How Hebrew, Torah, and Jewish Wisdom Answer Humanity’s Deepest Questions.

There is a quiet struggle at the heart of human life: the tension between action and inertia. Between seizing a moment and letting it slip by. Between movement that builds a life, and delay that slowly drains it. We often assume that motivation must come first. That clarity, energy, or inspiration will eventually arrive and carry us forward.

The Torah teaches the opposite. Energy follows action. Life is shaped not by waiting, but by movement. In this talk, Chief Rabbi Dr. Warren Goldstein explores one of the most important principles of Jewish thought and personal growth: the power of decisive action. Drawing on Torah wisdom and Pirkei Avot, he shows why procrastination is not neutral, why inertia strengthens the body at the expense of the soul, and why meaningful change begins only when we move.

There is a quiet struggle at the heart of human life: the tension between action and inertia.

This idea is crystallised in the Parsha of Bo through the symbol of matzah. Matzah is not merely bread eaten in haste. It represents spiritual clarity. The difference between matzah and chametz is delay, and delay belongs to the physical world. The Exodus revealed that material power, even at its greatest, yields effortlessly to spiritual force. That is why redemption happened with urgency. Speed itself became a spiritual statement. Pirkei Avot teaches that growth begins with action. One act leads to another.

Momentum creates strength, clarity, and purpose. Delay, by contrast, creates a quiet erosion of meaning. This world is a place for doing, not drifting. This talk is about reclaiming agency, breaking the spell of procrastination, and understanding why purposeful action is not impulsiveness, but alignment with the soul. It offers a Torah framework for building a life of depth, vitality, and inner contentment. Key Insights

• Life’s deepest struggle is not between good and evil, but between action and delay.
• Energy does not precede action; it is generated by action.
• Matzah represents spiritual momentum, not merely haste.
• The Exodus reveals the power of the spirit over matter.
• Inertia strengthens the body while weakening the soul.
• This world is for doing; rest has its place, but it is not the goal.
• Purposeful action creates momentum, meaning, and inner strength.

Unlocking the Ancient Secrets: How Hebrew, Torah, and Jewish Wisdom Answer Humanity’s Deepest Questions

In a world buzzing with scientific breakthroughs and prophetic whispers, one question echoes louder than ever: Why does the scientific community overlook the Hebrew language—the oldest traceable tongue in human history—and the profound wisdom of the Torah? As Gregg Braden unveils astonishing DNA discoveries that mirror ancient Jewish texts, and podcasters like George Noory on Coast to Coast AM probe the mysteries of existence, it’s time to turn to the guardians of this knowledge: the Jewish people.

From the Ebla tablets affirming biblical narratives to prophecies unfolding in real-time, like the Star of Jacob and the onset of Gog and Magog, the Torah declares, “I have told you the end from the beginning” (Isaiah 46:10). This blog dives deep into how Hebrew and the Torah are revealing scientific truths and prophetic realities, proving that all Gregg Braden and George Noory seek is preserved in Jewish tradition. As the Chief Rabbi’s perspective illuminates, we are here not for passive wonder, but for action—tikkun olam, repairing the world through mitzvot.

The Primordial Language: Hebrew as the DNA of Creation

Scientists widely acknowledge that the earliest reconstructed languages stem from Proto-Semitic roots, dating back over 5,000 years. Yet, they hesitate to crown Hebrew as the original, despite its unbroken chain from ancient inscriptions to modern usage. Why this reluctance? The Torah boldly claims Hebrew as the language of Hashem—the divine code through which the universe was spoken into being (Genesis 1).

In Gregg Braden’s groundbreaking video, “This DNA Discovery Is Completely Beyond Imagination,” he reveals a pattern in human DNA where the atomic masses of its bases (hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen) translate via ancient Hebrew letter values to “God Eternal Within the Body”—echoing the sacred name YHWH.

Braden draws directly from the Sefer Yetzirah (Book of Formation), a foundational Jewish mystical text attributed to Abraham, which describes creation through 22 Hebrew letters and divine permutations. This isn’t a coincidence; the odds, as Braden calculates, defy random evolution. If Hebrew encodes life’s blueprint, why ignore the Bible?

Archaeological evidence abounds: The Ebla tablets, unearthed in Syria in the 1970s, contain over 15,000 cuneiform texts from 2500 BCE that reference biblical places like Sodom and Gomorrah, and even “Ya” (a form of YHWH). These artifacts corroborate Tanach narratives word-for-word, from patriarchal names to geographic details.

Yet mainstream science dismisses them as cultural artifacts rather than divine testimony. The Jewish sages, however, have safeguarded this: The Talmud (Sanhedrin 21b) affirms Hebrew as the holy tongue, used by Hashem at Sinai to address three million witnesses—a mass revelation unmatched by any other faith.

George Noory often explores ancient wisdom on Coast to Coast AM, asking why humanity holds such secrets. The answer lies with the Jewish people, the “seed of the woman” (Genesis 3:15), tasked with guarding Torah’s light amid exile and persecution. As Braden seeks the “people who hold the secret of why we are here,” he unknowingly points to Israel—the nation that has preserved Sefer Yetzirah and Kabbalistic teachings for millennia.

Prophetic Revelations: From Zohar to Modern Fulfillments

The Torah doesn’t just explain origins; it foretells the end. We’re witnessing the dawn of Gog and Magog—the cataclysmic war of nations against Israel (Ezekiel 38-39), signaled by Damascus’s prophesied destruction (Isaiah 17:1) and global disruptions. The Star of Jacob (Numbers 24:17) emerges as a harbinger: “A star shall step forth from Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel.” Jewish sages interpret this as the Messiah’s advent, crushing enemies and ushering in peace. In recent years, astronomical events and political upheavals—think Middle East tensions and a figure disrupting world governments—align eerily. Could this point to leaders like President Trump, whose policies (Jerusalem embassy move, Abraham Accords) stirred global wars and divisions? Prophecy suggests a precursor who “causes the whole world to go to war or disrupt all the governments,” paving the way for redemption.

A pivotal prophecy from the Zohar demands attention, especially for the Christian world. The Zohar (Vayera 119a) describes a time when a “donkey-riding king” arrives humbly, but not as Christianity claims. Rabbi Palanov (likely referring to scholarly critiques by figures like Rabbi Tovia Singer or Rabbi Pinchas Winston) dismantles the Christian reading of Zechariah 9:9: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion… your king comes to you… humble and riding on a donkey.”

Christians see this as Jesus’ triumphal entry, but the verse’s context (9:10) promises universal peace—”He shall speak peace to the nations; his dominion from sea to sea”—which was unfulfilled in Jesus’ era.

Wars persisted; no global shalom ensued. The Zohar presents this as a future Messianic king from David’s line, bringing true redemption after tribulations such as Gog and Magog. Jewish tradition holds that Zechariah’s vision cannot be Jesus, as the prophet foresees a warrior-king ending chariots and bows, not a crucified figure.

This wisdom has been “held and guarded” by Jews for generations. Why? Because Israel is the “servant” in Isaiah’s prophecies—the collective suffering redeemer.

