I said to him, I said it plain,

"Then you must wake them up again."

I said it very loud and clear;

I went and shouted in his ear.'

The Sophistry of Sacrifice

We have all heard the Bible stories and seen the pictures of altars of stones and burning pyres consuming animal sacrifices while devout men stand by gazing up to the heavens. Are these images truly portraying the desire and intent of God or are they the product of misinformation, sophistry and superstitious delusions?

It has been the contention of many students of the Bible that God never wanted the people to kill animals, set them on piles of stone and burn-up their dead carcasses- up. Could this be true?

Many people will attempt to hold that the translations of the ancient texts are clear and without flaw, but it is the authors who received divine revelation not the translators that were inspired. Sophistry was the first tool of the adversary.

Have we been kept from a full knowledge of the context in which the Bible was written? If we do not clearly understand the events surrounding the early Church then it is easy to create false doctrines and religious delusions about our salvation. God is spirit and wishes to write the truth upon your heart and your mind. If you believe in the doctrines of men instead of the spirit of God and His righteousness, then what you are about to receive may shake the foundations of what you have come to believe.

People may call it "nonsense" but the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland said, “You may if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!... You should have said, 'It's extremely kind of you to tell me all this' ...”

Though the people continued to profess the prophets at the time of Christ they were actually at enmity with them and brought the people back on the road to bondage. Lies and half truths had caused the people to stray away from the perfect law of liberty in the kingdom of God. One of the common errors propagated at that time, and today, was that there was a scriptural need for animal blood sacrifice.

“There is a portion of those people called Essenes... above all men devoted to the service of God, not sacrificing living animals, but studying rather to preserve their own minds in a state of holiness and purity.”1 The Essenes at the time of Christ prided themselves on their knowledge of the sacred text, but they disagreed with the Pharisees about its meaning.

The Pharisees believed it was an essential requirement of Moses to kill animals by the letting of blood and burn them up. “The Nazorean [Essene] abhorred all animal sacrifice and rejected, as forgeries and fictions, all Jewish scriptures that encourage such barbaric practices.” 2

Philo's Probus 75, and 80 through 82 all emphasize the Essenes policy of serving God rather than doing animal sacrifice. They served God, not with mindless bloody cultic rituals, but by serving one another in “Pure religion”.

James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.

The word “world” here in James is from the Greek kosmov [kosmos] defined “an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government.” It is from the Greek word komizw [komizo] defined “to care for, take care of, provide for”.

The word Essene has been so obscure that you will find dozens of opinions as to what it means. Just some of the interpretations are expectant, Asian, pious ones, Fundamental, even king bee. They were not a homogeneous group and were often identified with different forms of the word healer.3 They were constantly trying to heal or clean up the life and practices of the nation, hence their ritual of washing or baptism.

They not only healed physical maladies, but they tried to wash away the delusions of society. Their charitable system of welfare stood in contrast to the Corban of the Pharisees that made the word of God to none effect.  

The “Temple Scroll” and “Rule of the Community”4 simply validated the interpretation of the Essene philosophy, that “to serve” God meant “to heal”5 our relationship with Him by serving others.

The Pharisees considered sacrifice at the temple built by Herod to be an essential part of their national faith and function. They even went so far as to compel the sacrifice by statute in order to fill the treasury, from which they provided the benefits of government and of course their own salaries.

“And ...We are delivered to do all these abominations? Is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, even I have seen [it], saith the LORD.” Jeremiah 7:10,11

The Essenes believed that regular freewill sacrifice was an essential part of the health of a free nation. They understood the law of liberty required that all offerings were given by free choice and for the purpose of doing good for others.6 They knew that “children of God” needed to care about their neighbor's rights as much as they cared about our own.

Those who had two coats needed to choose to share with those who had none. John the Baptist clearly taught this same precept as he baptized people into the kingdom of heaven at hand.7 Herod the Great also sought converts to his vision of the “Kingdom of Heaven”. Once you were baptized by Herod's administration you were compelled to give your offerings, your Corban, to support the national social welfare under his exercising authority.

The Essenes even had their own gate at the temple. Most of the Essenes were spread throughout the nation and beyond. The contributions they received were distributed to the needy of society in a network of true charity. The Essene's Levites share, “which would otherwise have gone to the cultic personnel at the Jerusalem Temple, and part to the general social-welfare fund and the state treasury, it was available in its entirety to the Essene union for its own social services." 8

Even though the Essenes and their supporters were considered by some to be a political party they seldom held office in governments like Herod for two significant reasons. One, they would not take oaths, and two they would not exercise authority or compel the offerings of the people.

They knew the Old Testament required that the offerings of the people for the welfare of the nation were only to be by choice. They understood that when the people called for a central leader they were rejecting God.9 They knew that Samuel told Saul that his kingdom would not last because he was foolish enough to force the offerings of the people.10

By the time Christ arrived the offerings of the people were forced through statutory ordinances and a citizen could be arrested and punished if they did not make adequate sacrifice to the government temple treasury.

In 78 BC the Pharisees passed a statute that compelled the temple tax. This law11 was enforced by many civil magistrates in Judea. These magistrates were called 'elohiym12 in the Hebrew or theos13 in the Greek. Both terms were “applied as deference to magistrates” and in the Bible are commonly translated God or gods, which is why there were gods many.

