By Hazan Gavriel ben David, Esnoga Beit HaShoavah, Amarillo, Texas

Rabbi Yisroel C. Blumenthal posed the question again this week, cleanly, the way a teacher poses it when he already knows the room will reach for the wrong answer.

Who was God speaking to when He declared, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26)?

Does this mysterious passage reveal something profound about God, humanity, and the purpose of creation?

Yes. It does. And the profundity is not a second or a third person inside the One God. The profundity is that the human is a child of two parents, the Torah has already named: the earth, adamah, and the heavens, the breath of Hashem. The court is consulted. The parents are addressed. Only One creates.

That is the Jewish answer. It is the Rabbi’s answer. It is also the answer sitting in the next hinge of the scroll, Genesis 2:4, if we let the grammar finish the sentence Genesis 1:1 began.

The question, in the Rabbi’s own frame

In LET US MAKE MAN: Who Was God Speaking To?, Rabbi Blumenthal walks the verse the way Jews for Judaism has walked it for years. The plural is real. It is not a slip. It is also not a partnership in divinity. The Torah describes God taking counsel with His heavenly court before creating humanity, and then, in the very next verse, creating alone.

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ

And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” (Genesis 1:26)

וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם

And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:27)

Plural in the consultation. Singular in the act. The Talmud states the rule without raising its voice: wherever the heretics misread, the refutation is written beside the verse (Sanhedrin 38b). Verse 26 opens the door. Verse 27 closes it. One subject. One verb of creation. Vayivra Elohim. God created.

That is the Rabbi’s answer, and it should be stated before anything else is added. The “us” is the heavenly court. The Maker remains one.

Why is the court addressed?

Rashi learns meekness here, not metaphysics. Man is in the likeness of the angels. They might envy him. So the Holy One takes counsel with them. The midrash drives home the same point in a lesson Moses himself is reluctant to write. When Moses reaches na’aseh adam, he says, in effect, “Master of the universe, why hand the heretics an opening?”

The answer he is given is pedagogical rather than doctrinal. Write it. The greater will one day need to learn from his Creator that even the One who made the upper worlds and the lower worlds consulted the ministering angels before He made the human (Bereshit Rabbah 8:8).

The court does not co-create. It is taught. Some stand to plead. Some stand to accuse. The same pattern appears when the prophet sees the host of heaven stationed at the throne (1 Kings 22:19), and when Daniel hears a decree by the watchers (Daniel 4:14). Hashem has a family, a household. He does not have a colleague.

That is why the passage teaches human dignity without cracking the Shema. We are addressed in the figure before we exist. A being who will rule fish, birds, beasts, and soil is not manufactured in silence. The King announces the heir to the court so the court will not mistake the heir for a rival god, and so the heir will not mistake himself for a beast. The image is an office. Likeness is orientation. Dominion is the job description that follows the announcement, not a license to strip the house.

Hear, O Israel: Hashem our God, Hashem is one. The court can be spoken to. The court cannot be the Speaker.

The other Jewish answer, and it is not a rival

There is a second classical reading, and this essay is written to place it beside the Rabbi’s, not against it.

Ramban, citing Rabbi Yosef Kimchi, hears na’aseh as an address to the earth already on stage. The waters were told, “Let the waters swarm.” The earth was told, “Let the earth bring forth.” When the human is reached, the verb changes because the human is neither a swarm nor a beast. “Let us make” means: I and the earth already mentioned. The earth brings forth the body from its elements, as it did with cattle. He, blessed be He, gives the spirit from His mouth. Genesis 2:7 is the receipt for Genesis 1:26.

וַיִּיצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן־הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים וַיְהִי הָאָדָם לְנֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה

Then Hashem Elohim formed the human, dust from the adamah, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the human became a living soul. (Genesis 2:7)

Body from below. Breathe from above. Similar to both, says Ramban. In the capacity of the body, similar to the earth from which he was taken. In spirit, similar to the higher beings, because the spirit is not a body and does not die. Then verse 27 narrows the lens on purpose: “in the image of God He created him,” so no reader will think the human is only a finer animal. The distinction is the breath. The partnership is not divine. It is parental, and only one parent is God.

Rashi gives the court. Ramban gives the soil. Both refuse a second deity. A blog that loves the Rabbi’s question can hold both without blurring the lines between them.

Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 2:4: heaven and earth become parents

This is the additional data, drawn from the reading we opened on Parashat Bereshit, the seventy faces, and Adam the blueprint.

Genesis 1:1 is a completed architecture.

בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ

In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth.

God is the subject. Heaven and earth are the objects. Elohim builds by separation. Light from dark. Waters from waters. Sea from dry land. Days 1–3 make the rooms. Days 4–6 fill them. The human arrives last, male and female, in the image, blessed to be fruitful, to fill, to subdue, to rule. That is Adam as the crown of the architecture. Not yet Adam as a lonely body in dust.

Then the scroll turns the camera.

אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, on the day Hashem Elohim made earth and heaven. (Genesis 2:4)

Toldot is not a caption. It is a birth record. Everywhere else in Genesis, eleh toldot introduces what a parent generates: the generations of Adam, Noah, Shem, and Terah. Here, the parents are the heavens and the earth. Chapter 1: Heaven, then Earth. Chapter 2:4: earth, then heaven. That inversion is not a redactor tripping on his cloak. It is the hinge that turns a cosmos into a family.

Watch the Name do the same work. Chapter 1 speaks as Elohim, the face of power and judgment, din. Chapter 2 fuses the Name: Hashem Elohim, compassion joined to power, and never Hashem alone in this panel. The Judge and the Merciful are one. The garden is where you find out whether the human can live inside that oneness. Hashem hu haElohim.

So when Genesis 1:26 says “let us,” the scroll has already prepared two listeners who are not gods. The court above, which must not envy the image. The earth below, which must yield the body. And the breath that will make the dust a speaker comes from the same One who made the heavens in Genesis 1:1.

Earth is adamah. Heaven is the breath.

Say it plainly, because the Torah says it plainly.

The human is not named for a private biography. Adam is the creature taken from adamah, colored like adom, kept alive by dam. Earth. Red. Blood. The human is the dirt that learned to speak.

Before that learning, chapter 2 diagnoses a world that is finished and still barren: no shrub of the field, no herb of the field, because Hashem Elohim had not caused rain, and there was no human to work the ground. Then a mist rises and waters the face of the adamah. Rain, even as mist, is heaven and earth acting like parents. That is why 2:4 called them toldot.

Then the forming. Dust from the ground. Breathe into the nostrils. Nishmat chayim. Ramban will not let that breath be mistaken for a finer vapor of the elements, or for an overflow from the angels. The full Name is on the verse for a reason. The soul is breathed from the Most High. The body stays kin to the potsherd. The person is at the meeting.

That is what “in our image, after our likeness” is doing in Kimchi’s reading, the reading Ramban calls the clearest. Our image: the human will resemble both parties to the making. The earth, in body. The higher realm, in spirit.

Psalm 8 sets the altitude without confusion: “You have made him a little lower than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor.” Lower than the court. Higher than the cattle. Child of soil and of breath. Not a third of God, and not a godling in clay.

Males and females belong in the same sentence. Genesis 1:27 refuses to let image be a male monopoly: “in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Genesis 5:2 goes further: “He called their name Adam on the day they were created.” The singular contains the plural. The name is the species, the couple, and the first person. Pull one ring out, and the others collapse.

What is the passage for

The Rabbi’s video asks what the verse teaches about human dignity, responsibility, and the purpose of creation. The Torah’s answer is practical.

Dignity: you were announced. A court was told. A ground was addressed. A breath was given that did not come from the ground. No human is raw material.

Responsibility: image is not a complexion. It is a post. Rule the fish and the bird and the beast without becoming what you rule. Work the adamah you were taken from. The ground is mother, not merchandise. Cain’s blood crying from the adamah is the family crime in the family soil. If Earth is parent, brother’s blood on the ground is not a private stain. It is a wound in the mother.

Purpose: the human is the place where the upper and the lower are supposed to meet without one swallowing the other. Elohim separates, or the world drowns. Hashem Elohim moistens, or the world bakes. We are the creature who has to learn both gestures. Receive life. Do not seize it. The Tree of Life remains the destiny of the one who can hold judgment and compassion in one Name. Exile, in Genesis 3:22–24, is mercy against a hand stretched out to take.

All of that fails if “let us” is drafted into a divided God. A divided God cannot give an undivided image. A partner-god cannot teach the court humility, because he would be negotiating, not consulting. The next verse exists so that mistake cannot plead ignorance.

Adam the blueprint, not a fossil

Adam is not a fossil and not a mascot. The Adam is a blueprint. Image. Dust. Breath. Male and female. Naming. Loneliness. Desire. Exile. Work. Childbirth. Death. Brother-blood on the ground. The seventy nations of Genesis 10 are not other species. They are Adam after the split, mapped into seventy faces.

The alef becomes an ayin, so the one human can wear seventy faces and still be called back to the Tree. Wine is yayin, gematria 70. The Torah is compared to wine. Seventy faces. Seventy languages at Sinai. The opening plural of Genesis 1:26 is not the first crack in unity. It is the first hint that one image will have to be carried by many without ceasing to be one.

That is why the Ten Sayings later feel like family medicine. They answer wounds already open in the garden and in the field. You shall not murder. Do not steal a life that was breathed. Do not bow to what you were set over. Remember the day the making stopped, so the child of earth and breath does not forget which parent is God.

A direct answer, in one page

Rabbi Blumenthal, this is the answer as we hear it at Beit HaShoavah, offered beside yours, not in place of it.

God was speaking to His heavenly court, as Rashi and Bereshit Rabbah teach, so that the greater would consult the lesser, and so that envy would not be the first word spoken over the image.

God was also speaking to the earth, as Ramban and Rabbi Yosef Kimchi teach, because the body of the human was to come up from adamah, as the beasts had come up, while the breath would come down from Him.

And the scroll itself, at Genesis 2:4, tells us what those two are in the grammar of family. Heaven and earth are the toldot-parents. Genesis 1:1 creates them. Genesis 2:4 lets them generate. The earth is the mother of the dust. The heavens are the realm from which the breath of Hashem is given. The child is called Adam because he is still adamah, and is called a living soul because he is no longer only adamah.

The “our” of image and likeness is the resemblance to both sides of that making. The verb of creation stays singular because resemblance is not authorship. Parents in the order of the world. One Father of spirits. One Name.

That is profound. It is also enough. The purpose of creation, at the human seam, is a meeting: soil that can hear, breath that can choose, a court that must not be jealous, and a people who will one day be told that the greater consults before he acts. We are at that meeting. We are not the Maker.

Hazan Gavriel ben David Esnoga Beit HaShoavah, Amarillo, Texas Parashat Bereshit, 5787

Frequently asked questions

Who is the “us” in Genesis 1:26?

In Jewish tradition, the “us” is the heavenly court, the ministering angels, whom God consults. It is an act of humility and a guard against angelic envy, not a confession of multiple deities. A second classical reading, Ramban’s, hears God addressing the earth: the earth to yield the body, God to give the breath. Verse 27 returns to the singular: God created.

Does “Let us make man in our image” teach the Trinity?

No. The Torah places the singular act in the next verse: “And God created man in His image.” Sanhedrin 38b notes that the misreading is answered beside the verse itself. Image means office, dignity, and resemblance to the charge God gives, not a division inside the One God. Hashem is one.

How are heaven and earth our parents?

Genesis 2:4 calls the next panel “the generations of the heavens and the earth.” Toldot is a birth language. Genesis 2:7 then shows the birth: the human is formed from adamah, the earth, and receives nishmat chayim, the breath of life, from Hashem Elohim. Earth mothers the body. The breath from above fathers the living soul. Only God is the Creator.

What does it mean to be made in the image of God?

Not a body copied from God. God is not a body. Ramban: the body resembles the earth it was taken from; the spirit resembles the higher realm, because spirit is not flesh and does not die. Psalm 8: a little lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor. Image is responsibility: rule without ravaging, work the ground you came from, carry the breath you were given.

Why does Genesis 1:27 switch from plural to singular?

Because consultation is not creation. The court may be asked. The earth may be addressed. The making is God’s alone. The switch is the point.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

• The Blueprint in the Code: What DNA, Coins, and Ancient Words Reveal
• The Evidence of Silence: Peter Loth’s Story and the Story of Christianity
• Parashat Bereshit: Dan McClellan’s First Contradiction, Our Mail, and Adam the Blueprint
• Trump Is Rebuilding An American Heritage Returning To God, Family, Country.
• The Torah Is Incredible: Unequivocal Mathematical Proof of Divine Origin — And Why It Survives Every Test

Creation itself was declared tov me’od — very good. You are His child. He does not need your goodness; He wants you to choose it. The command in Devarim is still the same one that stood between the two trees:

“See, I have set before you life and good, death and evil… choose life.”

The Tree of Life was never removed from the structure of reality. It is still the option. Hashem is already in every human life as HaMakom. The only thing He leaves entirely in your hands is whether you will fear Heaven — whether you will turn toward Him and choose good.

The Jewish idea, in short

Free will had to exist in the Garden. That is why there were two trees.

If there had been only the Tree of Life, Adam and Chava would have had no real alternative. Love that cannot be refused is not love; obedience that cannot be refused is not choice. Hashem therefore placed the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the same garden so that the first humans — and every human after them — would stand before a genuine decision.

The Sages put the paradox in one sentence (Berachot 33b):

“Everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven.”

And Rabbi Akiva (Avot 3:15):

“Everything is foreseen, yet free will is given.”

Hashem knows the whole story because He is not in the story. He is HaMakom — The Place. The world exists inside Him; He is not contained by the world. Time and space are His creations. His four-letter Name (Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh) itself holds hayah / hoveh / yihyeh — was, is, and will be — at once. From outside time, He sees every moment. From inside time, you still choose.

That is the “Name squared” image: the letters arranged in a geometric square containing galaxies. The Name is not a label inside the universe; the universe is inside the Name.

Creation itself was declared tov me’od — very good. You are His child. He does not need your goodness; He wants you to choose it. The command in Devarim is still the same one that stood between the two trees:

“See, I have set before you life and good, death and evil… choose life.”

The Tree of Life was never removed from the structure of reality. It is still the option. Hashem is already in every human life as HaMakom. The only thing He leaves entirely in your hands is whether you will fear Heaven — whether you will turn toward Him and choose good.

מקום in standard gematria is 186.

$$מ = 40,\quad ק = 100,\quad ו = 6,\quad ם = 40$$מ=40,ק=100,ו=6,ם=40

$$40 + 100 + 6 + 40 = 186$$40+100+6+40=186

That is the number that the Arizal and, later, the Kabbalists pair with the squared Tetragrammaton.

The squared Name (Mispar Perati)
Do not square 26. Square each letter of יהוה:

$$10^{2} + 5^{2} + 6^{2} + 5^{2} = 100 + 25 + 36 + 25 = 186$$102+52+62+52=100+25+36+25=186

HaMakom
With the article: המקום = 5 + 186 = 191.
If the final mem is counted gadol (600): מקום = 746. The usual teaching uses the simple 186.

Where the word first appears
Genesis 1:9: “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered unto one place (makom).” The first makom in Torah is the gathering-point of creation — space itself being assigned a location by the One who is not located.

The midrash that names Him HaMakom
Bereishit Rabbah 68:9, on Yaakov at Bet-El (“he encountered the place”):

Why do they call the Holy One HaMakom? Because He is the Place of the world, and the world is not His place.

That is the theological payload of 186: He contains time and space; they do not contain Him. That is also why foreknowledge and free will can stand together.

Other 186 identities used in the sources

Form	Value	Note
מקום	186	Place / HaMakom without the heh
יהוה squared letterwise	186	Arizal / mispar perati
קוף (letter kuf spelled out)	100+6+80 = 186	Kuf is the inner letter of makom
יעקב + its 4 letters	182 + 4 = 186	Ohr Chadash: Yaakov is the “place” for Israel
נקודה (165) + small gematria of נקודה (21)	186	Some creation teachings: the primordial point plus its reduced value

The letters of the word itself
מקום splits as מ–ם (the two mems, waters / presence) around קו (kav, the ray). Chassidic writers read that as: the inner letters are the kav that enters the vacated space; the outer letters are the mem of the primordial “waters.” Space is not empty. It is structured by the Name.

Reduced / katan
1+8+6 = 15; 1+5 = 6. Six is vav, the connector between the Name and makom. The Place holds the worlds together.

For the video line, the clean teaching is:

Square the Name: 100 + 25 + 36 + 25 = 186.
186 is Makom.
The Name squared is The Place.

That is the gematria. The midrash is the meaning.

“But Hashem already knows what I will do — so where is free will?”

From outside the reel, He sees every frame at once. That is what the Name means: hayah, hoveh, yihyeh — was, is, will be — one word. Square the letters, and you get 186, which is Makom. He is the Place that contains the film. Knowing the movie is not the same as forcing the actor.

From inside a frame, the choice is real. Rabbi Akiva: All is foreseen, yet free will is given. Free will is not a single moment at the beginning. It is everywhere on the strip.

The film strip and the Matrix line

Your life is already on the reel, like a finished movie in the can. In the block universe, you can “visit” any frame — memory, teshuvah, even prayer that reaches “back” — but you do not cut frames out. The Matrix line is used that way: you did not drop into this world only to invent a path from nothing. You entered a story that already has a shape, and you are here to understand why you chose and to live out that choice as His child.

That does not cancel bechirah. The Oracle can see the door. You still walk through it.

What has Hashem made you for

He made you with potential. He made you succeed. You are not a prop outside Him. You are a frame inside HaMakom. The two trees are still standing in the middle of the garden because a movie without a real choice is not a human life.

In 2000, at Rabin Medical Center in Israel, Professor Leonard Leibovici took the charts of 3,393 patients who had bloodstream infections between 1990 and 1996. He randomized them, double-blind. Then people prayed for one group — years after those hospital stays were already over.

The prayed-for group had a slightly lower death rate (28.1% vs 30.2%) and significantly shorter hospital stays and fever. The prayer landed in the past.

Ephraim’s point is not “science proved tefillah.” He says it himself: an interesting, controversial study that fits what the Torah already teaches. In Hashem’s world, there is no separate past. He is HaMakom. Every frame is present to Him. So ein mukdam u’meuchar baTorah — there is no before and after in the Torah. Avraham is not gone. Kaddish is not only memory. A mitzvah can touch a life then.

The four reasons (Shaar HaGilgulim, as Ephraim teaches them)

1. Repair. You crossed a prohibition. The soul returns to fix the break.
2. Finish the mitzvah. You left a positive command undone. Torah itself is the endless one: if you only learn pshat, you return to it until you also learn remez, drash, and sod. Four levels. You can learn forever.
3. Help someone else. Not because you failed. Because you are needed. A soul that has already done well is sent back to guide and rectify others.
4. Bashert. Free will can make two destined souls miss each other. The wheel brings them again.

Purpose

The destination is set. The route is yours. Ephraim’s GPS: you take a wrong turn, and it says, “Recalculating.” Same end. New road. Hashem made you to succeed. Gilgul is not a trap. It is time to learn and to choose good in this frame.

Free Will is the only thing you do not do against your will.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

• Home Page:
• What It Means To Be Free.
• How Can Christianity and Judaism Be “Two Sides of the Same Coin” When One Looks Nothing Like the Original Blueprint?
• The Greater Exodus is Coming
•  The Tree of Life Is Still Here

The Blueprint of Creation and the Tree of Life

The First Hebrew

An essay on Gan Eden as the story of every human soul

The Story Beneath the Story

The story of Gan Eden is not a children’s tale about a talking snake and a piece of fruit. It is not only a report of something that happened once to two people at the beginning of time. It is the story of every human being who has ever been born.

Adam is not merely a remote ancestor. Adam is the father of everyone alive today. We are all B’nei Adam — children of the one. Before the many, there was one. That one is the blueprint.

The Zohar Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai

The Torah cannot be understood on the literal level alone. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the Zohar warns against the person who thinks the narratives of the Torah are ordinary stories: the tales are garments; beneath the garments is a body of commandments; beneath the body is a soul; and in the World to Come the righteous will look upon the soul of the soul.

The Rambam Genesis: A Map to the Soul

The Ramban writes at the opening of Bereishit that Ma’aseh Bereishit is a deep secret that cannot be understood from the verses themselves, but only from the received tradition dating back to Moshe Rabbeinu, and that those who know it are bound to conceal it. The Rambam, in the Guide for the Perplexed, likewise treats the account of creation and the garden as carrying secrets clothed in figurative speech.

He refuses to read Genesis 3 as a casual historical anecdote. It is an instruction about the human intellect, desire, and the condition of man. What follows stands in that line: peshat is not discarded, but the garden is read as the map of a soul.

What Is Adam?

Adam is not a private biography. Adam is the original collective spirit that contained every later soul. Before individuals, there was one living form — a cell that would divide into a body of many cells, still sharing one life.

The Arizal’s tradition of the great soul of Adam and the simple fact that Scripture itself calls male and female by the single name Adam point to the same truth: the many are rooted in the one. To ask “Who was Adam?” is also to ask “Who am I?” The garden is not only behind us. It is the inner landscape through which every soul passes.

The Process of Life. Atzilut, Beriah, Yetzirah

Creation itself proceeds in stages, as the verbs of Scripture reveal. Intention arises first. Then creation. Then formation. The four worlds of the kabbalists — Atzilut, Beriah, Yetzirah, Asiyah — are not later inventions pasted onto the text. They are the grammar of Bereishit. Bara, “He created,” and the verbs of forming and making describe different densities of being.

Adam was not created first as a creature of the physical world. The human was intended, created, and formed in the upper garden and the lower garden — spiritual dimensions of Gan Eden in Beriah and Yetzirah — and only afterward clothed in the density of Asiyah. The verbs tell you which world is being spoken.

Adam The BluePrint and the Two Yuds

When the Torah describes the forming of the human, it writes vayyitzer with two yuds: וַיִּיצֶר. When it describes the forming of the animals, the same verb appears with one yud. The Sages heard the doubled letter.

There were two formations: from the upper worlds and from the lower worlds; a formation for this world and a formation for the World to Come; and two inclinations placed within the one being — yetzer tov and yetzer hara.

“Woe unto me from my Creator, and woe unto me from my inclination.” The two yuds are the signature of a creature who belongs to heaven and to earth at once. That is what it means to be Adam.

Why They Ate: Wisdom, Growth, and Two Readings of Genesis

Why did they eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? The surface reading is disobedience. The inner reading is more severe and more compassionate. Chava saw what the verse actually says she saw.

