U.P.A.T PART ONE – A PERSONAL STORY

Preface

My Preface is really the honest and humble beginnings of a stuttering kid who felt his desire for Jesus as early as I remember. Through the rebus of my earlier formative years I can pull back now and see that each particular event that seemed so emotionally disconnected to a Logical way of thinking was indeed beads on an infinite Stringed system which bore the name, LOGOS
and His ordered system.

Formative Years

I was born on July 18, 1967 and raised in Memphis, Tennessee until I was 10 years old. My recollection of 50 years ago captures that of a holy and magical time. That holy and magical Hub was in Memphis, Tennessee. I can never forget the particulars such as my address, zip code, phone number and layout of my home at 3351 Joselyn Street, zip code 38128, phone number 388-5193.

I went to Messiah Lutheran right off of Austin Peay Highway. This Highway shared my Dad’s business just a mile up the street. His business was called “Sherwin Williams- Raleigh Home Decorating Company”. Here, at my Dad’s place of business, he always saved me silver dollars and half dollars so that I would “one day” buy a better drum set than the one I had. Also, he would let me choose the art supplies by which I wished to express myself on the days I went to my Dad’s place of work. He taught me how to draw and play chess. He built for me the most elaborate (to this day) chess table I have ever seen. I still use this table, though mostly to study
Theology on. On the other side, Mom was the spirit of magic. She inspired me through each season with an overwhelming sense of color and the festivities that were associated with them. She made haunted houses out of boxes for me around the first of October so that I could feel all of October and its leading up to Halloween. Thanksgiving was beautiful because it filled the gap between Halloween and Christmas. Christmas was the pinnacle of the 3 months of magic with elves, Santa and the almighty Christ as the only reason for any of this. If Dad was the ‘sketch’ of
my life’s formative years then Mom was the color.

At my school I took for granted at times that all of the kids believed that Jesus was Lord and though we might ‘act out’ on occasion we had a spiritual compass by which we could gauge our thoughts, feelings, actions, etc. In the 1970s at a Messiah Lutheran, one was expected to respect your elders, parents, teachers, leaders within the Church and everyone in the paradigm of an isolated Christian life. This simply was the way it was no matter what the current opinion is.

I’ll never forget the Lutheran mosaic windows, purple, white, red candles, and cathedral ceiling which was very much like most Roman Catholic Church buildings. The sun’s light would illuminate us with a hues of purple, red, green, yellow, etc. I mostly sensed the overwhelming presence of the purple and red combination. These colors still beautifully haunt me around Christmas time. The regal sense by which liturgy was recognized without making it a challenged thing. Simply put, the icons of the church, the seasons by which we liturgically expressed them, and all of the somewhat historically pagan festivities that went with them simply exemplified
Christ’s beauty to me.Yes, a pagan’s Christ, nonetheless, Christ, the Creator of all of Creation both invisible and visible, powers and energies. A central focal point was what I had and now have again. Hardships to challenge these foundational beliefs and recognitions were to come and did.

Chapter One

Leaving my Eden

What happens when such a beautiful paradigm is shattered?
My Family left Memphis in 1979 due to a nearly instantaneous vaulting crime wave. We moved to Hendersonville, Tennessee (about 10 miles north of Nashville, Tennessee). It was then that I turned 11 that summer. I entered 6th grade and began attending a public school that was not focussed on God. The teachers were careful with me to talk about God or as they called it, “religion”. Such an idea was so foreign to me because I never thought that a relationship with a community of people who loved God would be called “religious”.

Instead of reverence as I understood the meaning to be in my youngest years I heard and witnessed some of the kids talk about every possible thing of disrespect toward the opposite sex, blaspheming God’s name in every possible way, and drugs and alcohol were already accepted as a norm for children who were only 10 and 11. Even children younger than 10 had I heard boasted of already doing drugs. It was beyond my capacity to mentally, morally and emotionally compute this. I can still remember the emotion of this hurting me for them and feeling the absolute loss of the Kingdom of God for their sakes. I remember not judging them but rather hurting for them. I even remember crying for them. 

There were, of course, kids who opposed that way of thinking. Though, as the years passed, we integrated day after day and inevitably we started to act and think somewhat alike.

It was in 6th grade in my new school, new home, new neighborhood and new life that I obtained a stutter. My stutter destroyed any sense of strength – should I say “will power” – to fit in anywhere. I didn’t have the ability to be cool anymore, a commodity which was priceless in school. I asked God “why?”. The ridicule of my stutter became more and more. My stutter crippled me. For the first time in my life I didn’t want to go to school. I didn’t want to socialize. The horror of speaking up in class, answering a question directed at me, reading aloud, etc. was enough to end me. I didn’t want to study or do school work. I didn’t want to go to school. I asked my Mom to allow me to skip school on days when I knew we had to read aloud or do oral book reports in front of the class.

During this time my Dad had taken on a corporate job which took him away from home. Sometimes, he wouldn’t come home.  I’ll never forget the summer of 1980 when my Dad brought his corporate boss to my home where my Mom made a tremendous dinner for us all. Mr. Hillman Cagle was Dad’s boss’s name. Hillman Cagle is one of the particulars in my memory that I consider poetically pivotal. He treated my Mom like dirt. He wanted to show off his position I guess in front of my Dad. He talked down to her. Dad didn’t say anything about it. I believe it was to save his job. I still had the ethical mind of a child to want to tell this dragon to get out of our home. After this most memorable and horrible evening the following years of my life became more and more clouded. Everyday I practiced numbing myself mentally and emotionally to not ‘take in’ the day’s particulars (events) nor what life meant anymore.

From 1979 – 1982 one of the countless events of my mind numbering remembrances was our neighbors, the Lancasters. They had brought so much grief to my family with their drunken nights and coming over to our yard to trash it. One night, in a drunken fit, Mr. Lancaster threatened my Dad’s life. His son had thrown dog poop on my Mom over the fence. My Dad threw back their beer bottles that they had thrown onto our yard.

All of this torture from the Lancasters had lasted for nearly 3 years which took its toll on all of us. Their youngest son tortured me with words as well as throwing objects at me on the bus everyday only to threaten me with his much older and bigger brother to beat me up if I challenged him back. Not just this, but everyday I experience a new lie that he created about me and my family that I would attempt to debunk while stuttering. I wanted to die. I wanted to commit suicide. Eventually, my Dad got an attorney and with the severity of the threats made against my Dad and my Family and they had to move a long distance from our home. They had a restraining order set and I never heard from them again. Nonetheless, the trauma was instilled in all of us.

Jumping forward

Around 1982, my Dad showed signs of pressure to fit into the corporate. He joined the Lion’s club and stayed out late. He was influenced by Hillman Cagle to be more ‘social’. My Dad and Hillman Cagle would go out drinking. Later, I found out that they went to different clubs with not the best of intentions. Mom eventually found napkins with lipstick on them that weren’t hers in Dad’s car. Mom kept it together for the Family and also out of fear I’m sure. She did challenge Dad later. She knew this would be bad but she couldn’t allow this behavior to go on in front of me as a budding teen and her as a Wife who deserved a faithful husband. Dad had begun
drinking heavily during this time. His rages met his drinking sprees. I’ll never forget the day when she addressed him on his infidelity and alcoholism. She asked, “what has happened to you? Have I not always been faithfully yours? Have I always not been here for you?”. My Dad’s rage ended in him throwing a whiskey bottle at her and driving off. He didn’t come back until we acted on Faith a while later.

In 1985 I joined the Marines. I finished Boot Camp at Parris Island and I.T.S. (Infantry Training) at Camp Lejeune by January 1986. My Dad was gone during this time. He had left my Mom and me and was living with an assumed girlfriend. Though I was in the Military I felt the agony of my Mom being alone with only an 8th grade education living in a very expensive home in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in Hendersonville. Not only did I have my challenges in some of the toughest training in the world I was thinking of my Mom constantly. At one point I even sent her
home money from my Military Base. This money was in the form of a government coupon. I thought it would help Mom. In my naivete I thought she could pay for the mortgage. Well, she couldn’t. Also, I couldn’t afford to purchase the necessary things for myself through training. This got me into a whole lot of trouble. Eventually, the commanding officer of our Company saw this as a noble act and I was exonerated from any wrongdoing.

All of these horrors that were happening at home made me feel like I should carry guilt for that. After all, in my teens I finally stood up against my Dad for yelling and screaming at my Mom and me which, I thought, *caused* Dad to leave. It’s all my fault I thought. I carried the guilt of protecting my Mom’s heart and body. Knowing what I know now, my Dad was nothing more than a fallen sinner like all of us. He needed Christ like all of us need Him now. I reasoned early on that it was my sin which put more responsibility on Dad and myself. I didn’t know what he had gone through, that is, the etiology of his life. Then, a new challenge came. Eventually in 1986 my Dad attempted suicide. Hillman Cagle, of all people, called me and said that my Dad was in the hospital and that my Dad’s condition was bad and that I needed to handle it like a man and ‘get over it’. This is the last I ever heard of Hillman Cagle. It was as though HIllman wanted me to ‘get over’ sadness, remorse, brokenness, humility, working it out through long suffering and forgiveness, etc. The true words of the Devil and the pivotal time in me and my Mom’s life where we did what Jesus would do.

Before there were the “What Would Jesus Do” wristbands my Mom asked me what we should do now? “Kyle, Dad left me for another woman, he has been excessively violent, etc…what should we do?” I said what the wristband questioned.

“What would Jesus do, Mom?” We took him home. We eventually lost that home. I filed for a line 7 and was honorably discharged finally in 1988. We regrouped. Dad came to the LORD. We became a God fearing Family again. Remembering all of my childhood I desired to start that all over again as part of the leadership to do so. For the next 24 years I was blessed to have them both in my life. We had challenges for sure but we recognized God as the Supreme Leader of our Family. We eventually created a nursing home on a private level and paid off all of our debt. We bought a humble home and I eventually purchased mine.

CONTINUED PAIN

I got married in 2000. My wife at the time moved from China to the U.S. getting her Masters in Business with English as a second language. She was a scientist in China. She was an unbeliever in God. She was in the Red Army and served the state. She came from poverty andfear in her youth. Her bedroom window in China was backed up to the public waste alley. She smelled feces all through her youth with a strong desire to leave and never come back one day. The hope of an ordered system that she could grasp ahold of to save her from poverty unto death was somewhat found for her within the Chinese communist paradigm. With many pitfalls in this system she decided to leave China. When she moved to the U.S. she carried with her the
attributes of what communism did and did not do for her as a living soul. Eventually, she became a Christian with many theological discussions that we had.