Man was created by God to be free under His authority. He was given dominion over the earth, but not over other men. Man has been led to freedom under God by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Man often returns to bondage where other men gain power over him, not to prevent crime, but, to force contributions. This is often lawfully done by offering benefits in exchange for the right to choose, i.e. Liberty. By coveting these benefits of these authoritarian benefactors we may be made merchandise, i.e. Human resources, damning us to bondage under their authority.14

After the Judeans, who received the baptism of Christ's ministers, were put out of the temple system of welfare,15 they came together in a virtual and virtuous community living under the “perfect law of liberty”. With the Pharisees' refusal of temple treasury benefits, they were set free from the corresponding obligations of paying into that system.

Those who elected ministers according to the law laid down by Christ and Moses only had to pay what they felt they could pay for the support of the kingdom. If they could not pay all that might be expected they were forgiven. No Christian was dragged into court for failure to contribute to Christian ministers because that policy was contrary to Moses and Christ.

Luke 16:8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

Those who learned to forgive and give according to the needs of the Christian community survived and thrived in the hard times that came upon the nation. Many nations have followed the system of forced contributions and benefactors who “exercise authority” but where there is freedom of religion you may choose which God or gods you will serve.

Christ had promised to take the power of the kingdom away from the Pharisees and give it to those who would bear fruit,16 and His words and redemption were fulfilled when he could appoint that kingdom17 to those who understood the godly precept of charity and service.

“Redemption is deliverance from the power of an alien dominion and the enjoyment of the resulting freedom. It involves the idea of restoration to one who possesses a more fundamental right or interest. The best example of redemption in the Old Testament was the deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, from the dominion of the alien power in Egypt.”18

Thousand followed the ways of Christ, choosing liberty, free will offerings to men they trust, for the care of the widows, orphans and needy of their society as we see in the book of Acts. Rome had made its position clear, Jesus was the Christ, the anointed King of Judea.19 His appointed ministers could receive the contributions of the people and only they could bring charges of failure to pay to their members, which was of course forbidden by Christ as he retaught the charitable ways of the kingdom. The Pharisees continued to try to trump up charges against the Christians, but even their strongest supporters, like Saul, began to abandon their way s of force20 and followed after the way of Christ.

“The annual Temple-tribute was allowed to be transported to Jerusalem, and the alienation of these funds by the civil magistrates treated as sacrilege.”21

Systems like that of Herod's and what Rome had also become were more common at this point in history and they were also faltering under corruption, over spending and ever expanding inflation22 and government cost. They even began to debase the coins by removing silver in order to stretch available funds, but skyrocketing inflation was the end result.

Although such systems were common enough amongst the gentile23 nations they did not instill the necessary national virtue of giving and thanksgiving taught by the prophets of the kingdom.

The early Christian community was well-disciplined and organized. While the Roman system of political control and its usurious economy was breaking down, those who followed Christ were not only jealously persecuted but they were excluded from the tables of civil welfare.

In about AD 150, Justin Martyr, hoping to clear the misconceptions and prejudices surrounding Christianity, wrote the Emperor Antoninus Pius in defense of the Christian faith and allegiance to Christ:

“And the wealthy among us help the needy ... and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need.” (Ch. 65-67)

As we saw with ministers like Stephen, we also see the Didache stating:

“Therefore, elect for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are meek and not lovers of money, true and approved, for they also perform for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers.” Didache 15:124

The nature of these appointments would remain the same for centuries. In the 10th century, drastic reforms were enforced to “unify the liturgy” of the Church. This authoritarian call for unity under a centralized Church had been creeping into societies thinking from the beginning.

Liturgy is defined as “a prescribed form or set of forms for public religious worship.”25 It is from the Greek word leitourgi and leitourgos, meaning “public service” and “public servant” respectively. Liturgy was not about singing and vestments and the smoke and mirrors of modern Christendom. It was about the public servants of the kingdom of God operating under the perfect law of liberty in true worship of God26 by service to the people.

God’s doctrine is summarized in the virtuous application of Love God and His ways with all that you do and actively love your neighbor's rights to his life and liberty as much as you love your own. The Church that comes together according to these ancient may overcome all tyrants, despots, and enemies of freedom and liberty. They can and will inherit the earth.

Rome had once depended upon freewill offerings for both its military and its welfare system. Like the Israelites in the days of foolish Saul,27 and then Solomon and Rehoboam,28 they steadily moved to systems of compelled contributions, eventually licensing, regulating, and controlling their temples through civil statutes and authority. Instead of charity they fostered covetousness through the right hand or agency of governmental power. They redistributed wealth, forced the contributions of the people, establish welfare29 and social benefits in abundance by benefactors who exercised authority. But, even in a time of abundance and affluence, those systems weaken the virtuous character of the people and eat away at the bonds of brotherhood and community30 to say nothing of their substance.

We see the Bible talking about free will offerings,31 sacrifices and condemning forced sacrifices.32 What are these sacrifices really all about? It was about separating people of vice from those of virtue, the covetous from the charitable, the loving and forgiving from the brute, the faithful from those who rejected God's rule over their lives. One system made us in the image of God and the other made us in the image of the beast. One system was based on liberty and the other was based on bondage.

“Are men the property of the state? Or are they free souls under God?