Isaiah 53: The Suffering Servant as the Jewish People

No passage stirs more debate than Isaiah 53, often co-opted by Christianity as a portrait of Jesus. Yet, the Hebrew text and context scream otherwise: “He was despised and rejected by men… he bore our illnesses… wounded for our transgressions.” The chapter describes a “servant” emerging from obscurity, shocking kings with unforeseen exaltation (Isaiah 52:13-15). Who is this? Not an individual, but Israel—the nation Hashem calls “My servant” repeatedly (Isaiah 41:8, 44:1).

The quote you shared captures it: “He grew up like a sapling before Him, like a root from dry ground… Despised and rejected… Indeed, he bore our illnesses…” (Isaiah 53:2-5). Jewish sages like Rashi explain this as the Jewish people’s exile—persecuted, afflicted, yet bearing the world’s sins through faithfulness to Torah. Pogroms, Holocaust, and inquisitions: Israel as the “man of pains” heals humanity by modeling ethical monotheism. The “wound” (chaburah) brings shalom—our survival testifies to divine providence. Christianity’s lens ignores the plural “servants” in Isaiah 52-54, where Israel collectively atones.

The second video you referenced, on Parshat Bo, underscores Judaism as the system preserving these traditions. Matzah symbolizes urgent action—leaving Egypt’s spiritual inertia. We’re here for deeds: Mitzvot transform the mundane into holy. As Mesilat Yesharim teaches, true purpose is to earn divine closeness by overcoming trials.

Answering Gregg and George: Why We’re Here—for Action

Gregg Braden asks: If DNA holds a divine message, who preserved this wisdom? George Noory probes: What’s the secret of existence? The Jewish people, history’s most resilient family, hold the keys. Despite comprising 0.2% of the world, Jews have won 22% of Nobel Prizes—testimony to Torah’s intellectual fire. Sefer Yetzirah, which Braden cites, teaches creation via letters, aligning with quantum physics’ observer effect and string theory’s vibrations.

Science ignores the Bible because it demands faith in revelation over empiricism alone. But evidence mounts: Quantum entanglement mirrors Kabbalah’s interconnected sefirot; Big Bang echoes “Let there be light.” Prophecies fulfill: Israel’s rebirth (Isaiah 66:8), ingathering exiles (Ezekiel 37), nations dividing the land (Joel 3:2)—all amid Gog and Magog’s stirrings in Ukraine, Middle East, and global alliances.

We are here for action. Torah isn’t theory; it’s blueprint. Love your neighbor (Leviticus 19:18), pursue justice, awaken the divine spark. As the Chief Rabbi might say: “Hashem told the end from the beginning—now act to hasten redemption.”

In conclusion, Hebrew and Torah unveil science and prophecy as one. From DNA codes to the Star of Jacob, Jewish wisdom answers all. Ignore it no longer; embrace action. What questions linger for you?

Hazan Gavriel ben David. Synagogue Beit Hashoavah. YouTube Channel Hazan Gavriel ben David

“Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4) Table

Gage, W. A. (2011). Milestones to Emmaus: The Third Day Resurrection in the Old Testament (pp. iv – v). Warren A. Gage.

How is this the meaning of Daniel? Where is the burial and resurrection?

Warren Gage offers one of his most detailed and elaborate typological interpretations in this milestone. He constructs a timeline that stretches the events of Daniel 6 into a three-day sequence:

• Day 1: Daniel prays three times, is accused, and is condemned under the unalterable decree.
• Day 2: The conspirators report him; the king labors to deliver him until evening, but cannot.
• Day 3: Daniel is cast into the den that night; the king comes early the third day, the stone is removed, and Daniel is lifted out unharmed.

Gage then draws extensive parallels to Jesus:

• Daniel’s innocence and envy-driven accusation → Jesus’ innocence and envy of religious leaders (Matt 27:18).
• King Darius bound by unalterable law → Pilate bound by higher powers.
• Daniel’s three daily prayers → Jesus’ three prayers in Gethsemane.
• Stone sealed over the den → stone sealed over Jesus’ tomb.
• Daniel emerges unharmed on the third-day morning, “lifted up” → Jesus rises on the third day.
• Accusers thrown in and destroyed → Jesus’ enemies judged.
• Daniel exalted to rule → Jesus exalted to God’s right hand.
• King’s decree to all nations → Gospel to all nations.

He even notes “not one of his bones was broken” (Dan 6:22–23; cf. John 19:36) and Daniel’s prosperity/exaltation (Dan 6:28). Gage presents this as a “remarkable preview of the gospel” and a clear third-day resurrection type.

From the perspective of the original Aramaic/Hebrew text of Daniel 6, its historical and literary context, and traditional Jewish exegesis, this milestone does not withstand scrutiny as a prophetic foreshadowing of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. The “third day” chronology is artificially imposed, and the episode lacks the core elements of death, burial, and resurrection.

1. There Is No Actual “Three-Day” Sequence in the Text—Daniel Is in the Den for Only One Night

• The text is explicit about timing: Daniel is cast into the den that night after the conspirators press the king (Dan 6:16).
• The king spends the night fasting and sleepless (v. 18).
• Very early in the morning (בְּשַׁפְרְפָרָא / b’shaprapara, “at dawn”), the king goes to the den (v. 19) and finds Daniel alive.
• Daniel is immediately “taken up out of the den” (v. 23).

This is one night (roughly 12–18 hours), not three days. Gage creates the “three days” by counting backward from the accusation/prayer day, inserting an extra day of the king’s “laboring,” but the narrative flows continuously without such a gap. The king hears the accusation, tries to deliver Daniel “until the going down of the sun” (v. 14), then immediately commands that Daniel be cast in that same evening. There is no full second day of imprisonment.

Contrast with Jesus: literal death on Friday afternoon, burial before sunset, in the tomb all of Saturday (full day + nights), rising early Sunday morning—counted as “three days” in Jewish inclusive reckoning (part of Friday + Saturday + part of Sunday).

2. Daniel Never Dies, Is Never Buried, and Does Not Rise from Death

• Daniel is thrown into a lion’s den (a pit/cave-like enclosure), not a grave/tomb.
• A stone is placed over the mouth and sealed (v. 17)—a parallel Gage emphasizes—but this is to prevent escape or tampering, not to entomb a corpse.
• Daniel remains alive the entire time; God’s angel shuts the lions’ mouths (v. 22). He is “taken up” (הַסְּקִיל / hasqil, “lifted out”) unharmed—no death or resurrection occurs.
• The phrase “not one of his bones was broken” (v. 23, implied by “no injury whatever was found on him”) is protective deliverance, not post-mortem preservation (contrast Ps 34:20 applied to Jesus in John 19:36).

This is a story of divine protection from death, not resurrection after death.