I raised her only daughter, Alicia, as my own. I eventually home schooled her due to her busy schedule as an ice figure skater – which she went on to place in the Nationals. She had great coaches and was even coached on occasion by Scott Hamilton, once by Michelle Kwan and other recognizable skaters.

I found once again a *magical* and *holy* place in this world. A world that I hadn’t experienced since I was very young in Memphis. My responsibilities were great concerning being a family man and joint income provider. My wife trusted what I did to teach and father Alicia. I spent pretty much every waking hour with Alicia as a homeschool parent and best friend/ Father. My wife spent time with Alicia as well as working at the ice skating facility. This was where Alicia trained and my wife’s job benefited us with some discounts and benefits. The only times I wasn’t with her and around my wife were when I taught music privately or played concerts. As Alicia, my daughter, was entering Columbia jr. college at 15 years old with supervision as a minor and with just a few more high school credits to go, she exhibited a high academic ability for languages and science. I must always give credit to her mother for teaching her the sciences and higher math for which I would never have been equipped to have done. So, her mother being a Chinese scientist and imbued knowledge to Alicia and the saturation of proto Indo European languages (especially Greek) and Hebrew completed her in the areas of languages and science. Alicia had become fully fit to receive knowledge with a categorizing mind.

Alicia and I studied Greek, Hebrew, Latin and Proto Indo European linguistics together since she was 10. I had her analyzing Shakespeare at an even earlier age. She understood Anglo Saxon roots as well. She linked etymologies to Biblical Studies. She found truths of how the Biblical languages exemplified the classical languages of the old world. She found a ‘collective Logos’ through this genius of language studies showing a richness and more importantly a Hope fulfilled from the authors who wrote in ancient Greek, Assyrian, Akaddian, Sumerian, etc. She saw how Christ was the answer for all that the ancients were reaching for without the fleshly conclusion found in Jesus’ life and death. She began to be able to break down any word and follow its etiology and etymology. This beautiful gift followed into her scientific studies as well.

Our lives were without question seemingly ‘successful’. I had no thought other than the present time that all was well. During that time while Alicia would be training I began working on theological lectures that I put to audio recording and text. This gave me even more fulfillment. I was able to process the events of my life with God’s works upon my family’s. This was the era upon which I began a foundation of theological thought that has continued to the present day.

MY PARENT’S ‘SKETCH’ AND ‘COLOR’

I revived that same exact spirit during these times that my Mom and Dad did with me concerning the holidays, times and seasons of the year, etc. At night to put us to sleep we would watch Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings together. We watched all of the Jesus movies ever made. All such entertainment gave us a gentle hand in putting us to sleep. All was seemingly well with
us. My wife at the time worked with me to get out of any debt that she was adamant about. I absolutely concurred. We were debt free at the prime of our lives. House paid for, cars paid for, no debt minus food, electricity and insurance.

During my time with Alicia and my first wife I would begin building “Haunted Houses” in my backyard around August. The process was one of my biggest joys in planning and executing these projects every year. It would take on the average 3 months to build each one of these and
at least that much time to break them down. By the last week in October we would have our two nights, sometimes 3 with outside black and white silent Dracula (Nosferatu) movies, people reading Edgar Allen Poe, entertainment such as Steppenwolf’s guitarist, Bobby Cochran, singing Halloween songs, while ca 40 actors in the Haunted House would terrify anyone who dared to enter this ‘maze of death’. We also had food cooking on the grills with all of the associated smells of joy and the sounds of people ecstatically screaming in the Haunted House. Cars parked for blocks down the street, etc. It was like the spirit of the 1970s had visited the new millennium. With our Bose sound system and 50 smoke machines roaring no
one could miss this monstrosity for miles. The Haunted House would take up ½ an acre alone not to mention all of the other activities taking up the rest of the back yard. Some 80 – 100 rooms comprised these Haunted Houses that I built for Alicia for nearly 13 years. I didn’t care because of the joy it brought Alicia.

With all of that collective joy that nearly all felt it only made my wife happy if we made a profit off of it. I didn’t charge people a lot to come to our Haunted House because I wanted there to be some joy in doing something other than money as a focus. I charged enough to recover from the materials and did get it. I put all of it into my wife’s hands every year and said we have a little more than what we put into it. She was never satisfied with a little more. Though everyone loved it and that everyone came to it every year, it was obvious that abundant profit was all that she
cared about concerning these joyful endeavors. We were debt free and making close to 100 k/ per year. What did it matter? We were thankful, joyful, happy, at peace I thought.

My wife’s lack of emotional sharing became evident to me more and more as our marriage continued. Intimacy in every way became nil from her side. I asked my wife “could we have a child together?”. She said to me, “you are not worth having a child with, you don’t make enough money”. She began to only talk about money when we were better off than ever financially. I thought if I worked harder for whatever reason she would be more secure and joyful. That never happened. I put everything into Alicia to show my wife that I am ‘worthy’ to be a father and
husband. I put every bit of compassion and kindness that I had in me to my wife. I worked harder than ever. I thought my efforts and will could hold this marriage together. I thought that though skating bills were astronomical it never hurt us because we made enough and were debt free. Shouldn’t this make her happy? It was still not enough.

During Alicia’s first year of college both of my parent’s health began to fail. I had always loved my parents beyond the stars. No matter what had happened in the past Christ’s love had healed us all. I was the first to forgive because I always had the most guilt for some reason. I felt guilt because “I had to hold it together”. My bond with them was as a child’s love for their parents. With more bills coming in for college, parent’s need for financial resources, emotional necessity from a wife at this time when my parents were both dying, etc. I thought that my wife would be there for me. Instead, she told me as we were driving to the hospital for the last time that Mom would be alive that “if I made more money they wouldn’t be dying”. My parent’s pre-existing conditions trajected exactly as they should have to these times and dates of devastation.

ENTERS THE HOLY GHOST

With my Mom dying June 30, 2011 at 3:30 pm and my Dad dying on November 10, 2011 at 7:45 pm they had left me on this earth with a void that was filled by God. I still tried to create hope in this world with my wife. With no intimacy, blame for what I couldn’t have stopped concerning my parent’s death, violent challenges of “why don’t we just get a divorce” anytime we had an argument, to the self preservatory fear of losing my home that I paid off for way before I met my wife were all of a sudden caught up into a ball of grace. The Holy Spirit comforted me and
directed me to go to her and say, “I want a divorce”. I went on to win an EMMY that year and Ricky Skaggs picked me up as his percussionist. It was like God was telling me to trust him and that I would not falter.

There were still residual effects that cost me more than I can explain here, throwing me into bankruptcy years later after fighting financial devastation and failure to recover. Yet, a bank filled with God’s gold, that is, a loving Wife who cares for me and gave me a child named Eden and two beautiful step children.

So much good has happened in between all of these events but I have listed what I intended to do is show you. Trials are NEVER over. God not only knows and not only plans but ordains your joy and your sufferings to make you understand GOD’s value and your value.

FINAL STATEMENTS

I would like to mention that my Daughter, Alicia, transferred to Belmont University. She studied Biology obtaining a 3.8 G.P.A. and achieving awards for academic and leadership excellence. She went to Medical School at E.T.S.U. where she matriculated ranking high in her grades. She presently is a practicing M.D. having finished her residency. All of my inherited step kids are Honor Students thriving with brilliant inquisitive minds. My seven year old is learning the Greek New Testament and figuring out etymologies with the fervor for truth like all of my other children.
Alicia, Ethan, Fiona, Eden and my Wife, Samantha, are a gift beyond comprehension.
I would also like to go back in time to 1986 when I first came back from the Marines to see my Dad at the hospital. A time when I needed a spiritual guide. Here, I would like to mention Jim Brown, a hard line minister from Texas, who addressed me with the idea of Predestination after Dad had attempted suicide. Jim also imbued me with the importance of knowing the Greek and Hebrew Text of the Bible. For this, I will always be grateful to God for Jim. Because of Jim’s influence I enrolled in college to study Greek and Hebrew. If it hadn’t been for this agent of
God’s knowledge I don’t know where I would be. Keep this in mind we are all agents whether ‘unsaved’ or ‘saved’. Here, I must qualify my statement: we’re all on a journey to God and secondly I have been part of the ‘unsaved’ being saved. This will be addressed later. I would like to also mention my Dad for keeping my interest in drumming all those years. I would like to mention my Mom for inspiring me to be different, abstract sometimes, and fill the air with new worlds for all to enjoy.

Chapter Two
GOD, THE GRAND GEOMETER
God’s advancing the least (me)

My first semester of Greek and was an eye opener. I found that classical Greek and Biblical Greek conveyed a kind of ‘geometry’. I found Hebrew to be ‘referential’ to the landscapes that the ancient Hebrews saw. “Eternity” could reference as far as the eye could see or maybe to the horizon where time and earth ‘cut off’. These languages held linguistic shapes by which one could relate a prepositional stance. Words such as “dia, en, hupo, huper, eis, peri, olam, ets, ayin, eyah, eyelah, etc. All such words were in relation to God and not man. They helped me to understand ‘where’ I stood with God in the Greek New Testament. Mental ‘shapes’ would be tapestried into the analysis of these two linguistic Biblical landscapes. This was the vast ocean I
had begun to dip my feet into.

CONCERNING THE GREEKS

Euclid and Plato immediately come to my mind when addressing ‘time as space’. Classical Greek and New Testament Greek shared a kind of spatiality that could convey higher philosophical and Theological maxims (launching points for reasoning).

Astronomically and geographically speaking, the Greeks held that the fullness of a time was shown as “paths”. Paths of spheres, orbs, circles, patterns of circles, the completions of rotations, orbits, etc. showed a “completion”. An example of the fullness of a time might be the planets completing their orbiting and passing through their constellar housings in the heavens only to return again to the beginning point of which their trek began. In this approach, the Greeks looked at time as space. Later, it was a necessity to show a more unified way with other
cultures a measured sense by which the Greeks could convey time.

It was only after this that the Greeks used these spheres to justify increments of measurement in a rectilinear fashion with spheres and spatialities as their models for time measurement. Not only the Greeks, but many Indo European and Indo-Aryan cultures hold that spheres signal time at hand or a point of special significance. As an Indian percussionist I have to understand and execute my knowledge in the talas or time cycles via hand gestures, finger placements, etc. I
can give the visual signal to the other musicians as to where we are in a complex rhythmic pattern by the position, shape or configuration of my hand. In the west we are more accustomed to counting in a linear fashion until the piece is through. In the Indian, we finalize when the cycles are through.