This same battle continues throughout the world?”33

The Invention and Convention of Language

Two major groups at the time of Christ had extremely different opinions of the scripture. They both read from the Old Testament. They both studied the scriptures, understood Hebrew, and sought to follow the teachings and precepts of God. They both disagreed completely over what should be considered clear statements of truth in the Biblical text. One rejected Christ as a matter of public policy, considered him to be a false teacher, and continued to do their animal sacrifices, forced contributions, pray in Hebrew, wear their robes, and practice their self righteous rites and rituals. Both claimed the Old Testament was divine in its origins.

The Old Testament was so popular with Christ and Christ's followers, i.e. Christians, that He and they quoted from it constantly. Christ preached the kingdom at hand, was the king of that kingdom according to thousands of people and was proclaimed king by some of the most powerful governments officials of the time.34 Christ appointed ambassadors35 to preach and minister that kingdom and to baptize more people into it. But His ways of liberty and freewill offerings were not the ways of the “world”.36

So, what does the Bible really say? Whose opinion is correct? Should we consult the Judeans who followed and accepted the ways and sayings of Christ as to what the words of the old text meant or should we ask those who rejected rejected Him? Do we have the message right today or has the enemy crept in with damnable heresies and strange doctrines that no longer seem strange to us? Have we too been mislead by sophistry and lies, misconceptions and half truths? Is a strong delusion coming or is it already here? How do we find the truth?

If we are to seek the kingdom and His righteousness there is no stone that should be left unturned. We must explore the source and look at all things anew. We must see with new and humble eyes and seek to understand that God is the same today as he was yesterday. His kingdom and righteousness have never changed.

“For precept [must be] upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little:” Isaiah 28:10

Sophistry is the first tool of the adversary. Samuel Johnson, who authored the first English dictionaries, tells us that “Words are the signs of ideas.” What were the authors of the Bible trying to tell us? Part of the answer to this historic conundrum may be found in the language itself.

“And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it. Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.” Ex. 20:25-26

The Hebrew word rigmah [hmgr] is translated into council, but actually means literally a “heap of stones”, or “gathering of stones”.37 It is from the Hebrew word Regem [Mgr] which means friend38 and is the same three letters of ragam [Mgr] defined stone39. Both words have as a common origin [bgr] regeb clod (of earth). Why would the word for stone also mean friend? And why would a council of men be represented by the word for a gathering of stones. The idea that the term for stone might represent a man or that a gathering of stones might compose a living altar of men or a living stone temple should be a readily acceptable metaphor.

“Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5

There are several chapters in the book Thy Kingdom Comes that deal with the sacrifices on stone and earth altars. An altar of earth was simply a metaphor for each family being a living altar of earth. The word earth here is from adamah which is also translated “husbandman”. This adamah is the red earth from which Adam was made. The sons of Adam are to be the husbandmen of the earth and commanded to “dress it and keep it”.

In our modern language we may express someones character as rock solid, or ask what metal a man is made of. No one imagines that someone is actually made of stone or metal. These are simply metaphors.

In Hebrew the four letter word for naked, aruwm, [Mwre] is also translated prudent, crafty, subtle. So what does the word aruwm mean, naked or prudent? It is from the word ‘aram [Mre] which is translated subtilty, crafty, prudent, beware, very, and craftiness, but also is translated gathered together and heap.

How do we determine what these words mean if they may have so many different meanings? Is there a key to understanding the meaning of these words? Who can tell us? How can we know? Have we been left clues to assist us in unraveling the mysteries of language and words written thousands of years ago? Who will reveal the truth in the written text?

We know the Pharisees did not understand the scriptures correctly, though they were fluent in Hebrew. Who wrote their dictionaries and defined the terms of their text? The Hebrew language is full of symbols, metaphors and conceptual imagery. All languages are ways to represent ideas with symbols. Is there a clue in the symbols that form the words?

Unlike the languages of the West, Hebrew letters have meaning, and those meanings are used to produce the words themselves. This is not possible with any language based upon a phonetic alphabet. Most alphabets, unlike Hebrew, are designed to represent sounds not ideas.

Unscrewing the Inscrutable

A Chinese “logograph” or "ideogram", is a single grapheme which represents a base word, which is a meaningful unit of language. While Chinese characters are often thought of as overly complex, in fact they are all derived from several hundred simple pictographs and ideographs in ways that are usually quite logical. Combinations of these ideographs are used to form more words and ideas.

The word tree evolved from a single grapheme of a tree to a simpler ideogram that has its origins in the original drawing but is far more abstract.

To write the word representing a woods you simply added another tree.

To express the idea of an entire forest was simply a matter of drawing three tree ideograms.

This same evolution can be seen with words like sun. The final line drawing of the sun was composed of straight lines because of the medium of writing and the economy and simplicity of lines.

A word like moon may have a crescent shape with a cloud. It may develop legs because it travels across the sky. Again the medium that is used may alter its appearance to the use of straight lines.

To create new words with combinations of ideograms you can take the symbol for the moon and combine the word for sun with it. This produces a picture representing the concept for brightness or light.

The same process may be performed to create other complex symbols from 400 basic graphemes. The symbol for a bird evolved into abstract line drawings.

Variations could represent different types of birds with a single stroke.

The line drawing for a mountain may be much more abstract, but it had its origins in a very simple and obvious drawing.

If you combined a bird with the symbol for a mountain you can produce new idea or concept. The abstraction and natural reason of the language becomes more obvious with new words like island which is represented by the combination of a mountain and a bird.