3. Jewish Interpretation Emphasizes Faithfulness, Divine Deliverance, and God’s Sovereignty—Not Resurrection Typology

• Rabbinic sources (Talmud, Midrash, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, etc.) highlight:
• Daniel’s unwavering prayer life despite danger (three times daily as a model for Jewish prayer).
• The king’s distress and the power of an unchangeable decree.
• Miraculous angelic intervention and the reversal of fate (accusers destroyed).
• The spread of God’s fame to all nations (Dan 6:26–27).
• No classical Jewish commentary treats the lions’ den as a “third-day resurrection” type or messianic prophecy in the Christian sense. The “morning” deliverance is immediate vindication, not a three-day motif.
• The book of Daniel is apocalyptic and exilic literature, focused on faithfulness under persecution (similar to Esther, Joseph), not explicit messianic resurrection patterns.

4. The Parallels Are Selective and Overstretched

• “Three times a day” prayer → three prayers in Gethsemane: The text says Daniel prayed three times daily “as was his custom” (v. 10)—a lifelong habit, not a special preparation for this trial.
• Stone and seals: Common ancient prison/security measures; not uniquely tomb-like.
• Exaltation and worldwide decree: Daniel is already a high official; his promotion is confirmed, but the king’s edict praises God, not Daniel personally.
• These elements make for compelling typology only when read backward through the lens of the Gospels.

Conclusion on Milestone 6

Daniel 6 is one of the most beloved and powerful narratives in the Tanach: a righteous man faces death for his faith, is miraculously preserved by God, and God’s name is glorified among the nations. It teaches profound lessons about prayer, integrity under pressure, and divine deliverance. However, it does not depict a “third day resurrection.” Daniel never dies, spends only one night in the den, and is delivered alive the next morning. The “three days” chronology is an artificial construction that the text itself does not support.

Gage’s reading continues the pattern we’ve seen across all milestones: a creative, post-resurrection Christian typology that imposes a death-burial-resurrection framework onto narratives that, in their original context and plain meaning, simply do not contain it. The Tanach here speaks of deliverance from death, not resurrection after death.

Next is Milestone 7: Esther Delivered from Death on the Third Day

Today, as we declare the new month, this is the section of Tanach we read from. I will share with you in a later article about why we celebrate the New Moon.

“Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4)

Gage, W. A. (2011). Milestones to Emmaus: The Third Day Resurrection in the Old Testament (p. iv). Warren A. Gage.

Milestone 5: David Delivered from Death on the Third Day
(Primary reference: 1 Samuel 20:18–19, 35 – Jonathan’s plan for David to hide in the field for three days during the new moon feast, with the signal on the morning of the third day.)

In Warren Gage’s framework, this episode in David’s fugitive life serves as another “third day” deliverance from a death decree. David faces Saul’s murderous intent (Saul has already tried to spear him multiple times in 1 Sam 18–19). Jonathan devises a test. David absents himself from the new moon feast. He claims he is going to Bethlehem for a family sacrifice.

David hides in the field “until the third day at evening” (1 Sam 20:5, 19), and on the morning “of the third day” (v. 35), Jonathan goes out to shoot arrows as a signal. The outcome confirms Saul’s rage. Therefore, David must flee for his life. Yet he emerges safely from hiding on the third day. In doing so, he “rises” from his concealed place of peril to continue his anointed path.

Gage sees this as typological. David (anointed king, type of Christ) faces a death threat and descends to a hidden/low place. On the third day he “rises” to safety, with weeping reunion (vv. 41–42) echoing resurrection themes.

How does this match?

Some Christian typological readings (independent of Gage) amplify this: David hides by a “stone heap” (Ezel, v. 19), “descends” to the place, remains hidden, and “rises” on the third morning (v. 41 uses “rose” or “arose” in some translations for David’s emergence), paralleling Jesus rising from the stone-sealed tomb.

From the Tanach’s original Hebrew text, historical context, and Jewish interpretive tradition, this milestone does not hold up as a prophetic pattern or foreshadowing of Jesus’ literal death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. The “third day” is a practical waiting period. Furthermore, the episode lacks essential elements of the resurrection.

1. The “Three Days” Is a Strategic Hiding Interval for Safety Testing, Not a Death-and-Resurrection Sequence

• Jonathan instructs David to hide “three days” (שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים) so the absence can be observed at the feast without immediate suspicion (vv. 5–6, 19). It’s a calculated timeframe for Jonathan to gauge Saul’s reaction without endangering David prematurely.
• On the morning of the third day (v. 35), Jonathan performs the arrow signal, confirms the danger, and David flees. No death occurs—David is alive and in hiding the whole time. He simply avoids detection.
• The verb in v. 41 (וַיָּקָם / wayyaqom, “he arose/rose”) describes David standing up from his hiding spot to embrace Jonathan—not a resurrection from death. It’s everyday language for getting up after waiting (similar to “arise” in many non-theological contexts).

Contrast with Jesus: actual crucifixion death, burial in a tomb sealed for three days, divine bodily resurrection. Here, there’s no death, no burial, no revival from the dead—only evasion of a threat.

2. The Threat Is Ongoing Persecution, Not a Realized Decree of Death Followed by Revival

• Saul’s hatred is real (he attempts to kill David repeatedly), but in this specific episode, David never faces execution—he preempts it by hiding.
• The narrative focuses on covenant loyalty between David and Jonathan (vv. 12–17, 42), Jonathan’s self-sacrifice (risking his father’s wrath), and David’s anointing as future king. It’s about human friendship, political intrigue, and divine protection of the anointed one—not resurrection typology.
• Jewish exegesis (e.g., Rashi, Radak, Malbim) emphasizes themes of loyalty, the tragedy of Saul’s jealousy, and David’s righteousness. The three days are logistical, not symbolic of death-to-life. In classical rabbinic sources, this is framed as a resurrection motif.

3. Typology Is Highly Allegorical and Relies on Selective Parallels

• Gage (and similar interpreters) highlight “descent” (to the field/stone), hiding (like in a tomb?), and “rising” on the third day with tears (like post-resurrection encounters). These are stretched: hiding in a field ≠ burial; standing up after waiting ≠ , rising from death.
• The Tanach frequently uses “three days” to refer to short absences, tests, or transitions (e.g., travel, preparation). It’s a conventional biblical interval, not inherently resurrection-coded without New Testament application.

Conclusion on Milestone 5

This story beautifully illustrates covenant faithfulness, the cost of loyalty in crisis, and God’s preservation of His chosen king amid danger—profound lessons in their own right. However, it does not depict or foreshadow a Messiah who dies for sins, is buried, and rises bodily on the third day. The “third day” is incidental timing for a covert test, not a deliberate eschatological pattern. Gage’s reading continues the pattern we’ve observed: retrofitting numerical matches into a resurrection template, where the text itself provides no internal evidence for death, burial, and resurrection.

The chain of milestones remains consistent in its approach—strong on creative typology, but the plain reading of the Tanach doesn’t support the claim that Jesus’ third-day resurrection is explicitly “according to the Scriptures” in these passages.

Hazan Gavriel ben David.

Milestone 4: The Gibeonites Delivered from the Sword on the Third Day
(Joshua 9:15–27, with emphasis on vv. 16–17: “At the end of three days after they had made a covenant with them, they heard that they were their neighbors… And the sons of Israel set out and reached their cities on the third day.”)