The language of God and man 

In one way, there is no difference between English and Greek. People generally use prepositions without thinking about it. Words such as “pro, pre, dia, through, eis, into, en, in, hupo, under, huper, above, peri, around, etc.” are all employed to communicate placement within a paradigm of space.

What grabbed me was that there was a Theology necessitated by the usage of prepositions in the New Testament Greek (and, developmentally, to the Platonic dialogues). I later realized in the semester that these prepositional words would come in very handy in understanding how we relate to the God of the Greek New Testament.

 The Prepositions of Christ Colossians 1:16 – 20 (speaking of Christ)

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible , whether they be thrones, or dominions , or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him.

 1:17 And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist. 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the Church: Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence.
1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell;
1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to *reconcile all things* unto Himself, by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven”. Now, let’s read it again with focus on the prepositions:
1:16 “For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible , whether they be thrones, or dominions , or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him.
1:17 And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
1:18 And He is the head of the body, the Church: Who is the beginning, the firstborn from thedead; that in all things He might have the preeminence.
1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell;
1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to *reconcile all things* unto Himself, by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven”.

Prepositionally, this passage concludes that Christ precedes all things in time. In verse 20 it says that through His blood on the cross and that all things in Christ will be fully restored unto Himself..

reconcile – apokatallassó – ‘fully restore’; ‘bring back to new’; ‘bring back to harmony
all things – ta’ panta – ‘everything’; ‘all’; ‘every’; ‘without loss of anything’;

How does all of this theology and language study relate to me?

If you are a believer in Christ you will inevitably experience tragedy. You will inevitably experience hardships, possibly on a daily basis. It can be easy to conclude that you are the only one who has ever gone through specifically this or that. We can also conclude through tragedy that joy and revelation come out of this contiguum.
I would probably agree with you if you told me that. Some of us might find it embarrassing to feel that way so we remain silent and internalize a kind of specialness in our sufferings. We wait for a logic that can come from such a suffering of uniqueness not found in an idea about God’s Sovereignty ‘because God wouldn’t cause harm to us’.

If we claim the narrative that God wouldn’t cause suffering then we illogically weaponize our special sufferings and suspend our beliefs in an Invisible-Sovereign God resulting in a blockage of human intercourse with God.

UNHEALTHY ‘SPECIALNESS’

Thinking that “only I have suffered like ‘this’, therefore, I have some kind of claim on this type of suffering” one might find their specialness not only in their uniqueness of suffering but their justifications for acting as a free agent, a rogue of sorts, that can tell you that “no one has suffered like me”. This specialness can be argued away through Scripture. Here, we are at the crux of the verse that you hopefully just read:

Colossians 1:16: “ For Him and by Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether it be thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by Him and for Him”.

With the above the Scripture, we can make the argument that this only applies to political powers since Thronoi (thrones), Kuriotaytes (lords/ magistrates), arxai (rulers), and exousiai (authorities) were used.

Maybe one could say that these invisible and visible powers are heads in heaven, earth and hell.

Here’s a look at a verse in the Bible which hints to us the invisible existent powers (αόρατες υπάρχουσες δυνάμεις) that run their predeterminate courses:

James 4:13 “Now listen, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on αόρατες υπάρχουσες δυνάμεις and make money’. You do not even know what will happen tomorrow! Who are you/ what is your life? You are a mist that appears for a short duration and then vanishes. What you should say is this: ‘If it is the Lord’s Will, we should even live and do this or that.’ As it is, you boast and brag. All such boasting is evil”.

Just think about this last verse for a moment. There is an invisible Will that is going on while we are perceiving in the flesh that we are doing something. Evil is defined right here as speaking as though you can do something at all. It is also defined as bragging. Our apostle James wants us to understand it this way: “if God wills then we should even live”. How far have we come from this in our daily church thinking, planning, organizing, preaching, teaching, etc.? Today we have become Christians in a secular society laden with a language that does not exalt God and His will in our lives and many of us don’t even recognize the discrepancy. Sin speaks true and consistently as to what ‘freedom from’ God’s righteousness is. In this, sin doesn’t lie.

ORIGINS, IDEAS, MYTHIOPIA, AND CHRIST’S FULFILLMENT THROUGH THE MYTHS OF BEELZEBUB

In the earliest cases for “beginnings” of gods, demons, etc. one demon god comes to mind simply because of his primacy, simpleness and relatableness to many ‘next generation’ shamanistic and quasi religious practices that sprung from the primal ‘dung heap’ as him. His name is many but one of his earliest names is “ Beelzebub, the Chief of Demons”. The earliest name for Satan was the root word “SHT”
which literally means, “shit”
The richness and thickness of the primary belief in this dung god is that he is a myth housed in the simpleness and ‘ordinariness’ of life by which a “primitive” might have believed.

1
Proto Uralic Saksa – filthy; unclean/ SIT – to bind/ SITTA – (slang) shit/ SIJTE – Grove – offering place (garden)/ SIB (as in the Philistine “FLY” – Lord of the Flies) ‘to cast a spell”

Sumerian —-Shesh’ (all Sumerian words received from the P.Uralic and arer represented here for 1) filthy 2) bind 3) (slang) ‘shit’ 4) Grove/ Garden/’offering place 5) ‘fly’ (as pestilence) are cognates to the Proto Uralic, Ugric, and Finnic (Finnish) — i.e., Sumerian matches the P.U., Ugric, and Finnish — even nearing in spelling (Grimm’s equivalents)

Ugric Shosh (same meaning as above)

Finnish tade, tadeh (same as above)

*In each case, the morphology of Saksa and Sit do fit the original meaning for “shit” as ‘unclean, Hebrew “corban”, “dung”, “filthy”, etc.

The Arabic borrowed this later meaning, Shaytan or Satan, and once again, loaned it into the later medieval Hebrew language – which reinforced it as a Word of Assimilation into the Hebrew Culture. Yes, the Hebrew translators could have used “SHT” for a more contextually fitting “SHT” – i.e., “satan” – versus our modern ‘rogue actor of evil’. This is, for sure is a result of the Babylonian influence on the Hebrew Pharisees in Babylon which ‘borrowed’ this word and I believe has caused our modern Church to be ‘dualistic’ and corrupt.

It is my contention that the Aramaic from the Peshito in Christ’s words must be brought in concerning Be’elzebub. In Matthew 12 of the Peshito (Aramaic Gospel Text) Jesus employs the word “bab’el-zebub” for Ba’alzebub or Ba’alzebul. I have read numerous references to the name. The most simple is “Ba’al’s Dwelling”. In the pagan Roman world during Christ’s days on earth, many pagan idol worshipers “housed” their gods. Interestingly, as a tabla player, I have played Indian music at several concerts called “Bhajeons” which loosely mean, “a music flow jam session for the gods” or god, deity, etc. of focus in that particular house. Further, I know of some very wealthy Indians who buy homes for their deity or deities. This is not too far off from Greek and Roman idol worship in their housings or temples. Nor is it too far off from Catholic images or icons such as Mary or any of the apostles taking ‘sainted’ status. I tread on dangerous ground in that I am not Catholic, Hindu worshiper. Yet, I find some “kind” of merit in these icons by what they do for those who use them to ‘shoot past’ the dead thing to an alive idea. This kind of worship seems to attract the tactile senses by which we primitively seek. Oddly, I find myself seeking this kind of primacy through words hoping to find a ‘tactileness’ to the weightiness of their meanings and unions with a grander Theology. The Medieval Latin word

2
I use “primitive” in the jocund, rather my view is that “primitive” should mean ‘a holy approach, whole approach, pure, without mixture, without double vision, etc.”. Therefore, “primitive” means ‘in the genius of the minds of that time long forgotten’ and not as a derogatory nor ‘backwards’ definition.

Furthermore, such ‘primitives’ would have, with simple clarity, associated such abstract notions as unitive or singular. Their collective and multidimensional (as we see the world now) world was without the fatigue of one important fallacy: the ‘knowledge’ of *good and evil*.

As in the story of Adam and Eve after they took of the ‘forbidden fruit’ they had their ‘eyes opened’ and could see good *and* evil. They were both under judgment and did judge. They became ‘as gods’ as The Satan said they would. This double vision wasn’t always so and neither was the view of the ‘dung god’ which was naturally born in the mind of earlier man. If something would take flies away from your village you would reckon it to a force that worked in that way. You would regard it with value and over time venerate it.

THE DUNG GOD’S EARLY  REPRESENTATIONS

The “dung god” or “fly god”, Beelzebub, seems to be first built upon its sound and then the word-representation of such a sound via onomatopoeia. In the Kartvelian 3 , Georgian, and Sumerian (all dating to at least 4,000 B.C.E.) we have the onomatopoeic “bzz, blzz, v’v, etc. which was used in such ancient kingdoms to represent a pestilent bug, especially that of the fly.

Words beginning with natural representations such as bird, river, tree, rock, bug, etc. also carried ‘associative name sounds’ or abstract meanings by which they move, act, ‘are as’, etc. Such words can become, over a process of time, assumed social memes. Furthermore, these social memes can be culturally integrated into the fantastic. I use the word ‘fantastic’ in the Tolkien sense here to explain such examples of fables and superstitious associations. Both Tolkien’s view of ‘temporary suspension of disbelief of the ordinary mundane world fused with Owen Barfield’s “collective representation” we can find an early world by which pestilence is related to the sound and name is of the ‘name-sound-thing’ called “Baal-zebub”. Such acts were
not view as efforts but rather as assimilation into a self-referencing tribal colony.

Therefore, ‘name-sound-thing’, in many early cultures, is one and the same. These societal associations can be hard to detach. Such associations become what we call endonyms, or insular socially based names. These can represent particulars which are a part of insular social structures.

From there, linguists can study cultures of focus for their semiotic usages such as signs and symbols by which they once upon a time were interpreted within their mythology/ideology/ theology/ sociology, etc. These phenomena do take ‘body’ or ‘social anima’ wherewith a particular culture can participate in its daily activities.

Such representations are found in 2 Kings 1:2 where the King of Israel, Ahaziah, fell through a roof injuring himself. Ahaziah, the King of Israel – knowing YHWH, calls on the god of the flies instead of YHWH. This god of Ekron called Be’el-zebub (god of flies) was an interesting social

4 Simo Parpola’s Sumerian etymologies; volume 3
3 Klimov’s Kartvelian etymologies

god that allows for us to view Ancient Near East primitive beliefs that many others believed in at that time, both Israelites and Philistines. It is interesting that the ‘type’ of injury was somehow addressed by Ahaziah as an injury that Beelzebub could fix. We see that Ahaziah’s belief was in Beelzebub’s ability to ‘take away’ an injury.