“When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise…” She saw food. She saw beauty. She saw wisdom — lehaskil. The tree offered expanded vision. The eyes would open. They would know, as knowing is known, in a world where good and evil are no longer sealed in separate rooms. That is not a small temptation. It is the temptation of growth.

Here, the Jewish reading of Genesis differs from the dominant Christian reading. In much of Christian theology, the episode becomes original sin: a fall that stains every descendant and can be repaired only by a unique savior. Judaism does not deny the wound. It refuses to make the wound the last word about the human being. The Torah’s own later voice is not “you are ruined.”

The Two Trees-Choose Life

It is “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil… therefore choose life.” The tree is the beginning of moral knowledge and free will, not the annihilation of the image. Good and evil are now intertwined in everything in this world. Beneficial things can harm. Bitter things can heal. That mixture is Earth’s climate. It is also the only climate in which a soul can grow.

How does a soul grow in heaven? In a realm of unbroken unity, there is light, but there is little to push against. What can you gain there that you do not already have as a gift? Growth is the greatest reason for coming here. Earth is not a punishment first. Earth is a workshop. The descent is for the sake of the ascent. You are formed against your will.

You are born against your will. So teaches Pirkei Avot. The soul does not volunteer for constriction the way a tourist volunteers for a trip. The soul is brought. It resists. It is placed. That resistance is part of the tradition’s honesty. We did not design this curriculum. We are inside it.

What Death Means, and What Nakedness Became

What is death? In Hebrew, the surrounding language of death is the language of crossing. The root avar means to pass over, to transfer, to move from one place to another. A ma’avar is a passage. Mavet, death, in the inner reading, is not the snuffing of a candle. It is histalkut — a leaving of one garment and one world for another.

The First Hebrew Adam, Crossed Over: Died

So Adam and Chava did die. They crossed. They left the unity of the upper garden and entered the world of duality. Male and female as separate, facing one another rather than as one Adam. Heaven’s unity became earth’s two.

“They were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed.” In the world before eating, nakedness was transparency. Nothing to hide because there was no split between the inner and the outer. After eating, the same nakedness became a source of shame. The eyes opened onto a world in which exposure has a cost. That is not only a story about clothing. It is a story about consciousness.

The Garments of Light to Garments of 70

Then Hashem makes garments. The verse says kotnot ‘or — garments of skin. In Rabbi Meir’s Torah, the same words were found written as garments of light. One letter: alef instead of ayin. Or with an alef is light. Or with an ayin is skin. Alef is one. Ayin is seventy.

The journey from garments of light to garments of skin is the journey from unity to the seventy faces of a fractured world. Spirit becomes physical. Light is folded into skin. That is embodiment. That is what it means to become human in Asiyah.

The Torah has seventy faces. Each letter has seventy reasons it stands where it stands. The shift from alef to ayin is not a scribe’s accident in the Midrash. It is the whole itinerary: from the One into the seventy, so that the seventy can find their way back to the One.

The Real Journey: Consequences, Work, and the Serpent

What does it mean to become human? It is not a fall that ends the story. It is a journey that has consequences. Our story is the same story, with the same consequences. The work of your hands. The pain of raising children. Bread from a ground that resists you. These are not only curses. They are the curriculum of a world where nothing is handed over finished.

The serpent is told it will crawl on the dust and eat dust all the days of its life. The appetite that once could have walked is now pressed into the earthly realm. This is the animal self against the higher soul.

Who is the serpent? Not a cartoon villain outside the human being. In the inner teaching, the nachash is the innate drive, the yetzer itself. At first it had “legs” — a capacity to move upright, to walk toward Hashem. After the misdirection, it loses that stature. It crawls. It eats dust. Its hunger is now bound to the lowest field.

358 – Messiah and the Serpent

The serpent is the life-energy of the soul when that energy is directed toward appetite rather than the Source. Hashem’s question in the garden is not only a question to one man in one hour. It is the question asked of us: Are you Adam or a snake? Will the drive remain on its belly, or will it rise above its lower states and follow Hashem?

The gematria makes the point without softness. Nachash, serpent, equals 358. Mashiach equals 358. The same number. The misdirected energy is not thrown away. It is removed from the dust and moved upward. What crawls can walk. What eats dust can feed on the Tree of Life. The serpent must rise. That rising is the work of redemption in a single life and in the life of the world.

The Journey Home

The path is from spirit to physical and back again. Light into skin. From this world home. But not as we left. We return with love that was lived, with struggle that was not theoretical, with wisdom that can only be purchased where good and evil grow on one tree. That is why the eating happened. Not because the story needed a villain, but because a soul that never leaves unity never learns what unity costs and what unity is worth.

This is taught in its fullness only from teacher to student, father to son, within the oral tradition. The verses are the garment. The soul of the verses is handed across a table, not downloaded from the page alone.

Adam remains the first Hebrew in the sense that matters here: the first one whose name means both “earth” and “likeness,” the first one formed with two yuds, the first one asked whether he would be a human being or a snake. The garden is still open as a question. The Tree of Life still stands in the center. The blueprint has not been lost. It is waiting for hands that have already known skin and still remember light.

“It is a tree of life to those who grasp it.” — Proverbs 3:18

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Beit Hashahoavah

• Chapter 2: The Tree of Life
• Why Christianity Never Got Out of the Garden
• Hashem Chose a Family: The Tree of Life Blueprint Was Given to Protect All of Humanity
• Becoming Aware of Your Soul: The Tree of Life Blueprint Christianity Never Answered
• The Eternal Struggle of Self: Reincarnation, the Expanding “I,” and the Soul’s Never-Ending Journey

One Of America’s Top Vision Doctors

In the first minute of a conversation between caregiving researcher Neal K. Shah and neuro-optometrist Dr. Bryce Appelbaum, the host is corrected. Eyesight, Appelbaum says, is a symptom. It is the ability to focus clearly, the thing glasses and contacts are for, the thing a standard exam stops at: are the eyes healthy, and can you read the chart? Vision is what the brain does next.

It filters, organizes, and processes what comes through the eyes, then turns it into meaning and action. You can be told you are 20/20 and still be unable to converge both eyes on one point, track a line, or find your way through a familiar room.¹

That correction is the whole essay.

We have an attention deficit. I transpose letters. You carry the signs people file under dyslexia. I also teach Torah. For years, I watched my grandchildren glued to a phone, and I watched my mother spend the last years she could still function in front of a television, in a house that was not empty. I thought those were separate sorrows. Appelbaum’s distinction says they are one failure, missed because everyone was reading the chart.

Scripture already ran the functional exam.

Where there is no vision, the people come apart

The King James of Proverbs 29:18 says, “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” The Hebrew is sharper, and it is not about eyesight.

בְּאֵין חָזוֹן יִפָּרַע עָם וְשֹׁמֵר תּוֹרָה אַשְׁרֵהוּ

Where there is no chazon, the people yippara. Chazon is a revealed sight, an oracle, not a score on a chart. Yippara is the same verb used of Israel at the golden calf: they cast off restraint, they were made naked, they came apart.² The second half is not a different subject.

The one who guards Torah is happy. Revelation without instruction runs wild. Instruction without a living sight is a chart you can recite but still cannot use to navigate the room.

A standard exam asks, ” Can you read the letters. A functional exam assesses whether the two eyes and the brain work together. The proverb asks the same question of the people. Can you see what was revealed and keep it?

The wrong prescription

My teacher, Rabbi Tovia Singer, does not tell people to pray for a doctrine. He tells them to read the Book and take off the glasses someone else put on them. Read the original without the prescription.

That is Hosea, not a slogan.

נִדְמוּ עַמִּי מִבְּלִי הַדָּעַת כִּי־אַתָּה הַדַּעַת מָאַסְתָּ וְאֶמְאָסְאךָ מִכַּהֵן לִי וַתִּשְׁכַּח תּוֹרַת אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֶשְׁכַּח בָּנֶיךָ גַּם־אָנִי

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you from being priest to Me. You have forgotten the Torah of your God; I also will forget your children.”³

Nidmu is to be cut off, silenced, ruined. The cause is not a missing building. It is mibli hada’at, due to a lack of knowledge. And the knowledge they rejected is named in the same verse: Torat Eloheicha, the Torah of your God. The priest who will not look at the text loses the children. That is the verse I did not want. It is also the verse that explains a house.

Appelbaum says fifteen of the eighteen symptoms most often tied to ADHD are also symptoms of functional vision problems, and that children labeled with ADHD are about three times more likely to have convergence insufficiency, the failure of both eyes to point at the same place.⁴

I am not a clinician, and I am not claiming my transposed letters were only a vision problem. I am saying that a label can describe the behavior while missing the team that is failing. Someone looks at the chart, says, “You see fine,” and hands you thicker glasses.

Adam’s family has been handed a religion in the same way. We can pass the chart. You can repeat the creed. You still cannot converge. The Torah’s claim is blunt: one Adam, one household, one set of sayings. If the glasses require a second founder before the first book is allowed to say what it has to say, they are not correcting vision.

They are replacing the test. Christianity and Islam can be argued elsewhere. Here, one contrast is enough. The Ten Sayings repair a house. A creed that cannot sit at the same table as the family next door has failed the functional exam. Rabbi Singer’s instruction is the clinical move: take the prescription off and read the page as it was before the glasses.

This is a midrash on a medical distinction. Dr. Appelbaum did not diagnose a religion. The mapping is mine.

A mother, a television, a familiar room

The 2024 Lancet Commission added untreated vision loss to its list of modifiable dementia risks, a small share in its worldwide model, about 2 percent.⁵ A Johns Hopkins analysis the same year, in a national sample of older Americans, estimated that up to 19 percent of prevalent dementia cases might be attributable to vision impairment, much of it correctable, with contrast sensitivity and near vision carrying more of the weight than the distance chart.⁶

Appelbaum’s point to families is the practical one. Getting lost in a familiar place can be an early warning sign that spatial vision, not just memory, is failing. A standard exam does not test whether the brain is still building a map of the room.

I missed it.

My mother spent the last years she could function watching television, alone inside a house where her family lived. I am not diagnosing her from a podcast, and I am not charging the family with a medical error. I am naming what the screen does. It does not ask you to converge on a face.

It does not ask you to track a voice, judge a doorway, or answer. Passive television viewing and scrolling, Appelbaum warns, weaken the visual and nervous systems, especially when cognition is already declining.¹ The room goes flat. The person is present and not present.

Hosea had already said the quiet part. Forget the Torah of your God, and the children are forgotten too. A person can live with the Book in the house and still be watching something else. Lack of knowledge is not a low test score. It is a priestly failure: the ones who were supposed to keep the sight did not put the page in their hands.

Glued: To Your Phone and Television

Appelbaum calls the screen habit a strain that the visual system was not built for. Hours at inches from the face. High-energy light. Almost no distance. Almost no real depth. A two-dimensional field where the eyes lock near and stop teaming the way they team in a room.¹

I have watched my grandchildren’s posture. Glued is the word, and it is earned. A child who cannot look up cannot learn to track a line of Hebrew, a face across the table, or a boundary. Yippara again. No chazon, and the people, including the small ones, cast off restraint. The phone is not a neutral window. It is a prescription that says the chart is fine while the skill of seeing a real room atrophies.

He does not answer that with thicker glasses. He answers it with training. Shut the near field. Give the system distance, motion, and two eyes on one point. The spiritual shape is the same. Shut the rectangle. Put the page in the hands. Read aloud. The skill returns with use. Hosea’s threat is also Hosea’s map: the children are lost when the Torah is forgotten, and they are the ones the verse refuses to leave unnamed.

The exercise

Appelbaum’s good news is that vision is a skill, trainable at any age, and that cognitive decline is not always a sentence.¹ I cannot promise that of a brain disease. I can say the proverb has already promised it to the people. The one who guards Torah is happy. Not the one who passed a creed. The one who keeps the instruction at heart, where the seeing actually happens.

Adam is the blueprint. The Ten Sayings are the alignment. Torah is the operating text. Someone gave us glasses and told us everything was all right. Rabbi Singer’s line is the functional exam: do not pray for a doctrine. Read the original without the prescription.

Do one thing. Do not collect a new religion and call it a checkup. Ask whether the eyes and the instruction are converging on one point. If the household can name one father and keep the sayings, the chart was never the problem.

I transpose letters. I still track the text. That is the receipt that the skill can be trained.

With thanks to Dr. Bryce Appelbaum and to Neal K. Shah of Johns Hopkins and CareYaya, for the conversation that made the distinction plain: eyesight is the symptom; vision is the brain. The rest of the mapping is a Torah teacher’s, not theirs.

---

Footnotes

1. Neal K. Shah, interview with Bryce Appelbaum, OD, “The 30-Second Exercise That Could End Reading Glasses Forever,” YouTube, July 21, 2026, https://youtu.be/tkwSfy5prIE. Appelbaum distinguishes eyesight (clarity, the chart, glasses) from vision (brain filtering, teaming, tracking, depth, meaning, action), and warns that passive screen time weakens the visual and nervous system.
2. Proverbs 29:18. Hebrew chazon is revelation or oracle, not eyesight. Yippara is “cast off restraint”; the same verb describes Israel at the calf in Exodus 32:25.
3. Hosea 4:6, author’s translation from the Masoretic text.
4. As stated by Appelbaum in the Shah interview. The convergence finding has a paper trail: David B. Granet et al., “The Relationship between Convergence Insufficiency and ADHD,” Strabismus 13, no. 4 (2005): 163–68, reported a roughly threefold higher rate of convergence insufficiency among children with ADHD. Overlap of symptoms is not the same as identity. Vision therapy studies have reported improved binocular measures and lower ADHD symptom scores in children who had both; they do not show that ADHD is only a vision problem.
5. Gill Livingston et al., “Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet Standing Commission,” The Lancet 404, no. 10452 (2024): 572–628. Untreated vision loss was added as a modifiable risk factor, with a population attributable fraction of nearly 2 percent in the Commission’s model.
6. Jason R. Smith et al., “Vision Impairment and the Population Attributable Fraction of Dementia in Older Adults,” JAMA Ophthalmology 142, no. 10 (2024): 900–908. In a U.S. sample of older adults, the population attributable fraction of prevalent dementia for at least one vision impairment was 19 percent (95 percent CI 8.2–29.7). That is an upper-bound estimate assuming causality, not proof that one in five cases is caused by the eyes alone. Contrast sensitivity carried the largest share.

• Chapter 1: The Elephant in the Room
• The Divided Mind: Cain, Abel, and the Blueprint of Creation in Torah and Neuroscience
• The Atom and The Man
• Toldot | תולדות | “Consequences”
• Until This Day Parashat Ki Tavo

The Temple was a working sanctuary with precise rules, not a metaphor that any death could fulfill.

A korban required the right animal, the right place, the right hands, and the right application of blood. Jesus of Nazareth met none of those requirements. That is not polemics. It is how the system actually operated.

Whoever told you a crucified man could function as a Temple sacrifice never sat with a Jew whose family still carries the priestly line. My grandfather was a Cohen. The procedures were not poetry. They were law, logistics, and lineage.

This essay explains how the Temple actually worked, what the offerings really did, why a human execution outside the city cannot be a korban, and how the asham language of Isaiah 53 fits the remnant of Israel and her Messiah without turning the Torah’s sacrificial system into a one-time human offering.

Sacrifices: How the Temple Actually Worked

The Second Temple was the operational center of Jewish religious life. Pilgrims came three times a year. Daily and festival offerings ran on a schedule. Priests served in rotating mishmarot. Two lambs were offered every day as the tamid, funded by the half-shekel tax collected across the empire.

On Passover, the volume was enormous: even conservative reconstructions put tens of thousands of lambs through the courtyard in a single afternoon. Priests worked in relays. When the hooks on the walls were full, they used poles. Blood was collected in vessels designed so it would not congeal if set down. This was a functioning facility, not an abstract symbol.

Five species could go on the altar: cattle, sheep, goats, turtledoves, and pigeons. Grain offerings used semolina, oil in prescribed forms, frankincense, and salt. There was a price ladder all the way down to two birds or a tenth of an ephah of semolina, so the underprivileged were not locked out.

You immersed. You left your shoes. In many cases, the owner himself placed his hands on the animal (semikhah) and performed the slaughter. The priest’s monopoly was the blood: receiving it, carrying it, and applying it to the altar according to the type of offering.

The system was terrestrial and specific. Location mattered. Only the Temple courtyard counted. The Kohanim from Aaron’s line handled the blood. Only unblemished animals of the permitted species were valid. Human sacrifice was forbidden. That last point is not a side note. The Torah repeatedly condemns it.

The Five Offerings, Sorted by Why Someone Came

The offerings are not interchangeable “sin payments.” They answer different needs.

Olah (burnt offering). The whole animal (except the hide) goes up in smoke. It is a gift of complete dedication. Daily tamid offerings were olot. It is not primarily a sin vehicle.

Minchah (grain offering). Flour, oil, and frankincense. The option when an animal is beyond reach.

Zevach shelamim (peace/well-being offering). Shared meal. Parts on the altar, parts to the priests, the rest eaten by the offerer and family in a state of ritual fitness. Thanksgiving, vows, and freewill offerings often took this form. The Passover lamb belongs in this family of shared sacred meals, not in the chatat category.

Chatat / hattat (commonly mistranslated as “sin offering”). Better understood as a purification offering. It addresses unintentional violations and certain states of impurity (childbirth, some skin conditions, Nazirite completion, etc.). The blood is applied to the horns of the altar and, in graver cases, to the inner furnishings.

The offering cleanses the sanctuary from the contamination that sin and impurity deposit there. It does not function as a general substitution that transfers an individual’s guilt onto an animal, so the person walks away justified in the later Christian sense. Intentional, high-handed sin was not covered by a standard chatat.

Asham (guilt/reparation offering). A ram in most cases. It addresses specific trespasses: misuse of holy things, certain frauds and oaths involving money, and cases of doubt (asham talui). Restitution plus a fifth is required in addition to the animal. It repairs a breach. It is not a catch-all atonement for the human condition.

These categories matter. Conflating them is how later theology turns every drop of blood into the same transaction.

What a Sin Offering Really Is

The English phrase “sin offering” has done more damage than almost any other translation in this subject. The chatat is not a payment that buys the sinner a clean slate by killing a stand-in.

Jacob Milgrom and others have shown that the blood of the chatat is applied to sacred furniture because impurity and certain sins defile the house. The more serious the offense (high priest, community, or unrepented high-handed sin), the deeper the contamination reaches into the sanctuary. Yom Kippur’s inner rite exists to purge the Holy of Holies itself.

The offerer leans on the animal and may confess. The animal dies. Blood is dashed or smeared where the Torah specifies. Priests eat most ordinary individual chatatot. The person is restored to fitness to approach the sanctuary. That is not the same mechanism as “one man dies and the world is declared righteous.”

A Cohen’s grandson hears this in the family register: the work was physical, timed, and locational. Blood that never reached the altar was not a korban. An execution performed by Roman soldiers on a hill outside the walls was not a korban.

Why Jesus Could Not Have Been a Sacrifice

Start with the Torah’s own rules, which were still in force while the Temple stood.

• Species and fitness. Only listed animals, unblemished, of the right age and sex for the offering type. A human being is not a permitted species. The Torah treats human sacrifice as an abomination. Crucifixion wounds, scourging, and a pierced side would also fail the “without blemish” standard applied to animals.
• Place. Sacrifices are brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting / Temple. Offering elsewhere cuts a person off from the people (Leviticus 17:8–9). Golgotha was not the Temple courtyard.
• Agent. Kohanim handle the blood. The owner typically slaughters. Roman soldiers and a public execution do not fulfill either role.
• Blood on the altar. Leviticus 17:11 ties the language of atonement to blood at the altar God designated. Blood that soaked the ground outside the city was not applied to the horns or the veil.
• Type mismatch. Christians identify Jesus with the Passover lamb, a sin/guilt offering, and the Yom Kippur rites. Those are different korbanot with different procedures, different eating rules, and different blood applications. The pesach is eaten in homes in haste; it is not the chatat that purges the sanctuary.
• No priestly offering, no burning of designated parts, no priestly consumption. After death, the body was taken down and buried. That is burial, not the prescribed treatment of sacrificial portions.

The Temple System

The claim that the Temple system was always only a shadow pointing to one future human death is a later reading. While the Temple stood, Jews—including Jesus’ own contemporaries who continued to bring offerings—treated the system as binding.

The Gospels themselves show people being sent to the priests to complete purification rites. The system was not considered obsolete before 70 CE.

After the destruction, Judaism did not invent a replacement for human sacrifice. It intensified teshuvah, prayer, and deeds of justice. Hosea 14:3 is read as “we will offer the words of our lips instead of bulls.” That is the Jewish path forward, not a retroactive validation of an extra-Temple execution.

The Asham of Isaiah 53: Remnant of Israel and Her Messiah

Isaiah 53:10 uses the word asham: “if his soul makes an asham” / “when you make his life a guilt offering.” The surrounding poem describes a servant who is despised and wounded, yet will see offspring and prolong days. The nations, and even “we,” are shocked by the reversal.

Jewish interpretation of the servant has never been monolithic.

Many readers, especially from the medieval period onward (Rashi and others), identify the servant with Israel or the righteous remnant. Israel suffers at the hands of the nations; the remnant remains faithful; the suffering itself becomes a kind of reparation that the nations will one day recognize.

The grammar can be collective even when the pronouns are singular, a common biblical device. The remnant is the part of Israel that did not abandon the covenant while the majority stumbled. Their endurance “bears” the consequences of the people’s and the nation’s violence.

Targum Jonathan

Other traditional sources—Targum Jonathan on 52:13, Sanhedrin 98b on 53:4, various midrashim, and later commentators such as Alsheich—read the passage messianically. The Messiah (sometimes distinguished as a suffering figure) identifies with Israel’s pain, intercedes, and is ultimately exalted.

Some texts even speak of the Messiah accepting suffering so that Israel will not perish. That is not the same as a once-for-all human korban that ends the need for the Temple system. It is the Messiah as the concentrated, faithful Israel—the remnant in person—whose life and affliction repair the breach.

The Asham Offering

The asham itself, in Leviticus, is a reparation offering. It restores what was taken plus a fifth and then brings the ram. In the prophetic image, the servant’s life functions as that reparation: the damage done to God’s name, to Israel, and to the relationship with the nations is made good through the servant’s fidelity under suffering.