Warren Gage presents this episode as another link in his chain of “third day” deliverances from a decree of death. In his reading, the Gibeonites face imminent destruction by the sword of Israel (as Canaanite inhabitants marked for ḥerem, or holy war devotion), but through deception and a hastily sworn covenant, they are spared execution. The discovery of their trick occurs “at the end of three days,” and on that third day Joshua confronts them, curses them, but ultimately confirms their lives—they become servants (woodcutters and water carriers) rather than corpses. Gage interprets this as a third-day deliverance from death to life, with the Gibeonites’ submission foreshadowing Gentile inclusion in salvation through mercy rather than judgment.

From the perspective of the Tanach’s plain text, original context, and Jewish interpretive tradition, this milestone provides no substantive support for a typological foreshadowing of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. The “third day” reference is purely logistical, and the episode lacks the core elements of death, burial, and rising.

1. The “Three Days” Is Travel and Discovery Time, Not a Death-to-Life Transition

• Joshua 9:16–17 describes the sequence: Israel makes the covenant (v. 15), then “at the end of three days” (מִקְצֵה שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים) learns the Gibeonites are nearby neighbors who deceived them. The Israelites then travel and arrive at the Gibeonite cities “on the third day” (בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי).
• This is narrative pacing: the Gibeonites came from nearby cities (Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, Kiriath-jearim—about 20–30 km from Gilgal), so three days is realistic for the deception to be uncovered and the delegation to arrive.
• No one is in a death-like state for three days. The Gibeonites are alive and well throughout; the threat of death is potential and future (what Israel might do upon discovery), not realized.

2. No Actual Death or Burial Occurs—Only a Commuted Sentence

• The leaders of Israel are furious at the deception but feel bound by their oath sworn in Yahweh’s name (v. 18–19). They cannot kill the Gibeonites without violating the covenant and risking divine wrath.
• Joshua pronounces a curse of perpetual servitude (v. 23), but explicitly preserves their lives: “None of you shall be cut off from being slaves” (v. 23 implies ongoing existence). They become temple servants (v. 27), a role that continues into the time of David (see 2 Sam 21).
• Jewish tradition views this positively in some respects: the Gibeonites’ fear of God leads them to seek mercy, and their integration shows the power of an oath and Yahweh’s protection of the covenant. Midrashim (e.g., in Talmud Yevamot 79a) note their descendants include notable converts or temple workers. Nowhere is the episode framed as a resurrection motif.

3. The Theme Is Deception, Oath-Keeping, and Mercy Despite Fraud—Not Resurrection Typology

• The primary lesson in the text is caution in decision-making (Israel failed to inquire of the Lord, v. 14) and the inviolability of oaths, even when sworn under false pretenses.
• The Gibeonites’ deliverance comes from human covenant fidelity, enforced by the fear of God, not a divine third-day intervention that reverses death.
• Contrast with Jesus: actual execution, literal burial in a sealed tomb, supernatural bodily resurrection on the third day. Here, there is no execution, no tomb, no rising from death—only a legal reprieve from a threatened sentence.

4. Continued Pattern of Numerical Coincidence Over Prophetic Substance

• As in previous milestones, a mundane “three days” (travel/reporting delay) is elevated into a resurrection template.
• The Tanach uses “three days” frequently for short journeys or intervals (e.g., Abraham to Moriah, spies in the hills, Joseph’s brothers in custody). It is a standard biblical time marker, not a coded resurrection signal until New Testament authors apply it christologically.

Conclusion on Milestone 4

The Gibeonites’ story is theologically rich: it illustrates the binding nature of oaths, the possibility of mercy for Canaanites who submit, the dangers of acting without divine inquiry, and Yahweh’s sovereignty over human plans. However, it does not depict or foreshadow a Messiah who dies for sins, is buried, and rises bodily on the third day. The “third day” here is incidental chronology, not eschatological pattern. Gage’s typology requires reading the text through a post-resurrection lens that imposes resurrection imagery where the Hebrew text itself gives no warrant.

The pattern we’ve seen across the first four milestones holds firm: creative allegorical connections built on the recurrence of the number three, but lacking the essential sequence of actual death → burial → resurrection that Paul claims is “according to the Scriptures.”

Next is Milestone 5: David Delivered from Death on the Third Day.

Hazan Gavriel ben David. Beit Hashoavah YouTube Channel Hazan Gavriel ben David.

The reason for these studies is to show how Christianity has fallen into what my Rabbi calls the “Lullaby Effect” (Read the “Rock A BABY IN THE TREE TOP”). As a hint, pay attention to the caps.

I would like to present as evidence in a court of law, “Heaven and Earth,” that the algebra does not add up. The verse in the Christian Bible says: “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4).

Gage, W. A. (2011). Milestones to Emmaus: The Third Day Resurrection in the Old Testament (p. iv). Warren A. Gage.

This verse does not exist in our Tanach, and I will prove it to you over the next 30 lessons. My goal is not to prove that I am right and you are wrong. Rather, it is to help you and me understand why we are on different paths regarding our Tanach. The sources do not belong together. So let us reason together, my friend.

My goal is to help the world understand one thing. We, the Jewish people, have been, throughout our history, a light to Hashem. Hashem is everyone’s Father and breathed his lifeinto them. They were made good, special, and unique, with a purpose, and Hashem needs them to show Himself in the world. Hashem needs you, my friend.

The”Lullaby Effect”

Warren Gage continues his pattern of identifying “third day” episodes as typological previews of resurrection: deliverance from imminent death threat on or after three days. In Joshua 2, Joshua sends two spies into Jericho. Rahab the prostitute hides them on her roof under flax stalks when the king’s men come searching. She lowers them by rope through her window (her house is on the city wall). Then she instructs them to flee to the hills, and tells them: “Hide there three days until those who are pursuing you return; then afterward you may go on your way” (Joshua 2:16). The text notes they hid in the hills for three days (v. 22). As a result, they evaded capture, and then returned safely to Joshua.

Gage likely frames this as the “faithful spies” facing a decree of death (pursuit by the king of Jericho, who wants them executed as threats). But on the third day (after the hiding period), they are delivered alive—symbolizing a resurrection-like escape from death. Rahab’s faith and scarlet cord are included as redemptive elements foreshadowing salvation through Christ. This fits his broader typology of Joshua (Yehoshua = “Yahweh saves,” akin to Jesus) conquering a “great city” (Jericho, paralleling end-times judgment). Moreover, the spies act as witnesses delivered on the third day.

The Tanach and The Proof

From the Tanach’s original context, language, and Jewish interpretive tradition, this milestone does not support a prophetic pattern of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. In fact, the connection is superficial and numerological rather than substantive.

The “Three Days” Is a Practical Hiding Period for Evasion, Not a Death-and-Resurrection Motif

• Joshua 2:16 and 2:22 use “three days” (שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים) as a realistic timeframe: the king’s search party would pursue for a few days, then give up and return to the city. The spies wait until it’s safe, then proceed.
• This is tactical advice from Rahab to ensure escape—no death occurs, no burial, no revival. The spies are alive and hidden the entire time; they simply avoid detection.
• Compare to Jesus: actual death, entombment for three days, bodily resurrection. Here, there’s no equivalent to death or burial—the “three days” is precautionary waiting, not a liminal state between life and death.