The boar is considered a ‘cthonic’ taxi into hell. Dr. Marija Gimbutas and Ted Hughes do quite an extensive treatment on the boar as the taxi which ‘takes away’ and ‘puts into hell’ some-thing. This belief can be read in William Golding’s, “Lord of the Flies”. Such a demon and god are interchangeable with Beelzebub, Lord of the Flies, the dung god, and reaching back to Biblical stories – the god of Ekron.

As Ahaziah, the King of Israel, believed that Beelzeb could “take away” his injury we can see this same belief predating the Bible in ancient Canaan and post dating Jesus’ scenario concerning powers of bind and loosing and attributions to Beelzebub . Again, we see a rich verbal imagery in the Lord of the Flies represented as the Boar’s head who could take the flies ‘away’ from the camp and give ‘power’ to the leader of the group who was maddened with a “faux primacy”. Brilliant was William Golding to bring this out within his story for we have no recourse but chaos when our eyes are blinded to order. So, in the antimony of *God as Satan* we can see that we come to a seeming crux that is eliminated by Narrative such as in Job. The story begins with ‘representations’ of ‘evil’ as a rogue or roving Satan nearly ending Job’s existence to the end of the book of Job where it was GOD-YHWH all along Who did this destruction to Job *unto* Job’s betterment and rectification with God.

I find this so interesting when reading the Bible in Isaiah 45: 7, Romans 13:1-ff, and Colosians 1:16-17 that ALL THINGS ‘good and evil (both representing to us)’ are from, by, made for, made of, fulfilled in, determined by the LORD. Where is there dichotomy? Where is there room for dualism? Who can oppose the Prime Mover, the Only Mover, The Verb of all things?

Literary mechanisms for indefinable comprehensions

JESUS AS A BEELZEBUB

5 Grimm’s “Teutonic Mythology; volume 3; pages 998 and 99 we see the ‘shape’ of the devil as a fly. In the LXX, Jacob Grimm quotes 2 Kings 1, 2 as Baal-zeebub to be called in the Greek Baial muia, i.e. the fly god. In the ancient religion of Zoroastrianism (possibly dating back as far as 2,000 B.C.) we see the defiant spirit against Ahura Mazda known as the ‘devil’ named Ahriman. Ahriman is seen in the shape of a fly. In Lithuania, there is a myth of mussu birbiks – fly god. Such a god is usually found buzzing and blowing. Fairytales from Germany hold that diabolic spirits can be held in glass or “phials” (vials) as “flies”. Loki turned into a fly or ‘fluga’ when defrauding Freyja. A Lombard myth found in Paul Diac. 6:6 of the ‘malignus spiritus’ who settles on the window as a fly and gets a leg chopped off. Loki as a fly can get through keyholes (Norske folktales). Grimm’s “Teutonic Mythology; volume 4; pages 1604 and 1605 give us Belsebuc in the fragments of Madelghis. Referenced as “a fly such as a spirit shut up in a glass”. Hence, the myth “there’s a devil in the glass”.

Jesus was reproached as prophetically found ca 750 years prior Jesus’ stay on this earth in Isaiah 53. As we read from Isaiah 53 in paraphrase: “we esteemed HIM not as HE was stricken but that we knew HE was God’s anointed”. Isaiah tells us that we loved to cast our evils on Him — likened to Ahaziah’s view of Beelzebub . In Potts’ “Bible Proper Names” he says that Baalzebub was a “God of wandering” (vagationis, vel muscarum) as flies ‘wander’. Going “to and fro”, “roving”; the raven’s eye that scans back and forth.  Josephus says in his Antiquities 9,2,1 says that King Ahaziah sent his ‘sickness’ (as a thing) to THE FLY’ <- that is, the god of Ekron was the ‘caster’, ‘carrier’, ‘exorcist’ and ‘receiver’. So, the god Baalzebub was viewed as the god of healing to Ahaziah. So, Beelzebub represented a ‘healing aspect’ to Ahaziah while reigning as king under the God of Israel which was YHWH.

Likened to Ahaziah’s beliefs, the Pharisees shared somewhat a muddled view of Jesus and blamed Jesus as the Lord of the Flies for Jesus could ‘take’ the disease from and (I assume) take the disease upon Himself ——making Him both a healer and an unclean thing (according to the Pharisees’ accusations).

COMPLEXITY ABOVE REASON TO THE PHARISEES

The complexity lies in the fulfillment of the One who would ‘loose’ or ‘release’ the ‘binding’ by which mankind has been ‘bound’ in prison to, i.e., sin. The exorcisms Jesus did were an ‘outward manifestation’ of the power that He held and could consistently do. The intriguing tie in between the word ‘cast out’ in Greek ( *ekballo* ek {out} + ballo {cast}) and exorcise gets close to the primitive view of Beelzebub. The Pharisees were relegating Jesus’ works to Beelzebub because many fallen men of Israel such as Israel’s king, Ahaziah, actually believed that Beelzebub could ‘exorcise’ or ‘cast out’ or ‘take away’ an evil spirit.

Already we are dealing with the Pharisees misunderstanding that “evil (Ra’ah – ‘destruction’) ” is ordained by God and that in their misunderstanding of the total Sovereignty of God, they fall into dualism making the world a good and evil place by which They can judge.

The Reason that Jesus brings is brilliant in Matthew 12:24. Jesus takes Sovereign Reason to the Pharisees. He shows the difference between “casting” and “loosing”. Again, ‘casting’ was believed to be an attribute of Beelzebub and to many Shamans throughout time. Whether they be smoke and ladders or ‘real’, Jesus showed His ‘casting’ to be consistent as (1) The Power of God (2) In respect by which most Jewish exorcist thought was the proper procedure.

Point number two was made by Jesus in order that He not stick out of the crowd as being anything more than a Jewish exorcist. But, it was the fulfillment of loosing that only Jesus had to release what His Father in Heaven had bound. In this, Jesus would *show* not only His title as exorcist but as Healer and fulfiller of Joel’s prophecy as the forerunner to the Holy Ghost Who would continue the work of God until the Kingdom of God be complete on this earth.

Jesus addresses the Pharisees’ blindness of the Kingdom of Heaven that the Pharisees claimed to be, i.e., the kingdom of heaven. It takes a complete understanding of the distinction between ‘casting’ and ‘exorcising’ to understand the ignorant judgments made by the Pharisees concerning Jesus ‘casting out’ as using Beelzebub’s spirit to exorcise when in totality, Jesus was ‘loosing’ spiritually and prophetically, though ‘casting out’ physically.

Here is my paraphrased attempt at Jesus’ famous words to the Pharisees based on Matthew 12:24 and following. I attempted to put in historical, social, prophetical and linguistic interpolations to bring a modern coherency for my understanding. My paraphrastic attempt here is ONLY for my inability to read rough-shod over these verses and ‘get it’.

“ Oh, you wretched Pharisees! How can an unclean thing cast out an unclean thing? How can Satan cast out Satan lest his house collapse? If I am Satan WHY am I casting out Satan lest I fall? What do you think I am doing then? Can you not see the incoherency in your Idle words? If I cast out devils being a devil then who’s authority (shem) do your children (disciples) cast out devils by? Am I not a Jew? Therefore, what ‘standard’ is held to the Jews to be an exorcist? Am I not exorcising before you? Do you not optically see the healing of this demoniac? Is there more to me than just me being a Jewish exorcist? What draws you to me, a Jewish Exorcist who is actually doing his job correctly and by the book? Am I not doing legitimate exorcisms?Do you
not see the miracles I do in the physical world before you? Do your eyes betray you? In contrast, are other Jews displaying this power? Are there other Jews in the name of the law and not the prophets that are doing the same things as I? In contrast, are there successful exorcists using My Name who are completing these same miracles? Yes, there are! Would you argue that they are not? Are they working or not?

I say that there is not only the physical miracle that your eyes see before you here and now but the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God which was prophesied to come. I am that fulfillment of prophecy. It is now which the prophets spoke of. I justify not only my acts of exorcism, but the fulfillment of binding and loosing by which you claim to understand. I am releasing – loosing that which was put into binding by My Father in order to show prophecy’s fulfillment. It is Me and My Kingdom, my Children of My Authority, that are fulfilling not only All Righteousness but the
grasping for hope in a failing pagan’s idea of just who Beelzebub was supposed to be for them. Just and true is judgment and fulfillment of prophecy here and now. I am the Judgment. I am the answer for the Prophets of the Jews and the fallen pagans of this world who were bound to find a ‘representation’ of a savior type.

Until your time and your children’s *time* has come, your children shall be without knowledge feigning your judgment. They shall be your exorcists feigning you to be exorcised or exorcising someone that is not needing such an exorcism. You feign loosing and binding yet have no understanding of this time at hand to fulfill such prophecies that Joel spoke of. It is I which is in agreement with what My Father and the Holy Spirit do.

Yet, for now, you define whatever ‘evil and good’ means to you and you teach it to your followers. But as to your followers, students and future Pharisees who watch and hear me teach the Gospel and then listen and watch you incessantly contradict yourselves, they will remember my Words to see if your words and your actions hold up. They will see which is evil and good – i.e., that which builds up and that which breaks down upon itself. To those who are two fold the children of blindness that you teach, they will either judge you by my words, wittingly or unwittingly, or they will judge you by what you call devilish and judge you by the confusion which you have taught them. Loosing and binding is Joel’s prophecy concerning now. I AM the fulfillment of God’s Will that by the Holy Ghost I shall cast out that which is bound by God. You condemn the very Spirit by which I cast out. If I cast out by the Spirit of God then the Kingdom of God has come upon you and you are already judged. Again, you call yourselves the Kingdom of God, yet ironically enough, you are already in Judgement since I AM the Judgement. All is exorcised now and judgment is already done for I AM the Judgement. Therefore, If I come “casting out devils” then I am here to cast you out. Yet, this is not what I am doing. I am releasing the bindings by which my Father established in order that I might show the Power of the Kingdom of God is here and now with me. You are either with me or not. You either gather or scatter. But don’t you dare mock the Holy Spirit which releases those who are captive in this world with many sins too grievous to bear. I am here for my little ones who will follow in My Shem – My authority! You can mock me as a man but you will not be forgiven in this life nor the next if you mock the Holy Spirit which works in me. Nonetheless, you are vipers. Nothing good comes out of your muddled hearts, minds, mouths… you lay in wait to strike, injure, maim, kill. For whatever your heart is, your words will reflect your heart. For your words will either justify you or condemn you”.