The remnant lives that pattern across history. The Messiah, in the sources that read him here, is the one in whom the remnant pattern reaches its clearest expression. He does not abolish the distinction between permitted animals and human beings. Jesus does not move the altar to a Roman execution site. He embodies Israel’s vocation and, in some readings, bears its cost until God vindicates him and restores the people.

That is a Jewish way to hold both the remnant and the Messiah without importing a theology that the Temple’s own rules cannot support.

The Temple was never a general license for any death to count as atonement. It was a house with doors, an altar with horns, a priesthood with a pedigree, and a list of animals.

A Cohen’s family remembers the difference. The asham of Isaiah 53 can speak of Israel’s remnant and of her Messiah as the one who shares and concentrates that remnant’s calling. It does not rewrite Leviticus so that a man killed outside the walls becomes the ram.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

• Chapter 2: The Tree of Life
• The Torah never commanded offerings. It never said “bring the best.”
• Two Sides Of The Same Coin Christianity and Islam (Part 2)
• The Sleep That Binds A Marriage
• Judiasm Has Nothing to Hide. A Point-by-Point Response to The BLK SHP Bible Talk Episode

Sit down. You asked me what the Tanach says about Daniel 9. Not what Monte Judah said. Nor what the King James said. Not what a church calculator said when it was trying to land on a crucifixion. You asked what the Hebrew says.

You once sat in those rooms. I know Lion and Lamb. The charts. They mention the “seventy weeks” that always seem to end wherever the teacher needs them to end. You told me they spoke of waiting — even of 1,335 years — as if Gabriel had handed Daniel a stopwatch for a man from Nazareth.

Twelve years later, you are here, in 5787, and the clock they sold you still has not produced the world the prophets described. That is not an accident. That is what happens when you force a Jewish text to answer a Christian question that was never asked.

So we will do what we always do. Israel will open the book. We read the words. We refuse to let a translator smuggle a theology into a noun.

I. Daniel is not hunting for a crucified god. He is hunting for Jeremiah’s seventy years.

Open Daniel 9 from the beginning. Do not start at verse 24. Missionaries love to start at verse 24 because the first twenty-three verses ruin the sermon.

In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans — in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, meditated in the books, over the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years for the desolations of Jerusalem.¹

Daniel is reading Jeremiah. That is the whole setting.

For thus saith the Lord: After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will remember you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.²

And again:

“And this whole land shall be a desolation, and a waste; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon.³

Daniel sees that the seventy years are not behaving the way he first counted them. Daniel fasts, and he puts on sackcloth. He confesses the sins of Israel. He begs for the city and the Sanctuary. Then Gabriel arrives — not to announce a new religion, and not to predict a Roman crucifixion four and a half centuries later — but to explain the chronology Daniel has been miscounting.⁴

That is the peshat. If you lose the peshat, you will invent a church.

II. The seventy weeks are seventy sevens of years — 490 years — decreed upon Israel and Jerusalem.

Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sin, and to atone for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.⁵

A “week” here is a heptad of years. Almost no one disputes that. Seventy times seven is 490 years.

Rashi states the span with the simplicity of a man who is not selling a product:

The count of the weeks is four hundred and ninety years: the Babylonian exile seventy, and the Second Temple four hundred and twenty.⁶

From the destruction of the First Temple until the destruction of the Second Temple. That is the frame. Not from Artaxerxes to Calvary. From churban to churban.

Look at what verse 24 says must be accomplished by the close of those 490 years — six things:

1. to finish the transgression
   
2. to put an end to sin
   
3. to atone for iniquity
   
4. to bring in everlasting righteousness
   
5. to seal vision and prophet
   
6. to anoint a most holy place — kodesh kodashim, the Holy of Holies, a place, not a person⁷

These six things are messianic in the true sense. They describe the world after Israel’s long accounting is complete — the world in which transgression is finished, prophecy is sealed because it has been fulfilled, and the Holy of Holies is anointed again.

Now I will ask you the only question that matters. Did any of that happen in the year 30, or 33, or whenever the church says the Nazarene died?

Did the transgression finish?
Sin come to an end?
Did everlasting righteousness arrive?
Was the vision and the prophet sealed because the age of fulfillment had begun?
Was the Holy of Holies anointed?

Consider the world. Look at the first century. Look at the year 70. Sin did not end. The Sanctuary was burned. Israel was scattered. If a missionary tells you Daniel 9 is about Jesus, he has just handed you the refutation. Jesus did not do the six things.

The church then invents a “second coming” to park everything the first coming failed to deliver. Daniel 9 does not give them that parking space. The 490 years have ended. When they terminate, those six things are supposed to be in view — not postponed for two thousand years while the nations invent new sins.

Isaiah told us what actually triggers the redemption:

And a redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.⁸

The clock in Daniel 9 runs out in the year 70. From that moment, every generation of Israel can bring the redemption if it returns. That is why our Sages said the potential for Mashiach is launched at the destruction.⁹ Not because a man was executed forty years earlier. Because 490 years have passed, the next move belongs to Israel’s teshuvah.

III. The Hebrew word mashiach does not mean “the Messiah” in Daniel 9.

This is the sleight of hand. Learn it once, and you will never be fooled again.

The word מָשִׁיחַ — mashiach — means “anointed one.” It appears in the Tanach about thirty-nine times. It is used by priests:

If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people…¹⁰

It is used by Kinby. It is used of Saul, of David, of the ordinary anointed monarch of Israel. And — this will shock a church audience every time — it is used of a Persian emperor by name:

Thus saith the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him…¹¹

Cyrus is called God’s mashiach. Explicitly. By name. Isaiah does not whisper it. He prints it.

In thirty-seven of those thirty-nine places, honest Christian Bibles translate the word “anointed.” Only in Daniel 9:25 and 9:26 do they suddenly write “Messiah,” capitalize it — Hebrew has no capital letters — and insert a definite article the Hebrew does not possess. The text does not say ha-mashiach, “the Messiah.” It says mashiach nagid, “an anointed prince,” and later mashiach, “an anointed one.”¹²

That is not a translation. That is evangelism wearing a lexicon.

IV. There are two anointed figures, not one. The church glues them together.

Read the Hebrew of verse 25 the way it is punctuated by the words themselves:

Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.¹³

Seven weeks. Stop. Then sixty-two weeks.

The first interval is forty-nine years: from the word concerning the restoration until an anointed prince. Who is that prince? The Tanach already told you. Cyrus. Isaiah called him mashiach. Ezra records the decree:

Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, and he made a proclamation… “Whosoever there is among you of all His people, his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem… and build the house of the Lord.”¹⁴

Rashi: the time from the destruction until Cyrus, whom the Holy One called His anointed and His prince.¹⁵

Then, for sixty-two weeks — 434 years — the city is rebuilt, street and moat, in trouble. That is the Second Temple period: Persia, Greece, the wars, the Hasmoneans, Rome. Anyone who has read the books of the Maccabees, or Josephus, or the last chapters of Daniel itself, knows those centuries were not a Sunday school picnic.

Then verse 26:

And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.¹⁶

A second anointed one. After the sixty-two weeks. Cut off. V’ein lo — “and he shall have nothing,” “and he shall be no more.” Not “but not for himself.” That missionary rendering is a theological paraphrase invented to smuggle vicarious atonement into a clause that does not contain it. The same idiom appears elsewhere as simple non-existence.¹⁷

Who is that second anointed one? Rashi identifies him as Agrippa, the last king of Judah in the days of the destruction.¹⁸ Other Jewish readers point to the last high priest — priests are mashiach in Leviticus — or to the cutting off of the anointed sanctuary service itself. The point is the same. An anointed figure of the Second Temple commonwealth is removed, and then the people of the coming prince destroy the city and the Sanctuary. Rashi: Titus and his armies.¹⁹

That is 70 CE. Tisha B’Av. That is history you can touch.

V. Why the church math can never work.

I will be very plain, because you were taught the opposite.

1. They start the clock in the wrong place.
They need a Persian “decree to restore Jerusalem” that lands them in the first century, so they shop among Cyrus (c. 538 BCE), Darius, Artaxerxes to Ezra (c. 457 BCE), and Artaxerxes to Nehemiah (c. 445 BCE). Each teacher picks the decree that fits his chart. Gabriel is explaining Jeremiah’s word about the city Daniel has been praying over — not authorizing a menu of Achaemenid paperwork.

2. They crush seven weeks and sixty-two weeks into one “sixty-nine weeks.”
The Hebrew separates them. One anointed after seven weeks. Another after sixty-two more. If you glue them, you invent a single “Messiah the Prince” who arrives after 483 years. That is how you get sermons. It is not how you get the verse.

3. They need “prophetic years” of 360 days, or lunar years, or whatever fudge makes 483 land on a Friday in Nisan.
When the plain solar count fails, the year itself is redesigned. That is a later Christian device. It is not in Daniel.

4. The last week destroys them.
Even according to their own accounts, Jesus died around 30–33 CE. The Temple fell in 70 CE. That is about forty years — not three and a half years, not “the midst of the week.” Verse 26 ties the cutting off of the anointed to the destruction of the city and the Sanctuary by the people of the coming prince.

Verse 27 then speaks of one week in which a covenant is strengthened with many, and for half the week, sacrifice and offering cease.²⁰ That half-week is the war: sacrifice stops, then the House burns. A death in the year 30 and a burning in the year 70 are not “mid-week.” They are a generation apart.

5. The New Testament itself does not use Daniel 9 this way.
Search the Gospels. Read Paul. Search Hebrews. You will find Daniel 7’s “son of man” on the lips of the Nazarene. You will not find a first-century apostolic sermon that says, “Gabriel dated the cross to the year we are standing in.” The crucifixion-clock reading of Daniel 9 is a later church invention, laid over the text after the fact, when missionaries needed a verse that looked like a date.²¹

6. Karet is not Calvary.
Yikkaret mashiach — an anointed one shall be cut off. Karet in Torah is excision: a person cut off from his people, often for his own grave sin.²² It is not a technical term for a righteous man offering himself as a sin-sacrifice. The church hears “cut off” and smells Golgotha. The Hebrew hears judgment and removal.

So when you say “the math can never work,” you are not being cynical. You are reading. The arithmetic only “works” after the translator has already committed the felony.

VI. What the Tanach says the Messiah actually is.

Daniel 9 does not give you a dying-and-rising god. The rest of the Tanach is even less helpful to that project.

The Messiah of Israel is a human king from David:

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous shoot, and he shall reign as king and prosper, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name whereby he shall be called: The Lord is our righteousness.²³

He gathers the exiles:

And He will set up an ensign for the nations, and will assemble the dispersed of Israel, and gather together the scattered of Judah from the four corners of the earth.²⁴

He brings peace so public that you will not need a tract to notice it:

And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.²⁵

The knowledge of God covers the earth:

They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.²⁶

The Temple stands, and the nations come to it:

And it shall come to pass in the end of days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established as the top of the mountains… and many nations shall go and say: “Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord.”²⁷

Ezekiel’s prince offers offerings in a rebuilt House. He does not abolish Torah. The Prince does not replace Israel with a church. He does not leave the world looking exactly as it looked the day before he arrived, only with a new religion attached.²⁸

If a candidate dies and the swords are still swords, the exiles are still scattered, the House is still in ruins, and the nations still do not know the God of Jacob — then the candidate is not the one Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel described. People may love him. You may have sung about him. You may have been told that “the first coming was for the soul and the second will be for the world.” Tanach never divided the job that way. The job is public. The Torah says the job is Israel. The job is this world made right.

VII. To the student who waited and who was taught to wait again.

You said you sat as a Messianic Jew and listened to Monte Judah on this very subject. You mentioned those who wait 1,335 years. I will not litigate every chart that the ministry ever drew. I will tell you what the charts all have in common.

They treat Daniel as a locked safe whose combination is a date for Jesus. When the date fails, they move the starting peg. How come the peg will not move? They change the year’s length. When the year will not change, they invent a “gap” between the sixty-ninth week and the seventieth, and hide two thousand years inside a comma. That gap is not in the Hebrew. It is in the embarrassment of a prediction that did not come to pass.

Daniel 9 is not a riddle about Nazareth. It is a word to a Jew in exile who is trying to understand Jeremiah, who is shown that Israel’s accounting would run from one destroyed House to the next, and that after that accounting the six things of verse 24 would stand ready — if this people would return.

We are now in 5787. The Second Temple has been down for 1,956 years. That is a long time to wait. It is not a reason to accept a mistranslation. It is a reason to do what Daniel did in the opening of the chapter: confess, return, and take the books in our hands without a church standing between us and the page.

The Redeemer comes to Zion and to those in Jacob who turn from transgression.²⁹ That sentence is still the sentence. It does not require a crucified mashiach in Daniel 9. It requires Israel.

When a missionary says, “Daniel predicted the exact year Jesus would die,” you now know what to answer.

Show me the six things.
Let me see the two anointed ones without glue.
Where is ha-mashiach in Hebrew?
Read for me v’ein lo as “not for himself.”
Show me a last week that is forty years long.
Show me the New Testament quoting this clock.

He cannot. Because the Tanach never said it.

Now go read it again. In Hebrew, if you can. In a Jewish translation, if you cannot. And this time, do not start at the verse they underlined for you.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Notes

1. Daniel 9:1–2.
   
2. Jeremiah 29:10.
   
3. Jeremiah 25:11–12.
   
4. Daniel 9:3–23. Gabriel is sent “to tell thee, for thou art greatly beloved; therefore consider the matter, and understand the vision” (9:23) — the vision attached to Daniel’s prayer about Jerusalem and the seventy years, not a hidden passion narrative.
   
5. Daniel 9:24.
   
6. Rashi on Daniel 9:24. The traditional Jewish chronology of the Second Temple as 420 years, added to the 70 years of Babylon, yields 490.
   
7. Kodesh kodashim is the inner sanctum of the Sanctuary throughout Torah (e.g., Exodus 26:33–34; 1 Kings 6:16). It is a place that is anointed, not a title for a man.
   
8. Isaiah 59:20.
   
9. See the rabbinic tradition that associates the potential birth/advent of the Messiah with the destruction; the theological point, as taught in this school, is not that a literal infant is born on Tisha B’Av, but that, with the 490 years having closed, the messianic age is no longer waiting on that clock. It is waiting on Israel’s return.
   
10. Leviticus 4:3. See also Leviticus 4:5, 4:16; 6:15.
    
11. Isaiah 45:1. Cf. Isaiah 44:28: “Who saith of Cyrus: ‘He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure’; even saying of Jerusalem: ‘She shall be built’; and to the Temple: ‘Thy foundation shall be laid.’”
    
12. Compare standard Christian English (KJV, NIV, etc.) at Daniel 9:25–26 with the Hebrew, which lacks both the definite article and any capital letters. In the other occurrences of mashiach, those same Bibles typically print “anointed.”
    
13. Daniel 9:25.
    
14. Ezra 1:1–3; cf. 2 Chronicles 36:22–23.
    
15. Rashi on Daniel 9:25, citing Isaiah 45:1, 45:13.
    
16. Daniel 9:26.
    
17. Jeremiah 50:32 uses v’ein lah meqim of Babylon’s fall — “none to raise her up” — as simple finality, not vicarious suffering.
    
18. Rashi on Daniel 9:26: “The anointed one will be cut off — Agrippa, the king of Judea, who was ruling at the time of the destruction, will be slain… and he will be no more.” Rashi adds that mashiach here “is purely an expression of a prince and a dignitary.”
    
19. Rashi on Daniel 9:26: “the people of the coming monarch will destroy… That is Titus and his armies.”
    
20. Daniel 9:27.
    
21. The New Testament cites Daniel (notably Daniel 7:13–14 in the trial scenes), but it never presents 9:24–27 as a dated prediction of the crucifixion. The “seventy weeks prove Calvary” argument is post-biblical church apologetics.
    
22. See Leviticus 17:4, 18:29, 20:3–6, and the wider Torah use of karet.
    
23. Jeremiah 23:5–6; cf. Jeremiah 33:14–16; Ezekiel 37:24–28.
    
24. Isaiah 11:12; cf. Deuteronomy 30:3–5; Ezekiel 37:21–22.
    
25. Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3.
    
26. Isaiah 11:9; cf. Habakkuk 2:14.
    
27. Isaiah 2:2–3; Micah 4:1–2; Zechariah 8:20–23; 14:9, 16.
    
28. Ezekiel 37:24–28; 40–48; Isaiah 2:3 — “for out of Zion shall go forth the law.”
    
29. Isaiah 59:20; cf. Isaiah 59:21.TThe he

Tanach quotations above follow the sense of the Jewish Publication Society/traditional Jewish English and are checked against the Masoretic Text. Rashi is cited from the standard commentary on Daniel. This is a teaching in the peshat: what the verses say in their own language and setting, not what a later church needed them to say.

A davar Torah for Shabbat, 15 Tishrei 5787 — First Day of Sukkot

After the teaching of Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein on Simchat Torah, and the closing of Moshe Rabbeinu

The Mishnah

עַלכָּרְחֲךָאַתָּהנוֹצָר, וְעַלכָּרְחֲךָאַתָּהנוֹלָד, וְעַלכָּרְחֲךָאַתָּהחַי, וְעַלכָּרְחֲךָאַתָּהמֵת, וְעַלכָּרְחֲךָאַתָּהעָתִידלִתֵּןדִּיןוְחֶשְׁבּוֹןלִפְנֵימֶלֶךְמַלְכֵיהַמְּלָכִיםהַקָּדוֹשׁבָּרוּךְהוּא.

Against your will you were formed, against your will you were born, against your will you live, against your will you die, and against your will you are destined to give an account and a reckoning before the King of the kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.

— Rabbi Elazar HaKappar, Pirkei Avot 4:22.

¹

Life is never the script you write. Hashem writes all of our stories. That is not a slogan for a hard week. It is the operating system of Torah. The soul does not ask to enter the womb. The infant does not ask to leave it.

The sufferer does not always get to choose the hour of rest. And when the body is still, the Mishnah says the story is not over. There is still din v’cheshbon — judgment and an accounting — before the King who cannot be bribed.

Rambam hears in this Mishnah a careful line. The compulsion is over being formed, being born, living, and dying. It is not over fearing Heaven. “Everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven.” We do not write the plot. We do write whether we bow inside it.

²

What Rabbi Goldstein taught from Moses

Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein, speaking from the reading of Simchat Torah — Vezot Haberakhah, the death of Moses — taught the sentence this community has been carrying: things do not turn out the way we wish. That is reality. Hashem writes the story. Moses is the greatest Jew in history, and even he does not get the ending he begged for.

On Simchat Torah we dance with the scroll and then we read that the dancer’s teacher dies in Moav. The happiest day of the year closes the Five Books with a man who can see the land and cannot enter it. Rabbi Goldstein’s point is not cruelty.

It is honesty. If Moses’ life is not a prosperity script, yours will not be either. Joy on Simchat Torah is not the joy of getting what you asked. It is the joy of still holding the book whose Author did not consult you.

The Tanakh: Moses asked. The answer was no.

Listen to the prayer. Moses does not hide the wanting.

I pleaded with the Lord at that time, saying… Let me, I pray, cross over and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan, that good hill country, and the Lebanon. But the Lord was angry with me because of you, and would not listen to me. The Lord said to me, Enough! Never speak to Me of this matter again.

Deuteronomy 3:23–26.³

Then the last mountain. Hashem shows him everything — the land sworn to the fathers — and closes the door in the same breath.

The Lord said to him, This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, I will give it to your offspring. I have let you see it with your eyes, but you shall not cross over there. So Moses, the servant of the Lord, died there in the land of Moab, at the command of the Lord.

Deuteronomy 34:4–5.⁴

The Torah’s last human sentence is not “and Moses entered.” It is “and there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.” The unmatched prophet is the one who did not get in. The children go in. Joshua is filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses laid his hands on him. The story continues without the man who carried it this far.

⁵

Why? The Torah itself gives more than one door into that question. At Mei Merivah, “because you did not trust Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel.” In Deuteronomy, “the Lord was angry with me because of you” — the generation of the spies.

Rabbi David Fohrman has taught that Moses’ well-meant system of intermediate judges already taught a people how to set a burden down and hire a middleman, and that distance later flowered in the spies. Different doorways. One fact: the greatest Jew in history stands on Nebo and does not write the last line.

⁶

Why this belongs in the sukkah today

Today is not Simchat Torah. Today is the first day of Sukkot, and it falls on Shabbat. In the Diaspora we read Leviticus 22:26–23:44, maftir Numbers 29:12–16, haftarah Zechariah 14.

Next week the cycle will carry us to Hoshana Rabbah, then Shemini Atzeret, then Simchat Torah on 23 Tishrei, when Vezot Haberakhah is leyned in full. But the daily aliyah from Chumash today is already the seventh reading of Vezot Haberakhah: Moses goes up from the plains of Moab to Mount Nebo.

⁷

So the festival and the death are already speaking to each other. This morning’s festival reading commands:

You shall dwell in booths seven days… so that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 23:42–43.⁸

A sukkah is a house you did not get to finish. The roof must be schach — plant matter that is detached, that leaks stars, that cannot be a fortress. The Mishnah says we make the sukkah our permanent dwelling for seven days and the house temporary. That is Avot 4:22 built in wood. Against your will you live under a roof you do not control. Hashem made Israel live in booths. The script of security is His, not ours.

⁹

Zechariah, which we read today, does not promise that history will follow our draft. He promises that the Lord will be King over all the earth, and that the remnant of the nations will go up year by year to bow and to keep the feast of booths. The nations do not write that ending either. Jerusalem does not ask Washington for permission to be the place the world is told to climb.

¹⁰

The joy that is left

Kohelet, the scroll of this season, says there is a time to be born and a time to die. You do not pick the first. You rarely pick the second. What you pick is whether, in the days between, you will call the work “hevel” and walk away, or call the work “the gift of God” and eat your bread in the sukkah anyway.

¹¹

Moses asked again and again. The Torah uses va’etchanan — I pleaded. Hashem said, rav-lach. Enough. And then Moses does the last thing a man can do when the script is taken from him: he blesses the son of Jacob. Vezot haberakhah. This is the blessing. He does not get the land. He gives the people his last words. That is surrender that still has hands.

Hag Sukkot

Shabbat and Sukkot meet this year on the same night. Rest, and a hut that can blow. Against your will you were born. Against your will you sit here, some of you far from the land Moses only saw.

Hashem writes the story. Our work is not to seize the pen. Our work is to dwell in the booth, to bless the children who will cross, and to give the account without pretending we authored the days.