This combining of ideas with symbols actually effects our thinking. One consequence of this form of writing is that the pronunciation of the language is not tied to letters. The sound of the words may change drastically over a period of time. Japanese and Chinese writing may be comprehensible to both cultures, but their spoken language bears little or no commonality.

Hebrew uses only a few dozen basic symbols which construct three letter base words. Meanings may become more complex or changed by adding different letters or placing them in different orders within the base word.

The Territory of Babylon

Modern alphabets represent sounds or a combination of sounds to record a previously spoken language. Languages like English and Greek may combine words to form new words, but the letters themselves are only representing sounds, not ideas.

Today's Hebrew is a spoken language that is based upon the old written Hebrew texts. That Hebrew inspired text was composed as a written, not a spoken, language. Its letters have meanings which are combined to form root words and concepts.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is: [said Humpty] which is to be master - that's all.”

Throughout history men have sought a way to have power over other men. There is no more cunning and powerful tool than the sophistry of language. The adversaries of liberty fuse their tyranny over the minds of the masses by feeding their pride and vanity.

“For when they speak great swelling [words] of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, [through much] wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.” 2 Peter 2:18

Without humility and a sincere desire and willingness to consider, to think, to ponder, and to question what we already believe to be true then we will be barred if not imprisoned in our own thinking.

The Pharisees would not set aside their preconceived notions and failed to recognize the Messiah. Translators of the Hebrew language commonly translate a single word a dozen different ways. This produces hundreds of alternate translations in a single paragraph. Examining the letters may give insight into the language. Understanding the meaning of the letters may give us clues as to what words mean. Can flesh and blood reveal the truth? To understand the text we need the rock of divine revelation.

What do Hebrew words really mean?

The Hebrew word mizbeach is always translate into the single English word altar. It is a four letter word MemZayinBeit Chet [xbzm] from the three letter root word xbz, zabach, meaning to sacrifice or offer. Zabach is composed of the three letters Zayin (z), Beit (b), and Chet (x).

The letter Zayin, identified by some as The Woman of Valor, means a tool, aid, handmaid, precious useful, or of value.

Beit means Purpose, God’s purpose or house.

The Chet, has been called The Life Dynamic, and is said to mean to live and to give life, thanksgiving.40

The added letter to form the word mizbeach is Mem. It is the letter representing Water, and can symbolize a fountain or flowing. If it is added to [zabach, xbz] offering, we get the word altar [mizbeach, xbzm].

Mizbeach, xbzm, includes the ideas of value going to the house of God in a flowing of freewill sacrifices of thanksgiving. To show how the meaning of letters continues in other words we may look at ZayinBeit, bz. By itself, its meaning is given or honor.

The letter Daleth [d] is said to mean Selflessness, Charity, a door or pathway. Add the letter Daleth to ZayinBeit, and you get the word for to endow, bestow, or gift [dbz]. Add a Lamed [l] and you have the word exalt [lbz]. Replace it with the letter Nun and you have gain [nbz]. Replace it with a Yod [y] you get pure[ybz].

Other combinations produce words like precious, another gold and by replacing a letter of the word the meaning of flow may become cut off.

Words with identical letters are often given different meanings by men a thousand years after Christ. Take the word for the number seven in Hebrew. The word for 7 in English is seven, in German sieben, in Sanskrit sapta, in Greek hepta, in Latin septem, and in ancient Saxon sebums. The Hebrew word is often represented as Sheba. It only consists of three letters, Shin, Bet, Ayin [ebs]. It is identical to several other words which appear in Hebrew concordances and are represented as if they are different words. Here are several entries which are all composed of same three letters:

Strong's numbers 7646 through 7652 appear as saba`, sabea‘, soba`, shaba, but all are from ShemBeitAyin [ ebs]. They are translated seven, satisfy, fill, full, plenty, plenteous, enough, satiate, sufficed, unsatiable, weary, but also swear, charge, oath, adjure, straitly.

Some of these words are distinctly different yet they are identical except for the vowels. The problem is there are no vowels in Hebrew. Remember Hebrew was not created to be spoken, only written.

Over 700 years after Jesus was proclaimed king in Judea someone began to create the Masoretic version of the Old Testament. Vowel points were added to the text along with cantillation marks. The people who did this were influenced by what they already believed.

Although they may have attempted to do a good job they interpreted trope41 and rhetorical schemes.42 according to their own preconceived notions, concepts and beliefs. Like the Pharisees before them, they may not have known the word and meanings of the Father because they did not know Christ. They may have been under the same delusion of the Pharisees who failed to understand the Old Testament.

As we have seen in the original Hebrew new words could be constructed by adding or changing a letter. If you add the letter Hey, h, to the word ShinBeitAyin, ebv, you get what some write as shib`ah but in the Hebrew there is still only the same four letters, hebv. This word maybe translated seven things or the seventh item, but with a different set of vowel points the word hebv, becomes the name Sheba, numbered 07652. With another set of points the translators make ShinBetAyinHey into the word sib`ah, numbered 07653, with the meaning fullness or satisfaction. It also appears as 07656, Shebah, or 07655, shib`ah, also translated 'seven', 'seven times', or as 07654 sob`ah it becomes satisfy, enough, full, or sufficiently, or as 07653, sib`ah again, becomes fullness.