THE SUFFERANCE AND GENTLENESS OF JESUS AS EXORCIST

There’s a hint that I get in the Gospels where Jesus heals but is fulfilling the act for what man has staged. This may be way out of line at this juncture but I wouldn’t oppose this hypothesis right now since the “Logia or Memra” brings us to this juncture: *of all the ‘powers that be’ – (Greek:‘exousia’) they are indeed of God…so, how could God be casting His own works out? Jesus makes this clear to the Pharisees. Why would He loose and bind at random? He wouldn’t. Jesus told the Pharisees that they make laws and break them —all which make life unbearable
to the sons and daughters of the Pharisees- spiritually speaking. Why shouldn’t there be binding of HIS own accord? Wouldn’t this fit the schemata for all of the Old Testament Evil Spirits or Satans? That is, the demons, evil spirits, Satans, etc. were nothing more than Secretaries, Agents, “The Hands”, “The Eyes”, etc. of the LORD. Wouldn’t exorcism, therefore, be the loosing of the necessary binding that God put on mankind for a while? A binding to make those who were most bound most thankful? I couldn’t argue against this in the field of Sovereign thought. Could it be, in my final thoughts, that Jesus was gentle with the mysticisms of HIS day and that HE did not ‘break the traditions of men by doing something different according to the formulas for exorcisms but rather had the REAL POWER to exorcise? 

Also, Christianity had not begun as we call Christianity. Jesus was a Jew preaching the “euhados” or the “well way”. So, the Pharisees would have to mete out with their judgment with the same scrupulosity that they gave Jesus. If the other Jewish exorcists weren’t casting out or loosing the demons how much more judgment should they meet out! Than Jesus? If they didn’t then the inequity of their judgment would proclaim their hypocrisy and Jesus’ Godhood. Concerning not only the potency of Jesus’ exorcism power His ‘style’ would have shamed the snakes and ladders show with His meekness. 

I say that Jesus gently respected and implemented the idea of ‘formulae’ for exorcisms as understood by 1st century Chrestoi and Jews. Jesus did the formulae revealing His sufferance to the incompleteness of such mysticisms within exorcisms. This earmarks the title of Son of Man where He took on all of the fallacies of man while His title “Son of God” is His authority over Heaven and earth. ///// Yet, by His true healing hand did He fulfill and reveal His role and the role of the Holy Spirit in the prophecy of Joel 2:25 – 32. This passage is somewhat shroudedin apocalyptic verbiage but is fulfilled soon after Jesus’ resurrection in Acts 1:11.

The Holy Spirit is doing His work now on earth to confirm the power of healing, exorcisms, preaching the Gospel through the Martyrs of the first century Church with signs and wonders. The Holy Spirit’s power at that time (ca. 35 A.D. to 100 A.D.) was expressed in Palestine and in foreign lands. They continued Jesus’ work by casting out or ‘loosing’ those who were ‘bound’ to a littany of sin. They experienced hearing the Gospel in foreign languages that are intelligible and understood.

Therefore, Jesus’ binding the ‘demon possessed’ would be ‘loosed’ by the First Church Martyrs. It was therefore, by Jesus’ “NAME” or “Shem” that his exorcising power would continue with Jesus’s Disciples through the Holy Spirit which is the Seal of God upon these precious Martyrs.

THE NATURAL MAN

The Natural man is only condemnable when left to his accord. He is not, however, left to his accord for God is working through ‘all things’ to bring an ‘apokatakalleo’ – or ‘return to wholeness in perfect harmony’ as we see in Colossians 1:17-ff:

Colossians 1:17-ff – “He is before all things and in Him all things hold together. {18} And He is the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning and firstborn from among the dead, so that in all things He may have preeminence. {19} For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, {20} and through Him to *reconcile {Apocatakalleo – ‘restore and bring back to harmony) to Himself *all (panta – ‘every’; ‘not one thing missing; all) things, whether things on earth or things in Heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.

Therefore, not only must the natural man have a supernatural reckoning with Christ it is obvious in Colossians 1:17-ff he will! Colossians 1:21 continues with addressing our ‘once upon a time natural man’ that was hostile (by *nature*) to God but that we are now (all) reconciled to God in our continuance (not our works but of God’s) of our new man which is reconciled. In God’s working through us we will continue, we will establish, we will not be moved from the hope of the Gospel ! Why? Phillippians 1:6 “Being confident of this, that HE Who began a good work in you WILL carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus”.

Ephesians 2 makes it clear that we were at one time “naturally damned”. What does this mean? We’re damned for good? No. It means that our ‘state’ was, is, will be damned ‘in that state of fleshly being’. That is, the ‘state of the flesh’ is already damned. The NEW you is not. And it i this Hope that eliminates the illusory battles of ‘good vs. evil’. It is the NATURE of man that will be used mathematically by God until at each increment that lesson of Natural damnability is no longer needed. We are no longer ‘our flesh’. When the lesson that we can’t get it together in the Natural state is learned we’ll be moving on to higher ground. The Will with its stories to tell along
the way will be used as a witness concerning Sovereignty. We will preach to the world of our being saved from the impotency of the flesh.
It is under the umbrella of being human that we are all bound to the flesh and the fallacies that go with it. We are bound to it until we are ‘scored’ with the tattoo of God slowly but inevitably. We are marked for Life. This is binding and loosing, this is the exorcism of the flesh out of us – a supernatural act, and a direction not chosen by man but God UNTO salvation.

Satan, The Obedient Servant

Preface
Who is the ‘god’ of this Age?

Let’s start here in Ephesians 2: “Once (pote – ‘a *time when*) YOU (the predestinated child Ephesians 1:4) WALKED according to the age (AEON- era) of the world…of this accordance to the “archon” or “ruler” ***of the air*** and the ***spirit** NOW working in the sons of disobedience.

This is the Greek archon, leader or god of the age (aeon/era/ hora/ hour/horizon/) by which 2 Corinthians 4:4 refers: 

“The god of the age (aionos-era) has blinded (tuphlos) the eyes of the unbelieving (*apeitheia* = ap {not} + peitho {persuaded}. So, at one time you, believers, were ‘hardened, immovable, insensitive, not persuaded so as not to beam forth (augasai) illumination of the gospel”.

So, Ephesians 2 and 2 Corinthians 4 give us terms such as “ruler, authority, air, spirit, —all which are *now working (Greek: Nunti)* , in the sons of disobedience. This means that we have a ‘present day god’ who is currently-now working (energountos) in the ‘sons of apeitheias (‘the immovable-unrepentant’)’.

So, I continue with WHO is this ‘god’? Well, he walks, talks, rules, blinds, acts, acts within THIS AGE, THIS TIME, THIS DURATION, THIS ERA, THIS AEON.1

This is most important to understanding what he is by name. The Indo European root for “Time” is “timon” which shares the exact origin with Demon. “D’-mn is the P.I.E. root for “divider of time + god” . To find the zero grade root for ‘time’ and ‘demon’ has its primacy-root in “de”. A good treatment on this amazing root can be found in Dr. Joseph Shipey’s work on Proto Indo European roots to the American and English language. It is in the here and now as to when and where “The Divider” acts. That is, both in space and tempo. Should it be a wonder therefore, that the Latin Vulgate gives us the Latin “TEMPUS” for “Temptation”. It means ‘to be strung across time, to be stretched, pulled, torn, divided, rent, —i.e. “TEMPO- ed” … or, “OVER-TIMED” …i.e., you have been tested on the duration of your faith.

1 Chronos, as in ‘time’ and ‘god’, most certainly fits the bill for “The Satan as ‘tempo’ or ‘tempter’. Chronos ‘consumes’ us all in his ‘divisions’ of time and is the head or “archon” of ‘time divisions/ the eras’. His consort/ bride is Ananke. Ananke was given a tremendous treatment in Plato’s “Cratylus”. She/ It is the
field of thorns and thicket by which one traverses for their erotic fulfillment at the end of such a telegraph. The outcome is never what it seems to be in one’s hopes and initial desires.

James 1:13,14 – “(let) no one being tempted (“Tempo – Latin/ Greek:peirazomenos – put through trials, dragged, pulled through {in this age/ time/ duration} ) say, “By God I am being tempted –for God cannot be tempted and He tempts no one. A man is tempted (*peirazetai* – drawn out, pulled through, dragged, put through) by his own desire ( epithumias – passions that drive one) – being drawn away and being enticed (deleazo – ‘baited’, ‘lured’) …THEN, *desire* or your *passions* (eros – ‘e’ – ‘out’ + ‘rous’ – ‘flow’/ ‘river’), having conceived, gives birth to sin (harmateia – that which misses the mark). Once sin has become fully grown it brings death”. ——-/// So, I’m immediately brought to the first chapter of Job in the dialogue of God and “the Satan”. Satan was given the boundary lines by which he could ‘do his work, authority,
authorship, energy, work, etc). Satan was always known in the Farsi, old Hebrew, and old Slavic as a word that denotes ‘sifting without mental cognisance’. Even when “the Satan” in the book of Job answered YHVH as to what he was doing his reply was, “Going to and fro” – i.e., ‘meandering, roving’. In Zechariah 4:10 –God’s eyes were considered “The Satans” because they rove in judgment. / His (Satan) was governed by an overriding force and in our terms, bound to or limited to which he could ‘work’ or ‘sift’. In Isaiah 45:7 – ff. it is God who says, “I, the Lord, *create both Good and Evil”. The Hebrew says that “evil” is “ra’ah” which means ‘falling down, destruction’ (such is found in the “evil” or “ra’ah” that God creates in Isaiah 45:7). So, it is God’s essence that is shared with Father and Son having set the ordained plan from God’s Tselem (Hebrew “mind/ imagination”) to create all things and to reconcile all things unto Christ. /It is God’s eyes which are ‘fully fit’ to scan, judge, see, etc. — i.e., His “Satans”…Zech 4

Does the god of this age have free agecy?

Colossians 1:15-20: (15) (Jesus) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: (16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. (17) And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. (19) For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell; (20) And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Isaiah 53:1-ff (750 B.C.) supports the brutal enactments unto a predetermined glorious ending:
(1) Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

(2) For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

(3) He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid
as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

(4) Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted (Scapegoat/ Sacrificee theme fulfilled).

(5) But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the
chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

(6) All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

(7) He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

(8) He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people He was stricken.

(9) And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

(10) Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

(11) He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

(12) Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

As we see in this prophecy (Isaiah 53:10) 750 years before the Birth of Christ that it pleased God (Father) to ‘bruise’ Jesus —put Him to agony unto death…for the PURPOSE of (Colossians 1:20) *reconciliatory (apokatallazai) salvation literally ‘unto all’ (Panta – every) …not a random meaningless pointless act but a Providential Intention.