Shabbat shalom. Chag sameach.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Beit HaShoavah — Amarillo

Notes

---

1. Mishnah Avot 4:22 (some older printings number this mishnah later in chapter 4; the text is the same). The speaker is R. Elazar HaKappar. Full mishnah also teaches that the born are to die, the dead to live again, and the living to be judged; that He is designer, creator, discerner, judge, witness, and litigant; and that the grave is not a refuge.

---

2. Rambam on Avot 4:22, citing Berakhot 33b: “Everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven.” Rambam notes the Mishnah does not say “against your will you sin.” Choice remains inside a life you did not request.

---

3. Deuteronomy 3:23–26. The verb va’etchanan is related to chinun, a plea for unearned grace. Rashi: Moses asked for a free gift, not wages.

---

4. Deuteronomy 34:1–5, the seventh aliyah of Vezot Haberakhah and the close of the Chumash. Cf. Deuteronomy 32:48–52, Ha’azinu: “You shall see the land from a distance, but you shall not enter.”

---

5. Deuteronomy 34:9–10. Joshua is filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses laid hands on him. The epitaph: lo-kam navi od b’Yisrael k’Moshe.

---

6. Numbers 20:12 (Mei Merivah). Deuteronomy 1:37; 3:26; 4:21 (“because of you”). Rabbi David Fohrman, Why Couldn’t Moses Enter the Land?, on Exodus 18 and the judges as a technical solution that created distance. Sotah 14a: Moses wanted the land for its commandments, not its fruit.

---

7. Diaspora leyning, first day of Sukkot when it falls on Shabbat, 15 Tishrei 5787 / 26 September 2026: Leviticus 22:26–23:44; Numbers 29:12–16; Zechariah 14:1–21. Simchat Torah in the Diaspora this year: 23 Tishrei / 4 October 2026, reading Deuteronomy 33:1–34:12 and Genesis 1:1–2:3. Daily Chumash today (Chabad cycle): Vezot Haberakhah, seventh portion, Deuteronomy 34:1–12.

---

8. Leviticus 23:33–44 is the festival list in this morning’s reading. Verses 42–43 give the reason for the sukkah: so generations will know that Hashem seated Israel in booths at the Exodus.

---

9. Mishnah Sukkah 2:9; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 639:1 — dwell in the sukkah as one dwells in the house. The roof must be schach through which rain and stars can enter; a sealed fortress is invalid.

---

10. Zechariah 14:9, 16–19, today’s haftarah. The feast of booths becomes the pilgrimage of the nations after the war for Jerusalem.

---

11. Ecclesiastes 3:1–2; 3:13; 5:17–18. In many years Kohelet is read on Shabbat Chol HaMoed Sukkot. Because the first day is Shabbat this year, some communities read Kohelet on Shemini Atzeret. The scroll still belongs to the season.

The question of who is speaking in the Tanakh was not invented on a livestream. It was settled in the wilderness. In the year 2448 AM — 3339 years before this writing — Israel received Torah at Sinai and then spent forty years under Moshe learning how the language works:

Who the verb belongs to, what a construct chain means, when Elohim is Hashem and when Elohim is a judge or a power, and how a shaliach may carry the Sender’s first person without becoming the Sender.

English Bibles arrived last. Greek councils arrived last. Podcast frames arrived last. None of them gets to redefine the dikduk.

This essay answers the questions pressed by GodLogic and the panel in the debate with Samson, strengthens the verses he was not given time to open, and shows why the Trinity argument collapses when you refuse to let English do the theology.

A second video — an educated Christian pressed to find a prophet who taught three persons in one essence — makes the same hole visible from another angle. No, Navi taught that sentence. That is not a dodge. It is the text.

What do they need the text to do

The move is a shift, not a reading.

1. A malakh or a navi speaks in the first person.
2. The narrator later says, “Hashem who spoke.”
3. Therefore, the speaker is Hashem.
4. The same applies to a later man who speaks with authority, Hashem.
5. Like, three persons share one essence, and the worship of the man is the worship of Hashem.

Step 3 is the break. Hebrew already knows how to say that the word is Hashem’s without collapsing the speaker into the Sender. That tool is shlichut. Shelucho shel adam kemoto: a person’s agent is like him for the mission. “Like” is not “is.”

Rambam does not reject Christianity because they called Jesus an agent. An agent would have been the Jewish-shaped claim. He rejects it because they serve a god other than Hashem, alter the Torah, and make the go-between the object of worship. The fifth principle: do not serve angels or any intermediary to draw near to Him. “My Name is in him” (Shemot 23:21) warns against confusing the bearer with the Owner.

Forty years of grammar school in the desert

Sinai is 2448 AM. Moshe taught Written Torah and Oral Law together. For forty years, the nation heard the words and learned their grammar. Ve-shinantam le-vanekha. Haqhel — men, women, children, and the stranger.

Egypt and Mesopotamia locked writing in a scribal caste. Israel received an alphabet and a command to teach it. That does not mean every shepherd wrote like a sofer. It means the reading tradition — who is speaking, what the construct means — belonged to the people who received the book, not to the last man who bought a King James.

A short Hebrew lesson

Person lives on the verb. אַרְבֶּה is 1cs: “I will multiply.” English adds “the angel said” to keep the ontology tidy. Hebrew already named the speaker. It did not name him the Sender.

Suffixes attach “me” to the visible speaker. מִמֶּנִּי = from-me. Agency language. Not a metaphysical ID card.

Construct is ownership, not identity. מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה = messenger of YHWH. The second noun owns the first.

Subject switches are unmarked on purpose. Malakh, then YHWH, then Elohim in one scene names the source of the word. It does not erase the speaker’s office.

Elohim is a lesson, not a loophole. Singular verb when it is Hashem; plural sense when it is judges or powers (Shemot 21:6; 22:7–8; Tehillim 82).

Teaching line: A shaliach can speak in the sender’s mouth. He cannot sit in the sender’s chair.

---

GodLogic’s questions, one by one

1. “Show a human agent identified as Yahweh, not merely speaking on His behalf.”

That demand smuggles the creed into the question. Tanakh does not need a human to be Yahweh.

Bereshit 16:10, 13. The speaker is מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה. The verb is 1cs plus infinitive absolute: “I will surely multiply.” Then Hagar names YHWH the-one-speaking (הַדֹּבֵר) “El-Roi.” The participle names the source. The scene still opened with a malakh. Agency metonymy — not identity.

2. “Isaiah 7 — Isaiah is not called Yahweh.”

Correct — and that helps us. Yeshayahu 7:10: “YHWH continued to speak to Achaz.” The mouth is the prophet’s. Source attribution is not identity. If this verse proved identity, every navi would be Hashem.

3. “Deuteronomy 29 — Moses is not Yahweh.”

Correct. YHWH commands Moshe; Moshe delivers covenant speech that moves between “He” and “I.” Person-switch is a known feature of Biblical Hebrew (the Decalogue does it). It does not write “Moshe is YHWH.”

4. “1 Kings 20 — the runners are not Ben-Hadad.”

Correct — and that is the analogy. The messengers speak in Ben-Hadad’s first person. Ahab answers the message. Nobody thought the runners were the king. When a malakh says “I brought you up from Egypt,” Israel answers Hashem, not the courier.

5. “Genesis 15 — the Word of Yahweh is a second person.”

דְבַר־יְהוָה is construct: word-of-YHWH. Hebrew personifies speech the way it personifies wisdom. Targum Memra is a buffer against anthropomorphism, not a second god waiting for John 1.

6. “Solomon sat on the throne of YHWH. Why isn’t Jesus divine for sitting on God’s throne?”

Divrei HaYamim I 29:23: Shlomo sat on the throne of YHWH as king. If that construct made a man Hashem, Shlomo would be Hashem. Fleeing to Revelation is a change of library.

7. “Only God receives worship.”

Hishtachavah also meets kings and guests. Context decides civil vs cultic. Shoftim 13:16: The malakh refuses food and redirects the olah to YHWH. That is the Fifth Principle on the page.

8. “The Angel of the Lord is Yahweh. Look at the first person.”

Bereshit 22:12 — malakh YHWH: “You have not withheld your son from me” (מִמֶּנִּי).
Shemot 3:2–6 — malakh appears; YHWH saw; Elohim called; “I am the God of your father.” One scene of mediated speech.
Shoftim 2:1 — malakh: “I brought you up from Egypt.”
Shoftim 6 — Malakh appears; then “YHWH turned to him and said.” Gideon fears because he has seen the malakh face-to-face.
Shoftim 13:22 — Manoach, father of Shimshon: “We shall die, for Elohim we have seen.” The wife answers with YHWH’s will. The only figure they saw redirected worship away from himself.

The debate about “Samson” never opened Shimshon’s own birth chapter.

9. “If agency explains Tanakh, it cannot stop Jesus from being Yahweh.”

It can. Agency explains speech. Shemot 23:21 forbids worship of the speaker. Moshe in Shemot 33 refuses a mere malakh and demands Hashem’s Presence. If the malakh were already Hashem, the protest would be empty.

10. “The Word in Ezekiel is personal; John names him Jesus.”

Yechezkel hears the word of YHWH. Speech can “come.” That is not a second uncreated person. John 1 is a Greek prologue. It is not a footnote to Yechezkel.

---

Why the Trinity argument is false

The definition — one essence, three co-equal co-eternal persons — is not in the Tanakh and not in Moshe’s mouth.

In the Muslim Lantern discussion with an educated Christian, the guest is asked to show a prophet who taught that definition. What appears is the usual list: two Yahwehs in Bereshit 19, plurality language, later revelation filling Sinai’s “gap.”

Bereshit 19:24 repeats the Name for source and emphasis (“YHWH rained … from YHWH from the heavens”). That is an idiom, not a second occupant of the throne, and there is still no third person and no “essence.”

Tehillim 82 — Elohim who will die like men: judges, already mapped in Shemot 21–22.

Bereshit 1:26 — “Let us make” after a singular “Elohim said,” then singular “Elohim created.” Majesty or the court. Not two other uncreated persons.

1 John 5:7 (KJV) — the cleanest English Trinity verse — is a later insertion. A doctrine that needs a verse the scribes added is a doctrine the prophets did not teach.

Shema Yisrael, Hashem Elokeinu, Hashem echad. That is the covenant’s claim. Not a set waiting for Nicaea.

What English misses every time

The writer adds “the angel said” where 1cs already stands. The translators capitalize LORD, so every appearance looks like a second character. The scribes separate the paragraphs about Malakh and YHWH into two biographies. Why do Christian Bibles translate Elohim as “God” when the syntax is plural? It reads construct as identity. It imports the term “Person,” which the Tanakh does not have.

Hashem sends. The malakh speaks. Israel answers Hashem.

A shaliach may use Hashem’s voice. He is not Hashem. English cannot promote him. The Trinity cannot recruit him.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Why he could not enter the land — and why Glenn Beck’s history lesson has to start at Sinai

By Hazan Gavriel ben David  ·  Beit HaShoavah, Amarillo

Moses is the greatest Jew in history. That is not my slogan. It is the last word the Torah speaks about a human being. “Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (Deuteronomy 34:10).

The Talmud adds that every other prophet saw through an unclear glass; Moses saw through a clear one (Yevamot 49b). Maimonides writes that Moses’ prophecy was waking and direct, without riddle.

If you take those lines seriously, the foundation stone is not Jesus, and it is not Muhammad. It is the man who stood at Sinai and then died on the wrong side of the river.

I write this as an open letter to Glenn Beck and as a teaching for the House of Abraham that gathers at Beit HaShoavah. Glenn, you love the children of Hashem. Our teachers hear in ahavah the root hav — to give. Love is not a feeling you announce. Love is what you hand over.

You have given Israel a public defense when many pulpits went quiet. Keep giving. But if I take you at your own history lesson — tablets in Liberty’s hand, a broken chain at her feet, pilgrims who thought they were finishing Moses’ march out of captivity — then the line does not stop in Nazareth. It goes back to Moses.

We arrived against our will. We will still give an account

Pirkei Avot 4:22 — the Mishnah, Rabbi Elazar HaKappar said: against your will you were formed, against your will you were born, against your will you live, against your will you die, and against your will you are destined to give an account before the King of kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He. No one voted to be born. No one votes at the hour of death. Hashem writes the story. We surrender even when the ending is not the one we drafted.

That is why Moses is also the greatest example of a fairytale that refuses to behave. He leads a nation out of Egypt. He receives the Teaching. He begs to cross. He does not cross. The children go in. Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein’s reading of Simchat Torah is the same hard mercy: things do not turn out as the righteous man wished. Reality is not a prosperity script. The Author remains the Author.

King Hezekiah is praised in the same key of trust, not replacement religion. “He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel; after him there was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among those who were before him” (II Kings 18:5).

The same chapter records that he smashed the bronze serpent Moses had made after the people burned incense to the object rather than to the One who sent it. That is the Jewish allergy in one scene. The moment the go-between becomes the destination, smash it.

Why Moses could not enter the Promised Land

Rabbi David Fohrman’s series Why Couldn’t Moses Enter the Land? is more precise than a failure-of-nerve story, and therefore more uncomfortable for later faiths built on a permanent mediator.

In Exodus 18, Yitro watches Moses sit from morning until night. Moses explains what the people are doing. “The people come to me to seek God.” He judges disputes and makes known the statutes of God. Law, in that sentence, is not a hoop. Law is how a nation seeks God.

Yitro answers with a phrase the Torah almost never uses: Lo tov — “This thing is not good.” The only other lo tov is Genesis 2:18, “It is not good for the man to be alone.” He then says Moses cannot do it levadecha, alone. The only other “X listened to the voice of Y” in that formula is Abraham listening to Sarah and taking Hagar. A third party enters an intimate pair because a technical problem looks unsolvable from inside the covenant.

A Technical Solution To A Spiritual Problem

Fohrman’s reading: Yitro’s hierarchy of judges is a technical solution to a spiritual problem. It saves Moses’ body. It also inserts layers between the people and the Presence they came to seek. In the war with Amalek, Moses raised his hands, pointing away from himself toward Heaven. Rashi says the hands win nothing; looking up wins. A court system is not the same gesture.

Forty years later, Moses looks back with the word Eichah — “How can I bear your burden alone?” (Deuteronomy 1:12). The Midrash ties that Eichah to the Eichah of Lamentations and to God’s Ayekah — “Where are you?” — after Eden. Lament is about distance. Weddings celebrate union. Funerals mourn separation.

The First Crack In Moses Leadership

Fohrman argues that the first crack trained a generation to reach for an intermediary when direct trust became too heavy. The spies were the next intermediate: a military file on a spiritual demand. There are no military solutions to spiritual problems.

That is why Moses can say, “The Lord was angry with me on your account.” Not because he cheered the spies. Because a well-meant system of mediators laid track, they later ran. If that reading is even half right, the later claim that there is one mediator between God and men is not the completion of Moses.

It is the institutionalizing of the distance already named as a wound. Job does not bridge the gap by inventing an umpire who can place one hand on God and the other on man, as if they were two litigants in the same order (Job 9:32–33). Sinai’s shock is that the Creator closes the distance Himself, then hands Israel a Teaching that is the form of love, not a substitute for it.

Glenn, you are right. The Root is Still Israel —

Hebrews 8 says that calling the covenant “new” makes the first one old, decaying, ready to vanish. Jeremiah 31 does not say the Torah vanishes. It says the same teaching will be written on the inward parts of the same people after exile. Repair is not replacement. Those two readings cannot both be the last word.

Paul’s olive tree in Romans 11 warns the nations not to boast against the natural branches. That warning was ignored for most of church history. Mishnah Kilayim 1:7 forbids grafting one kind onto another. The Sages were answering Leviticus 19:19, not Paul. Still, Torah is jealous of kinds. It does not bless the sermon that declares the root obsolete and then claims to live on its sap.

The synagogue of Israel reads Hebrew. The Septuagint is Alexandria’s translation of the Greek Scriptures. Moses did not need Alexandria. Youth in Israel wrapping tefillin and handing out Shabbat candles are not retrieving Paul. They are retrieving Sinai. Meanwhile, a generation here is doing what unrooted children do when the story they were handed no longer holds.

Isaiah does not appoint America as the witness. “You are My servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified” (Isaiah 49:3). The remnant is described without a second scripture: “The remnant of Israel shall do no iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth” (Zephaniah 3:13).

Jews read Isaiah 53 as Israel, or the righteous of Israel, because the book has already named the servant. Christians read a different subject into the same lines. Volume does not settle that. The living covenant does.

The Word Does Not Go Forth From Washington

October 7 tore a veil. It did not move Zion to Virginia. Zechariah’s burden opens on Damascus and only then gives Zion a king on a donkey who cuts off the war-horse (Zechariah 9). Esau and Ishmael are not late fan-fiction. They are Genesis unfinished.

Revelation is a book whose own churches cannot agree on how to read, and it did not give this decade the map its popular teachers promised. Our prophets and the greatest Jew in history already wrote the map in Hebrew.

Jordan Peterson, “They Do Not Set Well”

Jordan Peterson’s remark that the two testaments do not sit easily together is not an insult to your friendship. It is a literary fact that Jews have been named since the first century. Our Bible and the book that says ours is vanishing cannot both be the last word.

“For out of Zion shall go forth Torah, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” (Isaiah 2:3). Not from a studio. Not from a covenant that ages Moses into museum glass.

Christianity and Islam, in their classical forms, both stand up and tell the people who came out of Egypt that the last word has moved — to a son, or to a later prophet. The God who took us out of Egypt does not share that credit. That is not a call to hate your neighbor. It is a refusal to pretend that three mutually exclusive claims are one religion.

Moses, the greatest Jew in history, does not enter. He enters the people’s memory instead, which is harder. He is still the unmatched prophet. The land is given to the children so they will learn not to outsource the relationship again.

Glen, You Are One Of My Heroes

Glenn, keep supporting Israel. Most of your Jewish friends will thank you and change the subject. This is the subject. Against our will, we arrived. Against our will, we will give the account.

The only sane posture left is the one Moses learned on the mountain he was not allowed to cross: surrender to the God who took us out of Egypt, and do not put anyone — judge, king, apostle, or son — where the people were supposed to seek Him.

Hazan Gavriel ben David teaches at Beit HaShoavah, the House of the Water Pouring, in Amarillo. More Torah at beithashoavah.org.

A Linear Historical Timeline. This article explores The Star of Jacob Prophecy and its historical significance.

From Balaam’s oracle to the headlines on your screen

Hazan Gavriel ben David  ·  Amarillo, Texas  ·  Elul 5786 / September 2026

I first published this material months ago. It sat on the site with one view. That is on me. The teaching was buried in chapters, asides, and personal scenery that did not help a reader walk the road. This post is the rewrite: one line through time. The Torah first. Then the Zohar. After that, the dates. Then the headlines as they appeared.

No decoration. There is no Christian overlay. No private setting. Only what the Tanakh says, what the Zohar says, what Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov has been teaching in public, and what the newspapers printed on the day the thing happened.

My teachers in this matter are Rabbi Tovia Singer, Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov, Rabbi Mendel Kessin, Rabbi Zev Leff, and others across the Jewish world who have said, in their own language, that we are no longer speaking about a distant acharit hayamim. We are watching it.

Rabbi Singer has said the prophecies are unfolding now, in real time, in the headlines. Rabbi Palvanov has spent years mapping Balaam’s star onto the Zohar’s calendar and onto a comet the astronomers named before anyone in a beit midrash asked for it.

Rabbi Kessin has been saying for years that the last war of Persia and the pride of Edom sit inside the same window. Rabbi Leff has said he hears the footsteps.

I am not a prophet. I am a chazzan in Amarillo who learned to read the Zohar with Palvanov’s classes and the Tanakh in the other.

What follows is the sequence.

I. The Oracle Itself

The oldest messianic line in the Torah does not come from a son of Jacob. It comes from Balaam, son of Beor, hired by Balak to curse Israel, who opened his mouth and could not curse them. In Parashat Balak, he says he is looking to the end of days — acharit hayamim — one of the few times the Chumash uses that phrase.

I see him, but not now; I behold him, but he is not near. A star has gone forth from Jacob, and a scepter has risen from Israel; it shall smash the brow of Moab and tear down all the children of Sheth. Edom shall be a possession, Seir a possession of his enemies; and Israel shall do valiantly.

— Numbers 24:17–18

The Hebrew is darach kochav miYaakov. Darach is a path, a trail. Kochav is a light in the night sky. The combination is not a still lamp. It is a body that moves and leaves a wake. That is why Jewish readers for generations have heard a comet in the verse, not only a metaphor for a king. The scepter that rises with it is the staff of Israel. Moab is on the east bank. Edom is the west. The oracle is not a Christmas pageant. It is a map of the last war and the last king.

The Rambam cites this verse as one of the proofs that Mashiach will come. The Ramban reads the star as the gathering of the dispersed, a light crossing the firmament from the ends of heaven. Rabbi Akiva applied the verse in his generation to Shimon bar Kokhba and called him Bar Kokhba, Son of the Star. The revolt failed. The verse did not retire. It waited.

II. What the Zohar Added — The Calendar Inside the Star

The Zohar on Parashat Balak, volume III, 212b, does not leave the star as poetry. It gives a weekday, a Hebrew date, a duration, a first city, a collapse of buildings, the death of a ruler, a spread of the light across the world, wars in four directions, the loss of faith among the nations, the rise of a proud king, and then — when the star is gathered in — a trembling in the Land, a cave, a fire, a branch that rules, and the revealing of Mashiach.

It is taught that in the future the Holy One, blessed be He, will rebuild Jerusalem and reveal one firm star, glowing with seventy pillars of fire, and with seventy sparks flashing from it in the middle of the firmament, and they will be reigned over by seventy other stars, and they will glow and burn for seventy days.

— Zohar III, Balak 212b

And the star will be seen on the sixth day, on the twenty-fifth day of the sixth month. It will be gathered on the seventh day, at the end of seventy days. On the first day, it will be seen in Rome. On that same day, three high structures of that city of Rome will fall, and a great edifice will fall. The ruler of that city will die. Then the star will spread out to be seen in the rest of the world. In that time, great wars will stir all around the four corners of the world, and no faith will be found among its people.

— Zohar III, Balak 212b

In the middle of the world, when that star shines in the middle of the firmament, a great king will arise and rule the world, and his spirit will gain pride over all the kings, and he will awaken a war between the two sides, and he will become strong against them.

— Zohar III, Balak 212b

On the day that the star will be hidden, the Holy Land will tremble forty-five miles around the place of the Holy Temple, revealing an underground cave. From this cave will come out a blazing fire… and a great branch will grow out, and it will rule over the whole world… Then Mashiach will be revealed to the entire world.