While many of these translations may be similar the word satisfaction and seven are distinctly different words. There are many other words that are strikingly different in meaning coming from the same words and if improperly marked or translated they may alter the entire meaning of the text in the mind of the reader. This coupled with the preconceived notions of the student, a false impression or understanding of the meaning of the text may result.

We cannot mention the Masoretic text without also referencing the Septuagint. Legend has it that 72 translators working for Ptolemy Philadelphus, produced this oldest extant Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, possibly in Alexandria, c.250 B.C. The original Hebrew appears to be lost in antiquity, but it appears evident Jesus and the Apostles quoted from it. A question remains were their some fundamentally false interpretations included in that work that brought about an inverse view of the biblical text between Essene, Pharisee, and Sadducee faction at the time of Christ?

Blood and Burnt Flesh

Languages are often full of metaphors and symbols of ideas and concepts. As you examine just a few phrases in the Biblical text note the alternate possibilities based on the variety of words available to choose from in the English. How can we verify the truth even with an intense study of the available early codex and fragments? Besides multiple variations in the translated words we may observe words and letters added or deleted.

The mathematical combination of possible translations becomes astronomical with these observed variations. The Hebrew language has been in the hands of Pharisees and other apostate religious groups for centuries.

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Attributed to Mark Twain

Is the Leviticus instructions concerning blood sacrifice talking about livers or squeezing out kidney fat before burning up dead animals just to please God in heaven with the intoxicating aroma of burnt wool and hair or are the authors talking about something completely different?

If you change the definition of words you can change our understanding without changing the original text. Just shifting a definition of a word from sacrifice to kill can began to alter the entire understanding of any text. To change our vision of the historical context will also change our interpretation. To fail to understand the metaphor and symbolism of a language common to the authors can take us away from understanding their original intent. The very idea that the same word for liver also means to honor, heavy, grievous, harden, glorious, sore, made heavy, chargeable, great many, and promote should raise concern, if not immediate alarm.

If the word translated kidney is also translated reins how do we know what is being said? The kidney is an organ while the word reins is defined:

“A means or an instrument by which power is exercised. Often used in the plural: the reins of government.” 43

With our rudimentary knowledge of the language and any concordance we may began to reexamine the words of the Bible. What you are about to see concerning the text may shatter the Humpty Dumpy mentality that words can mean what you choose them to mean. Or, you may disregard the possibility that you have been deceived and continue to believe a lie.

Alice thought the question is, “can make words mean so many different things.” But Humpty knew that the “The question is: which is to be master - that's all.” In any case the truth shall set you free.

We should look at all things anew. Search to see and understand what God wants us to know. Are these altars with burning animals a conjuring trick to invoke the Holy Spirit and the power of God or were they a practical system of charity with a purpose and a plan which by its nature kept the people free souls under God? If we stray from the precepts of God, His Way, will we become bound souls under the gods of authoritarian benefactors ruling through the institutions of men? Will we become merchandise, human resources?

“Thine eyes shall see the king... Thine heart shall meditate terror.. where is the receiver? ... Thou shalt not see a fierce people, a people of a deeper speech than thou canst perceive... that thou canst not understand. Look upon Zion, the city of our solemnities: thine eyes shall see Jerusalem a quiet habitation, a tabernacle that shall not be taken down...” Isaiah 33:17, 20.

The Journey Continues.

The following two Old Testament verses deal with burnt offerings, altars and other words mentioned earlier like livers and kidneys. If evil fooled the Eve with words, could we also be deceived? Who will seek the truth?

First verse Leviticus 9:10: “But the fat, and the kidneys, and the caul above the liver of the sin offering, he burnt upon the altar; as the LORD commanded Moses.”

But the fat, is from the Hebrew word cheleb, blx, [Chet, Lamed, Beit] with the Strong's number 02459, translated fat 79 times, fatness 4, best 5, finest twice, grease, and marrow. It is defined 1) fat... 1c) choicest, best part, abundance (of products of the land).

Some where between 700AD and 900AD the same three letters blx split and became what we see as Strong's 02460, the name Cheleb, blx, which was defined as "milk" and also became the word Chalab, blx, numbered 02461 translated milk 42 times, cheeses and sucking once each.

Does cheleb mean abundance in general or fat. Is milk a metaphor for prosperity as we see in the land of milk and honey?

The phrase and the kidneys is from kilyah, hylk [kaf, Lamed, Yod, Hei], numbered 03629, and is translated kidney 18 times. It is translated reins 13 times. The "reins" and the "heart" are often mentioned together, as denoting the whole moral constitution of man. If we say someone has a lot of heart we know that we are referring to his capacity to love not the capacity of the pump in his chest.

The word kilyah is from kily, ylk, translated vessel 166 times, instrument 39, and weapon 21 times, but also jewel 21 times, stuff 14, thing 11, armour 10, furniture 7, carriage 3, bag twice with 13 other miscellaneous translations. It is also from the word kalah, hlk, translated consume 57 times, end 44, but also, finish 20 times, fail 18, accomplish 12, done 9, spend 8, ended 7, determined 4, away 3, fulfil 3, fainteth, destroy, left, waste twice each, again with 13 other miscellaneous translations.

I include these common examples of just how much translators can redefine words and sentences by the variations they have available. But we may also see how the meaning of the letters can help us see the truth.