2. No Actual Threat of Immediate Death Realized; It’s Pursuit and Potential Capture, Not Execution Followed by Revival

• The king seeks to seize the spies because they pose a threat to Jericho (v. 2–3), but Rahab’s quick action prevents their capture. They are never arrested, imprisoned, or executed.
• The narrative emphasizes Rahab’s faith (she confesses Yahweh as God, v. 11), covenant-making (the scarlet cord as a sign of protection, v. 18–21), and mercy—classic themes of Gentile inclusion and redemption through faith.
• Jewish exegesis (e.g., Rashi, midrashim such as Numbers Rabbah, or later sources) highlights Rahab’s conversion, her merit in saving the spies, and her place in Israel’s lineage (she marries into the line leading to David and the Messiah). The three days are rarely, if ever, emphasized as symbolic of resurrection; they’re logistical.

3. Typology in Gage’s Framework Is Highly Allegorical, But Lacks Textual Anchors for Third-Day Resurrection

• Gage often draws parallels between Joshua and Revelation (e.g., the conquest of Jericho as judgment on a “great city,” two spies as two witnesses). This is creative but not directly tied to resurrection here.
• The “faithful spies” are delivered because of Rahab’s faithfulness, not a divine third-day intervention. The three-day mark is the end of danger, not emergence from death.
• Broader Tanach patterns: “Three days” appears in many contexts (travel, waiting, purification—e.g., Gen 40:20 with the cupbearer; Exod 3:18 for request to Pharaoh). It’s a common biblical interval for completion or transition, not inherently resurrection-coded unless the apostles apply it christologically (e.g., Jonah 1:17 cited by Jesus in Matt 12:40).

Conclusion on Milestone 3

This episode powerfully illustrates themes of faith in crisis, the divine protection of the faithful (even outsiders like Rahab), and the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s plan—profound truths in their own right. However, the “three days” is incidental safety protocol, not a foreshadowing of a Messiah who dies for sins, is buried, and rises bodily on the third day. Gage’s reading retrofits the number into his template. The text provides no internal warrant for seeing death → burial → resurrection here.

The pattern persists: a casual mention of “three days” is amplified into eschatological typology. But the details (no death, no burial, no rising from the dead) don’t match the core claim in 1 Corinthians 15:4.

Next up is Milestone 4: The Gibeonites Delivered from the Sword on the Third Day (likely Joshua 9, where the Gibeonites deceive Israel into a treaty, and on the “third day” their trick is discovered—Joshua 9:16–17). Shall we proceed there, or do you have specific thoughts, adjustments, or additional angles for this one? This is shaping up into a solid, scripture-centered critique for your blog!

Milestone 2: The Tribal Patriarchs of Israel Delivered from Death on the Third Day
(Likely centered on Genesis 42:17–18, in the Joseph narrative: Joseph’s brothers imprisoned for three days, then addressed by Joseph “on the third day.”)

Gage builds on his overarching theme here. He treats the Joseph story as a prophetic preview of Jesus (a common typology in evangelical circles, with Joseph as a “type” of Christ—betrayed by brothers, exalted to save many). In Genesis 42, the ten brothers (excluding Benjamin initially) come to Egypt during the famine to buy grain.

Joseph recognizes them, accuses them of being spies, imprisons them all together for three days (v. 17), and then, on the third day (v. 18), releases most of them with grain, while holding Simeon hostage and demanding that they bring Benjamin back.

Another Third Day: Addressing Christian Claims.

Gage interprets this as another “third day” deliverance. The brothers face a “decree of death” (imprisonment under threat, echoing their past guilt over selling Joseph). But on the third day, they are granted life and freedom (with conditions). This, for Gage, symbolizes resurrection from peril.

He likely ties this to the “suffering followed by glory” pattern. He sees Joseph’s testing as a shadow of Christ’s passion. The imprisonment is a death-like state, and the third-day release is resurrection-life granted to the “tribal patriarchs” (the future tribes of Israel). As a result, this fits Gage’s broader claim that the Tanach is filled with third-day motifs pointing to Jesus’ resurrection.

From a careful reading of the Tanach in its original context and within Jewish hermeneutical tradition, this milestone also fails to substantiate a direct prophecy of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. Here’s a structured breakdown:

1. The “Third Day” Here Is a Short Imprisonment for Testing, Not a Death-and-Resurrection Sequence

• Genesis 42:17 explicitly states Joseph “put them all together in custody for three days” (וַיַּאֲסֹף אֹתָם אֶל־מִשְׁמָר שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים). This is a brief detention period—common in ancient Near Eastern legal/customary practices for interrogation or reflection—not a burial or literal death.
• On the third day (v. 18), Joseph speaks: “Do this and live, for I fear God” (עֲשׂוּ זֹאת וִחְיוּ אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים אֲנִי יָרֵא). The brothers are released to return home with grain (provision/life), but one (Simeon) remains bound as surety.
• No one dies, is buried, or is revived. The brothers are alive the whole time; the “death” threat is psychological and conditional (if they don’t comply, future consequences). It’s a test of character and repentance for their past sin against Joseph—not a resurrection event.
• Contrast with Jesus: literal death on the cross, burial in a tomb for three days, bodily resurrection. The parallel is forced; the numerical match (“three days”) is stretched to fit the template.

2. Context Is Reconciliation and Testing Within Family Dynamics, Not Messianic Prophecy

• The entire Joseph cycle (Genesis 37–50) focuses on themes of divine providence (“you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” – Gen 50:20), forgiveness, family restoration, and survival during famine.
• The three-day imprisonment serves narrative purposes: it gives the brothers time to reflect on their guilt (they confess among themselves in v. 21–22, linking it to Joseph’s suffering), heightens tension, and allows Joseph to observe their honesty.
• Jewish exegesis (e.g., Rashi on Gen 42:18) emphasizes Joseph’s fear of God as motivation for mercy, and the brothers’ conscience awakening. Midrashim explore their remorse, but none frame the third day as a resurrection motif or link it to a future Messiah rising from death.
• No internal textual signal (like explicit language of “rising,” “life from death,” or prophetic foreshadowing) points beyond the immediate story.

3. Typology Overreach: Joseph as Type Is Valid in Some Ways, But Not for Third-Day Resurrection Here

• Joseph prefigures aspects of Jesus in Christian tradition (betrayed for silver, exalted to save, provides bread of life in a famine).
• But this specific “third day” episode doesn’t align with resurrection. Elsewhere in Joseph’s story, the three days are more prominent with the cupbearer and baker (Gen 40: the baker executed, cupbearer restored “on the third day” – v. 20). Some link this to crucifixion/resurrection duality. Gage may blend these, but Milestone 2 targets the brothers’ imprisonment.
• Even the cupbearer/baker parallel is about judgment and vindication (one to death, one to restoration), not collective deliverance from death on the third day.

4. Broader Pattern in Tanach: “Third Day” as Narrative Device, Not Unified Resurrection Doctrine

• As with Milestone 1, “third day” often marks completion, transition, or divine action (e.g., preparation periods, recoveries). It’s not inherently eschatological or resurrection-coded in the Tanach itself.
• Paul in 1 Cor 15:4 appeals to “the Scriptures” for the third-day rising, but Jewish interpreters (ancient and modern) see no such unified doctrine. The apostles’ reading is a post-resurrection, Spirit-guided christological lens—not the plain peshat meaning.

Conclusion on Milestone 2

This is another instance where an incidental “third day” reference (a three-day hold for interrogation and moral testing) is retrofitted into a resurrection typology. The text teaches about repentance, providence, and family healing—powerful themes in their own right. However, it does not prophesy or pattern a Messiah who dies for sins, is buried, and rises bodily on the third day.

The Joseph narrative is rich with messianic echoes in Jewish thought too (e.g., Messiah ben Joseph in some traditions). But those focus on suffering servant/redeemer roles, not specifically the third-day resurrection from this episode.

Gavriel, this continues the pattern we saw in Milestone 1—strong on creative typology, weak on textual warrant from the Tanach’s own voice. Therefore, it invites deeper reflection on how we approach “according to the Scriptures”: through an apostolic midrashic lens (valid for NT believers) or through the original Hebrew context (which doesn’t demand these connections).

Ready for Milestone 3 (The Faithful Spies of Jericho Delivered from Death on the Third Day – likely Joshua 2, Rahab hiding the spies for three days)?

Hazan Gavriel ben David YouTube Channel, Synagogue Beit Hashoavah – House of the Water Pouring.

Does the Torah Speak of Yeshua’s Death and Resurrection

“Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4)

Gage, W. A. (2011). Milestones to Emmaus: The Third Day Resurrection in the Old Testament (p. iv). Warren A. Gage.

Milestone 1: Isaac Delivered from the Knife on the Third Day (Genesis 22:1–14, with focus on verse 4: “Then on the third day Abraham raised his eyes and saw the place afar off.”)

Warren Gage presents this as the first major “milestone” in his argument. He argues that the Tanach (Hebrew Bible) repeatedly foreshadows Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection on the third day. In his framework, the Akedah (Binding of Isaac) serves as a typological preview. Abraham’s journey to the site of sacrifice takes three days. Isaac is essentially “offered” (facing death), but is dramatically spared and “received back” alive on the third day.

As a result, Gage sees this as a pattern of suffering/death threat followed by deliverance/glory on “the third day.” This, in his view, mirrors Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Furthermore, he connects it to Hebrews 11:17–19. There the New Testament says Abraham “received [Isaac] back as a type” (or figuratively, “in a figure,” ἐν παραβολῇ), implying a resurrection motif.

This is a classic Christian typological reading, and it’s not unique to Gage. Many evangelical scholars and early church fathers (like Origen) have drawn similar parallels. However, when we examine the text of Genesis 22 in its original context, language, and Jewish interpretive tradition, this connection to a literal “third day resurrection” does not hold up as a direct prophetic pattern.

In fact, here’s a step-by-step breakdown of why it doesn’t fit as evidence for Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection “according to the Scriptures.” This is what Paul invokes in 1 Corinthians 15:4.

1. The “Third Day” in Genesis 22:4 Is Simply Travel Time, Not a Theological Marker of Resurrection

• The phrase “on the third day” (בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי / bayyom hashlishi) describes the duration of Abraham’s physical journey from Beersheba to Mount Moriah. That is a distance of roughly 50–70 km, realistic for a three-day walk with servants and a donkey.
• It functions as a narrative detail to build suspense and emphasize Abraham’s obedience over an extended period. There’s no indication in the text itself that the number three carries symbolic weight here related to death and revival.
• The actual near-sacrifice and deliverance happen immediately upon arrival—no additional “three days” of death-like state or burial occur. Isaac is never killed, buried, or resurrected; the knife is raised and stopped in the same moment.

In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection follows a literal three days in the tomb (death → burial → resurrection). The Akedah has no equivalent sequence.

2. No Actual Death or Resurrection Occurs—Only a Threat Averted

• Isaac faces imminent death but is spared by divine intervention, which substitutes a ram for him. Importantly, the text explicitly states: “Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son” (Gen 22:13).
• Hebrews 11:19’s phrase “figuratively speaking” (or “in a parable/figure”) refers to Abraham’s faith that God could raise the dead if needed (v. 19: “He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead”), but it does not claim Isaac was actually dead and resurrected. Therefore, it’s about Abraham’s mindset, not a historical event.
• Jewish tradition (midrashim in Genesis Rabbah and elsewhere) sometimes explores imaginative ideas of Isaac’s ashes or momentary death, but these are later interpretive expansions, not in the biblical text itself. The plain reading (peshat) is clear: no death occurs.

3. Jewish Interpretation of the Akedah Focuses on Faith, Obedience, and Merit—Not Resurrection Typology

• In rabbinic sources, the Akedah is central to Rosh Hashanah liturgy, invoking Abraham’s (and Isaac’s) merit for atonement and mercy on Israel. The ram’s horn (shofar) recalls the ram offered in place of.
• Some medieval texts (e.g., influenced by midrash) speculate on Isaac’s willingness or even symbolic death, but mainstream Jewish exegesis (e.g., Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam) rejects literal sacrifice or resurrection ideas as contrary to the text.
• The “third day” is rarely, if ever, highlighted in Jewish commentary as a resurrection motif here—it’s practical journey time.

4. Broader Biblical Use of “Third Day” Lacks Consistent Resurrection Theme

• “Third day” appears frequently in the Tanach for various reasons: preparation (Exod 19:11–16, Sinai revelation), travel, recovery (Hos 6:2 is poetic/national revival, not literal individual resurrection), or narrative pacing.
• While some Christian interpreters see a pattern of “suffering then glory on the third day,” this is a retrospective reading. The Tanach itself does not present a unified “third day resurrection doctrine.” For instance, Jonah 1:17 (three days in the fish) is the closest Jesus explicitly cites (Matt 12:40), but even that is about deliverance from peril, not death-and-resurrection in the full sense.

Conclusion on Milestone 1

Gage’s claim relies on a strong typological/allegorical lens. He sees Christ’s shadows everywhere, even where the text gives no internal signal. From the perspective of the Tanach’s original language, context, and Jewish hermeneutics, Genesis 22 teaches profound lessons about faith, obedience, divine provision, and the rejection of human sacrifice.

However, it does not prophesy or typify a Messiah who dies, is buried, and rises on the third day. Instead, the “third day” here is incidental travel, not a deliberate foreshadowing of resurrection.

This pattern repeats in many of Gage’s milestones. A surface-level numerical match (“third day”) is elevated into a prophetic template. But the textual details (no death, no burial, no rising) don’t align with the core elements Paul references in 1 Cor 15:3–4.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

In an era when science fiction meets ancient wisdom, Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov’s lectures offer a mind-bending bridge between Torah teachings and modern theories such as the simulation hypothesis and time travel. Drawing from Kabbalistic sources, he unpacks the 50,000-year Cosmic Jubilee—a grand cycle of creation, destruction, and renewal. This blog dives into five videos that connect biblical concepts with quantum physics, ancient anomalies, and even timeline manipulations from classified projects. If you’re searching for “Cosmic Jubilee Torah Simulation Time Travel,” you’re in the right place.