— Zohar III, Balak 212b

The sixth month is Elul. The sixth day is Friday. The twenty-fifth of Elul is the day the Sages assign to the first day of Creation. The Zohar is saying: the sign that Jerusalem is about to be rebuilt in truth will rise on the anniversary of the world’s first dawn, on the eve of Shabbat, and it will burn for about seventy days.

Rome, in this literature, is not only the city on the Tiber. Rome is Edom — the power that sits at the center of the West in a given generation. Palvanov has also noted that in the lifetime of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, Beirut served as a Roman administrative capital in the East. When the Zohar says “a city of Rome,” a reader who knows the second century does not have to fly to Italy to find the buildings.

III. The Teachers Who Said: Look Up

Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov, writing at Mayim Achronim and teaching in Toronto, is the one who put the calendar on the public table. In December 2023, he taught that astronomers had found a new comet, C/2023 A3 Tsuchinshan–ATLAS, discovered 9 January 2023, predicted to reach perihelion — closest approach to the sun — on Friday, 27 September 2024. That civil date was 25 Elul 5784. A Friday. He said he was not a prophet. He was reading the Zohar next to an astronomy bulletin.

We know that one of the oldest prophecies and traditions about the Moshiach likely comes from Balaam, a Gentile prophet who came to curse Israel but couldn’t. Instead, he gives a prophecy that actually says, ‘I will tell you what will happen at the end of days.’

— Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov, cited in Israel365 News, 29 January 2024 and 28 August 2024

Israel365 News printed the claim twice before the comet arrived: first in January 2024 under the headline “EXPERT: Star of Jacob will appear on Friday, September 27,” and again in August 2024 under “Scientists expect Star of Jacob to appear this month.” Palvanov added the disclaimer then, and he has kept it: there are ways to read the passage. He still looked at the sky.

Rabbi Tovia Singer has not built a comet calendar. He has done something plainer. He has stood in front of cameras and said that the wars the Prophets named are no longer commentary. They are the news.

There are messianic prophecies unfolding now.

— Rabbi Tovia Singer, 2026 interview on missionaries and the signs of the age

What’s going on to the north? It’s in Ezekiel 38 and 39. Well, it’s happening right now as we are speaking, in real time. Israel is battling Iran’s proxies, Hezbollah, in the north. Those are headlines. Like, we don’t have to guess.

— Rabbi Tovia Singer, “The Signs of Messiah’s Arrival,” June 2026

Rabbi Mendel Kessin has taught for years from the Ramchal that the cosmic week is winding down, that Persia’s war and Edom’s pride sit inside the last window, and that the year 5786 carried the gematria of yavo Mashiach. After the nations moved to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations in September 2025, he called the vote itself a messianic event: the world lining up as Gog.

The United Nations is Gog and Magog. The UN represents the world, and therefore it must defy Israel. That is a messianic event. It means the Messiah is here.

— Rabbi Mendel Kessin, September 2025, reported by Israel Today

Rabbi Zev Leff asked whether Mashiach is here and answered in the old language that still fits: if you ask me if he is here, he is not here; if you ask me if I hear his footsteps, I hear his footsteps. He pointed to the ingathering, the land giving fruit, and the nations gathering against Israel as the shape of Gog and Magog.

These men do not agree on every date. They do not need to. They agree on the direction of the river.

IV. The Long Fuse — Before the Comet

1989 / 5750 — The Zohar’s last “late” gate

Palvanov has taught the Zohar’s calculation that the end of days begins a cosmic six hours before the Sabbath of history. Six hours is a quarter of a day. A heavenly day is a thousand years. A quarter is 250 years. Count back 250 years from the year 6000, and you land at 5750 — 1989–90. That year, the Berlin Wall fell. The Soviet Union cracked. A million Jews began to come home from the north. Palvanov’s own family was in that wave. The Talmud already said that the greatest sign of redemption is the Land bearing fruit again. By 1989, that sign was no longer a hope. It was an export.

9 January 2023 — The astronomers name the star

9 JANUARY 2023

A new comet is logged: C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan–ATLAS).

Astronomy circulars; later cited by Palvanov in his December 2023 class “Will Mashiach Come This Year?”

No rabbi commissioned the discovery. Purple Mountain Observatory in China and the ATLAS survey in South Africa found a dirty snowball on a long loop from the Oort Cloud. The predicted perihelion was 27 September 2024. Palvanov opened a Hebrew calendar, saw 25 Elul on a Friday, and remembered Balak 212b.

7 October 2023 / 22 Tishrei 5784 — Simchat Torah

7 OCTOBER 2023

Hamas-led militants burst from Gaza on Simchat Torah. More than 1,200 were murdered in Israel. Hostages taken into the tunnels.

Every paper on earth.

This is not the star. This is the war the star would later illuminate. The Zohar said that when the star appears, wars will already be stirring in the four corners. By the autumn of 2023, Israel was fighting in Gaza, under fire from Lebanon, watching Yemen close the Red Sea, and listening to Iran speak in the voice of Persia. Rabbi Singer would later say, ” We do not have to guess. The north is Ezekiel. The headlines are the north.

Isaiah 17 had waited longer than any city on earth. “Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city, and will become a ruinous heap.” Damascus had been conquered and rebuilt for three thousand years. The verse was still standing. So was the palace.

13 April 2024 — Persia fires in the open

13 APRIL 2024

Iran launches a direct missile-and-drone attack on Israel — the first time in history Tehran strikes the Jewish state in its own name, not only by proxy.

International wires, 13–14 April 2024

Singer has marked that date. For decades, Iran worked through other men’s hands. On 13 April, the mask came off. The midrash that Kessin teaches — Persia moving against the world, Edom answering — stopped being a page in Yalkut Shimoni and became a ticker.

31 July 2024 — Haniyeh in Tehran

31 JULY 2024

Ismail Haniyeh, political chief of Hamas, is killed in Tehran hours after Iran’s new president is sworn in.

Reuters / AP, 31 July–1 August 2024

The head of the October 7 political house dies in the capital of Persia. The scepter of Numbers 24 is not a metaphor when the men who planned the massacre start falling in other people’s bedrooms.

V. The Seventy Days

Friday, 27 September 2024 — 25 Elul 5784

27 SEPTEMBER 2024

Comet C/2023 A3 Tsuchinshan–ATLAS reaches perihelion. Astronomers call it visible. Photographers catch it in twilight. Palvanov later says he saw it from his own backyard.

NASA Earth Observatory; Sky & Telescope; BBC Sky at Night; Palvanov, “Lebanon & Iran in the End of Days,” 9 October 2024, and “The Mashiach Window,” 2025

The same civil night, while the comet was at the sun, Israeli aircraft put bunker-busters into Hezbollah’s underground headquarters in Dahiyeh, south Beirut. Multiple apartment blocks came down. A mushroom cloud stood over the suburb. The next day, the IDF and then Hezbollah itself said Hassan Nasrallah was dead.

27–28 SEPTEMBER 2024

“Hassan Nasrallah, Who Led Hezbollah for Decades, Killed at 64.” “Israel kills Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in airstrike.”

The New York Times, 28 September 2024; Reuters, 28 September 2024; AP, 28 September 2024

Hassan Nasrallah, who led the militant Hezbollah organization in Lebanon for more than three decades, was killed on Friday in heavy Israeli airstrikes just south of Beirut.

— The New York Times, 28 September 2024

The Israeli military said it carried out a precise airstrike on Friday while Hezbollah leaders were meeting at their headquarters… The strike leveled six apartment buildings.

— Al Jazeera, 28 September 2024

Read the Zohar again with those two sentences in your hand. A star seen on Friday, 25 Elul. On that same day, three high structures fall, a great edifice falls, and the ruler of that city dies. Palvanov’s reading: Beirut was Rome-in-the-East when the Zohar’s teaching was born. Nasrallah was the ruler of that fortress-city. The buildings were not a parable. They were dust on Saturday morning television.

Amos had already named the fire: “I will send fire upon the house of Hazael, and it shall devour the palaces of Ben-Hadad. I will break the bar of Damascus.” (Amos 1:4–5) Palvanov tied the bunker-busters to that fire. The comet was the clock. The fire was the headline.

The comet remains in the sky

The Zohar said seventy days. Perihelion was on 27 September. The closest approach to Earth was on 12 October 2024, during the Days of Awe into Sukkot of 5785. Naked-eye photographs filled the astronomy pages through October and into November. Palvanov counted the window to about 6 December 2024, when the object faded from ordinary sight. That is not midrash. That is an ephemeris.

16–17 October 2024 — Sinwar

16–17 OCTOBER 2024

Israeli troops kill Yahya Sinwar, Hamas leader and architect of October 7, in a ruined house in Rafah. A drone films a wounded man throwing a stick at the camera. Netanyahu calls it a milestone in “the sunset of Hamas’s evil reign.”

IDF statement, 17 October 2024; The New York Times, 18 October 2024; CNN, 17 October 2024

Haniyeh in July. Nasrallah on the day of the star. Sinwar three weeks later. The brow of Moab, in Balaam’s speech, is the leadership of the east bank of hatred. The children of Sheth are the wider swarm. The verse does not say Israel will argue with them. It says the scepter will smash.

5 November 2024 — A proud king in the middle of the world

5–6 NOVEMBER 2024

Donald J. Trump is elected the 47th President of the United States, to take office on 20 January 2025.

Every American paper.

The Zohar said that while the star shines in the middle of the firmament, a great king will arise, his spirit high over the other kings, and he will awaken war on two sides and prevail. Palvanov and Kessin have both, in different keys, cast this figure as a tool — a Cyrus, not a redeemer. Isaiah 45 calls Cyrus “My anointed” and still leaves him a Persian. The Jewish reading does not require the man to be righteous. It needs him to be useful. I will not baptize a president. I will also not pretend the Zohar’s “proud king in the middle of the world” landed in a vacuum.

6–8 December 2024 — The star is gathered; Damascus falls

8 DECEMBER 2024

“Syrian rebels topple Assad, who flees to Russia in Middle East shakeup.” “Damascus has been liberated, and the tyrant Bashar al-Assad has been overthrown.” Rebels enter the capital unopposed after a two-week lightning offensive. The family that ruled Syria for fifty years is gone in a night.

Reuters, 8 December 2024; CNN, 8 December 2024; The New York Times, 21 December 2024

Syrian rebels seized the capital, Damascus, unopposed on Sunday after a lightning advance that sent President Bashar al-Assad fleeing to Russia after a 13-year civil war and six decades of his family’s autocratic rule.

— Reuters, 8 December 2024

Israel bombs Damascus as 50-year peace deal ends with Assad’s overthrow: ‘Direct result of our forceful actions.’

— New York Post headline, 8 December 2024

Count it. 27 September to 6 December is seventy days. Assad fled in the night of 7–8 December. Palvanov taught “Damascus in the End of Days” on 10 December 2024, two days after the palace gates stood open. He read the Zohar’s “earthquake in the Holy Land” as a political quake first: the old order of Ishmael in Syria collapsing in the same week the star went dark.

Isaiah 17:1 is not finished. Damascus still has streets and minarets. The prophecy says the city will cease to be a city and become a ruinous heap. What fell in December 2024 was the kingdom of Damascus — “the fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus” (Isaiah 17:3). The throne of Ben-Hadad was empty. The portraits came off the walls. A year later reporters walked Umayyad Square and wrote that the sign “Assad’s Syria welcomes you” was gone. That is not the last word of Isaiah 17. It is the first word that verse has been able to speak in three millennia.

Zechariah 9 ties Damascus to the resting of the word of Hashem at the threshold of the last king. Palvanov spent a class on that knot: why would the Presence brush Damascus at all? Because the north has to break before Zion is quiet.

VI. After the Star — 2025 and 5786

The Zohar does not say Mashiach stands up on day seventy-one. It says the star is gathered, the Land trembles, wars continue in four directions, faith thins out among the nations, and then — in a time it does not date to the hour — a branch rules and Mashiach is revealed to the whole world. The years after the comet have been that middle.

The four fronts

By the end of 2024, Israel had fought in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen’s approaches, and the Syrian space that Iran had used as a corridor. Palvanov said the Zohar’s “four sides” were no longer a homily. Hezbollah’s arsenal was broken in the weeks after Nasrallah. The Houthis kept firing and kept getting hit. In August 2025, Israeli strikes killed the Houthi prime minister in Yemen. The papers treated it as another raid. The sequence treated it as another name on Ishmael’s roster.

September 2025 — The nations vote

SEPTEMBER 2025

Western governments and a United Nations majority move to recognize a Palestinian state on the eve of Rosh Hashanah 5786.

UN coverage; Rabbi Kessin’s recorded response, 19–22 September 2025; Israel Today, 29 September 2025

Kessin called the UN “Gog and Magog” because Gog is not only a man from the north. Gog is the world assembled against Zion. Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 38 do not require every rifle to be Russian. They require the nations to decide that Jerusalem is theirs to carve.

5786 — “The Messiah will come”

Kessin taught that 786, the number of the year 5786, equals yavo Mashiach — “the Messiah will come” — and also the language of the revelation at Sinai. He read the Yalkut Shimoni on Persia’s last war and said: ” This is the last war; a heavenly voice says, ‘ Do not fear; your redemption has arrived. Whether a student accepts every gematria is not the point. The point is that a senior teacher of hashkafah stopped speaking in the future tense.

Palvanov’s July 2025 class, “The Mashiach Window,” given as his last biweekly at the Sephardic Kehila Center in Toronto, asked the question his students had started to ask: you have not talked about the star in a while — where are we? His recap was blunt. The comet came on the day. He saw it. An oppressor of Israel died. Buildings fell. Then the political earthquake. Then fires around Jerusalem in a later season that he was willing to read against the Zohar’s fire. “We’ve basically [seen] that whole passage. Everything has been fulfilled from the comet to the death of the oppressor to the buildings to the earthquakes to the fires.” He did not say the story was over. He said the opening acts were no longer theoretical.

2026 — Persia, Edom, and the year 5787

As these lines are written — 22 September 2026, the week after Rosh Hashanah 5787 — the war with Iran and its remaining arms is the air the Jewish world is breathing. Singer sat with interviewers and kept pointing at Ezekiel 38. Kessin kept pointing at Paras and Edom. Palvanov taught “Trump, Iran & the Year of the Horse” in February 2026 and “Are We Living in the End of Days?” in July 2026 and answered a student who asked the simple question: Are we in the end of days? “Absolutely. I believe we 100% are.”

Rosh Hashanah 5787 fell at sundown Friday, 11 September 2026 — twenty-five years to the day from the falling of the towers in New York, the other “Rome” some readers have always heard in the Zohar. I will not force 2001 into 25 Elul. The Zohar’s date in 2001 was not 11 September. Honesty is part of emunah. What I will say is this: Edom’s towers have already fallen once in our lifetime, and Edom’s pride is again the weather of the world, and the shofar of 5787 sounded on a Friday night when the whole earth was already marked with ash. The Sages said the footsteps would not be quiet.

VII. What Has Not Happened Yet

A serious Jew does not pretend the scroll is finished because the first columns came true. The Zohar still awaits its full revelation. The Rambam still waits for a king from David who fights the wars of Hashem, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the dispersed. Rabbi Leff repeated those three tests in 2026. They have not been checked off. Isaiah 17 still has a heap where a city stands. Ezekiel 38 still has a gathering of nations larger than a proxy war. Zechariah still has feet standing on the Mount of Olives. The Third Temple is not up. Mashiach is not revealed to the entire world.

That is not a reason to go back to sleep. It is a reason to stay awake without becoming a date-setter. Palvanov’s standing sentence is the right one: I am not a prophet. I am reading. Singer’s standing sentence is the other right one: it is happening now; we do not have to guess. Both can be true.

VIII. How to Read This Without Losing the Torah

Christians will try to steal Balaam’s star for Bethlehem. Rabbi Singer has been dismantling that theft for decades. Numbers 24:17 is about a king who smashes Moab and takes Edom. The man from Nazareth did not do that. The verse is still in our book.

Internet mystics will try to turn the comet into Nibiru, a second sun, a planet of fear. The Zohar does not need a second sun. It needed a kochav on a path, on a Friday, on the 25th of Elul, burning for about seventy days, with buildings and a ruler falling in a city of Rome as the light appeared. That is a narrower claim. Narrow claims are stronger.

Politicians will try to wear the star as a campaign pin. Cyrus was a tool. Pharaoh was a tool. The proud king in the Zohar is a tool. The scepter rises from Israel, not from Washington and not from Moscow.

The work that remains is the work that the Sages always named: teshuvah, unity, Torah, the mitzvot of the Land, and the refusal to bow to the seventy nations when they lose their faith. The Zohar said that when the star shines, faith will not be found among them. Look at a university quad, a UN gallery, a comment thread. Then open a Chumash.

IX. The Line, One More Time

Balaam saw a star out of Jacob and a scepter out of Israel, not now and not near.

The Zohar dated the star to Friday, the 25th of Elul, seventy days, Rome, three structures, a palace, a dead ruler, four-front war, a proud king, a trembling Land, a revealed Mashiach.

Astronomers, with no interest in Balak, set perihelion for Friday, 27 September 2024 — 25 Elul 5784.

That night, the comet reached the sun, and Nasrallah was buried under the buildings of Dahiyeh.

Seventy days later, the comet faded, and Assad’s Damascus ceased to be a kingdom.

In the same window, Haniyeh died in Tehran, Sinwar died in Rafah, a proud Western king returned to the middle of the world, the nations voted to carve Jerusalem, and Persia came out of hiding.

Singer says the prophecy is happening now. Palvanov says the opening passage has already walked onto the stage. Kessin says the last war is this war. Leff hears footsteps.

I am a Jew in Amarillo. No prophet’s staff. I have a Zohar, a Tanakh, a calendar, and a stack of newspapers. That is enough to say to anyone who still thinks this is a metaphor: the star was in the sky. The buildings fell. The ruler died. The city of the north lost its king. The rest of the page is still being written in front of your eyes.

May we have emunah in the days when the Exodus seems small. Help us not invent what the text does not say. May we not deny what the text and the day have already said together.

חזקחזקונתחזק

Learn with us at beithashoavah.org  ·  Teachers: Rabbi Tovia Singer, Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov, and the living chain of Torah.

Sources for the reader

Tanakh: Numbers 24:17–19; Isaiah 17:1–3; Amos 1:3–5; Ezekiel 38–39; Zechariah 9 and 14; Isaiah 45:1–3.

Zohar III, Balak 212b (verses 501–503 and following), as translated in standard editions and as taught by Palvanov.

Rabbi Ephraim Palvanov: “Will Mashiach Come This Year?” (Dec 2023); Israel365 News interviews (29 Jan 2024; 28 Aug 2024); “Lebanon & Iran in the End of Days” (9 Oct 2024); “Damascus in the End of Days” (10 Dec 2024); “The Mashiach Window” (31 July / 1 Sept 2025); “Are We Living in the End of Days?” (July 2026).

Rabbi Tovia Singer: ongoing classes 2024–2026 on Ezekiel 38, the signs of Mashiach, and “prophecy happening right now.”

Rabbi Mendel Kessin: teachings on 5786, Persia and Edom, and the UN as Gog (Sept 2025; 2026 lectures reported by Israel365 News).

Rabbi Zev Leff: interviews on the footsteps of Mashiach and Gog and Magog (Hidabroot / Living Inspired, 2026).

Headlines as cited: New York Times, Reuters, AP, CNN, Al Jazeera, New York Post, NASA Earth Observatory, Sky & Telescope — dates given in the body.

This essay replaces earlier chapter drafts on beithashoavah.org. Those drafts mixed the timeline with private scenes that did not belong in the argument. The argument is the timeline.

A Question for Tony Robinson and the TorahResource Conference

Judah · Ephraim · Jeremiah’s rings · Zechariah 12 · 7 October 2023

When Tony Robinson found out that I had returned to my family in Israel without Jesus, he told me, “We the nations…” What I think he meant was Ephraim. Tony said we know just as much as the Jews.

That sentence is the question before the TorahResource conference.

• Do you eat honey from a rock?
• Does your story match your DNA?
• Are you Abraham’s children the way the Christian Bible says — spiritually — or the way Genesis, Y-chromosomes, and a Cohen badge say?
• Does DNA prove your covenant?

Hashem left a Blueprint that answers those questions in real time. It runs through my Cohen family. It runs through the only two people on earth who claim to be from Abraham in the body, not in a sermon.

The proof is not Hebrews 8. The proof is the Blueprint of Creation — the book I wrote as Adam: The Blueprint of Creation and the Tree of Life, and the companion work The Ten Sayings.

Judah and Ephraim must come back together. If they will not, the leftover name for that refusal is the one Malachi already used: Esau, I hated.

What Tony built, and what it cannot carry

Tony Robinson of Restoration of Torah Ministries spoke at TorahResource on Hebrews 8:13.

He split the verse into two spheres of obsolescence.

Sphere one: Israel’s human duty under Deuteronomy 6 becomes obsolete because God writes the Torah on the heart.

Sphere two: Aaronic priesthood, animal offerings, and the earthly sanctuary become obsolete because of Yeshua’s blood. He keeps the Law. He retires to the engine room.

His wife, Tina, is Jewish on her father’s side. The conference language is “Jewish eyes,” thematic analysis, and chiastic outlines. The destination is still a first-century death that initiates Jeremiah 31.

Rabbi Tovia Singer will not grant that court. Hebrews changes baalti bam — “I was a husband to them” — into “I disregarded them,” then announces that what is old vanishes. That is not peshat. That is a Greek note treated as the lab notebook.

Tony is a chemist. He knows primary data. Jeremiah in Hebrew is the notebook. Hebrews is a later student’s paraphrase with one verb flipped. October 7 has more data in the same notebook. You do not publish the paraphrase and call it the reaction.

Honey From The Rock

He made him ride on the high places of the earth, and he ate the produce of the field; He made him suck honey from the rock, and oil from the flinty stone. (Deuteronomy 32:13)

Honey from a rock is not a metaphor for a Gentile who found the Jewish Bible and now lectures Judah on what vanishing means. It is Israel’s odd food: sweetness where there should be none. A people pulled from flint. A priestly marker that survives the Inquisition. A city the nations cannot put down.

If your gospel needs the rock to be obsolete so the honey can be Jesus, you are not eating what Moses served. You are selling a different jar.

I came home without that jar. That is what Tony heard. His answer — “we the nations know just as much as the Jews” — is the oldest Ephraim temptation in the book: we have the words; therefore, we have the birthright.

Hosea already named the other side of that sentence. Ephraim mixed himself among the peoples. Then he is called “not My people,” and then, in the same prophet, “sons of the living God.” The repair is a return, not a claim of equal authorship.

Does your story match your DNA?

The Christian Bible says you are Abraham’s children by faith. Genesis says Abraham’s covenant line runs through Sarah, Isaac, and Jacob, in bodies, in a land, with a sign in the flesh. Those are not the same sentence. Everyone has a connection with Hashem.

There is no need for anyone to become Jewish unless you see the One True God, the God Who took you out of the land of Egypt. Everyone else is family returning to the Torah. Our Cousins. The other chosen nations that stand for Hashem.

Hashem Left a Measurable Trail.

All human Y-DNA, in the model I use from Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson’s Traced, collapses toward three fathers — Noah’s three sons — on a timescale that does not need deep-time mythology.

Abraham’s paternal signature does not appear in “every nation that believes.” It appears in specific branches: Isaac through Jacob, Ishmael through Hagar, and the sons of Keturah.

Only two people on earth stand up in public and say: we are Abraham’s seed in the body. Jews through Sarah. Arabs through Hagar. Not “spiritual Israel.” Not a conference badge. Blood.

Christianity and Islam both claim Abraham and then detach the claim from the family that actually carries the Torah and the Land. That is why I called them two sides of the same coin.

The Blueprint does not run through a broken paternal chain that lists God as a man’s father. If that chain is broken, it is not Abraham’s.

The Family Israel

My family is not a metaphor. I discovered I was Jewish at thirty-five. Sephardic names — Diaz, Lucero, Trujillo, Almanzar, Ramirez — hidden after 1492, whispered through Mexico and the Texas panhandle. In 2001, a bat kol told me to live as a Jew.

In January 2017, my uncle Yosef Diaz’s FamilyTreeDNA Big Y-700 came back as J-FT235823, within the Cohen Modal Haplotype, with a parent line branching in the late First Temple Levant. The dashboard shows the Cohen badge. Grandfather Luz Diaz. Uncles. Male descendants. Priestly continuity on more than one side of the house. From Judea to adobe to Amarillo.

Aaron’s Sons The Cohen

That is honey from a rock. Not because DNA is the covenant — halakhah is the mother and the commandments — but because the Blueprint did not vanish when the Church said the first covenant grew old.

A Cohen marker that still matches Aaron’s window is what sphere two cannot explain. Jeremiah 33 said the Levites would not lack a man. My uncles are not that man at an altar. They are the receipt that the line was not a shadow ready to vanish.

Does DNA prove your covenant? It cannot baptize a Gentile into Judah. Anyone can falsify the claim that Abraham is now a mood. It can show who was hidden and who came home. It can ask Tony a chemist’s question: if the Torah is your foundation, why is the priestly Y-chromosome still ticking in families that left Jesus on the table?

The Rings Are Rising. The Center Is Not Signed

Jeremiah 30–33 is not a jumble. It is a booklet.

A Judah’s land and cities speak again

  B     Both houses sown

    C     New covenant: My Torah on their heart

  B’    Sun and moon: Israel will not cease

A’ Jerusalem rebuilt, not uprooted

Jacob’s trouble sits in front (30:7). David and the Levites sit behind (33:14–26).

A and A’ are moving in real time: 1948, 1967, a city the world cannot drop. B and B’: Judah planted; the nation not erased. Ephraim still the open verse. C is not done. No honest checklist says every Israelite knows Hashem without a teacher.

The Rabbis Speak: Jeremiah, Zechariah, Moses

Zechariah 12 is the next panel. Jerusalem is a burdensome stone (12:3). The tents of Judah first (12:7). Then the land mourns as for a firstborn, family by family (12:10–14).

7 October 2023 — Simchat Torah 5784 — is that mourning. Singer has said it in plain speech: Zechariah 12 is end-time, after the return, after Jewish Jerusalem, then the trauma. Not a crucifixion ripped from verse 10. A nation that had been tearing itself apart stood in one hesped. That is Mashiach ben Yosef weather. It is not Jeremiah 31:33 completed.

Glazer’s codes cluster “seventh of October,” Iran, Hamas, the morning after Hoshana Rabbah. Kessin puts the hostages and Persia on a last-war clock. Palvanov reads Sukkot and Chanukah as redemption architecture, not children’s play.

Leff will not let Jews get comfortable in a sweet exile while the world lines up at the stone. Tatz will not sell a date; he will sell emunah when the Name is hidden. Sokol handed the mic to men who, after that Shabbat, started reading the Nevi’im as if the ink were wet.

None of them — if they are reading Tanakh — get to cash C because A’ is under fire.

Judah and Ephraim, or Esau, I hated

Ezekiel 37 is not replacement theology. It is two sticks in one hand: Judah and the Israelites with him; Joseph, that is Ephraim, and the Israelites with him. One nation. One king. David. Sanctuary in the midst. That is the same consolation as Jeremiah 30–33.

Obadiah 18 puts the reunion in a furnace: house of Jacob a fire, house of Joseph a flame, house of Esau stubble.

Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? … yet I loved Jacob, and Esau I hated. (Malachi 1:2–3)

The Ten Sayings is the public repair of a family wound that starts in Genesis 27. A father’s incomplete blessing. A brother’s stolen name. Sinai’s words are not a new religion. They are the Blueprint spoken aloud, so brothers, stop treating blessing as zero-sum. Fohrman showed the architecture: the Ten Words are already living in Genesis.

My book Adam says the Tree of Life was in the midst from the start. Christianity never left the Garden because it needs the fall to be total and the Tree to be a man on a stick. The Torah says the path was guarded, not deleted. Proverbs 3:18 already named the Tree. Deuteronomy 32 already named the honey.

So here is the conference question, without poetry.

If “we the nations” means Ephraim — the lost house that must become a flame with Judah’s fire — then Ephraim’s job is to come home to the Torah Judah never stopped carrying, not to announce that Judah’s priesthood is sphere two. Kalev was Judah. Yehoshua was Ephraim. The two who told the truth about the Land were already a two-stick pair. The ten who said “we cannot” died in the sand.

If “we the nations” means we have equal say over Israel’s notebook, that sentence is Esau’s. Esau is the brother who treats the birthright like soup and the blessing as something you can take with a kiss, even though the dots over vayishakehu already marked it as false. Palvanov’s Edom work is the long version. Rome, then, a church that says the first covenant vanished, is that kiss at scale.

Tony, you can be a friend of Judah. You cannot be Judah’s co-author. You can keep kosher and still be standing on the wrong side if the price of your system is a vanished altar in a book that swears the opposite. Tina does not need your spheres to be a daughter of Israel. She needs Jeremiah in Hebrew and a people who will not trade her father’s line for a Melchizedek footnote.

What part of the New Covenant did Jesus initiate?

None of the signs Jeremiah gave.

• Not both houses under one Torah on the heart.
• Not “they shall all know Me.”
• Not Levites who never lack a man.
• Not a Jerusalem that is finished holy.

The Bible Is Speaking

What we have is A and A’ in motion, a stone the nations are lifting, a mourning that already happened family by family, and a Cohen badge on a ranch in Texas that sphere two cannot metabolize.

The brothers must come back together. Ezekiel 37. Two Sticks That is Ezekiel. The fire of Obadiah. That is the Ten Sayings of family medicine. That is Adam: one human family, three fathers after the Flood, one chosen house to guard the Tree so every family can live.

Ezekiel 37 Judah and Ephraim

Judah without Ephraim is a fire without a flame. Ephraim, without Judah, is a nation that knows “just as much” yet still cannot say the Shema without a Greek overlay. Together, they are the stick. Apart from that, the leftover name is the one God already used for the brother who would not let Jacob be Jacob.

Eat the honey from the rock. Match the story to the blood. Let the Blueprint, not Hebrews, tell you who Abraham’s children are.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Esnoga Beit HaShoavah — Amarillo, Texas

beithashoavah.org

Adam: The Blueprint of Creation and the Tree of Life  ·  The Ten Sayings

Checklist — so the center stays empty until it isn’t

Text	Sign	Now
Deut 32:13	Honey from the rock	Hidden Jews, Cohen lines, a people still here
Jer 30:7	Jacob’s trouble	Shoah; 7 Oct 2023
Jer 31:23–26 / 38–40	Land and Jerusalem	1948, 1967, the stone
Jer 31:27–30	Both houses sown	Judah, yes; Ephraim, the question
Jer 31:31–34	Torah on the heart; all know Him	Not yet
Jer 33:14–26	David and Levites	Not yet
Zech 12:3	Burdensome stone	Visible
Zech 12:10–14	Mourning as a firstborn	7 October 2023
Ezek 37	Two sticks, one nation	Commanded; not finished
Obad 18 / Mal 1:3	Joseph’s flame; Esau stubble	The fork in the road

FAQ

What did Tony Robinson mean by “we the nations”? He said it when he learned I had returned to Israel without Jesus. If he meant Ephraim, the prophets require Ephraim to join Judah, not to supervise Judah’s notebook. If he meant equal revelation, that is Esau’s claim.

Does Cohen DNA prove priesthood? It does not replace yichus and halakhah. It does show a Levantine priestly Y-line surviving expulsion and silence. That survival is the opposite of “ready to vanish.”

Are Christians Abraham’s children? Not the way Genesis measures children. Faith does not rewrite a paternal covenant or a land oath. The two public, bodily claims Abraham makes are Jews and Arabs.

Must Judah and Ephraim reunite? Ezekiel 37 says yes. Obadiah says the alternative is Esau as stubble. The Ten Sayings are how brothers stop treating blessings as theft.

PART II

Jeremiah’s A–B–C Rings

A ring is not a decoration. In Hebrew rhetoric, the middle is the load-bearing verse, and the outer members interpret each other. You cannot cash the center and throw away the wings. That is the argument against reading Jeremiah 31:31–34 as a stand-alone “new covenant” that retires the rest of Israel’s file. There are at least four nested rings. They all point at the same partners and the same unfinished signs.

The five-oracle ring (Jeremiah 31:23–40)

This is the A–B–C that matters most. After the poems of 30:5–31:22, the Masoretic text places five short salvation oracles.

Slot	Verses	Content
A	31:23–26	Judah’s land and cities speak blessings again. Farmers and flocks. Thirsty souls filled.
B	31:27–30	Both houses sown: Israel and Judah, seed of man and beast.
C	31:31–34	New covenant with both houses. Torah on the heart. All know Me.
B’	31:35–37	If sun and moon cease, Israel ceases. They cannot. Israel will not.
A’	31:38–40	Jerusalem rebuilt from Hananel to the Corner Gate. Not uprooted again.

A ↔ A’ — inhabited Judah / rebuilt Jerusalem. Land language on both ends.

B ↔ B’ — both houses planted / the nation that cannot be erased while creation holds.

C — the only place in Tanakh that uses the phrase berit chadashah. It sits in the middle on purpose.

Lundbom notes the glue: od (“again”) in 31:23 and lo od (“no longer”) in 31:34 form an inclusio. Continuity and discontinuity live in one envelope. The Torah is not replaced by another religion. The manner of knowing changes. The partners do not.

What the ring forbids: lifting C out as a first-century church document. If A and A’ are land and city, and B and B’ are both houses plus a nation that lasts as long as the sun, then C is written for those same houses in that same land. A completed C with an empty A’ is a broken chiasm.

The inner ring of C (31:31–34)

Days coming (v. 31). Not like the covenant of the Exodus day (v. 32) — baalti bam, “I was a husband to them,” in the Masoretic Text. This is the covenant: Torah in the inward parts; I am their God, they are My people (v. 33). They shall not teach… for they shall all know Me; I will forgive (v. 34).

The LXX reads the husband’s verb as “I disregarded them.” That single change is what Hebrews needs. The ring around C does not. A husband who writes Torah on the heart is not one who has discarded the marriage so that others could pick up the ketubah.

C’s partners are named twice: the house of Israel and the house of Judah (v. 31), then the house of Israel after those days (v. 33). “Israel” here is not a church title. It is the northern house returning into the same covenant as Judah — Ezekiel’s two sticks in prose.

The poem cycle in front of the ring (30:5–31:22)

Barbara Bozak’s map of the poetic core is six poems that alternate masculine and feminine address: Jacob’s trouble (m.), Zion’s incurable wound (f.), tents rebuilt (m.), virgin Israel and watchmen on Ephraim (f.), the returning procession (m.), Rachel weeping then Ephraim the dear son (f.).

Jacob’s trouble (30:7) is the first movement consolation must pass through. Rachel’s weeping (31:15) is the last poem before the five oracles. 31:22 — “The Lord has created a new thing: the female encompasses the gever” — sits on the seam labeled chadashah just before the berit chadashah.

The outer frame: chapters 30–33

30:1–3 is the title page: write these words: I will restore the fortunes of Israel and Judah; I will bring them back to the land I gave their fathers. Chapter 32 is the enacted sign: a field bought in Anathoth during the siege. Chapter 33 returns to the city, then tightens the oath: a Branch for David; Levites who shall not lack a man; if you can break day and night, then My covenant with David and with the Levites can be broken. It cannot.

33:17–26 is B’ written in institutional language. Sun and moon in 31:35–37 guarantee the nation. Day and night in 33:20–26 guarantee David and Levi. A reading that retires the priesthood must cut this page from the booklet.

The rule the rings teach

1. Partners stay named. Israel and Judah. Not nameless new people.
2. Land stays terrestrial. Cities, gates, towers, fields in jars.
3. Torah stays Torah. Written deeper, not replaced.
4. The center cannot be collected early. If C were finished, A’ would already be holy to the Lord, never uprooted, and chapter 33’s Levites would have a man.
5. Ephraim is inside the booklet. Watchmen on Samaria’s hills. Rachel. Both houses are sown. A “nations know as much as the Jews” claim that does not walk Ephraim back to Zion is standing outside the ring.

That is the literary answer to Tony’s spheres. The wings can move. Jerusalem can rise. The land can mourn as for a firstborn. The middle is still the middle.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Hashem of Israel, and the War Over Jerusalem

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Esnoga Beit HaShoavah, Amarillo, Texas

Rosh Hashanah 5787  ·  13 September 2026

People keep saying Judaism and Christianity are two sides of the same coin.

They are not.

The original Blueprint is Torah. It was given in Hebrew to a people who stood at Sinai, in a language that behaves like chemistry—letters as elements, roots as compounds, speech that creates. Christianity took that Blueprint, translated it into Greek and Latin, and built a church. Islam took the memory of that Blueprint, declared the book in our hands corrupted, and built an ummah. Christianity and Islam both installed a later central figure. Both wrote a new scripture. Both taught that Israel’s covenant was finished.

Christianity and Islam are the two sides of the same coin.

They look different. They fail the same tests. And the war unfolding in front of our eyes—over Jerusalem—is what happens when two replacement systems meet a people and a city that refuse to stay replaced.

The Coin

One side keeps the text and changes the heir.

The Church becomes the “new Israel.” Sinai is fulfilled or set aside. The servant of Isaiah 53 becomes one man. Jerusalem becomes a symbol, a basilica, or a stage for someone else’s return. The Greeks gave that move its philosophy. Logos. Ousia. Hypostasis.

Latin gave it law and empire. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was recast in the language of Athens and Rome. The Filioque, the schism of 1054, fifty thousand denominations—that is not one faith guarding one Name. That is a divided kingdom arguing in borrowed tongues.

The other side preserves the history and discards the text’s reliability.

Islam says that the Torah was given to Musa. Then it says the scroll Jews still read is tahrif—distorted in meaning and later in the wording itself. The Qur’an tells the People of the Book to judge by what they have. Four centuries later, Ibn Hazm cataloged “errors” and blamed Ezra.

Popular teaching now is simple: your book cannot be trusted; ours corrects it. The qiblah turns away from Jerusalem. Abraham and Ishmael are sent to build a house a thousand miles from Moriah. The final community is not Jacob’s children. The Jewish state is not a dispute about borders. In the theology that feeds Hamas and Iran, it is din batel—a canceled religion that has no right to rise.

Different mint. Same metal.

Both claim Abraham. Islam and Christianity both step off the line through Sarah and Isaac the moment the land and the living Jews become inconvenient. Both say they honor the God who spoke in the Hebrew Bible. Neither submits to that God as He named Himself: the God of Israel.

How Far From Hashem

Hashem did not give a philosophy. He gave a people, a land, a language, and a book.

He hid the name Jerusalem in the Five Books on purpose. The word never appears in the Torah. Instead, Moshe keeps pointing: ha-makom asher yivchar Hashem—the place that Hashem will choose. Twenty times and more, mostly in Devarim.

The Tree of Life stood in the midst of the Garden. Tradition places the altar on that same cosmic center: the Foundation Stone, the navel of the world. Adam offered there. Abraham bound Isaac there. David bought the threshing floor there. The Name chose a hill and then waited until a king from Judah could stand on it.

A replaced person can be spiritualized. A replaced city cannot.

Measure the distance:

Covenant. Hashem binds Himself to Jacob’s line and does not repent of His gifts. The Church inherits Israel. The ummah cancels Israel.

Book. We still read the Hebrew. Christianity kept the pages and changed the key. Islam remembered the Torah and then taught that our pages are not that Torah.

Place. Zion. The church spiritualized it. The mosque redirected prayer away from it and built a rival center.

End of days. Isaiah and Micah: Torah goes forth from Zion; the word of Hashem from Jerusalem. Zechariah: Ten men from the nations take hold of a Jew’s garment. Survivors of the attack on Jerusalem go up for Sukkot. The coin says the opposite—Jews convert, Jews disappear, or Jewish sovereignty is a theological crime.

That is not a family quarrel about “fulfillment.” That is a different God-story wearing Israel’s vocabulary.

Language Is Not Neutral

The language you choose trains the mind that looks at the world.

Hebrew is verbal, historical, covenantal. Dabar is word and deed. Shalom is wholeness in motion. Letters carry weight, number, and form. The world is spoken into being. Hearing is the first commandment: Shema Yisrael.

Greek asks what a thing is. Latin asks who has jurisdiction. Those are powerful human instruments. They are not the language from above. When John writes “In the beginning was the Logos,” he performs a collision and a key change. When the Qur’an is recited as the final Arabic speech, it claims to close a book it never fully received.

You cannot get the God of Israel out of a system that will not stay in His language, on His mountain, with His witnesses.

Tahrif and Supersession Are Cousins

Christians do not need to call the Torah forged. They call it old.

Muslims do not need to keep our verses as canon. They call them altered.

The result for Israel is the same. The gift passed. The heir changed. The city is up for grabs.

Jay Smith is right about this much: the Qur’an feeds on midrash, Targum, and late Christian tales, then denies the integrity of the book it fed on. Our own work on the Septuagint is the Christian twin: translation became theology; theology became replacement. Neither system can afford a Jewish people who still have the original, still speak the Name, and still live in the place the Torah pointed at without naming.

If they believed the Tanakh on its own terms—I will bless those who bless you; to your seed I will give this land; you are My witnesses—they would not spend centuries trying to get rid of us, convert us out of existence, or explain why our return is a problem to be solved.

A handful do believe it. Size is not faithfulness. Two and a half billion Christians, two billion Muslims, fifty thousand church letterheads—and fifteen million Jews who can measure, in their own bones, how few have read the book they say they inherited.

The War Before Our Eyes

On October 7, 2023, the coin showed its face.

This is not the first border war. It is a war over whether the God of Israel still has a people and a city. The sermons that call a Jewish capital on that mountain illegitimate are not “politics.” They are tahrif with rockets. The blood-libel language recycled on Western streets is not “critique.” It is the old church accusation in new clothes. Iran’s proxies, the UN theater, the churches that cannot say “Israel” without a lecture, the mosques that cannot say “Jerusalem” without erasing Zion—these are two sides of one refusal.

Zechariah did not describe a metaphor. He described nations gathered against Jerusalem, and then survivors were required to go up and keep Sukkot. Isaiah did not describe a church. He said: For Zion’s sake I will not be still, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest.

We are watching men try to keep a counterfeit in circulation after the witness people came home.

1948 should have ended the Christian chart that said Jews would never be a nation again. 1967 should have ended the claim that Jerusalem would stay under Gentile rule forever. The years since October 7 should have ended the fantasy that this is about settlements. It is about the Name.

Hashem hid Jerusalem in the Torah so that when the city rose again, no one could say Moshe forgot to mention it. Hashem pointed. He waited. He brought us back. The nations are doing what the prophets said nations do when the place He chose becomes visible again.

The Blueprint Has Not Moved

Adam received a charge. Noah received a world. Abraham received a line. Sinai received a nation. The Tree of Life was never a metaphor for a church or a final prophet. It is the unchanging Blueprint for humanity—and Israel was chosen to guard it for the sake of every family on earth, not instead of them.

We are one human family in DNA. We are not one covenant. The distinction is already in Rebecca’s womb: two nations, two paths. The path that carries the Name runs through Isaac, Jacob, Zion, and the book we still open in Hebrew.

Christianity never left the Garden in one sense. It built a system on a different reading of the first chapters and then claimed the original had been replaced. Islam took another road of replacement. Both stand outside the reality that the Jewish people still possess the Book handed down from those who heard the words of Hashem.

No later claim erases Sinai.

What We Are Asking

We are not asking the nations to become Jews. The Torah already gave the children of Noah their seven. We are asking them to stop minting the coin.

Stop teaching that Israel is a closed chapter. Please stop teaching that our book is forged. Stop treating Jerusalem as anyone’s prize except the One who chose it. Bless the people He named. Come to the mountain He pointed at. Learn the language He spoke.

For out of Zion shall go forth Torah, and the word of Hashem from Jerusalem.

The war you are watching is not proof that the covenant failed. It is proof that two civilizations built on replacement cannot tolerate a people and a city that refuse to stay replaced.

Hashem of Israel is still the God of Israel.

The coin is counterfeit.

Zion is not.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Esnoga Beit HaShoavah

Amarillo, Texas

Scripture to sit with: Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 43:10; Isaiah 62:1; Micah 4:2; Zechariah 8:23; Zechariah 14:16–19; Deuteronomy 12 (the place He will choose); Genesis 17. Romans is not the end of this story. The prophets are.

The Torah does not begin with a sentence. It begins with a hinge.

English readers are handed a clean, finished line: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Hebrew readers are handed a letter that is closed on three sides and open only forward, a noun that refuses to stand alone, and two stories whose first three verses cannot be understood except as one another’s missing half.

engediresourcecenter.com

Not Quite the Beginning – En-Gedi Resource Center

That is the claim of our sages, and it is the claim of the grammar itself. Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 of Bereishit are not two drafts left in the same folder by accident. They are a blueprint that generates infinite meaning precisely because every letter is load-bearing. Remove one, and the house of creation does not stand.

This is an English lesson from Hebrew. And it is a lesson in how to see the Writer’s fingerprint.

The first three verses of the first story

Genesis 1:1–3

בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ
וְהָאָרֶץ הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ וְחֹשֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵי תְהוֹם וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים מְרַחֶפֶת עַל־פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי אוֹר וַיְהִי־אוֹר

When God began creating the heavens and the earth — the earth being tohu and vohu, with darkness over the face of the deep, and the spirit of Elohim hovering over the face of the waters — Elohim said: Let there be light. And there was light.

Notice what English usually hides.

Rashi’s first grammatical observation is not midrash. It is syntax. The word reshit in the Tanakh is almost always in the construct state — “the beginning of something.” It does not like to stand alone as “In the beginning.” Read as a construct, verse 1 is not the main clause. It is the temporal frame. The first completed divine speech — the first sentence — arrives only in verse 3.

Verse 1 names the objects: heavens and earth. Elohim is the subject. Creation is an act of a Master Builder who speaks structure into existence. Verse 2 names the problem: watery chaos, formlessness, darkness over the deep. Verse 3 names the first solution: light that divides. The whole first account will proceed by separation — light from dark, waters from waters, land from sea, day from night.

Elohim is the Name of judgment, of measured power, of “God saw that it was good.” A builder evaluates. If it is not good, it does not stand.

The first three verses of the second story

Genesis 2:4–6

אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם
בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם
וְכֹל שִׂיחַ הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִהְיֶה בָאָרֶץ וְכָל־עֵשֶׂב הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִצְמָח
כִּי לֹא הִמְטִיר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים עַל־הָאָרֶץ וְאָדָם אַיִן לַעֲבֹד אֶת־הָאֲדָמָה
וְאֵד יַעֲלֶה מִן־הָאָרֶץ וְהִשְׁקָה אֶת־כָּל־פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that Hashem Elohim made the earth and the heavens. Now no shrub of the field was yet on the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for Hashem Elohim had not caused rain upon the earth, and there was no human to work the ground. And a mist would rise from the earth and water the whole face of the ground.

The grammar has flipped.

Heaven and earth are no longer the objects of a verb. They are the parents. Toledot comes from yalad — to give birth. “These are the begettings of the heavens and the earth.” The cosmos is now the subject that generates. God is present as facilitator: Hashem Elohim, the compassionate Name joined to the judging Name.

And the problem is the exact inverse of chapter 1.

Chapter 1: too much water, too much darkness, no structure, a world that cannot stand.
Chapter 2: no rain, a parched field under unrelieved light, no human to till, a world that cannot grow.

Chapter 1 solves chaos by dividing.
Chapter 2 solves barrenness by uniting — a mist rises, heaven’s water and earth’s dust meet, and only then can life be formed from the ground.

Rabbi David Fohrman has spent years showing that these are not rival drafts. They are two faces of one act, nested like Russian dolls. You cannot imagine one without the other. The second story is what happens inside the first story’s sixth day, and the first story is the architecture that makes the second story’s garden possible. The “disharmony” that source critics treat as evidence of multiple authors is, on close reading, a designed inversion.

That is the Rabbi’s grammar: not “reconcile the contradictions,” but see the hinge. The texts know each other.

An English lesson from Hebrew

English likes finished subjects and finished verbs. “God created.” Done.

Hebrew in these verses is doing something more dangerous.

1. Construct state. Bereshit wants a partner. Rashi: There is no reshit in Scripture that is not bound to what follows it. The opening of the Torah is grammatically incomplete until you keep reading. Creation is not a closed event in the past tense. It is “in the beginning of God’s creating…” — a process whose first speech act is light.
2. The flip of subject and object. In 1:1, heaven and earth receive the accusative marker et. They are made. In 2:4, they beget. The same two nouns change grammatical roles. That is not sloppy editing. That is theology written as syntax: the created world is invited to become a co-creator. Rain from heaven, mist from earth, human from dust — generation, not only fabrication.
3. The small letter. In a Torah scroll, the heh of behibaram — “when they were created” — is written small. The sages hear worlds that were created and destroyed before this one, or the name of Abraham hidden in the letters of creation itself. A diminished letter is not a typo. It is a door.
4. Two Names. Elohim builds and judges. Hashem (the four-letter Name) is the Name of mercy, of presence that makes growth possible — related, the sages note, to rechem, womb. The second story needs both Names together because organic life requires both structure and compassion. One Name could not tell the whole story. Neither could one chapter.

English translations that flatten 1:1 into a standalone past-tense sentence and that treat chapter 2 as a “second, basic folk tale” have already lost the lesson. The Hebrew teaches you that meaning lies in the relationships among letters, words, and chapters.

Each letter depends on the others

The sages say the world was created with the letter bet. Why not aleph? Because the bet is closed above, below, and behind — you may not inquire what is above, what is below, what was before. It is open only toward the future, toward the next letter, toward the story that must still be read.

That is not anti-intellectual. It is a theory of reading. The first letter of the Torah already tells you that no letter is self-sufficient. Bet needs resh, aleph, shin, yud, and tav to become Bereshit. And Bereshit needs the rest of the verse, and the verse needs verse 2, and chapter 1 needs chapter 2, and Genesis needs the rest of Torah.

The Vilna Gaon could find the law of redeeming the firstborn encoded in the letters of the first word. That is not a parlor trick. It is the claim that the blueprint is fractal: the whole is in the part, and the part is unintelligible without the whole.

Infinite meanings are not a license to say whatever we wish. They are the opposite. Because the letters are interdependent, every new meaning must still fit the other letters. Midrash that ignores grammar is not the sages’ method. The sages’ method is to press the grammar until it yields another coherent story — and then another — without snapping the first story.

PaRDeS is not four disconnected layers. It is one text generating four depths because the letters were written to bear that weight.

The Writer’s fingerprint

Modern criticism looked at two Names, two orders of creation, two tones — cosmic liturgy versus intimate garden — and concluded: two authors, later glued by a redactor who did not mind the seams.

Look again at the first three verses of each story.

• Problem in 1: excess water, darkness, no form.
• Problem in 2: no water, unrelieved exposure, no growth.
• Solution in 1: speech that separates.
• Solution in 2: mist that unites.
• God in 1: Elohim the Builder, evaluating.
• God in 2: Hashem Elohim the Facilitator, causing rain, forming from dust, breathing.
• Heaven and earth in 1: objects.
• Heaven and earth in 2: parents.

That is not a seam. That is a chiasm of worlds. A redactor stitching scraps does not invert the physics of the problem and then invert the grammar of the nouns. A single intelligence that wants you to hold transcendence and immanence at once does.

The fingerprint is the interdependence. Judah’s story in Genesis 38 is woven into Joseph’s story in 37 with the same verbs of recognition and the same lost garment used as false evidence. The flood is written as a controlled return to tohu and a re-creation, with ruach Elohim again over the waters. Sabbath language returns in the rainbow. These are not coincidences piled up by chance. They are the same hand.

Michelangelo painted the gap between two fingers. The Torah writes the gap between two chapters and then refuses to let you close either one.

The garden needs the architecture of the six days. The six days need a creature who can till and keep. Structure without rain is a desert. Rain without structure is the deep. The Writer knew both.

How the sages insist we read

We do not read chapter 1 “scientifically” and chapter 2 “mythically.” We read both through the lens that the letters themselves demand: as a unified blueprint whose surface already contains its depths.

The sages are not adding meaning from outside. They are following the dependencies that the text installed.

• Why start with creation rather than the first commandment? Because the nations will one day say, “You are thieves.” The opening chapters are the deed to the world. (Rashi, citing Rabbi Yitzchak.)
• Why bet? To teach the direction of inquiry.
• Why two Names? Because justice without mercy cannot sustain a world, and mercy without justice cannot order one.
• Why toledot of heaven and earth? Because the cosmos is not a finished object. It is a lineage. You and I are in the generations of that first mist.

Tohu vavohu is not only primordial soup. It is any life that has form without purpose, or purpose without form. The mist that rises is not only hydrology. It is the meeting of what is above and what is below that makes a human possible.

philipcox.substack.com

Tohu vaVohu – by Philip Cox – The Inside Job

Read one chapter without the other, and you get a half-god: either a distant Engineer or a local Gardener. Read them as the sages and as the grammar require — each letter leaning on the next — and you get the paradox the Shema will later name: Hashem is our Elohim. Hashem is One.

That is the genius. Not that the text is pretty. That the text is so tightly designed that the only way to “solve” its tensions is to become a better reader — and a more whole human being.

The first three verses of each story are not two openings. They are one sentence, spoken in two registers, waiting for a reader who will not put the book down after verse 3.

Keep reading. The next letter is already holding this one up.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Noach, the greatest prophet of his generation, stands at the hinge of worlds: the last king-sage of an antediluvian city whose ruins still speak, the builder whose vessel preserved life, and the survivor who carried the memory of a single human family that once spoke one language and knew Hashem.

This essay draws the thread from the Sumerian tablets of Shuruppak through the excavations of the last century, the Zohar’s cosmic Shemitahs, the work around Lake Van and the mountains of Ararat, and the growing Noahide movement.

It is offered as research for the rewriting of Adam, the Blueprint of Creation, and the Tree of Life, and as a backstory that can move that movement: the original tradition is not a late invention.

The books of every college would have to be rewritten if the Jew is true—just as New Mexico footprints and Folsom points forced American prehistory textbooks to change when the evidence would no longer fit the old short timeline.

The Cosmic Calendar Only Torah Explains

The Talmud (Chagigah 13b–14a; Shabbat 88b) records 974 generations before Adam. Psalm 105:8 speaks of the word commanded to a thousand generations; twenty-six generations from Adam to Moses leave 974. These are not metaphors. Combined with the Zohar and later kabbalists (Rabbeinu Bechaye, Tiferet Yisrael), they sit inside the doctrine of Cosmic Shemitahs: seven cycles of 7,000 years totaling 49,000 years, after which a cosmic Jubilee returns the world to tohu va-vohu.

No other religion provides a coherent account of tens of thousands of years of human (and pre-Adamic) history while preserving moral agency, covenant, and a single Creator. Earlier cycles were more sophisticated; each subsequent generation, from the height of Adam, grew dimmer in perception even as technical skill sometimes increased. The flood generation was the nadir of that decline. Noah was “righteous in his generations”—the greatest prophet of that generation precisely because the rest had forgotten.

That framework is why the same flood memory appears on every continent. Humanity once shared a single language and a single knowledge of Hashem. After the waters receded, only those who stepped off the ark could tell what the world had been like before. The stories that survived—Ziusudra, Utnapishtim, Atrahasis, Noah—are not independent inventions. They are the testimony of the remnant.

Shuruppak: A Real City, a Real King, a Real Inundation

The Sumerian King List names five antediluvian cities. The last is Shuruppak (modern Tell Fara / Fara in southern Iraq). Its final king before “the flood swept over” is Ubara-Tutu; his son is Ziusudra (“life of long days”), the figure later called Utnapishtim (“he found life”) and Atrahasis (“exceedingly wise”). The Instructions of Shuruppak, one of the oldest wisdom texts, is addressed by the father to his son.

In 1931, Erich Schmidt directed a joint excavation by the American Schools of Research and the University of Pennsylvania at Fara. They reached the ruins after cutting through roughly 45 feet of overburden in places. Between the Jemdet Nasr (Fara I) and Early Dynastic (Fara II) levels, they found an inundation deposit. Schmidt wrote that the biblical flood story

“seems to be based on a very real event or a series of such, as suggested by the existence at Ur, at Kish, and now at Fara, of inundation deposits, which accumulated on top of human inhabitation.”

He added that “the Noah story” may symbolize the survival of Sumerian culture after that break.

Samuel Noah Kramer, the epigraphist on that season and later the great Sumerologist, returned to the same evidence. He noted that Ziusudra was already a venerable literary figure by the mid-third millennium BCE and that the flood motif was too central to be “nothing more than a total fabrication of fancy and fantasy.”

Noach’s Sons Have The Story

Kramer concluded, following Max Mallowan’s “Noah’s Flood Reconsidered,” that the Mesopotamian story and the Genesis version based on it were inspired by an actual catastrophic (if not worldwide) disaster whose traces remain at Kish and Shuruppak around 3000 BCE.

These are not the quotes that dominate introductory textbooks. Textbooks prefer to treat the flood as “myth borrowed during the Babylonian exile.” They rarely linger on the fact that the city named in the oldest tablets was excavated, that a sterile silt layer sits exactly where the texts place the catastrophe, and that the excavators themselves connected the dirt to the Bible.

The History Books Would Have to Be Rewritten

Adelheid Otto of LMU Munich, who has returned to Fara with geophysical survey and new soundings, states the obvious that earlier teams already saw: Shuruppak is “the city where, according to various cuneiform texts, the flood took place, and the king of Shuruppak named Ziusudra built this ship and thereby saved humanity.”

She notes the thick layers of inundation found by earlier excavators and the city’s uniquely watery setting. A simultaneous surge of the Tigris and Euphrates, combined with blocking southerly winds, could inundate all of southern Mesopotamia.

The plans to save the world were completed because a righteous man received the warning, tore down his house, built the vessel to specification (gopher wood, rooms, pitch inside and out, three decks, dimensions given in cubits), gathered the seed of life, and shut the door when Hashem shut it.

One Language and One Place: The Stories Match

The Atrahasis and Gilgamesh versions preserve the same engineering logic: roof it like the Apsu so the sun cannot see inside; make the tackle strong; use bitumen. Divine command, coupled with human obedience, produced the only structure that rode out the storm. After seven days, the waters stilled; a window was opened; birds were sent; sacrifice was offered. The survivor then told the story of the world that had existed before.

The Mountains of Ararat and the Work at Lake Van

Genesis says the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. That region is eastern Turkey, around Lake Van (the “Lake Vaughn” of current fieldwork) and the volcanic massifs that include Tendürek and Ararat itself.

Matthew LaCroix and collaborating archaeologists and geologists (including Robert Schoch) have documented megalithic ruins both on land (Ayanis, Kef Kalesi) and underwater. The submerged structures lie 75–85 feet down—the deepest confirmed megalithic ruins yet identified.

Lake-level reconstructions and the last major eruption of the adjacent volcano place those ruins before the lake reached its present height, consistent with a Younger Dryas or earlier date. The stonework shows the same precision, tool signatures, and sacred geometry (including six-spoke Flower of Life motifs) found at Göbekli Tepe, Puma Punku, and other “impossible” sites. Mainstream dating assigns the visible Urartian layer to the first millennium BCE; the deeper architecture does not fit that layer.

What Our Mother Earth Says: I Call Heaven and Earth to Witness

A few dozen miles away, the boat-shaped Durupınar formation has been mapped for decades. Recent soil chemistry and ground-penetrating radar (Noah’s Ark Scans team working with Turkish archaeologists, including Prof. Cenker Atila of Sivas Cumhuriyet University, plus specialized radar originally developed for U.S. defense) show statistically large differences inside versus outside the outline:

Three times the organic matter, elevated potassium consistent with wood ash, an eight-fold pH shift, 40 percent higher carbon, and right-angled anomalies and possible deck-like layering at depths matching a three-deck vessel whose length is given in Genesis as 300 cubits. Atila has said the current data increase the likelihood that the formation is the ark “with each passing day.”

These are not proofs that close every debate. They are the kind of converging physical traces that, in any other field, would force a rewrite of the chapter. Hashem’s handiwork is visible in the preservation: a silt layer at the exact city named in the oldest tablets, a boat-shaped anomaly whose internal chemistry differs from the surrounding mountainside, underwater megaliths that should not exist at that depth if the conventional timeline is complete.

One Language, One Memory, One Argument

Flood narratives exist from Mesopotamia to the Americas, from China to Australia. They share a chosen survivor, a vessel, animals, birds, a mountain landing, and a sacrifice. That distribution is what one would expect if a single catastrophe were remembered by the descendants of a single family who later scattered after Babel, when the one language was confused.

Only the people who lived through the event and walked off the vessel could have described the antediluvian cities, the moral collapse, and the precise instructions for the boat.

Matthew LaCroix makes the same case to Christian and Muslim audiences that this research makes to the Noahide world: the Hebrew account is not a late derivative. It is the distilled, covenantal version of a memory that is older than the tablets we have recovered. If that is so, then the standard college narrative—civilization begins in the fourth millennium, the Bible is myth assembled in exile, deep time belongs only to geology and not to Torah—cannot stand.

New Mexico: Close To Home

The New Mexico footprints at White Sands (dated 21,000–23,000 years ago) and the Folsom points, which first proved that humans hunted Ice Age megafauna, already forced American prehistory textbooks to be rewritten. The same intellectual honesty applied to Shuruppak, the Shemitah cycles, and the Ararat evidence would be required of world-history and comparative-religion textbooks.

The Noahide movement, growing worldwide, is not inventing a new religion. It is recovering the seven laws given to the children of Noah—the remnant who stepped onto dry ground and were told that the rainbow is the sign that the world would not be destroyed that way again.

The Greatest Prophet That Saved The Underworld

The greatest prophet of his generation built the vessel, completed the plan, survived, and told the story. The dirt at Fara, the chemistry at Durupınar, the stones under Lake Van, and the Zohar’s 49,000-year calendar are the data that challenge the critics. The original Blueprint remains.

The physical traces now being mapped in the mountains of Ararat add a second, independent line of evidence that the Torah recorded real history rather than later myth. Genesis 8:4 does not say the ark landed on the single peak of Ağrı Dağı. It says it came to rest “on the mountains of Ararat”—the highland region of ancient Urartu in eastern Turkey.

That is exactly where two clusters of remains have been studied: a high-altitude wooden structure on the mountain itself and the boat-shaped Durupınar formation in the foothills a few miles south.

The Durupınar Formation: Dimensions, Chemistry, and Radar

In 1959, a Turkish army captain spotted a 157-meter (515-foot) boat-shaped ridge on aerial photographs. That length corresponds to 300 royal Egyptian cubits—the exact figure given in Genesis 6:15. The width-to-length ratio also falls within the biblical proportions. The site sits at roughly 1,920 meters elevation in the foothills, well within the “mountains of Ararat.”

Recent work by Noah’s Ark Scans, working with Turkish archaeologists under Prof. Cenker Atila of Sivas Cumhuriyet University and using specialized radar originally developed for U.S. defense applications, has produced the most detailed subsurface picture yet. Ground-penetrating radar and electrical resistivity tomography show right-angled anomalies, a central corridor, and layered features consistent with three decks—the number specified in Genesis 6:16.

The Soil

Soil samples taken from inside the outline versus immediately outside it show statistically large differences: approximately three times the organic matter, 38–40 percent more potassium (associated with wood ash), an eight-fold pH shift, and higher carbon.

Andrew Jones of the scans team called the internal-versus-external contrast “statistically staggering” and “the most compelling evidence for an oral tradition origin.” Atila has stated that the accumulating data raises the probability that the formation is the ark “with each passing day.”

These are not the kinds of results that appear in standard textbooks. They are the kind of converging physical signatures—geometry matching the cubit specification, internal architecture matching three decks, and a closed chemical system consistent with decayed timber—that would force a rewrite if they belonged to any other ancient vessel.

The High-Altitude Wooden Structure and the 2009 NAMI Expedition

A second body of evidence comes from higher up on the mountain itself. In 2009, the Hong Kong-based Noah’s Ark Ministries International (NAMI) team documented a large wooden structure at approximately 4,100 meters (13,500 feet), exposed in ice and rock.

Footage shows compartments, sloping floors, support beams, openings, and boards joined in a manner consistent with heavy timber construction.

A black, shiny coating on some surfaces was identified as pitch—the material Genesis 6:14 commands Noah to use “inside and out.” The team dated the wood to roughly 4,800 years. Later visitors, including an American researcher in 2014, reported a second deck.

The Building Pattern Matches The Torah

Randall W. Younker, professor of archaeology, initially skeptical, examined the images and reports from people who had been on site and concluded: “I am convinced it is not a recent fraud or fake—it has been up there for some time—so it is a legitimate archaeological site. As such, it deserves a careful study.”

Gilbert H. Grosvenor, long-time editor of National Geographic, had already written that if the ark were ever found, it would be “the greatest archaeological discovery in history \ldots and it will alter all the currents of scientific thought.”

Mainstream academic literature treats both sites with extreme caution and often dismisses them. That is expected: accepting either would require rewriting the chapters that presently treat the flood as a local Mesopotamian memory later inflated into a universal myth.

The Torah’s recording, however, is precise on the points that can still be checked: the landing region (mountains of Ararat, not a single summit), the dimensions in cubits, the three decks, the use of pitch, and the fact that only a survivor who had lived through the event could have transmitted those details.

Why Only a Survivor Could Have Told It

The pre-flood world of Shuruppak, the moral collapse, the exact building instructions, and the landing place in the highlands of Ararat could not have been invented centuries later by people who had never seen the vessel. Someone who walked off the ark onto dry ground in that region told the story.

That story was preserved in the Hebrew record with a fidelity that later cuneiform versions (Ziusudra, Utnapishtim) echo but do not surpass in covenantal and dimensional detail. The same memory appears, in broken form, on every inhabited continent because the remnant who left the ark were the ancestors of all subsequent nations—and they once spoke one language and knew Hashem.

The work at Lake Van (megalithic ruins at depths inconsistent with the later Urartian layer), the silt at Shuruppak, the chemistry and radar at Durupınar, and the high-altitude timber on Ararat itself are not isolated curiosities. Together they form a chain that begins in the oldest Sumerian tablets, passes through the Torah’s exact specifications, and ends in the ground of eastern Turkey.

That chain is the handiwork of Hashem and the reason the books of every college would have to be rewritten if the Jewish recording of history is allowed to stand. The Noahide movement, growing across the world,d is recovering the laws given to the children of that remnant. The ark that saved them is still, in fragments and chemical signatures, where the Torah said it would be.

Hazan Gaviel ben David

• How Christianity Took Jewish Roots
• Deuteronomy’s Covenant for America: Torah Blueprint, Rabbi Glazerson Codes, Gog Magog & 250th Anniversary
• Creating a Vessel of Worship: The Midbar of Silence, the Question of Justice, and the Song of the New Generation
• Milestone 19: The Lord Descending in Power upon Sinai on the Third Day
• A Dialogue on the Noahide Laws: Understanding the Seven Laws of Noah in Judaism

A Response to Rabbi Efraim Palvanov

Rabbi Efraim Palvanov’s lecture, Jesus in the Talmud, was given in good faith to Christians at the Villa Maria Education and Spirituality Center. He opened books; many churches only meet as internet weapons. That matters. The Talmud is a sea of Jewish wisdom. I learn from Palvanov on Edom, on history, on the long memory of Jacob’s twin.¹

This essay exists for a different reason.