Other words formed from the two letters kaf, Lamed, are kol, lk, said to mean “all” or koll, llk, defined as “perfect”. The Hebrew letters had meanings from the beginning and words were composed based on these original concepts. If you replace the letter Hei in reins with an Alef the word becomes imprison which is not a man in control but a man controlled. The word kilyah, hylk, has to do with reins, the power of choice or control. The Hei at the end usually refers to some thing.

The words and the caul is translated from yatharth, trty [Yod, Tav, Reish, Tav] numbered 3508 in Strong's and has the meaning appendage, overhang, protrusion. It is from the word yathar, rty, numbered 3498 and translated leave 52 times, remain 23, rest 12, remainder 4, remnant 4, reserved 3, residue 3, but also plenteous twice, behind, excel, much, preserve once each. The same three letters of the Hebrew rty has Strong's number 3499 and is also translated rest 63 times, remnant 14, residue 8, but also leave 4 times, excellency 3, withs 3, cord, exceeding, excellent, more, plentifully, and string once each; And it is the same as the three letter word Yether rty numbered 3500 and translated as the name Jethro said to mean abundance.

The word caul appears to be the leftover or extra from the Liver which is yet to be discussed and may have nothing to do with the liver of an animal but but a surprisingly different meaning.

The word above appears in several different forms Nm , ynm [ Mem, Nun or Mem, Nun, Yod]. These letter combinations are translated as among, with, from, that not, since, after, at, by, whether; as well as the word of 31 times, from 29 times, part 6 times, and even the word I 4 times, me 3, before 3, after, because, Therefore, out, for, than, and partly twice each, but also stringed instrument, whereby and if that is not enough to cause concern it is translated into 19 other words.

The words the liver is from kabed, dbk, [Kaf, Beit, Dalet] identified with the Strong's number 03516, and is translated liver 14 times but when it is from the same word kabad, dbk, numbered 03513 it is translated honour 34 times, glorify 14, honourable 14, heavy 13, harden 7, glorious 5, sore 3, made heavy 3, chargeable, great, many, heavier, promote twice each, with 10 other miscellaneous translations. It is given the meaning 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured.

The word dbk kabad is the same word for honor we see in Exodus 20:12 “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”

Kabed and Kabad are actually both the same exact Hebrew letters dbk Kaf Beit Delath

Kaf may mean something like “The Power to Actualize Potential”.

Beit is said to mean “God’s Dwelling Place”.

Dalet is associated with the idea of Selflessness – Charity

The same three letters word dbk is given the Strong's number 03514 and are translated heavy twice and grievousness or great number once each. It is defined as “weight, heaviness, mass, great... mass, abundance...

The same exact three letters word dbk which we see as liver appears as Strong's number 3515 translated great 8 times, grievous 8, heavy 8, sore 4, hard 2, much 2, slow 2, and hardened, heavier, laden, thick once each. It is defined with the meanings “heavy, great, massive, abundant, numerous, dull, hard, difficult, burdensome, very oppressive, numerous, rich.”

How can the same word that means liver also mean heavy, hardened, honour, glorious, chargeable, sore, grievous, slow or thick, etc.?

The phrase of the sin offering comes from Strong's 2403 and is said to appear as both hajx and tajx [Chet, Tet, Alef, Hei and Chet, Tet, Alef,Tav] and is translated sin 182 times, sin offering 116, punishment 3, purification for sin twice, and purifying, sinful, sinner once each. These words are from 2398 ajx which is translated sin 188 times, but purify 11 times, cleanse 8 times, sinner 8, committed 6, offended 4, blame and done twice, fault, harm, loss, miss, offender, purge, reconciliation, sinful, trespass once each.

The original two words end in the letter Hei or the letter Tav. These should create different words with at least slightly different meanings in the original language. The translators wield an amazing power of influence.

HEI, h, is a letter that includes the idea or concept of physical Expression--Thought, Speech, Action and life in action.

TAV, t, is a letter that includes the idea or concept of Impression - The Seal of Creation, the mark of God placed in the forehead of the loyal followers of God.44 It means faith.

The burnt is from the Hebrew word qatar, rjq, [Kuf, Tet, Reish] given the Strong's number 6999 and translated incense 59 times, and burn 49 times, but also translated offer 3 times, kindle, and offering once each, with 4 other miscellaneous translations. It is said to be a primitive root but is identical to Strong's number 7000, qatar, rjq, and other Strong's numbers 7001 and 7002 which are translated doubts twice, joints once, incense once, and joined once, and given the definitions of to shut in, enclose, join, knot, joint, and even problem.

Another word for burnt offering is `olah, 5930, hle, which is translated as burnt offering 264 times, burnt sacrifice 21, but also translated ascent and go up. The same word, hle, is also numbered 5929, but translated leaf and branch. Also, hle, numbered 5927, is translated up 676 times, offer 67, come 22, bring 18, ascend 15, go 12, chew 9 times, offering 8, light 6, increase 4, burn 3, depart 3, put 3, spring, raised, arose, break, exalted twice each and another 33 other miscellaneous ways.

The words upon the altar is from the Hebrew word mizbeach xbzm [Mem, Zayin, Beit, Chet], given the Strong's number 4196, and is always translated altar. It is from zabach, xbz, [Zayin, Beit, Chet] Strong's number 2076 and translated sacrifice 85 times, offer 39, kill 5, slay 5, but as Strong's 2077 xbz, it is said to mean sacrifice and is translated sacrifice 155 times, offerings 6, offer once. It also appears as the name Zebah said to mean “deprived of protection.”

