Kindly give us Scripture and verse along with the meaning of the biblical words and contexts in which a biblical word or concept is found. Simply throwing out a name of someone who teaches differently on a subject is not helpful either. There are many well known personalities the world over who are wrong on many subjects. Name dropping means nothing to the discerning truth seeker. We want to know what the Bible has to say on the subject.

Figuring that many people out there would like to have a fuller understanding of the meaning of 666, these last few days I have been researching this subject. Here is what I have learned. Please enjoy. — Natan

Revelation 13:18, Six hundred threescore and six [KJV]/666 [NKJV].  Here is the full text of this verse:

Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666. (Rev 18:13, NKJV)

For six hundred threescore and six (KJV) or666 (NKJV), New Testament Greek-English interlinear translations show two variants as to the Greek behind these words. Some show the Greek words hexakosioi hexekonta hex meaning “six hundred and sixty six” (e.g. William Mounce’s Greek and English Interlinear New Testament and The Greek New Testament [fourth edition by Aland, Metzger et al]. Most Greek lexicons define these same words (e.g. Thayer and Arndt-Gringrich) as meaning “six hundred and sixty six”…

  • hexakosioi means “six hundred”
  • hexekonta means “sixty”
  • hex means “six”

For six hundred threescore and six (KJV) or 666 (NKJV), J.P. Green and  J. J. Griesbach (in his Diaglott) in their New Testament translations have the Greek letters “χζς” behind the words 666 as does Vincent in his lexicon (Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament, vol. 2, p. 531).  

As to why some New Testament Greek interlinears and lexicons simply have the Greek letters χζς, while others have the Greek words hexakosioi hexekonta hex, Vincent explains that in the earlier Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is written in full (i.e. hexakosioi hexekonta hex) as opposed to just the letters χζς, which correspond to the Greek numbers (ibid.):

  • hexakosioi/χ = six hundred
  • hexekonta/ζ= sixty
  • hex/ς= six

Curiously Strong’s Concordance lists the Greek words behind the English words six hundred threescore and six (KJV) as χζς or chi xi stigma (Strong’s G5516). chi/χ is the twenty-second letter, xi/ζ is the fourteenth letter and sigma/ς is the eighteenth letter of the Greek alphabet. 

In those translations that list χζς as the Greek behind the words 666, the question is this: What is the last letter in this three letter word? It appears to be the letter sigma, which is eighteenth letter in the Greek alphabet and looks like this: ς. However, Strong’s lists it as a stigma  and defines this as “a non-existent letter in the Greek alphabet, and of this symbol says, “the primary meaning of stigma presumable derives from the primary word stizō (to ‘stick’, that is, prick); a mark incised or punched (for recognition of ownership), that is, (figuratively) scar of service.” Why Strong’s chose to call this letter a stigma instead of a sigma, is not explained. No other lexical reference that I could find calls the last letter of this word a stigma, but refers to it as a sigma.

So what is a Greek stigma? According to Wikipedia, 

Continue reading

Will this or something like it be the mark of the beast?


He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13:16–17)

From the Jerusalem Post at

Edelstein confirms: Coronavirus ‘green passports’ on their way

Health Minister Yuli Edelstein confirmed on Wednesday that coronavirusgreen passports are on their way.”Two weeks after the second shot, a person who was vaccinated will receive a green passport,” he said during a Labor, Welfare and Health Committee meeting on Wednesday, speaking of the document which is intended to prove that its holder has been vaccinated and will give those who have it certain benefits and freedoms.

Edelstein said that while he could not yet give all the details of how the passports would work, he could confirm that “it will free people from isolation [requirement]” and it would “allow [people] to enter places that will still be restricted to other populations.” “It will be a difficult logistical operation,” he added. MK Ophir Sofer said that the green passport would be an excellent tool for encouraging the population to get vaccinated.