If a Christian walks out of that room still clutching a list of “365 prophecies Jesus fulfilled,” we have not started at the beginning. That list is not in our Bible. It is a later inventory laid over the Tanakh. Biblical faith, if the word biblical means the book Israel received, does not begin with a man who dies for someone else’s sins. It begins in a garden with two trees, and it returns in Moses’ last speech: life and death, good and evil, set before you today.²

The Talmud is great. How well do you know your Bible?

Why I Am Writing This

I write as a chazan who has spent years in rooms with pastors and as a Jew who once lived inside the church’s reading of “our” book. The site I keep, beithashoavah.org, is built on one claim: we are one human family, fractured since the brothers of Genesis, and the Tree of Life was never replaced by a cross.³

Palvanov’s class asked Christians to hear Jewish sources. I am asking Jews and Christians the harder question first. Before we debate Yeshu in Gittin or Sanhedrin, can we read Genesis 2–3 and Deuteronomy 30 without importing a second plot?

That is the reason for this essay. Interfaith speech that starts in the Talmud will be clipped. An interfaith speech that starts in the Garden has to address the text.

Pros and Cons of the Palvanov Lecture

Pros. He did not hide Gittin 56b–57a. Palanov showed that the same sugya has Yeshu telling Onkelos to seek Israel’s welfare. He put Messiah, son of Joseph, the leper at Rome’s gate, and the Temple signs forty years before 70 CE on the table, rather than leaving them to hostile channels. He treated Christians as adults who could hear a Jewish voice. For an audience raised on “the Talmud says Jesus boils in excrement,” that correction is a public service.

Cons. Coded Balaam-as-Jesus readings and “Christian-sounding” Talmud lines become missionary clips the next morning. Chronology is soft: Yehoshua ben Perachiah is a century early. The venue’s goal — to help Christians learn about Jews — can blur into “the rabbis almost agreed with us.” Most of all, the lecture cannot carry the load Christians actually bring: a claim that Tanakh already announced a dying-and-rising God-man hundreds of times. If that claim is false, the Talmud debate is a side room.

Tovia Singer’s caution belongs here. Missionaries who say they do not believe the Talmud still quote it when it helps. Manis Friedman’s caution belongs here too. You may explain the difference without pretending that the two covenants are one. Palvanov sits between them. This essay chooses Singer’s starting gate and Friedman’s plain speech: serve the Father’s written word.⁴

The 365 Prophecies Are Not in Our Bible

Popular Christian apologetics still repeats that Jesus fulfilled 365, or 300, or “every” messianic prophecy. Search the Tanakh for that catalog. It is not there. What you find are specific promises about a king from David, ingathering, peace among nations, a rebuilt House, knowledge of Hashem covering the earth as water covers the sea. Those have not arrived. That is why Jews say the Messiah has not come. It is not stubbornness. It is literacy.⁵

A substitute death that pays the moral debt of the world is not the plot of Eden, not the plot of Leviticus (where a person brings his own offering and returns), and not the plot of the prophets (where Hashem says return and live). Ezekiel 18 is blunt: the soul that sins shall die; the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father. Isaiah 53 is a debate we can have — Israel as servant, a righteous sufferer, later midrash — but it is not a license to rewrite Genesis.⁶

If the Bible is true, start where it starts.

The Garden: Answer Fohrman’s Three Questions

Rabbi David Fohrman, in A Book Like No Other, Eden, will not let the story stay a lullaby. He asks the questions a child would ask.⁷

First: Why a Tree of Life and a Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? Those ideas have nothing obvious to do with trees or with each other. What is each tree for?

They are not two snack options. There are two ways of being human. The Tree of Life is life received from the Giver — relationship, trust, remaining in the Father’s definition of good. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is the ability to name good and evil from ourselves. The Torah later calls wisdom a tree of life to those who take hold of her.⁸ After the path is guarded, Sinai is not Plan B. It is the same Tree in a form that a nation can walk.

Second: What is the function of each tree? If they may eat of every tree but one, they already have life. Why plant a Tree of Life in the middle and later treat it like an emergency? Why would God withhold the knowledge of good and evil if “do not eat” already required knowing that a command can be broken?

The Only Verse That Promises Eternal Life

Adam was not a statue. He already knew enough to hear a command. What he did not have — and was not to seize — was the right to author good and evil. The Tree of Life was not extra decoration. Eternal life in Genesis 3:22 is attached to eating from that Tree, not to a later human sacrifice. In Adam: The Blueprint of Creation and the Tree of Life, I argue Adam was never automatically immortal. Life was given and had to be chosen. The cherubim guard a path, not a hole in the ground where the Tree once stood.⁹

Moses answers the “emergency” question at the end of the Torah. He sets before Israel life and good, death and evil — the two trees in speech, with no flaming sword:

“For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven… But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.”¹⁰

The Tree without the angels. That is biblical faith.

Third: Eve seems to misidentify the tree. The text says both special trees are in the midst. She speaks as if the forbidden tree is the one in the middle. Did she confuse them?

Fohrman is right that the geography is the theology. When the human eye treats the forbidden as the center, the Tree of Life is already off-center. Chavah’s sentence is the first time a human relocates the middle of the world. Every later religion that puts a man, a church, or a caliphate in the middle of the Garden is repeating her grammar. The Father’s written word keeps Hashem in the middle. Chosenness is not a trophy. It is the firstborn’s job to remember where the center is.¹¹

One Family, Two Brothers Against Jacob

We are one large family. The fractures are family fractures. Ham and Canaan open a wound after the Flood. Ishmael and Isaac split a house. Esau and Jacob shared a womb. The prophets do not treat those names as museum tags. They treat them as patterns that return when Jerusalem becomes a cup of reeling.¹²

Ishmael The Donkey of Zachariah 9:9

Ishmael is named Pere Adam—a wild-donkey of a man. His hand against everyone, everyone’s hand against him; he dwells alongside all his brothers.¹³ That is not a racial slur. It is the Torah’s picture of untamed strength living next to the covenant line, blessed with nationhood, not given the everlasting covenant of Isaac.¹⁴

Esau is Edom. He is the twin who sold the birthright and later comforted himself with the thought of killing Jacob. Our Sages read Rome — and the Christian civilization that rode Rome — as Edom: the brother who wants the blessing without the yoke. Palvanov’s own Understanding Edom series traces that line. I have written the same identification: Esau is not Ishmael. Brad Scott taught the opposite when I was in the church. The Hebrew Bible and the Jewish library do not.¹⁵

Esua I Hated

Psalm 83 puts them in one sentence: the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, a pact against Israel’s inheritance. Obadiah judges Edom for violence against his brother Jacob. The war we are watching is not “religion versus religion” in the abstract. It is the old triangle: Jacob holding the Land and the Book, Ishmael pressing as the wild donkey, Esau pressing as the twin who cannot bear that the birthright stayed in the tents.¹⁶

Hashem said the end from the beginning.¹⁷ The brothers of the world are still broken. The Jewish people were chosen to keep the Father’s written word so that the family has a way home. If we are chosen, the family should not replace that word with a second scripture or a dying god.

Zechariah: Check the Address

People say “Zechariah 12 says two of the city and one was saved.” That is not what chapter 12 says.

Zechariah 12 is Jerusalem as a cup of reeling and a heavy stone. Nations gather. Judah is made a firepot. Hashem defends the tents of Judah first. Then the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem receive a spirit of grace and supplication, and they look to Hashem concerning those who were pierced, and mourn as for an only son. Jewish reading does not have to donate that verse to John 19. It can remain Israel’s mourning in war, the piercing of her own, the grief of a firstborn nation.¹⁸

The “two parts / one third” text is Zechariah 13:8–9:

“And it shall come to pass in all the land, says the LORD, that two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined…”¹⁹

The “part of the city” text is Zechariah 14:2: the city is captured, houses plundered; half the city goes into exile, and the rest of the people are not cut off from the city. Then Hashem goes out to fight.²⁰

Three different cameras: siege (12), refining remnant in the land (13:8–9), partial exile from the city, then divine war (14). Mixing them into one slogan is how prophecy becomes a meme. Read the addresses.

A remnant refined, calling on the Name, hearing “You are My people” — that is Sinai language coming home. It is not a church altar call.²¹

Chosen Means the Father Already Spoke

Rabbi Fohrman shows that the Ten Sayings of Sinai are already pulsing through Genesis in order — family law written in family wound. Rivkah’s warning about Esau is already the grammar of “no other gods.” The civil branches of Ki Teitzei grow from those same fractures.²²

Psalm 147 is not polite. He declares His word to Jacob, His statutes to Israel. He has not done so for any other nation. Christians and Muslims may hold translations. They were not in the forty-year yeshiva.²³

So the question returns. If the Jewish people are chosen by Hashem, should not the family accept the Father’s written word? The who of the Tanakh is not a committee. The Boss speaks. Hashem commands. Hashem forgives the one who returns. He does not install a mediator you must worship in order to reach Him.

Maimonides could say Christianity and Islam spread monotheism among the nations and still deny that either one is the Tree. Palvanov can say Jacob and Esau may yet embrace and still not put Esau in Jacob’s tallit. I can honor a lecture that opened the Talmud for Christians and still say: do not start there.²⁴

Conclusion

The Talmud is great. How well do you know your Bible?

Know the Garden. Answer why there are two trees. Know that Moses put both trees back in your mouth and heart. The 365 prophecies Jesus fulfilled prophecies is a poster, not a pasuk.

Know that Ishmael is the wild donkey who dwells against his brothers, and Esau is the twin who never made peace with the birthright. Know that Zechariah 13:8–9 is the two-thirds and the third, and Zechariah 14:2 is half the city, and Zechariah 12 is the stone the nations break themselves on.

Then, if you still want to talk about Yeshu in the Bavli, we can. We will talk as people who have read the Father first.

For the longer Tree of Life argument, the Esau and Ishmael essays, and the Fohrman reading of Genesis as Sinai in seed form, see beithashoavah.org.

Hazan Gavriel ben David

• Debunking Christian Myths About the
• Hashem Chose a Family: The Tree of Life Blueprint Was Given to Protect All of Adam
• Bible Codes Revealed at Yiboneh with Rabbi Moshe Zeldman
• How Christianity Transforms the Tanach’s Messages of Life into Doctrines of Death:
• How Can Christianity and Judaism Be “Two Sides of the Same Coin” When One Looks Nothing Like the Original Blueprint?

Why the Bible Is the World’s Greatest Self-Help Book — and Why Resistance, Not Comfort, Makes a Person Whole

A teaching for Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and the year 5787

The Highways Are Already in the Heart

“Happy is the person whose strength is in You; the highways are in their heart.”

Ashrei adam oz-lo bach; mesillot bilevavam. The pathway to You is always on his heart.

So opens the psalm that names the blessed life not as a life without struggle, but as a life whose inner roads already run toward Zion. The mesillot — raised highways, built-up roads — are not out there waiting to be discovered. They have already been laid down inside the heart. The question of this season is never whether the path exists. The question is whether we will walk it when the road begins to resist us.

Self Help

The self-help shelves of the world are the most purchased books on earth, and almost no one who buys them becomes whole. That is not an accident. Most of those books sell a life without friction: optimize the self, protect the self, curate the self, soothe the self.

The Bible does the opposite. It is not a manual for the self. The Torah is the operating system and source code of the human mind and body. It tells you what you are made of, what broke, what the repair costs are, and who holds the compiler. You cannot debug a life with a book that refuses to name the Architect.

The World Began in Stumbling: Tohu, Resistance, and Two Trees

Start at the beginning. That is where the stumbling starts.

“The earth was tohu vavohu — formless and void — and darkness was over the face of the deep, and the spirit of Hashem was hovering over the face of the waters.” The world does not open in comfort. It opens in chaos.

The first movement of holiness is not the removal of resistance. It is the Spirit of Hashem moving over the dark waters — what the mystics called the pool of souls, the raw material of every life that would ever be asked to become righteous.

We are all already righteous in potential. Almost no one tells his own soul that it is good. The greater soul Hashem wants us to build in this world is not assembled by affirmations. It is assembled by His commandments and by the daily coronation of Him as King.

Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur: The Soul

That is what Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur come to teach: not that we are already finished, but that hope is still possible inside unfinished chaos.

In the garden stand two trees. The Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. A world with only the Tree of Life would be a world without resistance — no choice, no friction, no becoming. How can a person live in a world with no resistance?

He cannot. He can only float. Chava did not invent the fall out of malice. She named the structure of this world. Life in a body, in history, in marriage, in a nation, is the decision to eat from knowledge — to enter the field where good and evil actually press against each other — rather than remain in an untested immortality.

That is reality. Not the English paraphrase. Reality.

Ezer K’negdo: The English Lie and the Hebrew Truth

The first resistance Hashem built into the human being is not an enemy. It is a spouse.

“It is not good that the human should be alone; I will make for him an ezer k’negdo.” English Bibles say “helpmeet,” “helpmate,” “a helper suitable for him.” That translation is a softening. It is almost a lie. The Hebrew does not say assistant. Ezer is the word used, over and over, for Hashem Himself when He comes to Israel’s rescue — a warrior-helper, not a secretary. K’negdo means opposite him, facing him, against him.

Rashi, quoting the Talmud, refuses to let us sentimentalize it: if he is worthy, she is a help to him; if he is not worthy, she is against him, to oppose him. Chava was created to resist Adam — to place friction in the path of the isolated “I.” She was not made to complete his brand. She was made so that he would have to become someone large enough to love another soul as his own.

Love Your Neighbor- As Yourself

The first commandment of resistance is therefore this: love your wife as you love yourself. It is so hard because we are trained, by every self-help gospel of the age, to focus on the I, the Me, the private soul.

The one who is righteous understands that the whole world is his soul. The neighbor is not an accessory to the project of the self. The wife is not a member of the support staff for the husband’s dream. She is the first Sinai he will ever stand in front of.

I watched a film from Iran about the African communities there. It opens with a woman telling her husband that his idea of becoming a musician has no place in her world. She will not help him. The scene is not cruel. It is Genesis 2 speaking in a kitchen. A soulmate is not sent to remove the stones from your road. A soulmate is sent to be the stone you must learn to bless. She resists you so that you will become better than the man who only ever consulted himself.

Parshat Ha’azinu: Heaven and Earth Are Called to Witness

This Shabbat, 8 Tishrei 5787 — September 19, 2026 — is Shabbat Shuva, the Sabbath of Return that sits between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. The reading everywhere is Parshat Ha’azinu, Devarim 32, the song Moshe places in the mouth of Israel as a witness against them and for them.

“Give ear, O heavens, and I will speak; let the earth hear the words of my mouth.” Heaven and earth are summoned because, from Genesis 2 onward, they are our first parents. “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth.” Man is dust of the adamah and breath of the heavens.

What Hashem does to the earth, He also does to the human being, because we come from the stars and from the soil. When the land is judged, the body is judged. When the land is atoned for, the people are atoned for. That is why the song can end: “and He will atone for His land, His people.”

The Tzur – Our Rock

The Name that dominates Ha’azinu is not a feeling. It is Tzur — the Rock. “The Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are justice; a God of faithfulness and without iniquity, righteous and upright is He.” A rock does not remove resistance. A rock is what you strike against, what you hide inside, and what does not move when you do.

Hashem found Israel “in a desert land, in the howling waste of tohu.” The same word as the opening of Creation. We do not graduate out of chaos. We are found inside it. He circled him, instructed him, guarded him as the pupil of His eye, like an eagle stirring the nest — which is to say, like a parent who will not let the young remain untested.

Then comes the stumbling that repeats in every generation: “Jeshurun grew fat and kicked… You neglected the Rock that begot you, and you forgot the God who gave you birth.” Prosperity is not the opposite of resistance. Prosperity is often the place where we refuse it. We want the Tree of Life as a lifestyle and the Tree of Knowledge as a hobby. Ha’azinu will not permit that split.

The Song Of Operation

The center of the song, and the center of these Days of Awe, is the verse that should be written on the doorpost of 5787:

See now that I, I am He, and there is no god with Me. I put to death, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal; and there is none who can deliver from My hand.

— Devarim 32:39

That is the most important reality. Not the reality we prefer. The reality that judges us and heals us from the same hand. Rosh Hashanah asks: Who is the King? Yom Kippur asks who will let that King wound and heal him. Shabbat Shuva stands between them and says, “Return.”

Mikveh Yisrael: Hope Is a Baptism, Not a Mood

What Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur come to teach is the hope we have in Hashem. Not optimism. Hope.

The Hebrew word for hope is tikvah. The Hebrew word for the gathering of living waters — the pool in which the impure immerse and rise permitted — is mikveh. They are the same root, k-v-h: to wait, to gather, to hope.

Jeremiah names it without apology: “Mikveh Yisrael Hashem” — Hashem is the Hope of Israel, and Hashem is the mikveh of Israel. Rabbi Akiva heard the verse on Yom Kippur and said: just as a mikveh purifies the defiled, so the Holy One purifies Israel.

Hope is not a feeling you manufacture. Hope is an immersion. You go down into the chaos — tohu, the dark waters, the year that will not be easy — and you rise because the waters themselves belong to Him.

That is why the word can be translated, in the old Christian tongue, as the user of this teaching remembered it, as a kind of baptizing. Not as a borrowed sacrament. As the original Jewish act: the whole body, not one finger left dry, lowered into the gathered waters of the One who is both Judge and Fountain.

“Hope in Hashem; strengthen yourself and He will give your heart courage; and hope in Hashem.” The verse says Kaveh twice. You hope, you are strengthened, and then you hope again. Resistance is not a sign that hope has failed. Resistance is the medium in which hope is baptized.

5787: Friction Is Coming to Israel — Who Is Your Hope?

The work of the righteous will always be resistance in this world. That is not a prediction about geopolitics. It is the architecture of Creation, of marriage, of teshuva, and of Jewish history.

Friction is coming to Israel. It has never stopped coming. Ha’azinu already sang it: the nation will grow fat, forget the Rock, be handed over, and then — when power is gone, and no one is left, bound or free — “Hashem will judge His people and relent toward His servants.” The question of 5787 is not whether there will be resistance. The question is: Who is your Hope?

The Mikvah Of Israel

If your hope is a headline, it will drown. Hope is not a coalition; it will fracture. If your hope is the isolated I — my soul, my peace, my optimized year — it will discover that the self cannot be its own mikveh. If your hope is Hashem, then even the wound is inside the healing, and even the opposition of the one you love is inside the making of a greater soul.

The righteous person does not get a year without friction. He gets a year in which friction is interpreted. Adam hears in a spouse’s resistance the original ezer k’negdo. He hears, in the resistance of the nations, the song that already told him the Rock would both wound and heal. He hears, in his own stubborn “I,” Hillel’s second question: “And if I am only for myself, what am I?”

The Ethics of the Fathers: Work, Strength, and the Unfinished Task

Pirkei Avot does not flatter us. It trains us for resistance.

The world stands on three things: Torah, avodah (service), and acts of loving-kindness.

— Pirkei Avot 1:2, Shimon HaTzaddik

Not on comfort. Not on self-esteem. On Torah, service, and chesed — three forms of work that meet a resistant world and refuse to leave it as they found it.

If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And when I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?

— Pirkei Avot 1:14, Hillel

The first clause saves you from self-erasure. The second saves you from the religion of the I. The third refuses to delay. That is the whole psychology of teshuva in one Mishnah.

The day is short, the work is great, the workers are lazy, the reward is abundant, and the Master of the house is insistent. It is not incumbent upon you to finish the work, but neither are you free to desist from it.

— Pirkei Avot 2:15–16, Rabbi Tarfon

This is the opposite of the self-help promise. You will not finish. You are not permitted to stop. The Master is insistent. That insistence is not cruelty. It is the dignity of being needed by the house’s Owner.

Who is mighty? One who conquers his inclination.

— Pirkei Avot 4:1, Ben Zoma

Might is not the absence of an opponent. Might is the inner victory that only an opponent makes possible. Chava is opposite Adam. The nations opposite Israel. The yetzer opposite the soul. Hashem is opposite the isolated self, asking it to become a highway.

Choose Life Inside the Resistance

Moshe had already said it, one parsha earlier: “I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life.” The two trees are still standing. The English world will keep selling a garden with only one of them. The Torah will not. A human being becomes whole not by escaping friction but by letting friction become the place where the Spirit still hovers over the waters.

Adam/Humanity=Chava/Life + Resistance

Love the one who stands opposite you. That is the first resistance and the first repair. Tell your soul it is good — not because it is finished, but because the Spirit of Hashem has been moving over it since the first dark morning. Crown Him King on Rosh Hashanah. Go down into the mikveh of Yom Kippur, the Hope of Israel, and rise. Walk the highways that are already in the heart.

The work of the righteous will always be resistance in this world. That is not a sentence of despair. It is the description of a calling. The Rock wounds and heals. The spouse opposes and completes. The year 5787 will not be smooth. It does not have to be. It has to be true.

Mikveh Yisrael Hashem. Who is your Hope?

G’mar chatimah tovah. May you be sealed for a good year — not an easy one, a true one.

Inspired by Chief Rabbi Goldstein

Shabbat Shuva / Parshat Ha’azinu 5787

Hazan Gavriel ben David

Primary sources cited

Tanakh: Bereishit 1:1–2; 2:4, 2:9, 2:16–18, 2:23; 3:22–24. Vayikra 19:18. Devarim 30:19; 32:1–4, 10–11, 15, 18, 39, 43. Yeshayahu 40:31. Yirmiyahu 14:8; 17:13; 50:7. Hoshea 14:2–3. Tehillim 27:14; 33:20; 84:6; 121:1–2.

Chazal: Yevamot 63a; Rashi on Bereishit 2:18; Mishnah Yoma 8:9; Pirkei Avot 1:2, 1:14, 2:15–16, 4:1. Rambam, Hilchot Ishut 15:19; Hilchot Teshuvah 1:3.

Liturgical frame: Rosh Hashanah 1–2 Tishrei 5787 (sundown 11 September 2026 – nightfall 13 September 2026); Shabbat Shuva / Ha’azinu 8 Tishrei 5787 (19 September 2026); Yom Kippur 10 Tishrei 5787 (sundown 20 September – nightfall 21 September 2026).