Again the same word is given numerous meanings: offering, kill, sacrifice or even slay and are given different Strong's numbers. We could say that one is used as a verb and the other a noun, but although the word sacrifice can be both verb and noun, slay and kill are normally only verbs.

If the word zabach can mean sacrifice all the time and the word qatar can mean offer rather than burnt, then sacrifice may not always or ever be set on fire or killed, but simply something given as an offering.

Is there more purpose to these offerings than a mindless religious ritual that turn offerings into piles of ashes which are supposed to somehow please God by the stinking smoke rising to the heavens?

As the LORD is from the word translated LORD or Yaweh and is from the Hebrew letters Yod Hei Vav Hei, hwhy or YHVH said to mean “the Existing One”. It is thought to come from the Hebrew word hayah, hyh, with the Strong's number 1961, translated was, come to pass, came, has been, were, happened, become, pertained, and better for thee, etc.

The word commanded is from the Hebrew tsavah, hwu, [Tzadik, Vav, Hei] with the Strong's number 6680, translated command 514 times, charge 39, commandment 9, but, appoint 5 times, bade 3, order 3, commander once with 4 miscellaneous translations.

Even Moses has the meaning of water. Jesus called himself a well of living water from whom, if we drank, we would never thirst.

Obviously the translators took a great deal of license in composing a translation for us. Are they wrong or are we misled? By giving a strict meaning to words like burn, slay, kill, or liver, we and our thinking may be taken in a different direction. We should look into our hearts for the righteousness of God and the justice and mercy which He desires to rule over the choice of our sacrifices and offerings.

The next verse we see a similar pattern of numerous different words coming from a single Hebrew word and words in brackets that never existed in the original text. As you see a vast choice of words you could use to produce a translation, make a mental note of just how a phrase or sentence or chapter might be altered or directed by using these alternate choices. There are actually more options than we may readily see.

Looking at Leviticus 9:19 “And the fat of the bullock and of the ram, the rump, and that which covereth [the inwards], and the kidneys, and the caul [above] the liver:”

We have seen And the fat explained above.

The phrase of the bullock is from the Hebrew word showr, rwv [shin, vav, reish], which is given the Strong's number 7794. It is said to be from the Strong's word shuwr, which is numbered 7788, but consists of the same three Hebrew letters, rwv, and translated as went and sing once each, but is said to mean “to travel, journey, go”.

In fact, the same three letters in Hebrew are also given several other Strong's numbers, from 7786 to 7794. These words are translated as we see in 7794 as showr into ox 62 times, bullock 12, cow twice, bull and wall once each, but as 7790, shuwr rwv, it is said to mean enemy, or as 7791 and 7792 it is again translated wall, while 7789 which is said to be a verb is translated behold 5 times, see 4, look and observe twice, and lay wait, regard, and perceive once each. Strong's 7787 is said to mean cut, while Strong's 7786, still consisting of the same three Hebrew letters [Shin, Vav, Reish] rwv is said to mean: “to be or act as prince, rule, contend, have power, prevail over,” and is translated reign, have power, and made prince, once each.

So are we exhausted in our adventure down the rabbit hole in language land where words can mean what the translators want them to mean? Who has the power, you or the clerics? What shall God write upon your heart and mind at this journey's end?

And of the ram comes from the Hebrew word ayil lya [Alef, Yod, Lamed], which has the Strong's number 352, and is translated ram 156 times but also post 21 times, mighty (men) 4 times, trees twice, lintel and oaks once each. It is identical to 353 and 354, which are translated strength and hart as in a type of deer called a hart.

It is said to be the same as 193, [Alef, Vav, Lamed] lwa and defined prominence, 1a) body, belly (contemptuous), 1b) nobles, wealthy men, and is translated mighty and strength once each.

The words The rump is from 'alyah hyla [Alef, Lamed, Yod, Hei] and numbered 451. It is said to be from 422 'alah hla [Alef, Lamed, Hei] and is changed by the addition of an Yod in the middle. The word 'alah is said to mean to swear, and is translated swear 4 times, curse and adjure once each.

The word 'alyah' is consistently translated rump 5 times, but it is identical to the word 452 (which is the name of Elijah), and is supposed to mean “my God is Jehovah" or "Yah is God". Because of the meaning of the letters, it is reasonable to conceptualize the word to mean godly strength or power.

Does the word we see as rump actually mean “my God is Jehovah", who would, of course, be the beneficiary of our offering or sacrifice?

We also see the phrase and that which covereth [the inwards] coming from a single word Mcacceh, hokm, numbered 4374, and translated that which covers twice, cover or clothing once each. It is said to be from 3680, kacah meaning to cover, conceal, hide and is identical to 4372 and 4373, which is said to mean covering and valuation or worth.

We do not have time to go into this with detail. But it may be enough to say that since the Garden, we have had a problem with covering. Even the Levites who were the ministers of the sacrifice were supposed to have the people make their underwear. They were also not to go up by steps lest the people see their nakedness. Nakedness has to do with a lack of authority, and cover has to do with coverture. Making underwear had nothing to do with their fruit of the looms. But again, let us continue.