The Cosmic Jubilee: A 49,000-Year Cycle of Creation and Reincarnation

Rabbi Palvanov’s “The Cosmic Jubilee” (video 1) explores a 50,000-year cosmic framework mirroring the biblical Jubilee (Leviticus 25). The Torah’s command to count 49 years and sanctify the 50th with a shofar blast extends to universal scales: seven 7,000-year Shemitot (Sabbatical cycles) totaling 49,000 years, followed by a Jubilee reset.

Each Shemita corresponds to a Sefirah (divine emanation): Chesed (kindness), Gevurah (severity), Tiferet (harmony), Netzach (victory), Hod (majesty), Yesod (foundation), and Malkhut (kingship). Palvanov argues that we’re in the fourth (Netzach), explaining the global influence of Torah and technological advances such as electricity. Ancient sites like Göbekli Tepe (12,000 years old) and the Sphinx’s water erosion (indicating a pre-desert era) are remnants of prior cycles.

Reincarnation (gilgul) is central: souls evolve across cycles for tikkun (rectification). Palvanov quotes Rabenu Bahya: “The seventh millennium is the Sabbath of delight.” This aligns with science’s 15-billion-year-old universe, using “divine years” (Psalm 90: “A thousand years in Your sight are like a day”).

Torah Simulation Theory: The World as a Divine Matrix

In “Torah Simulation Theory”, Palvanov posits the world as a simulation, echoing Plato’s cave and The Matrix. Quantum physics supports this: particles are probabilities until observed (the observer effect), like a video game rendering only what’s visible. Niels Bohr and Erwin Schrödinger’s quotes highlight the “crazy” nature of reality.

The Torah’s “Olam HaSheker” (world of lies) and Zohar’s “Bereshit” anagram (head of the house) suggest creation is in God’s “head”—a conscious simulation. Repentance (teshuva) as “return” erases sins as if they never happened, like rewinding code. Miracles are glitches, reincarnation levels in a game. Palvanov notes Max Planck’s “conscious mind behind matter,” tying to “God is One.”

Time Travel in the Torah: Biblical Relativity and Visions

“Time Travel in the Torah” shows time as relative, per Einstein. Biblical anomalies like plants before the sun are not chronological; there’s “no before and after in the Torah.” Moses time-traveled to Rav Akiva’s class (Talmud Menachot 29b), seeing future teachings. Adam’s 930 years were 80 personal years at near-light speed, explaining long lifespans via divine light garments.

Palvanov connects free will to the block universe theory, which holds that all time exists simultaneously. The Jewish calendar’s variability reinforces the relativity of time. Repentance is spiritual time travel, undoing past actions.

Project Looking Glass and Timeline Convergence

The “Interview They Tried to Stop” reveals classified Project Looking Glass (from ancient seals) for timeline prediction. By 2012, all timelines converged to one outcome, making choices inconsequential—a “bottleneck.” Elites panicked, possibly using CERN to alter it. The Mandela Effect (e.g., the Fruit of the Loom logo) is a glitch caused by timeline shifts. Belief shapes reality; devices were placebos unlocking human potential.

Timeline Mess-ups: Majestic 12 and Future Humans

“They Messed Up Our Timeline” details time-travel paradoxes involving Majestic 12 and future humans (P45 from 45,000 years in the future, P52 from 52,000). They sought “Lotus” for genetic stability. Looking Glass showed branching realities, but 2012 locked futures. Simpsons “predictions” (e.g., the Trump presidency) hint at leaks of a timeline.

Palvanov ties this to Torah: cycles reset anomalies, gilgul repairs souls. These videos suggest that our reality is a simulation with manipulated timelines, aligning ancient wisdom with modern conspiracy theories.

Implications for Today: Awakening and the Next Jubilee

These lectures challenge linear history, proposing a cosmic simulation in which time travel and reincarnation refine humanity. Ancient anomalies like Göbekli Tepe are pre-cycle remnants; modern glitches like Mandela Effect signal shifts. As we near the Jubilee, awakening to this could hasten “Shabbat”—harmony before reset.

Next Blog: Dive into the Mandela Effect, Majestic 12 leaks, and how Torah predicts timeline glitches in “Mandela Effect in the Torah: Proof of Altered Realities?”

Trump as Modern Cyrus: Rabbis Proclaim a Divine Mandate for a New Era of Governance and Redemption

Dedicated to Rabbi Chaim Richman for his profound commentary on Parashat Shemot, illuminating the timeless lessons of faith and courage, and to Hillel Richman for unveiling “The Exodus Before the Exodus” – a groundbreaking exploration of Israel’s hidden history from the Book of Chronicles.

In the swirling currents of global politics, where ancient prophecies intersect with modern headlines, a chorus of voices from rabbis in Israel and America echoes a profound declaration: Donald Trump is the modern embodiment of Cyrus the Great, anointed by Hashem as a messiah-like figure to usher in an era of redemption. This isn’t mere rhetoric; it’s a spiritual framing rooted in biblical precedent, amplified by recent events as of January 15, 2026.

With Trump’s second inauguration looming and Iran’s internal upheavals intensifying, even Reza Pahlavi, the exiled Crown Prince of Iran, invokes the “Time of Cyrus” alongside the “Time of Trump,” envisioning a transformative alliance that could reshape the Middle East.

This blog delves into these connections, portraying Trump not just as a political leader but as a divinely appointed catalyst for a new way of governing—one that mirrors Cyrus’s tolerant empire, emphasizing sovereignty, alliances, and moral clarity over imperial overreach.

The Biblical Blueprint: Cyrus the Great as Hashem’s Anointed

To understand the fervor surrounding Trump, we must first revisit Cyrus the Great, the Persian king who ascended to power around 559 BCE. Cyrus wasn’t Jewish, yet the Book of Isaiah (45:1) strikingly refers to him as Hashem’s “anointed” (mashiach in Hebrew, often translated as messiah).

“Thus says the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held—to subdue nations before him and loose the armor of kings, to open before him the doors, the gates not to be closed.”

This divine endorsement followed Cyrus’s conquest of Babylon in 539 BCE, ending the Jewish exile imposed by Nebuchadnezzar. He issued the Edict of Cyrus, allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Second Temple, funding the project from Persian treasuries.

Trump Is Not Like the other Kings

Cyrus’s governance was revolutionary for its time. Unlike the brutal Assyrian and Babylonian empires that preceded him, Cyrus adopted a policy of tolerance and decentralization. He respected local religions, customs, and autonomies, integrating conquered peoples into a vast, multicultural empire stretching from the Mediterranean to India.

This “new way of governing” fostered loyalty through benevolence rather than fear, enabling economic prosperity and cultural flourishing. Historians like Xenophon in his Cyropaedia praised Cyrus as a model ruler, emphasizing his strategic alliances and ethical leadership. In Jewish tradition, Cyrus is celebrated not as a conqueror but as a redeemer, a gentile instrument of Hashem’s will, paving the way for messianic fulfillment.

Fast-forward to today: Rabbis and scholars draw direct parallels, seeing Trump as fulfilling a similar role in a world fraught with threats to Israel and global stability. As Rabbi Elie Mischel notes in The Israel Bible, Trump’s actions echo Cyrus’s edict, positioning him as a divine agent in the redemptive process.

Rabbis in Israel and America: Proclaiming Trump as Cyrus Hashem’s Messiah

The acclaim for Trump as a modern Cyrus isn’t fringe; it’s widespread among religious leaders in Israel and the diaspora. In Israel, billboards proclaim “Cyrus the Great is Alive!” alongside Trump’s image, crediting him with potential resolutions to ongoing conflicts like the Gaza war.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in 2018, explicitly compared Trump to Cyrus during a White House visit, thanking him for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital—a move akin to Cyrus’s temple decree. Netanyahu’s brother-in-law, Dr. Hagi ben Artzi, amplified this, citing Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights and Judea-Samaria settlements as legal, declaring him “greater than Cyrus” for his proactive stance.

The Rabbis look to the Torah

Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, Chief Rabbi of Tzfat, blessed Trump on his 2025 inauguration day, stating, “The Holy One, blessed be He, chose him and put it in people’s hearts to choose him, and he has a divine mission.”

Bible code expert Rabbi Matityahu Glazerson uncovered hidden connections in Leviticus, where “D. Trump” and “president of the USA” appear adjacent to “Koresh” (Cyrus) and “Moshiach.”

The Nascent Sanhedrin, a rabbinic body, minted a coin in 2017 featuring Trump and Cyrus, symbolizing his role in the rebuilding of the temple. In a 2025 letter, they urged Trump to establish an International Divine Court, viewing him as Cyrus’s successor in uniting believers.

In America, Messianic Jewish leader Rabbi Jonathan Cahn and evangelical preacher Lance Wallnau liken Trump to Cyrus and King Jehu, emphasizing his anointing despite his non-Jewish status.

Esua and The Redemption

Rabbi Mendel Kessin frames Trump as the reincarnation of Esav (Esau), embodying a redemptive return, with the gematria of his name (424) matching “Moshiach ben David.”

A group of Religious Zionist rabbis from Torat Ha’aretz HaTova declared Trump “God’s emissary in the global battle against evil,” praising his support for Israel and moral governance.

These proclamations intensified post-2024 election, with Trump’s “RELO Plan” for Gaza drawing Sanhedrin praise for biblical hints. As Rabbi Yosef Berger notes, Trump’s actions align with prophecies in Isaiah 45, where Cyrus rebuilds Jerusalem—mirroring Trump’s embassy move and accords. This isn’t blind adulation; it’s a recognition of Trump as a gentile mashiach, a facilitator for the ultimate Jewish Messiah.

The Prince of Iran: Reza Pahlavi on the Time of Cyrus and Trump

Adding a poignant layer is Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s exiled Crown Prince, whose statements evoke the “Time of Cyrus” alongside Trump’s era. In January 2026 interviews and statements, Pahlavi envisions a “free Iran” immediately recognizing Israel and expanding the Abraham Accords into the “Cyrus Accords”—uniting Iran, Israel, and the Arab world. This nods to Cyrus’s Persian heritage, positioning post-Islamic Republic Iran as a partner in peace and echoing ancient ties in which Cyrus freed the Jews.

Pahlavi communicates directly with the Trump administration, praising Trump’s “strong leadership” in supporting Iranian protesters. In a Wall Street Journal piece, he rejects U.S. military intervention, emphasizing Iranians’ agency while invoking Cyrus as a symbol of liberation.

“The real Iran is a different Iran—a beautiful, peace-loving and flourishing Iran,” he states, drawing parallels to Cyrus’s tolerant rule. Trump’s skepticism about Pahlavi’s domestic support notwithstanding, their dialogue underscores a shared vision: dismantling tyranny through maximum pressure and alliances, much like Cyrus’s conquest of Babylon.

Pahlavi’s “Cyrus Accords” framework aims to end Iran’s nuclear program, normalize relations, and foster regional cooperation—mirroring Cyrus’s empire-building through diplomacy. As protests rage in Iran, Pahlavi’s calls align with Trump’s “America First” yet alliance-focused approach, heralding a “time of Trump” as a modern echo of Cyrus’s redemptive era.

Trump Leading a Cyrus-Like Kingdom: A New Way of Governing

Trump’s leadership embodies Cyrus’s innovative governance: decentralized, alliance-driven, and morally grounded. Cyrus governed through satrapies, granting local autonomy while ensuring loyalty—a model Trump emulates with his “America First” policy, prioritizing national sovereignty amid global partnerships. Unlike isolationism, Trump’s Abraham Accords normalized relations between Israel and Arab states, fostering economic ties without cultural erasure, akin to Cyrus’s respect for diverse faiths.

A New Way of Governing

Trump’s “new way” challenges globalist overreach, emphasizing bilateral deals over multilateral bureaucracies. His recognition of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights subdued symbolic “nations” opposing Israel, opening “gates” for peace. Post-2024, Trump’s RELO Plan for Gaza hints at temple-related prophecies, with red heifers from Texas symbolizing purification rites. Benjamin Netanyahu, the “Son of the Right Hand,” collaborates with Trump as a modern Joshua, advocating Third Temple sovereignty.

The Third Temple

This governance shifts from endless wars to strategic deterrence, as seen in Trump’s Iran strikes and support for protesters. Like Cyrus, Trump subdues threats (e.g., nuclear deals) while enabling rebuilding—potentially the Third Temple. Rabbis see this as Hashem’s plan: Trump as a gentile messiah who will facilitate the ingathering of exiles and universal peace.

Yet, challenges persist. Critics decry the messianic hype as blasphemy, noting Trump isn’t Davidic. Biblical echoes warn: after Cyrus came trials. As Purim 5787 (2026) approaches, Trump’s era may test Israel’s faith, turning global hatred into redemption.

In this narrative, Trump isn’t just president; he’s Cyrus reborn, leading a kingdom of renewed alliances and moral revival. Those standing with Israel, like Batyah’s allies, extend arms amid cries to “kill the Jews.” Hashem’s gift unfolds: a leader for turbulent times, rebuilding not just walls but hope.

(Word count: 1,456)

Outbound Links:

• Rabbi Chaim Richman’s Podcast on Shemot
• Hillel Richman’s “The Exodus Before the Exodus”
• Dr. Doug Petrovich on Joseph in Egypt
• The Israel Bible on Trump as Cyrus
• Reza Pahlavi on Cyrus Accords
• Book of Isaiah – Bible Gateway

• Series: Part II That Which You Have Not Heard.
• Hashem’s Timeless Lesson: Truth Over Jealousy in the Bible, From Eden to Gaza
• How Could The Word Of GOD be Untrue
• Who Rejected Messiah? It Is Not Who You Think.
• The Bias of Torah. Then and Now.

Estimated reading time: 8 minutes