This includes the *works of evil* which is done by God’s ‘tool of evil’ – “the adversary” – “the antagonist” – The Satan – The Devil “. Otherwise, “evil” would exist as part of the essence of God and therefore Creation would have evil in its essence via its Creator. This leads to senseless arguments about redefining the lines of evil and creation at this juncture. If there be ‘evil’ *as* God, or at least part of His ‘essence’ then it wouldn’t be called ‘evil’….it would be called God.
Therefore, there is a “narrative” of *good* and *evil* as is defined through the complex and multilayered stories of the Bible.

How does the god of this age ‘work’ with a Sovereign
God in all of His goodness?

Does evil have an office by which it acts in accord with
God’s Sovereignty?

Is sin your choice or is it an ensign to remind you of your
inability to go to God?

ENTER SIN INTO THE HOLY

Is ‘sin’ a random act from a compulsory sense of being or is ‘sin’ participatory in the ‘coming to be’ process to shed ‘what is’ in the scheme of God’s ordination?

If (Romans 13:1-ff) ‘all powers (“archons” – ‘governments/ leaders/ rulers’) “that be” are ordained of God” then what are we to think of the ‘coming to be’ of both good and evil leaders? Can Hitler claim ‘independent agency’ in his actions if (1) his sins be true – by the literal definition and (2) Romans 13:1 says that God ordained his actions? Not by etymon – not by Scripture.

sin (n.) (the more simple definition)
Middle English sinne, from Anglo Saxon synn, syn “violation of divine law, offense against God; moral wrongdoing,” also “injury, mischief; enmity, feud; guilt, crime, misdeed,” from Proto-Germanic *sundiō “sin” (source also of Old Saxon sundia, Old Frisian sende, Middle Dutch sonde, Dutch zonde, German Sünde “sin, transgression, trespass, offense,” extended forms)

**The older notion of ‘sin’ means “it is true,” i.e. “the sin is real” (compare Gothic sonjis, Old Norse sannr “true”), from PIE *snt-ya-, a collective form from *es-ont- “becoming,” present participle of the root *es- “to be.”

The semantic development would be via the notion of “to be truly the one (who is guilty),” as in Old Norse phrase verð sannr at “be found guilty of,” and the use of the phrase “it is being” in Hittite confessional formula. The same process probably yielded the Latin word sons (genitive sontis) “guilty, criminal” from present participle of sum, esse “to be, that which is.” Some etymologists believe the Germanic word was an early borrowing directly from the Latin genitive.

As I have found that “sin” is found in the Latin “SENEX” to mean ‘old, without direction, wavering, stumbling, demented, to have travelled from the line, traverse past the straight line. Interestingly, “SENATE” connotes “elders” of the State who ‘have come to be true to their seat’ —- though they be full of maturity in their office have they ‘spoiled’? After all, where do you go when you have absolute to near absolute power?

Another support to the fuller color of this meaning: Aristotle’s “Coming to Be” and “Going Away” treatment give us the disposition by which we should ‘know something or someone’. The question he poses is simple: “And then what did it do? and then? and then? and then?…etc. This leads to (maybe in all respect, came from) Plato’s study of “Phusis” or “nature”. With all that is defined concerning “sin” plus both genius minds of Plato and Aristotle we come to the conclusion we see that sin means ‘a concluded truthful view of the actions of something’.

Evil entered Holy Creation through sin. But this has nothing to do with an idea of what we think “free will” means. If Jesus was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world then JESUS was a part of the Holy act of creation — INCLUDING the “””evil””” that man would do to put HIM on the ordained cross. In other words, ALL that was in the mind of God to *CREATE* the beginning to end and ALL of the sequences of events in the middle were set before they happened and this *IS GOOD* (“good” – Hebrew: *tov*-”beneficial”; “builds upon itself”, “anabolic”, “supports itself and the next step”). “Tov” or “Good”, as the Hebrew mind conveys, is not necessarily ‘happy’ but ‘beneficial’ in the plan of God, not sinful man’s plans.

God did not sin but ordained the ‘archons’ or ‘rulers’ in HIS grand Narrative to put Jesus to death at the act of creation (Revelation 13:8). It pleased God the Father to This was not an act of man’s ‘free will’ but an act of ordination by God – > Acts 2:23 “Him (Jesus), being delivered by the determinate counsel (‘te’- BOULE = “the WILL”) and (also) the foreknowledge of God—– (this verse goes on to speak of the ‘narrative’ by which the ‘actors’ do put Jesus to death—”ye have taken (you have taken Jesus), and by wicked hands have crucified and slain”. Again, Revelation 13: 8 makes it clear that Jesus is the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the world…i.e., at the “creation point” our God-Father WILLED (boule) Jesus be put to death. Moreover, Revelation 13: 1-8 un-caps’ {apo = ‘off’ + kalupto =’cap that covers’} the Kingdoms of the earth for whom power was given (by God) to mock God in HIS holy temple service. Babylon-Persia (lion), Greece (leopard) and Rome (Bear). Not just the Bible but us…as to how *we* should play out. As Revelation 13 continues we read that there is yet another Beast that had/has not/ will have a power likened to that of the first – I believe this first beast was Babylon led by the ‘god-king’ with various names for the various cultures which called him by their view of him: Nimrod/ Nebrod/ Marduk/ Enmerker/Narmer. In any case, it is “new Babylon” with its Final System of Worship – much like that of the Old Kingdom where ALL bowed to
Nimrod. This time though, the ‘system’ would be a full-on contagion that marks the world with His power. Anyone not worshiping his system – a.k.a. ‘receiving the *mark* of his likeness’ should be put to death. I remember studying the Sumerian/ Babylonian word for such a mark or ‘demarcation’ of *power*. The Sumerian word was called: “ME”. Not as in “me” in the English
(yet ironically – exactly what it is). The Sumerian word “ME” defined by Dr. John Halloran meant: “essence, function, office, responsibility, ideal norm; the phenomenal area of a deity’s power; divine power; divine decree; cult {the culture beset by the norm of operations}; silence as to anything against such a system”.

Such a system was ORDAINED yet—-the ‘authority’ by which it stands was already mentioned here in reference to Ephesians 2:2: “The ruler of authority of the air – aka, the Spirit now working in the sons of disobedience”. Also, read on in 2 Corinthians 4:4 – “the god of this aeon – “. Satan as a ‘roaring lion’. In all such cases, this Satan character is the head of the cosmokriton (world) and aeon (age) but not the Kingdom of Men as we see in Daniel 4:17. All men, whether in the faith or not, experience the Roaring Lion, Satan, in the world. In 1 Peter 5:8 says, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about (just as the Satan in
Job), seeking whom he ****may (‘be allowed’ to do his nature)**** devour: (9) Whom (Satan) ‘resist stedfast *in the Faith*, **** knowing that THE SAME AFFLICTIONS ARE ACCOMPLISHED IN YOUR BRETHREN THAT ARE IN THE WORLD.****

Is this not Universalism? Is this not Sovereignty? From the oldest book in the Bible, that is, the book of Job, we have absolute agreement as to how Yahweh uses Satan to do YHWH’s desire. 

This devouring is done on all men to ‘accomplish’ us. We have read this all wrong in the English!!! ugh!!

Another example is prophecy. Unless everything goes perfectly (that is: required WILLED ‘ra’ah {“evil”} and ‘tov’ {“good”}, then prophecy could never come about. Just as in Daniel 8 and 9 prophecies an exact number of years for the Messiah to come back concerning the 70-sevens/ Shavua (490 years) from decree to Jesus and the final 7 years (Shavua) of the 490 being Revelation’s final 7 years. Unless Nehemiah was given a decree by Artaxerxes, the Persian King, to go back into Jerusalem and rebuild the temple..then we wouldn’t have the final prophetical event of Daniel – i.e., Christ, to the Day, riding into Jerusalem as King of Kings. One act requires the next and so on. Daniel 9:24 – “Seventy Shavua (490 years) are determined upon thy people…..etc. :25 “from the going forth of the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem (Historically, we know that this was ca. 445 B.C.) UNTIL THE MESSIAH will be 69 SHAVUA (483 years {this puts Jesus roughly at 34 – 38 A.D. – depending on the calendrical formulas proposed by numerous ‘calendricists’. After this, the sons of disobedience (sons of the Prince/ANTICHRIST) will destroy the Temple (at Masada–ca. 70 A.D.). (then-at a futurative date) He (antiChrist) will confirm a ‘covenant’ for 7 years <- that is, the last “SHAVUA”. ///

So, this is ‘mathematically’ set at the beginning of Daniel’s prophecy to us. Daniel lived as a Persian captive who knew Persian astrology and probably taught this prophecy to the Persian Magi. Even the horrors of Herod slaughtering all of the children under two years of age (Prophesied by Jeremiah 31:15 and fulfilled in Matthew 2:16 – 18) was a necessary evil to drive Mary, Joseph and an unborn Jesus to Bethlehem where Daniel most assuredly told the Magi where Jesus would be…otherwise, the Magi were told directly by God.

Either way, all of these chain events could not be at ‘random’ if the Scriptures concerning prophecy about “what Will happen”. There are no dates that the heathen, atheist, agnostic, or anyone has placed on the prophecy of Daniel that would nullify the coming of Christ on a donkey and being praised as The King of Kings.

Part 2

Satan is the Agent of Evil While the Lord is the Prime
Cause, Intender, Motivator, and Predeterminer of Evil
June 26, 2023

Look at the phrase: “The Patience of Job”. Why is this such a catch phrase for the ages? It is because Job exercised “patience” in God’s will….not in a chaotic action by an arbitrary ‘evil’ force. Otherwise, we would have a dualistic ‘faith’, i.e., ‘believing’ that either good or bad ‘might’ win. Using reason, this IS an insane ‘kind’ of faith. Sadly, in our Christian culture, this is where we’re at. Therefore, why not ‘believe’ in the Devil if he is the ‘other’ lord of action, force, dynamism in this world? Optionally, “dualism”, -i.e., good vs. evil, renders theological insanity within the Christian church.

Examples go as follows for ‘dualism’ in the Church: “Eugene died in a horrible car crash – God would never have this happen”. “Those Christians in the train wreck died not at the hand of God”. Etc. So, where is God? Where is the Hand, Intent, Providence, Predeterministic God of the Bible? Our Biblical answers to our modern day catastrophes can be found in the ancient but timeless Word of God: The Evil (or The Satan found in Job) is a *quantity* brought by The LORD (cf.Job 42:11). Job’s family comforted Job ‘’from all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him (Job)’’. Again, the *agent* of destruction is The Satan. The Satan is found in the first two chapters of Job as being ‘directed’ to Job. The LORD ‘limits’ Job’s destruction at the
‘borderline of death’ —but everything else is within the “legal limitations of destruction by Satan”.

Dr. Tur Sinai in his book, “The Book of Job”, makes it clear that “Satan” did not have the suffix“-an” originally–as in “Shat-an” or “Sat-an”. Rather, this added suffixial “-an” came later to make it personal…i.e., “THE doer of disparaging- destroying, etc.” Such was NOT the case in ‘ITS’ original and oldest Semetic form as in Shat, which meant “to disparage”. Here, we must contrast “Shat/ SHT” from “Shatan, Satan, Shaytan”. For it was a social convention in assimilating with the neo-Babylonians and Persians that the Jews in Neo-Babylonian and Persian captivity adopt the ideas of the Babylonian and Persian ‘verbs of motion’. These approaches, for sure, gave power to the quality of action as “the mover, intender, actor upon, etc.{ cf to footnote 1}”. This
was not so in the earlier conventions of language concerning a Satan – i.e., SHT or Shat. ”Shat/SHT” was not a personalized doer, rather, SHT was the *agency* by which destruction occurred in the context of the story. It was the INTENDER that was the Prima Causa to the agency.

I find it interesting that the ancient usage of “SHAT” or “SHT”, i.e., “to disparage”, is the verb which means ‘to belittle to nothing; to make someone feel like nothing’. It is the VERY *picture* of the New Testament Greek word“MISEO” which is used in Romans 9 to mean “hated” in the sense of “reduced to non-importance, dismiss (hence the Greek: “Miseo”, not count (at least, for now)”. It is little things like this (from Sumerian to Older Hebrew/ Semetic to New Testament Greek semiotic/ endonymic agreement) that give me the rest in the consistent Theology of a
timeless God and His agents. This is why it is so important to study the ancient pictographs of the old world – for when the pictograph went away for ‘advancing societies’ the picture went away as to the IDEA to the word. Yet, not all is lost! Much study can ‘reconstruct’ the Sovereign Word of God which holds us all together.

Another highly interesting point that I have found in Scripture is that “SATAN” is used as the agent OF God and Later ‘dismissed’ into non-existence for the Story’s sake. Zechariah 3:1 makes it clear that Satan was an adversary innately while he was *at the right hand of God*. And, yes, Satan was *rebuked* because Zecharia’s prophetic *Joshua (i.e., the archetypical Jesus found here in Zecharia’s prophecy)* would be tempted and overcome. Was the act of overcoming sin by the prophesied Joshua/ Jesus THE rebuke, THE dismissal of Satan in this timeless-a-tempo prophetical scenario? I say, YES. Zechariah lived nearly a
thousand years after Joshua and YSHUA is both Jesus’ name and Joshua’s name.

This development of *the word and idea* is encased in a web of traditions that I plan on solving by going back to the very origin of Word and Idea.

WORD AND IDEA

Let’s start with the unbelievable comparative philologies and threading to both THE WORD “Ba’al – zebub’ and the Idea of what the “Lord of the Flies” really meant (*repulsion, offense, directives due to such repulsion, hating yet needing, etc.) to the ancient Philistines — probably an ancient Agean culture with its 5 main cities encamped in old Philistia (Canaan — now Israel).

Words related to the birth of the Name, “SHT”

Here are some of humankind’s oldest languages (nearing the Mother of all of our languages) with their similarities in a composite sketch for “Satan”. KEEP IN MIND, WE ARE DEALING WITH PICTOGRAPHIC SOCIETIES WHICH ‘DEPICTED’ STORIES WITHIN THEIR ‘WORDS’…SOMETIME, MANY EVENTS ARE SEEN WITHIN ONE PICTOGRAPHIC WORD.

Proto Uralic Saksa – filthy; unclean/ SIT – to bind/ SITTA – (slang) shit/ SIJTE – Grove – offering place (garden)/ SIB (as in the Philistine “FLY” – Lord of the Flies) ‘to cast a spell”

Sumerian —- (all Sumerian words represented here for 1) filthy 2) bind 3) (slang) ‘shit’ 4) Grove/Garden/’offering place 5) ‘fly’ (as pestilence) are cognates to the Proto Uralic, Ugric, and Finnic (Finnish) — i.e., Sumerian matches the P.U., Ugric, and Finnish — even nearing in spelling (Grimm’s equivalents)

Ugric (same as above)

Finnish (same as above)

*Conclusive ideas:

1)There was ONE STORY that was CARRIED THROUGH THESE PICTOGRAMS and
germaine to the entire old literate world spanning from the Saami (Old Finnish) culture to the Ural Mountain ranges to southern Mesopotamian Sumeria. This WAS the World.

2)The ‘nature’ of “the Satan” is to tempt, but, the mover of the agency of temptation is the Lord
Himself. Keep in mind, the suffix “-an” for Satan was not Hebrew, rather, a loan suffix given by a corrupted Neo-Babylonian and Persian idea which they corrupted from a much earlier form –i.e., SHT/ Shat..

3)When the pictograph went away the picture went away as to the IDEA to the word.

4)To think that “SATAN” came from its first beginnings as the literal “shit” and where we have taken it into some ‘rogue’ agent that can fight the Lord’s will IS “satanic”..lol

5) The Evil (or The Satan found here in Job) is a *quantity* brought by The LORD (cf.Job 42:11). Job’s family comforted Job ‘’from all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him (Job)’’. Again, the *agent* of destruction is The Satan. The Satan is found in the first two chapters of Job as being ‘directed’ to Job. The LORD ‘limits’ Job’s destruction at the ‘borderline of death’ —but everything else is within the “legal limitations of destruction by Satan”.

Footnote #1 The Arabic borrowed this later meaning, Shaytan or Satan, and once again, loaned it into the later medieval Hebrew language – which reinforced it as a Word of Assimilation into the Hebrew Culture. Yes, the Hebrew translators could have used “SHT” for a more contextually fitting “SHT” – i.e., “satan” – versus our modern ‘rogue actor of evil’. This is, for sure is a result of the Babylonian influence on the Hebrew Pharisees in Babylon which ‘borrowed’ this word and I believe has caused our modern Church to be ‘dualistic’ and corrupt.

Part 3 – Biblical – Historical/ Zechariah 3’s Achaemenid
“Satan/ Satrap”

The middle argument for Persia’s influence on Judaism’s language

Zechariah 3:1 ►

NASB Lexicon

NASB © Hebrew Strong’s Origin

Then he showed וַַּי ְר ֵ֗א ִני

(vai·yar·’e·ni) 7200: to see a prim. Root

me Joshua יְהֹו ֻׁשֻׁ֙ש ַ֙ע

(ye·ho·v·shu·a’) 3091: “the LORD is salvation,”

Moses’ successor, also the name of a number of Isr.

from Yhvh and yasha

the highַ הָּג ֔דֹול

(hag·ga·do·vl,) 1419: great from gadal

priest ַה ֹּכֵ֣הן

(hak·ko·hen) 3548: priest from an unused word

standing עֵֹ֕מד

(o·med) 5975: to take one’s stand, stand a prim. Root

before ִל ְפֵנ֖י

(lif·nei) 6440: face, facesfrom panah

the angel ַמ ְלַ֣אְך

(mal·’ach) 4397: Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance

ambassador, angel, king, messenger;

From an unused root meaning to despatch as a

deputy; a messenger; specifically, of God, i.e. An

angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher) —

ambassador, angel, king, messenger.a messenger

from an unused word

of the Lord, יְ ָהו֑ה

(Yah·weh) 3068: the proper name of the God of

Israel from havah

and Satan וְ ַהָּׂשָ֛טן

(ve·has·sa·tan) 7854: adversary, also the name of the

superhuman adversary of God of uncertain

derivation

standing עֵֹ֥מד

(o·med) 5975: to take one’s stand, stand a prim. Root

at his right hand יְ ִמ ֖ינֹו

(ye·mi·nov) 3225: right hand from an unused word

to accuse ְלִׂש ְט ֽנֹו׃

(le·sit·nov.) 7853: to be or act as adversary

denominative verb from satan

him.

I argue that the first appearance of the term “Satan” as a noun in the Hebrew Bible ought to be understood as an administrative official. It is in the ‘solidity’ of the Achaemenid Empire that one can now apply this ‘Satan’ as official to the Achaemenid council, Jewish Priestly class, and the angelic hierarchy. From the bottom up, the politically known evidence for Achaemenid structures provide a new way to read Zech 3 as we find in Herodotus’ account of Darius and his organizing the Persian Empire into tax districts or “satrapies”.

In the honorary Davidic era it was always the king who chose the high priest. In the
Achaemenid era, the priest would be chosen by the Great King. We have a parallel of
‘grounded- political actions founded by both political entities. Amongst the Persians the kingly duties were fulfilled by royal surrogates, the satraps. That the satraps represented the king and— as our Biblical Satan is with his emissaries, likewise, the
Persian satraps attempt to replicate the Persian King’s Kingly abode and jurisprudence. This ‘representation’ by the satraps to the King’s realm is a well documented fact.

As I stated previously concerning Zech 3, Joshua stands before “the Angel”. Again, it is so interesting to read in Hebrew that “MELEK” means “angel” here as much as it means “King” in other places. Who should decide which is a better translation? Context gives us the means by which we can translate more accurately. Therefore, why can’t this be another allusion to the Christ figure? It is YHWH’s “KING” – (as it is equally translatable to “angel”) that is presented. Would the King “TO COME” not be Christ Himself in this allegorical consecration? Are we still not in Zechariah 3’s prophetic vision? Yes, we are.

The temporal authority by which the satrap had to establish satraps as royal representatives is found in Zechariah being transferred to the heavenly realm, where the King/Angel of YHWH fulfills the same role in relation to YHWH himself. Such an act fulfills the satrap to the Persian King and the extension of the Lord via the Satan. In other words, Zech 3 would represent a court of a lower scale than in the pre-exilic period. 

Zech 3 is described as a consecration ceremony for Joshua – the.already-high-priest. Yet the text is promulgating an “otherness” consecration or consecrations. Indeed, Joshua is described as already “Great Priest,” as Job was a great god-fearing man. Zachariah 3’s scenario appears to be dealing with an accusation. This “consecration” seems to fit the antemetabole role by reversing the act of consecration. Surely this is abnormal for a priestly consecration.. /// I call this next part “the sandwiching” or “stacking” of layered elements that put us into a kaleidoscope of events all into one past, present-future- earthly – priestly-Heavenly:

(1) Zechariah 3 does not show here any biblical reference of literature on Priestly
consecration such as festivities, sacrifice, or priestly processionals.

(2) Joshua is before the Melech (“King”) of YHWH instead of YHWH himself, and this
parallels the place of the Christ.

(3) The ceremony involves elite rather than priestly clothing. This makes a priestly ordination
unlikely.

Yet, the “Melech” of YHWH gives me thought that it is neither a Achaemenid courtly act nor a Judaistic-Priestly act, but a Spiritual act using the Achaemenid court and Judaistic Priestly analogies to promote a higher picture of the Messiah.

Historically, if Zech 3 is read as a scene of satrapal confirmation, then the figure of the Satan would only correspond to the accusers who read the written accusation against Tiribazus (a satrap in the time of the Pharaonic Darius 1st) in Diodorus. At this point we could simply end reading the prophetical text of Zechariah. I do not believe such is the case. We know that the satraps had the role of reading the accusation and commenting on its legal validity. In the Persian satrapy system even a lower rung satrap could represent the king. Still, a satrap consulted other officials for objections to new appointments before confirming them and acquiring their oaths of loyalty. Such legal action held the criteria for some form of interrogation
to be established.

The Zech 3 passage depicts the moment where Joshua was vetted by the satrap by having to profess his loyalty to the king and in return was allowed to set-up a civil cult irregardless of how he had been chosen for the priestly position by the Judaeans. Using a theological interpretation in Zecharia 3 we can see where Joshua the priest did the same towards YHWH’s angel and that The Satan (a.k.a. spiritual ‘satrap’) was ready and waiting to vet the Priest of YHWH. Theologically, I see Joshua as Yeshua {or Jesus} acting as the *afflicted suffering servant* WHO served humanity, His Father in Heaven, Rome’s laws —as Pontius Pilate saw no fault in. Also, Jesus fulfilled the philosophies and wisdoms of the Greeks and their Paideia, which ironically
concluded the Gospels as the fulfillment of Platonic and Aristotelian LOGIC. Finally, Jesus, the GREAT PRIEST that was vetted by Satan, fulfilled the Law and Prophets of the Jews. The ‘straight’ in which Zecharias’s Joshua found himself would only be a light foreshadowing of the Messiah to come. The comparisons of the Achaemenid political-historical-reality was a striking reflection of Zecharia’s prophetic panoramic vision. Why do we ‘choose’ to see only one or the other? Why can’t the multidimensional God project HIS revelation into the Political, Priestly and
Angelic abodes? I think this approach would solidify a ‘composite sketch’ that only a Sovereign God could draw and force us to see more deeply with a faith in such a Sovereign Deity.

Therefore, it is easy to see how the Satan/ Satrap figure is also an ‘archangel-type’ when the theological meets the political Achaemenid assembly tradition. If Zoroastrianism was interpolated into the minds of the Jewish Rabbis and Scribes causing the Zoroastrian Angra Mainyu (destructive spirit/ mentality) connotative redactions in Persian captivity, it is not hard to understand how the original “class of satraps” later became a ‘referent’ to the Archangel of Destruction – i.e., “The Satan”. Is this a corruption of the Biblical text or God’s imprint through time using us all?

PART 4

Joab, the archetype of the Satan and David’s doer of dirty deeds-emissary

We should go back in the past to get this fuller story of Joab and David. The scene began as follows. Young David was a warrior in the house of King Saul of Israel, a close friend of the king’s son and heir apparent, Jonathan, and the husband of the king’s daughter Michal. But out of jealousy, King Saul turned against David and drove him from his service. Saul soon after lost the favor of God, and was killed in battle. When Saul and his sons died, David took the field of battle, and after a series of conflicts established himself first as king of Judah and after as king of all Israel.

Joab first shows up as a commander in David’s service when David was ruler of Judah in the south of the holy land, while one of Saul’s remaining sons, Ishbosheth, was still ruling northern Israel.

Abner, a commander from the north, met Joab and his brother Ashael in lands between north and south, and fighting broke out. Abner reluctantly killed Ashael in self-defense and fled, with Joab in pursuit. The men remained mortal enemies ever after this first armed encounter.

King David wanted peace with the northern kingdom, and agreed to meet with Abner, and the two men greeted each other with courtesy and terms of friendship. On hearing this, Joab used his role as a commander in David’s service to request to speak with Abner after he left David’s presence. When these two men met, instead of greeting Abner in peace as David had done, Joab stabbed him in the belly. (2 Samuel 3:27)

David made a long lamentation, fasted for sorrow for the murder of Abner and declared that he had absolutely nothing to do with the murder of the popular northern commander.

Joab next appears in the story of David’s adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, whom David impregnated while her husband was on duty in the army. David was unable to persuade Uriah to go home and sleep with his wife to cover up his own adulterous act.

He then gave a message to Joab to make sure Uriah got slaughtered in battle, and the evil deed was done. God later punished David for his sin, but Joab got off the hook again.Joab knew when to keep the king happy. When he was made commander of the army of Israel, he made sure David got credit for his own cunning in battle (2 Sam. 11:26 ff.)

Then, God spoke through David’s seer named Gad giving David 3 options of punishment. David took the shortest punishment in duration. In 1 Corinthians 21:14 God sent pestilence upon Israel killing 70,000 men. In vs 15 God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem and halted the angel as the angel had done enough.

Again, we see the arm of God doing horrible things. Moreover, we see God Himself sending pestilence to kill innocent people for an evil that David did, —while Satan goes untouched by God and so does Joab—the one who went out to collect the immoral census.

Reaching back through 1 Chronicles we can see what a blood thirsty General Joab was. Joab had wreaked fear not only in Israel’s enemies but also in David’s army and David himself. David told Solomon that Joab must be killed in order to stop the violence of David’s echoing war machine.

Is it too hard to see that Joab was a *kind* of Satan and that David was a *kind* of archetypical, at least in part, Christ?
**
Joab’s ability to use hard politics reached its zenith when King David had to contend with his troublesome son Absalom. Prince Absalom had first gotten into trouble when he avenged the rape of his sister Tamar by murdering her attacker against the king’s will.

The politically astute Joab cared little for Absalom, Tamar, the rape, or the revenge murder. But he could see that David did not want to punish his favored son in spite of his guilt, so he arranged for a pardon to please the king.

But when Absalom subsequently revolted against David, Joab led the king’s army against Absalom, and defeated him in battle. When the other officers refused to kill the king’s beloved rebel son, Joab had no such scruples.
He fired three darts into Absalom’s heart and buried his corpse in a pit, not a royal grave. Joab did what was in the best interests of the king, and therefore himself.

King David promptly went into mourning for his wayward son, and the troops who had secured the victory glumly wandered back into Jerusalem, sorrowing with the king. But Joab had the political sense to tell the king to declare it a victory, to hide his feelings, and to reassert his power. David followed Joab’s grim advice.

Tired of his hatchet man who had polished off his beloved son, David demoted Joab and appointed one Amasa as the new commander of the army. But very soon, Joab took care of that matter.In a subsequent military encounter, Joab asked to speak privately with his new commander. Joab made to give General Amasa the kiss of peace, and while puckering up, Joab grabbed Amasa’s beard and stabbed him in the bowels with a concealed sword.

While Amasa was bleeding to death in the street, Joab rallied the men on the very military expedition David had sent Amasa on, and won the day. He got his old job as David’s warlord back as well.

Joab made only one serious political mistake. When David was on his deathbed, one of his other sons, Adonijah, attempted to make himself king in his father’s place. Adonijah wisely consulted Joab, and got his support.

But David’s favor went to his son Solomon, and Adonijah soon was discredited, and for a time Joab kept his head low enough to keep it connected to his neck. But when David’s actual death drew near, he summoned Solomon to his side and reminded him of every single thing Joab had ever done.

David advised Solomon on dealing with his evil but useful nephew Joab, saying, “Now therefore hold him not guiltless, for you are a wise man; you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” (1 Kings 2:9)

When the discredited Adonijah stupidly asked his brother Solomon to wed his father’s beautiful but still virginal handmaid, Solomon had Adonijah put to death on the very day he made the request. Sleeping with the old king’s wife might have been seen as a claim to David’s throne, and this King Solomon could not tolerate.

It also provided an excuse to deal with Joab. Hearing of Adonijah’s fall, Joab fled to the tent of the Lord and grabbed onto the horns of the altar, pleading for sanctuary. Solomon was not impressed and ordered Banaiah son of Jehoiada to hack Joab to bits at the altar, which he gladly did.

In 1 Chronicles 21:1 we see Satan as he ‘stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel’.

Initially, Joab is the first mentioned to whom David is speaking. Only after the mention of Joab does the Scripture include ‘the rulers of the people’ with Joab. We see that Joab actually tells David that it is a trespass against the Lord to take a census of David’s army. Yet, it is Joab who is the arm of David and goes out to do this heinous act.

Then, God spoke through David’s seer named Gad giving David 3 options of punishment. David took the shortest punishment in duration. In 1 Corinthians 21:14 God sent pestilence upon Israel killing 70,000 men. In vs 15 God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem and halted the angel as the angel had done enough.

Reaching back through 1 Chronicles we can see what a blood thirsty General Joab was. Joab had wreaked fear not only in Israel’s enemies but also in David’s army and David himself. David told Solomon that Joab must be killed in order to stop the violence of David’s echoing war machine.

Is it too hard to see that Joab was a *kind* of Satan and that David was a *kind* of an
archetypical Christ— at least in part?

Joab ran to the tent of the Lord and grabbed onto the horns of the altar, pleading for sanctuary. Regardless of the humble sentiment displayed by Joab, Solomon ordered Banaiah to chop up Joab to pieces at the altar.

Benaiah was made commander of the army and then spent his days murdering Solomon’s opponents, as Joab had done for David before him.

Is Benaiah another Satan figure for Solomon? Returning to Isaiah 45: 7 – ff. “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil; I the Lord do all these things”. Isaiah 46:10 “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand , and I will do all my pleasure”…etc. If it is God who is ‘good’ and ‘creates evil’ then what does Satan do?

***In 1 Chronicles 21:1 we see Satan as he ‘stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel’.

Initially, Joab is the first mentioned to whom David is speaking which begs me to question who was Satan here? I will not conclude anything here. Only after the mention of Joab does the Scripture include ‘the rulers of the people’ with Joab. We see that Joab actually tells David that it is a trespass against the Lord to take a census of David’s army. Yet, it is Joab who is the arm of David and goes out to do this heinous act.