We have already seen that the word translated kidney is also translated reins, denoting a part of the moral constitution of man and has some connection to his right to choose, which is a gift from God.

As we have seen, the word liver, dbk Kaf Beit Delath, comes from the letters meaning “God's charitable house actualized,” and the word may be translated honor or liver just as the word heart today can mean an organ or an individuals capacity for compassion.

This division of the same word into more than one meaning, and the addition of numerous alternative words to translate that single word into, has left the text open to a great deal of conjecture and speculation by men who are not always as inspired as the original authors.

Take the word often translated dove, or in the Hebrew, hnwy yownah, which is numbered 03123  in Strong's Concordance, and probably is from Nyy  yayin meaning wine.

The word turtledove is rwt (towr) or rt (tor),  numbered 08449. It is  said to probably be from rwt towr or rt tor but numbered 08447 defined "circlet, plait, turn...  succession, order” and is translated turn, row, border. The word numbered 08447 is said to be from a primitive root numbered 08446 rwt tuwr defined “to seek, search out, spy out, explore.”

The word turtledove is translated turtledove 9 times, but also turtle 5 times. The same three letter word in 1 Chronicles 17:17, when given the Strong's number 08448, is translated “according to the estate.” 

We have to be in an almost hypnotic state to imagine that God wanted people to kill turtledoves and burn them up every time we sinned. Once we accept an idea, it is often difficult to change our thinking. The more bizarre, fantastic, or absurd an idea the more often the tighter its hold on our minds.

 This is why the world is in subjection, often defending that bondage with their very lives. One of the great tools of creating this state of confusion is the use of doctrines built around mysteries that are irrational, or are beyond natural comprehension or common sense.

If God never wanted us to kill animals in bloody mutilations, then Christ did not initiate the end of that animal blood sacrifice with His own innocent blood. Can Jewish and Christian scholars be so wrong? The prevarication about animal sacrifice is more pervasive today than it was at the time of Christ. That delusion blocks our understanding of Christ's message to us.

Long before Christ, there were written community disciplines that were saying that “They shall expiate guilty rebellion and sinful infidelity... without the flesh of burnt offering and the fat of sacrifice, but the offering of the lips in accordance with the Law will be as an agreeable odor of righteousness, and perfection of the way shall be as the voluntary gift of a delectable oblation.” Community Rule 1QS 9.3-5

Philo writes, in his Every Good Man is Free, 75, in reference to the Essene, “they do not offer animal sacrifice” and they “are men utterly dedicated to the service of God”. They served each other and the nation.

The Essenes held all things in common with no personal estate, like Moses' Levites and the early ministers of the Church, and “thanks to their type of community, goods were at any rate so great that they were the only Jewish organization of their time to be able to afford to include nonmembers in their charitable system.”45  

Even before the Essenes, Pythagoras, born in 569 BC, lived by similar precepts in Greece. “In Phoenicia he conversed with the prophets who were the descendants of Moses the physiologist, and with many others, as well as the local heirophants.”46 As a result, he also forbade those he taught to offer sacrificial victims to God. He said to worship instead only at altars which were “unstained with blood”. He expressed many other ideas uniquely similar to the Essenes on diet, communal living, and renouncing oath taking.

"The Nazorean abhorred all animal sacrifice and rejected, as forgeries and fictions, all Jewish scriptures that encourage such barbaric practices."47

"They were the only religious sect in their country and the entire Roman world who opposed the custom of animal sacrifice ... and later was to play such a pivotal role in Jesus’ life and teachings."48 

Why were they so against blood sacrifice even though they read the Bible and knew the ancient texts? If they were right and the Pharisees were wrong, then there has been a great deception about what God was calling the people to do in the very scriptures we read today and the doctrines we form.

Modern doctrines have been woven around the idea that Israel was supposed to kill animals upon stones because God needed blood sacrifice.

“For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.” Leviticus 17:11.

Sacrifice is giving up what we have been given, which is your life. When you give of that life you give of your own blood. If you are a shepherd it may come in the form of a sheep. If you are a carpenter it may be in the form of your craft. It is not about blood, or burning up. It is about letting go and truly giving up part of your self. It is about unselfish service.

To do this as a society through free will offerings, it will include forgiving that we may be forgiven, or giving that we may be given to. It is about giving up our life for others so that we may have life more abundant.

In the image of God, all you receive and give should be freely given. The welfare of your society should be according to the saying “... freely ye have received, freely give.” Matthew 10:8.

Eyes to see and ears to hear, working out our own salvation with fear and trembling, striving to know and do the will of God is our responsibility. There is a standard: it is the Holy Spirit. It is the comforter of God.

“Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5

Men have used the sophistry of language, the complexity of vocabulary to spin delusion, and lead men from the simple truths of God's ways.

Jesus told us to live in the world. Instead of keeping the people free, ministers have delivered them into bondage while they built their temples of dead stone, brick, glass, and wood. The nations of the world are in greater bondage today than that of Egypt. They have returned to the mire because false prophets or pastors have failed to teach the precept upon precept taught by Christ. They do not love their neighbor as themselves nor take care of the daily ministration. They send the people to Benefactors who exercise authority one over the other, opposing Christ's words in Luke 22:25-29.

Where are those who will seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness in Spirit and Truth?

'That's all,' said Humpty Dumpty.

'Good-bye.'

Downloadable booklet

Footnotes: