Christian-Writings

Writings by Rick Bruce	Other Author Good Christain Writings

Universal Iniquity and the Upright Heart	BABYLON THE GREAT (Unknown Author)
Is The Way of theWorld a Snare?
The Princess of the Jews
The Spirit In Media
The Ugly Witches and Beautiful Girls
Do we have a mother in Heaven?
Is There A Feminine Divinity?

For some time I have suspected that our current world is the most wicked that has ever been, even more wicked than Sodom, for their end came in a single day, but this world will be punished over many days. In Psalms 125 is an amazing revelation which may speak to this, but I believe God purposefully left it obscure enough that salvation might remain a test of the heart, not the mind. The key phrase is:

[Psalms 125:3 For the rod of the wicked shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous; lest the righteous put forth their hands unto iniquity.]

There are several definitions for what exactly “rod” means, but the most likely to fit in this phrase is authority, or rule, as there is also a correspondence to rod as rule in [Revelation 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron.] What might be understood from Psalm 125:3 is that employment of the elect by the wicked would cause them also to put their hands to the iniquity, whereby the wicked shall be judged. Therefore God tells us that the righteous will not be under the authority of the wicked, which is employed by the wicked, lest they also be judged as partakers of their iniquity. (Is the driver for the bank robbers guiltless?)

Could it be that in our modern world that the employment or association to eliminate poverty are the iniquity? Are not the righteous poor and needy, the Kingdom of God belongs to the poor, and by no means shall a rich man enter into heaven? Notice those who are rich negate the scripture Jesus says about riding a camel through these eye of a needle, [Mark 10:25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.], but what about not rich, but at least living comfortably because they have a steady job?

The five verses of Psalm 125 encapsulate an important message from God, and the scripture surrounding lend support to its understanding. [Psalm 125: 5 As for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways, the Lord shall lead them forth with the workers of iniquity: but peace shall be upon Israel.] Notice that the turning aside is correlated to verse 1, “they that trust in the Lord”. The turning aside is because they trust in their sure money, therefore they need not daily seek God. Their living is secure, they are not tossed about like a tempest, unsure from one time unto the next where house or bread will come from, and their family stands behind them. They do not daily weep, their path a trail of sorrow, waiting in their heart every day for the Lord to appear: for the rod of the wicked rests upon them: they have employment with the workers of iniquity. They are allied with them, accepted of them, but not so the upright in heart, who shall not be accepted, and will have no secure place among them.

Psalm 125:5 teaches us the false hearts of the believers in Christ will turn aside from trust in God, and unto evil doings. Notice the immediate result of not hoping in God each day results in turning aside from him and into evil ways. It is not just their faith is not passionate, or burning hot requiring a revival, but because they need not cry out to God daily, weeping in sorrow, poor and needy, afflicted and unsure one day to the next; they immediately turn to crooked ways as a sure phenomena. When their hearts are turned aside because they have the world, and do not need God, he will then lead them so that they serve the workers of iniquity, being partakers with them, because it is the appropriate manifestation of what is in their hearts. Do you know what it takes to be true of heart?

Do you get a regular paycheck? The next time you have your secure paycheck in your hand, contrast that moment to a moment of terror and a questioning why has God allowed this to happen. When you think with gratitude for your secure income, and your secure house, look at the man standing on the street who appears homeless, or jobless, alone or destitute: you should wonder who is fortunate according to the scripture, you or he; For the enemy to the world can find no place within it. [James 4:4 Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?] Therefore if the world has accepted you, and you have a brother that loves you, or a sister you are glad to see, how shall you be approved of God? Did not Jesus say that if you did not hate your worldly mother and father, and hate your life, and seek to lose it, you would not be worthy of him? [Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.], and [ Luke 9:24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.] Why then if you have family who loves you do think to be accepted of Jesus Christ? Why if your career is sure do you bother with religion, hoping for the reward to come? You have your reward, for only if the heart of a man turns aside from God may he be accepted of the world in any place, long enough for his career to be sure.

Do you read Luke 14:26 and say within yourself, this is the error of men? Sweet loving Jesus would never say something like, unless I hate my own children I would not be worthy of him, or this means something other than what it says, or this only applies to people with evil family members, even though the perfect scripture which God is able to translate into any language perfectly, does not say anything about “some people’s family”? If this scripture does not mean what it says, how can you trust any of it? Shall you just go by what sounds right to you and dump the rest, even though every respected minister of the gospel will tell you the scripture means what says, and says what it means, and there is no error, lies, false statements, or mistranslations, whereby those that would seek him be lost in confusion, and none could be held accountable by a misleading word? Why do you think the rich cannot be saved? They have their reward. Why do you think the popular cannot be saved? They have their reward. Why on earth would God essentially be saying you have to be poor, alone, and hated of the of the world to be righteous, saved, worthy of Jesus Christ? Because daily they weep in sorrow, fasting each and every day, having no one, and many are their afflictions. They had nothing in this world, therefore their reward is to come, and how much better it is! What are the riches of the world compared to the approval of Christ?! What is the fame of the world compared to the fame of the life to come, life everlasting with God, in flesh that ages not, neither is there fear it shall come into harm, or blemish, ever?! Did you trade the acceptance of this wicked world for that?! Do you know what it takes to have a true heart, refusing the friendship of the world?

Therefore do not be double minded about your religion. No preacher, priest, bishop, deacon, minister, or great man of scriptural teaching has access to any words beyond that which any might obtain and read (the bible), to contain any truth whereby the true of heart might come into the knowledge of salvation. I see these persons of faith on television, on the internet, or in the church, who have not faced the ugly reality of what the bible really says, even though God makes it crystal clear that his word can be trusted now and forever, even every word of it: [Timothy II 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:] (Notice it does not say, “Except the stuff that is obviously mistranslated or the error of men who wrote it.”)

If I found my own life was against an element of acceptance with God, I would examine it carefully, and what should I do if there was something wrong, but still I believe heaven and hell are but a stone’s throw away? If I was not able to give up my life in the world to be worthy of Christ, then I should forsake my religion, or else repent, but the ultimate definition of foolishness would be to expect both the world now, and the world to come. I would know that if I held on to the love of my family, or money, or career, or friends who love me and stand by me, that I have made my choice; my heart is turned aside. Should I then sing praises? Should I ask of him in prayer, anything but that my heart might turn to him, and when it does be outcast and poor, afflicted, oppressed, and depressed, even weeping to God for the pain daily? Do you know what it takes to be friends with the most high God?

There is only God or the world, let no one deceive you. Did you believe the false Christians, who say entering into eternal life was easy: just believe on the name of Jesus Christ? If you have not understood what it takes to be righteous you will lose that belief, because God will take it out of your heart the same as he put it in. The scripture will be fulfilled, that only those who still call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, for they earned the right to keep that belief in their heart, with weeping, and mourning each day, and being tossed about with tempest, often homeless, driven out of every place, a derision, hated, alone, an object of slander, being poor, afraid, having no surety. They cry out to him, and put their trust in him, as there was nothing for them to hold on to in the world. Only such will be turned again and return with everlasting joy on their heads, praising God their redeemer, who wipes away their tears, and for their patients fulfills the covenant to Israel: the everlasting life among men, for God dwells among them. [Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.], [ Psalms 126:5 They that sow in tears shall reap in joy. Psalms 126:6 He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.], [Psalms 126:2 Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing: then said they among the heathen, The LORD hath done great things for them.] Do you know what it takes to be upright in heart, forsaking all to follow Christ, and the sacrifice that really means?

Since the early days of my faith I found occasion to ask if the way of the world around me was wickedness to be repented of. The mystery was not and is not revealed to me, and I approached the question from many different angles, but my view remained the same: somehow, beyond proof or evidential discussion the world is an enclosure of evil careers, even the highly respected to honest lowly labor. In my occasions to ask this question I approached the problem from my own experience in everything from common labor to art and business or merchant endeavors which I partook. I wrote questions and essays extensively attempting to see if it might be revealed through literary and scriptural examination, but I found insufficient evidence or a smoking gun as it were, to make me sure concerning any career or endeavor from lowest to highest. A brief sample of questions I asked are: Is the way in the world of selling one’s services or products an inevitable stain to the soul, even though we may be faced with seemingly no choice, or doing such things in the most honest and inscrutable way? Are even the lowest honest labor jobs subject or unavoidable to sin in their doing (because of the world’s current state), or is honest labor in needed service the only path to salvation? If it is true that selling itself is a ruin to the soul, what are the mechanics of this phenomena? If the world is a paradox of worldly survival verses spiritual survival, might it be likened to the lion, who must commit murder of another animal to eat, seeming having no choice, but is against the law of God written in the heart of all creatures, for we know that [ Isaiah 65:25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox].

It seems to me this concept is exclusively available to the individual with faith in a life beyond the world. Otherwise the creature living for this life should not consider the possibility of this paradox: sin and be accepted, or refuse and face the ultimate consequence, (greater in the mind than fear of hell for we have not seen it nor fully believed it), poverty, even homelessness, and solitude. [ James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.], and Jesus said, [ Luke 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.] These scriptures suggest not that sin is pervasive in the world, but encompassing, and if this is true, what do those who would truly repent appear as? Would they be a minister, a used car salesman, a school teacher, the business man, or merchant? Yet of this question this important prophesy [ Luke 17:35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.] so in these last days people who do the same work can be saved, or left behind (their worthiness accounted from other doings). And finally the parameter, [Mark 10:25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.] suggesting a baring of the merchant, businessman, or even heir to worldly wealth. Who has taken issue with this scripture and will enter heaven? Did you see the rich man in our times who built a giant steel and mortar needle, and broadcast himself riding a camel through, as though to defy the word of God?

If indeed the occupations of the world are an encompassing evil, and the rich do not enter into his rest, it might be asked how in the judgment can they be held responsible when one must work to live, and some who cannot dig nor other menial labor must be a merchant or businessman of some kind? If the lion does commit murder, either to eat or slay his rival, how can they without conscious be prosecuted (for we know only the godly shall stand in the courtroom of God)? To examine this question the option must available that while we cannot know how the world or the judgment works, the parameters defined in scripture provide an element of choice, and therefore knowledge of options exist. We know [Matthew 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.], when it is uncovered that some chose wisely, and others foolishly. We might be interested to know then, what is the profile of the foolish?

One day I met a man who showed me a gold necklace, explaining God had led him to where it was so that he could steal it. I think so too are those who do not break the law of the world, but the law of God written in their hearts, and scripture contradicting their way of life becomes non-literal, or the error of men, which Jesus also noted of the hypocrites. What matter if I write this, or search diligently, but justify my continuance in sin by transposing my own meaning over the scripture, which is accountable to all as having clear meaning? I will surely be among those weeping and wailing and gnashing my teeth, because for all I denied myself, and all works I did, yet I should not see everlasting life nor enter the city of God, but be thrust out with the rest of the liars, whores, and all unclean. What could I say in the courtroom of God after it is revealed I chose poorly, and what could I do to one day find favor with God that I might be redeemed? Surely nothing, for we are given a lifetime to read and decide, and stop ourselves if we err. Now is our time to prove what our hearts are made of, and what need to prove it again? Should God have pity on me for my children’s sake, or the sake of my good works, but I continued in thefts and the making of lies; and as the man who stole the necklace say in myself, it is God who led me, and I knew not what I did? No, for all that need be seen of my heart has been seen over my whole life, and what kind of man I would be in eternity. Should I live with those who did not fail, whose hearts were not weak, and with courage unto death (the lord demonstrated), forsake all to repent? How is that fair to them, and heaven be heaven amongst the people of God? Therefore if we possess wisdom, we should prevent such a calamity before it happens, now, while we are yet in the world.

Now the profile of the foolish is recognizable, and clear to see, because in order to ignore key phrases of scripture, or to impose different meanings upon them, they must possess a basic failure in logic itself. It is not that their mind is less capable than others, or is prone to error such as not being able to add numbers and arrive at a correct total. Rather, as their heart continues to chose the sin of the world, (whatever thing in the world they cling to), their mind must string together ill fitting pieces of information, for which further denial of facts is required. For instance, a corrupt businessman explains the numerous lawsuits against him as jealousy of his success, blocking out the possibility in his mind it is because his ways are theft, and because of this blocking of truth in his life he also explains his obesity as a plot of Satan, and not his own choice of food. As denial of his own sin continues, the denial of logic continues, and his mind is ever more corrupt, even mad. This is known as the reprobate mind, worthy to be a sent strong delusion so that it believes a lie, and worthy because the heart was weak to the allure of sin, and weak in faith that the reward was worth waiting for. John also calls these the spirit of error, and spirit, because they indeed have an agenda, though they might profess faith in Jesus, but their loyalty to sin gives them the agenda of rebellion. They sing, and pray, and make good sounding words, but inwardly the world they create is designed to shut out the truth, and vilify the true, for as a liar for sin they cannot consider if their hate might be for truth, no, they cannot stop to consider because then they could not continue their sin which they love.

The recognition of the foolish is key to understanding the world (I say as much as we can know, for no man possesses understanding), because it is they who are most motivated to build a bulwark against the upright. I perceived a desperation, like that of Satan who knows he has but a short season, to fortify themselves against their enemy, God and his elect. Therefore they strive for control of the land, the money, and the systems that are allowed therein, making sure that none who would refuse to sin could easily live among them. Or, if that is not true, then by simple reason of majority of those who choose the world instead of God, the systems of ownership or the control of anything in the land possesses a pattern of defilement the elect cannot enter. In that case there might not exist any evidence as to the homogeny of wickedness in the occupations of the world, for simply by serving them you serve the rebellious (who all know God’s day is coming), and therefore are rebels. What pathetic state of affairs for them who immerse themselves (literally) in the Christian life (or any religion), practicing daily, giving tithes, praying urgently, and giving great sums to charities, and in the judgment it is revealed it was all a lie, for they continued in their oppressions, and fornication, which did great harm, but gave them the wealth to give generously. If they bothered to examine their own lives against the scripture, and be truthful about it, and if for example they decided they must live as a fornicator, why waste time in the church, or pray to a God who is surely their enemy?

We may not possess understanding, or know the workings of the world, nor exactly how we will be judged, but if we live by God’s word we can be sure that entrance into heaven depends on stopping doing it. And so if there is any doubt about other factors, (such as believing in your heart that Jesus is the Christ), know that if you don’t stop doing it: that is the thefts, adulteries, coveting, the making of lies, the defilement of the body, and the earth, the vanity of prayer without faith, the folly of rebellion covered by charity, and charity paid for by lies which deceive many, and murders (tobacco), and harms to the earth (denial of warming and its cause), blasphemy and saying the word does not mean what it says, and is not holy, and not able to be used as the document by which all men might know what sin is; then do not think you will be pardoned by anything else, for [ Luke 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.]. Now, before the mystery of the world is revealed, and before we know for sure all that is written in the scriptures, is the time to show your heart, for if it were a matter of the mind only then all manner of weak hearts might succeed by refraining in fear, but I see God’s great wisdom in his way to cloud the mind of the weak heart, but open to clarity the true heart, which minus understanding would refuse to do them, those things which ruin the soul, the only thing from this world we shall take with us into eternity.

Notice the real estate broker is just an example, I don't mean to pick on them in particular. What you said was thoughtful, that if the real estate broker did not specifically partake in a scheme to rip people off and the buyer agrees to the interest then it should not be accounted as a crime. What if however, in that same aspect, though the buyer agrees to the rate, the rate itself does not reflect the actual value of the loan or the goods the loan is for, therefore still making it theft. That might seem nitpicky to us, but what about from God's perspective? From another angle, if a theft of disparagement of actual value occurs in every transaction as a result of actual laws on the books and requirements of business, then the career of real estate broker is a crime just for that, which sin you had best be repenting from. That is just one thing (and not proven, but I hypothesize), but let us say in the general matter of selling, it is rare if ever that the homes or property being sold are fair from a standard we may not easily be able to determine, that is, the standard of God, or the true value reflected by all factors of value such as location, area problems, jobs, and a great long list. Now a true determining factor we may not have at our disposal and life must go on, but the idea I am raising is that while beyond our ability to truly reason all matters of fairness, the fact remains that if you sell something to somebody for a hundred dollars, but in fact it was worth sixty, then a crime is committed against the buyer, and the seller bears the guilt and stain to the soul, for which they should not continue (and here is the key to contemplating this idea), against all worldly logic, life, or even survival, for clearly the test of the world by which we are judged is a moral test, not a mind test, or a physical survival test, or an esteem among men test. When I ask if the world is a snare, I mean, are ALL occupations in our system subject to this problem, or even unavoidable, though this may seem impossible to us if we ask the questions: how else can we make a living, and how could God hold us guilty when there is no alternative? Are you saying be a beggar or live out in the woods, if indeed you concluded such, but even if you concluded that was a good idea, what if you cannot, or have a family to support?

(Unknown Author) * I found this at a forum but the author was included. There is a lot of caps shouting, but in fact it contains a lot of useful information on the identification of Babylon in these end times.

The vast majority of Christians in the U.S. have been taught that America is simply not in Bible prophecy. No matter where one may turn, America is not there, either by name or by any form of code name either. Thus say the host of America’s Christian clergy to their flock. The second thing they are told is that Babylon is NEVER TAUGHT ANYWHERE IN SCRIPTURE AS A NATION. Babylon is a SYSTEM, and most view it as a RELIGIOUS SYSTEM OF SOME SORT. Prophecy said these views would surface at the time of the end. It is the mark of apostasy to DENY YOUR IDENTITY, YOUR PERSONAL SIN, AND THE TIME OF YOUR VISITATION. In fact, that is the essence of all apostasy, THE REJECTION OF SCRIPTURE AS IT APPLIES TO A PERSON, COMMUNITY OR NATION. It is always SOMEONE ELSE, SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND AT SOME UNKNOWN “FUTURE TIME”. Never is it NOW, US and OUR NATION.
Does it not seem odd to you that America, the GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD, the greatest evangelical nation; that took the Gospel of Christ to the four corners of the world; THE RICHEST NATION ON THE EARTH, who has given more aid to nations than any other; THE NATION TO HAVE WON TWO MAJOR WORLD WARS and many others; IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE? That God would forget a nation that has been central to the survival of Israel in this age? Not even in a cryptic way? That is like saying God is blind in one eye, and cannot see out of the other! It is accusing God of utter negligence! But it is not God who is NEGLIGENT. It is not God who FORGOT AMERICA in prophecy. It is not God who failed to paint a picture that was OBVIOUS to those that wanted to find it. IT IS NOT GOD, BUT THE FALSE PROPHETS OF AMERICA WHO HAVE UTTERLY FAILED THEIR FLOCK. They are DECEIVED, AND THUS ARE DECEIVERS AND HYPOCRITES, WHO LEAD MILLIONS TO ETERNAL RUIN.
God told the citizens of BABYLON THE GREAT, AMERICA, exactly what would happen in America, and pointed a finger directly at the CHRISTIAN SHEPHERDS. Why do you suppose that God would pick a specific group and lay the blame right at their feet? Because it is GOD’S PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE ANTICHRIST NATION and the SIGNS PRECEDING IT. Remember that antichrist rises in DARK DECEPTION. “My people (Christians) hath been LOST SHEEP (UNSAVED, UNREGENERATE – HELL BOUND): THEIR SHEPHERDS (THE CHRISTIAN CLERGY, THE EVANGELISTS, THE PREACHERS, THE TEACHERS) HAVE CAUSED THEM TO GO ASTRAY,..(Jeremiah 50:6). The shepherds of God’s people in Babylon America embrace a FALSE SALVATION GOSPEL (eternal security/once saved, always saved or water baptismal salvation/regeneration and preterism which LIES about the future prophecies of the BOOK OF REVELATION. (Matthew 7:21-23; 2 Peter 2:1-3). These manmade “gospels” are UTTERLY FALSE GOSPELS! That is what Jeremiah means when he says: “they have turned them AWAY on the MOUNTAINS; they have gone from MOUNTAIN TO HILL, they have FORGOTTEN THEIR RESTING PLACE (the plain TRUTH OF THE WORD OF GOD).”
God fights His wars IN THE VALLEY. True salvation lies IN THE VALLEY. If you refuse the VALLEY EXPERIENCE (THE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF THE SALVATION DOCTRINE) you will never FIND YOUR RESTING PLACE. Jesus said you MUST PICK UP YOUR CROSS AND FOLLOW HIM. Matt 10:38. Babylon’s gospel of salvation HAS NO CROSS, NO DEATH OF SELF, AND THEREFORE NO TRUE LIFE. It is an utterly false salvation doctrine. IT SWEEPS THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICAN CHRISTIANS INTO ETERNAL HELLFIRE. That is why God says they ARE LOST SHEEP. They ARE lost, LOST FOREVER. “We are confounded, because we have heard REPROACH; SHAME HATH COVERED OUR FACES: FOR STRANGERS ARE COME INTO THE SANCTUARIES OF THE LORD’S HOUSE.” (Jeremiah 51:51). Indeed, the false Christian clergy ARE STRANGERS and they hold forth a FALSE GOSPEL, that leads to their REPROACH AND LOSS at the judgment seat of Christ. They shall one and all BE ASHAMED, and now face ETERNAL RUIN FOR EVER AND EVER. This is the primary reason why AMERICAN CHRISTIANS reject that America is Babylon. They have been UTTERLY MISLEAD BY FALSE SHEPHERDS. The mark of a FALSE TEACHER is one who DENIES OR CONTRADICTS THE WORD OF GOD, usually in an effort to prove his/her views correct. WE ARE ALL LIARS, AND GOD IS THE ONLY ONE WHO TELLS THE TRUTH. Titus 1:1
Babylon is referred to in the Scriptures as a nation both directly and indirectly. Often the term KINGDOM and NATION are used interchangeably. Old Testament prophecies identify BABYLON THE GREAT as a SINGULAR ENTITY, not some world wide system. Jeremiah 50:12 is a good place to start: “Your mother shall be sore confounded; she that bare you shall be ashamed: BEHOLD, THE HINDER-MOST OF THE NATIONS shall be a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert.”
This is a direct reference to BABYLON THE GREAT, who is also called THE DAUGHTER OF BABYLON. Jeremiah calls her directly THE HINDERMOST OF THE NATIONS. You view this from his perspective, as he looks down the tunnel of time – the HINDERMOST from him would be the LAST BABYLON. That means the LAST BABYLON TO RISE BEFORE THE END. The last and the YOUNGEST OF ALL THE GREAT NATIONS AT THE END TIME. In comparison with the other nations of the world, at the time of the end, SHE WILL BE THE YOUNGEST AND ALSO THE MOST POWERFUL NATION AMONG THE GREAT NATIONS. America fits that description TO A TEE. This latter day Babylon has a mother, which is also a NATION. This mother was responsible for “birthing” this mighty Babylon of the end times. WHO IS THE MOTHER OF IRAQ? If you read this verse carefully, it says that the MOTHER NATION PRECEDED BABYLON, GAVE BIRTH TO HER, WATCHES HER RISE TO FULL POWER, AND WATCHES HER DIE IN FIRE. Again, WHO IS THE MOTHER OF IRAQ? Iraq has none. Who is the mother of Rome, which is often presented as BABYLON? Rome is not a nation, but a city. Further, SHE HAS NO MOTHER. BABYLON THE GREAT is always shown as a SINGLE NATION FROM HER BIRTH TO HER RISE TO FULL POWER AND GLORY.
However, AMERICA has a mother. This mother was DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR HER BIRTH. That mother PRECEDED HER. England gave birth to America, and England is still around, and ENGLAND WILL WATCH AMERICA BURN. England is further confirmed as the mother of BABYLON THE GREAT by Daniel the Prophet in Daniel 7:4 (THE LION). Ezekiel also mentions it in Ezekiel 38/39 as “TARSHISH”, who gives birth to “young cubs”. Tarshish is a cryptic reference to ENGLAND and her young cubs are America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Daniel refers to her as a LION. The national symbol of England is A LION. The eagle wings on top of the lion IS AMERICA, HER DAUGHTER. America’s national symbol is THE EAGLE WITH OUTSTRETCHED WINGS.
Habakkuk is a key prophet in identification of BABYLON THE GREAT. He is usually ignored by prophecy “experts”. “For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans (New Babylon), THAT BITTER AND HASTY NATION, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling places that are not their’s (Think GEORGE W. BUSH!). (Habakkuk 1:6)”. “Sit thou silent, and get thee into darkness, O DAUGHTER OF THE CHALDEANS: for thou shalt no more be called, THE LADY OF KINGDOMS (Isaiah 47:5).” (STATUE OF LIBERTY!) She is presented in Scripture as being the MOST POWERFUL OF ALL END TIME NATIONS. None can come close to her in terms to WEALTH, POWER, MILITARY, AGRICULTURE, MANUFACTURING, MU-SIC,(horns and flutes) CATTLE, HORSES, AUTO-MOBILES AND TRUCKS (“Chariots”), AIR-CRAFT AND SPACE EXPLORATION. All of these attributes are listed by the prophets as they describe BABYLON THE NATION.
Babylon the Great is also referred to as the DAUGHTER OF BABYLON, and also THE DAUGHTER OF THE CHALDEANS. It is important to note that IT IS AGAIN A SINGULAR DAUGHTER. It is not DAUGHTER(S) OF BABYLON, but the ONE SINGULAR DAUGHTER. The word for “daughter” is “bath”, and it means OFFSPRING OR DESCENDENT of Babylon. LIKE MOTHER, LIKE DAUGHTER. Mighty Babylon, THE GREAT NATION OF THE END TIMES, is going to be PULVERIZED. She is to be UTTERLY DEMOLISHED FOR HER WICKEDNESS: ABORTIONS, MURDERS/WARMONGERING, HOMOSEXUALITY, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, DRUG ABUSE, SORCERY, VIOLENCE, THEFT, SELFISHNISS, GREED, APOSTASY, ETC. “Come down, and sit in the dust, O VIRGIN DAUGHTER OF BABYLON, sit on the ground: THERE IS NO THRONE, O DAUGHTER OF THE CHALDEANS: for thou shalt no more be called TENDER AND DELICATE(Isaiah 47:1).”
Here Isaiah calls BABYLON THE GREAT the QUEEN OF THE NATIONS, but her throne has been taken from her. She has been REMOVED AS THE MOST POWERFUL NATION IN THE WORLD, and made to sit in the dust. In other words BABYLON THE NATION is responsible for the BABYLONIAN WORLD WIDE SYSTEM IT CREATES. And behind it all stands THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY- WHICH THE BIBLE DEFINES AS SECRET LUCIFERIAN RELIGIOUS ORDERS: FREEMASONS, ROSICRUCIANS, COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS, CIA, BILDERBERGS, SKULL AND BONES, ORDER OF THE GOLDEN DAWN, ETC. THESE ARE ALSO KNOWN AS THE ‘MYSTERY RELIGIONS” OR ILLUMINATI, COLLECTIVELY. The Lord also uses the word “MOUNTAIN” to describe a kingdom or nation. Jeremiah 51 is a prophecy against the nation Babylon. Jeremiah says in 51:25: “Behold, I am against thee, O DESTROYING MOUNTAIN, saith the Lord, which destroyest ALL THE EARTH: and I will stretch out mine hand upon thee, and roll thee down from the rocks (other nations), and will make thee a BURNT MOUNTAIN (nation).”
The argument that Babylon is ONLY A WORLD SYSTEM utterly contradicts the Lord God and his prophets. BABYLON IS ALWAYS PRESENTED AS A NATION THAT GOES FORTH FROM ONE SPECIFIC LOCATION AND FROM THAT LOCATION CONQUERS THE WHOLE WORLD THROUGH THE SYSTEMS SHE CREATED. A spider weaves a large web, but she has to start from one place. Scripture is adamant and clear: SHE BEGINS AT BABYLON THE NATION, AND BABYLON THE CITY. Through her slowly expanding system of trade, economics, military power, political power and religious power, BABYLON’S WEB SNARES THE WORLD. That is why God says that THE BLOOD OF THE SAINTS, THE PROPHETS AND ALL THAT WERE SLAIN UPON THE EARTH (Revelation 18:24), CAN BE TRACED BACK TO BABYLON THE NATION, AND TO BABYLON THE LITERAL CITY. America is turning rapidly ANTI-CHRISTIAN. The UNITED NATIONS, for all of its speech about HATRED AND INTOLORENCE, is ANTI-CHRISTIAN TO ITS CORE.
The KING OF BABYLON THE NATION, is presented in the Scripture AS THE ANTICHRIST (LUCIFER). THIS KING, OF THE NATION BABYLON THE GREAT, goes forth and conquers and then RULES OVER THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD. Check Isaiah 14:4-6, Jeremiah 51:25; 44; Habakkuk 1:6-10; 2:4-5; Revelation 13:7-8; 17:18; 18:24, and you will see this. It is THE KING OF BABYLON in every single instance that GOES FORTH TO CONQUER AND TO DESTROY AND RULE THE NATIONS. It is ALWAYS BABYLON THE NATION AND THE CITY, from whence he gets his POWER TO DO IT. It is BABYLON THE NATION, through its deceptive front THE UNITED NATIONS, that rules the world FROM THE GREAT CITY BABYLON, which is NEW YORK CITY. That is why the UN is located in NEW YORK. It is no accident. It is not a coincidence!! That means that THE KING OF BABYLON must be, and has to be, A PRESIDENT/RULER OVER BABYLON THE NATION, and will also be at the end, A SUPER SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, A WORLD PRESIDENT. The occult knows ALL OF THIS. It is in almost all of their writings. They have written about the SECRET DESTINY OF AMERICA. Isaiah and Jeremiah claim the occult have labored from the inception of the nation to bring LUCIFER into the world. If the OCCULT FORCES KNOW THAT AMERICA IS TO SPAWN AND BE RULED BY LUCIFER (THE KING OF BABYLON), then why cannot Christians, WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SPIRITUALLY AWAKE, SEE IT?
The ANSWER LIES IN THE REJECTION OF THE WORD OF GOD; IN APOSTASY. It lies in an utter refusal to ACCEPT GOD AT HIS WORD. Jeremiah said the Christian leaders in America would UTTERLY REJECT THE TRUTH OF SCRIPTURE, and lead their flocks astray. THAT PROPHECY HAS BEEN FULFILLED IN AMERICA.
The context is plain and simple. BABYLON THE GREAT IS AN END TIME NATION, THAT PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN END TIME EVENTS. To claim otherwise is to UTTERLY CONTRADICT GOD. It is to spit in His face and call him a liar. The refusal to accept the fact that BABYLON THE GREAT IS A NATION AMONG THE NATIONS is one of the PRIMARY REASONS why many modern day prophetic scholars cannot understand WORLD EVENTS, as they relate to literal prophecy. And the false teachers of preterism (Revelation fulfilled in 70 AD) ARE IN COMPLETE DARKNESS! They are thus DECEIVED, AND ARE DECEIVING OTHERS TO THEIR UTTER DESTRUCTION.
They are looking at the European Union and some form of REVIVED ROMAN EMPIRE, which according to the Scripture, WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Did you know that John the Revelator UTTERLY DENIES A REVIVAL OF ROME? This is not to say the EU is not important, for the EU is in reality the formation of BIOREGION TWO of the UNITED NATIONS TEN WORLD REGIONS. It too will play a major role in the future. So these folks are always looking at some other place, while ALL OF IT IS HAPPENING RIGHT UNDER THEIR NOSE. The United Nations is rising up right in front of them, the American government is becoming more draconian and dictatorial, more openly antichrist and the false prophets continue to CHEER THEM ON and give them credibility in the phony voting charade!
America was born AS A GODLY, CHRIST FEARING NATION, but she will soon turn and utterly destroy her heritage and rise up as the LEADING CHRIST HATING NATION IN THE WORLD. It has happened exactly as Jeremiah said it would. New York City is the largest SEAPORT CITY in the Western Hemisphere, and America is surrounded by warm water seaports and trades by the sea with every nation upon earth. That is why all the “merchants will stand afar from the terror of her torment and weep” (for their loss of income) when she is destroyed. Rev 18:11. God said that Babylon the Great would be a nation formed out of every tribe and tongue on earth, who slowly migrated in to ONE NATION and formed THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD and that she is “INSANE WITH HER IDOLS”. That is why America has “E PLURIBUS UNUM” as it’s motto! It was foretold by God!
The U.S. Military is being used by the United Nations, as God said Babylon would have the greatest military machine the world ever knew or ever would know, but in the end, because she rejected Christ, it would fail her, “her mighty men would become as women”. WE ALREADY HEAR OF WOMEN FIGHTING IN IRAQ DUE TO A SHORTAGE OF SOLDIERS! THE AMERICAN MILITARY IS BEING DOWNSIZED AND IT’S LEADERS ARE CLAIMING THERE IS NO MAJOR THREAT – GOD SAID THEY WOULD DO EXACTLY THAT.
America is the central nation involved in GLOBALISM, and is the chief instigator of the NEW WORLD ORDER, and it is America that issued State Department Document 7277. American Corporations and their leaders have spanned the globe, for they are the MIGHTY MERCHANTS OF BABYLON THE GREAT, whom God calls THE GREAT MEN OF THE EARTH. AMERICA WILL BE, AND HAS TO BE THE KEY ANTICHRIST NATION OF THE END TIMES. He will go forth in anger and RULE THE WORLD FROM NEW YORK CITY, called the GOLDEN CITY, right at the UNITED NATIONS. (Isaiah 14:4-6) UNTIL AMERICA IS DESTROYED. The United Nations will soon be granted the right to TAX AMERICANS, and it will destroy the nations through that ability! IT’S COMING, AND IT’S COMING FAST. GOD TOLD US via his prophets, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Habakkuk, and a host of others that the NATION, BABYLON THE GREAT, would be all of this and much more. Jesus Christ said that as it was in the days of Noah, so would it be again. Many Christians do not realize that Noah lived 350 years AFTER the flood. He saw Nimrod’s BABYLONIA (The nation). He saw the MIGHTY CITY BABYLON that sat within the boundaries of the nation Babylonia. He saw the TOWER OF BABEL, that was beside the GREAT CITY. AS IT WAS, SO IT SHALL BE AGAIN.
Is it coincidence that THE STATUE OF LIBERTY, A LADY, sits in NEW YORK HARBOR, NOT FAR FROM THE UNITED NATIONS? OR THAT THOSE INVOLVED WITH THIS STATUE HOLD TO A RELIGION IDENTICAL TO NIMROD, THE FIRST ANTICHRIST? WAKE UP, O YE CHRISTIANS, FOR THE NIGHT IS FAR SPENT!! It is mere coincidence that America reflects in every way ancient Babylonia? From her laws to her hedonistic ways to her three class system, she mimics ancient Babylon. Is it mere coincidence that within the confines of America’s boundaries lies a CITY ON A RIVER? That is known as BABYLON ON THE HUDSON? Is it coincidence that within that City, is a glass tower that sits BY THE RIVER, and that tower represents man’s attempt to rule the world without God? Is it coincidence that the United Nation’s religion is identical to ANCIENT NIMROD? That the UN stands for GLOBAL GOVERNMENT, and is pushing hard for a one world economy, and wants the world to embrace her RELIGION?
You have a choice to make. You can either believe God or follow the false prophets of Babylon. You can either accept the truth of Scripture, or the apostasy of the false shepherds. You can either save your soul, and count it worthy to escape (Luke 21:36), or you can hate your soul, and cast your lot with the Babylonian false shepherds of eternal ruin. IT IS YOUR CHOICE. THE IDENTITY OF AMERICA AS BABYLON THE GREAT IS YOUR KEY TO THE WHOLE MYSTERY OF THE END TIMES!

I listened to all the arguments for years about where the real Babylon of Revelations is and have yet to see anything that disproves or causes serious doubt that my first realization about this was correct: It is America, even my own people, and even my own home town, Los Angeles, the world’s largest producer of pornography and other deadly lies of Hollywood broadcast throughout the world.

Without getting into the full report, I will state the one thing I believe makes this incontrovertible: (America is the Babylon described in [Revelation 17:1] “… the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:” – No other nation in these end times fits that description, with military power based throughout the globe. Not even close. It’s that simple. Also compare Jeremiah 50-52.

Scriptural sources (Authorized King James Version): (Jeremiah 6:2-27), (2 Kings 19:21-35), (Isaiah 54:1 - 17), (Micah 4:6, 5:1), (Zephaniah 3:14 - 20), (Psalms 45:13 - 17), (Revelation (19:7,8) (21:2,9) (22:17)), (Lamentations), (Proverbs), (Song of Solomon)

[Isaiah 54:1] “Sing, O barren ... thou that didst not travail with child” One might consider this is the message of God to his people using the sorrow of barren women, and their deliverance from that sorrow, as a way of telling Israel the time of their sorrow is finished. The question might be asked however: Why use only the things of women, and not include such as, “... and you who had no wives, neither glory among men...” as a reference to male grief to balance? One might answer: to keep with the feminine metaphor God uses for the people, which is likened to women because they obey and are kept by their husband God. Therefore there is no need to mention the things of men as this is a metaphor, but one might argue men are men, and women are women, and do you as a man desire to called a woman? or her or she, or be described by the things of women? It is undeniable that God is calling men “woman”, and “wife”, if this is a metaphor for the people, and this should not be an offense coming from God, but consider if it is not something more. If there is additional meaning to the exclusively feminine reference of Isaiah 54:1-6, one might think God is taking the time to comfort the women of his kingdom, giving them the hope and joy of his promise concerning the common desire of women to bear their seed and see their children, which meaning I think is also present. But when I read Isaiah 54:5 a thought occurred that this might be addressing a person: the human bride of the Lamb (I say “human” because the “bride” is described as the new city of Jerusalem in Revelation 21:10) [Isaiah 54:5] “For thy maker is thy husband ... the God of the whole earth shall he be called.” Notice this does not prove the proposition it also means the human wife, the queen, or Princess of Jews as I call her, (because is not Jesus the prince, and his father the king?) Understand there is a king and queen of heaven, and a king and queen of earth, soon to be, but now God in heaven is king, and his son the prince.)

Continuing with this idea of the human wife of the Lord being prophesied, what is derived from Isaiah 54 if indeed it is speaking of the “Princess of the Jews?” (Isaiah 54:1-4) She is described as a widow, and desolate, having no children, but she shall be plenteous in the world to come, life everlasting. God promises her she will not be confounded, nor put to shame, and she shall forget the shame of her youth as well as the reproach of her widowhood. Consider: Is God speaking to a real person? Is God comforting her (and all women with life perhaps) with words written thousands of years ago? If so we might consider this woman has been confounded, and ashamed, and she has born the reproach of a woman without a husband, but next he tells her something amazing: (Isaiah 54:5) that she is queen of Israel, for if her husband is the Lord of hosts (Jesus is the high priest, “the God of the whole earth”), the Prince (Because the Father in heaven is King), then is this not the Princess? [Isaiah 54:6] “For the Lord has called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou was refused, saith thy God.” She is forsaken and grieved, but what does it mean, “a wife of youth, when you were refused”? Does that mean, she was made (created as) as a wife, and in her youth she was refused as such?

Next in Isaiah we read what is perhaps an amazing message to the daughter of Zion: [Isaiah 54:7] “For a small moment I have forsaken thee; but with great mercies I will gather thee.” And [Isaiah 54:8] “In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer.” [Isaiah 54:9] “For this is as the waters of Noah to me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.” She has experienced God’s wrath, and he has hidden his face from her, but this is interesting since what shall their relationship be when he has unhidden his face from her? Then he goes on to make an oath to her, referring to the waters of Noah as an assuring example of a previous oath he has made. He finds it necessary to tell her when she is redeemed she will no longer live in fear of his anger. Has she been fearful to the extent it was necessary to tell her one day his wrath upon her would be finished? And for her hope of life in the future he wants her to know she need not fear the terror of God would befall her again? [Isaiah 54:11] “O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest (violent storm),...” The terror of God befalling the Princess, who is also the people or city, (Rev. 21:2 “...holy city...as a bride”).

The following verses Isaiah 54:11 - 54:17 make a transition from the person to the city (while yet retaining reference to the Princess simultaneously) and is why most interpret the daughter of Zion as only the people, Jerusalem, and not an individual. It may suggest there is a link between the person of the wife of the Lord and the city or Israel the people as a whole. It suggests something like “Mother Earth”, referring to the land as feminine (see Isaiah 13:13), or a ship as “she” or “her”. Perhaps the human daughter of Zion is a representative of the body of the people, as well as the land, might be the teaching here. [Isaiah 54:11] “I will lay thy stones with fair colors, and lay thy foundations with sapphires.” This is not the description of a person, but the holy city of Jerusalem as it will be, with streets of sapphire, like unto glass as described in Revelation 21:11, yet it comes right after the description of the person and therefore hints at a connection. What is God telling us with this daughter of Zion person/city/people connection? The impression I get reading Isaiah 54:11 - 54:17 describing the city, is that it also gives more detail about the person, then she is the leader of Israel at that time, (see Micah 4:8) she is the nation, she is the people, being the head at that time (for her king is yet to come). So in the following description of adversity against her is there an understanding that nations and persons will speak out against her, and gather for war against her? [Isaiah 54:15] “Behold, they shall surely gather together, but not by me (God): whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake.”, and [Isaiah 54:17] “No weapon that is forged against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn.” Shall we witness the Princess of the Jews condemning to hell those who speak judgment against her and her people? Notice in the verse between Isaiah 54:15 and 54:17, [Isaiah 54:16], “Behold I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and bringeth forth an instrument for his work, and I have created the waster to destroy.” Is the princess herself a weapon, as in the sword, such as [Amos 9:4] “...there will I command the sword, and it shall slay them:”

The last verse, speaks against the idea that an individual is being referred to: [Isaiah 54:17] “This is the heritage of the servants to the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.” Is God saying here the references to the feminine in Isaiah 54 is only a parable portraying the people, and not an individual? That may be, or it may have been added that the existence of the princess be hidden from those not worthy, that as the Jews who deny Christ, the enemies of the Lord might reveal their hearts by rising in judgment against her, (which they would not if they knew who that person was). Then again nothing in these verses exclusively refers to an individual, even if “woman”, “widow”, and “wife” are only parabolic names for the Jewish people.

Additional Notes: I Noticed another indication that “daughter of Zion” and “daughter of Jerusalem” might indicate the men as Zion, and women as Jerusalem, in [Isaiah 52:1] “Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city:” The “strength” indicating the male, as though to go forth for battle, and “beautiful garments” meaning the women, preparing their beauty as the inspiration of the men perhaps.

In Micah 4 is the connection to the supposed personal reference in Isaiah 54, again encoded with the established reference that the people/nation/city/land are referred to as “her”, “woman”, “tower of the flock”, “the daughter of Zion”, and “the daughter of Jerusalem”. [Micah 4:6] “In that day, saith the Lord, will I assemble her that halteth (lame), and I will gather her that is driven out, and her I have afflicted;” The description “afflicted” seems to correlate to the [Isaiah 54:11] “O thou afflicted...” description; (again I recognize this refers to the people, but my point is it may also simultaneously refer to an individual). [Micah 4:7] “And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: ...” and in [Micah 4:8] “And thou, O tower of the flock, the stronghold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee it shall come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.” Now “tower of the flock” being called “thou” might indicate a person, yet contrary to that (and the concept of personalization) are the next words “the stronghold of the daughter of Zion,”. How can “daughter of Zion” be a person if they are a stronghold? Could it be that “tower of the flock” is the only name indicating an individual among these names? “Flock” is clearly the people, and when you say “tower of” the inference is a leader out of that flock. Could it be that the Princess of the Jews is the tower of the flock (the elect), which are also called the daughter of Zion, and the Princess herself having power as an angel is their stronghold? If “stronghold” is a thing, why is it called “thou” (you)?

What is interesting here is that if it is a person, and that person is the Princess of the Jews, then this prophesy is saying the initial dominion of Jerusalem over the earth is obtained by the Princess of the Jews. “Dominion” is indicated to be domination of the whole earth [Micah 4:2 - 4:3] “For the law shall go forth of Zion, and he shall rebuke nations far off;” and if “many nations shall come... and we will walk in his paths:” This means the world is under the rule of Jerusalem, and if the daughter of Zion is the Princess, the wife of the Lord to be, then it is she who is ruler in the earth before the coming of the Lord. Notice in [Micah 4:8] it says “first” dominion, and the Prince (Yahshua, Jesus) comes to his rule after her. Notice the only other known female ruler of the Jews also did not possess a title, [Judges 4:4] “And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.” Notice she is not given a title of king or queen, but is the most high authority of the Jewish people at that time, (And was righteous, for no evil of her is mentioned.)

If this is true the Princess of the Jews is not exactly happy in her rule, as seen in the next verse [Micah 4:9] “Now why dost thou cry out aloud? is there no King in thee? is thy councilor perished? for pangs have taken thee as a woman in travail.” No king means she rules by herself, thereby supporting the idea she is the first ruler of the eternal kingdom of heaven on earth. Does it not appear however, she being human, is crying out because there is no man for her? Her man is a councilor (is not Jesus called the councilor), [Isaiah 9:6] “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”, and she is grieved that her councilor is not present with her to rule the people. She is still a widow! (Widow means having had a husband, but it seems to me this word is used also to describe a woman without a husband, since the Princess is also a virgin, [2 Kings 19:21, Psalms 45:14]) The “pangs”, and “as a woman in travail” do not seem to indicate actual pregnancy, since it says “as”, and there is a correlation to the return of the Lord, [Micah 5:3] “Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth:” The indication here might be that she in a sense travails to bring forth the children of Israel, (perhaps the travail being battle against the enemies of Israel and initial gathering of the elect) like a mother has charge of the children at the first, before the father. [Micah 5:2] “... though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting (Lord Jesus the Christ, the Holy One of Israel). An interesting question to ask is: is this the same woman referred to in Revelation 12? “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.” You see the correlating descriptions, cried, travailing in birth, and are the “twelve stars” the twelve gates of New Jerusalem, the twelve angels, the twelve tribes of Israel, and twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Revelation 21:12-14)?

Next seems to be a description which again has dual meaning: the people and the princess, who are cast off to dwell in the field (this time, now?) and dwell in Babylon (which I have felt referred to its modern day version, America, possessing the attributes described in Daniel and Revelations, [Micah 4:10] “Be in pain, and labor to bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail: for now shalt thou go forth out of the city, and thou shalt dwell in the field, and thou shalt go even to Babylon; there thou shalt be delivered; there the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thine enemies.” (Notice then the importance of these words: the elect Jews are captives in America, and in America will they be redeemed. [Zechariah 2:7] “Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon.) And another correlation to [Isaiah 54:15] “.... they shall ... gather against thee...”, [Micah 4:11] “Now also many nations are gathered against thee, ...”

[Micah 4:13] “Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion: for I will make thine horn iron, and I will make thy hoofs brass: and thou thalt beat in pieces many people:” If it is correct that this refers to an individual (as well), it matches with [Isaiah 54:16], the “waster”, one who destroys, the warrior princess; or the strength of the horn and hoofs means the military strength of Israel God shall make. But the horn of iron and hoofs of brass seemed to me like a superman, which would match the description of an instrument (person) of war. [Amos 9:3] “... though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea, there will I command the serpent, and he shall bite them:” (The “serpent” is singular, as a single angel, and is indicated as the power of God, the staff of Moses which becomes a serpent, representative of the Holy Spirit, (also named: Ruach ha Kodesh, Shekhinah, wisdom, grace, spirit, right hand) Therefore if God sends this individual to the bottom of the sea they must have super powers.

And [Micah 5:1] adds to the concept of a person of war, “Now gather thyself in troops , O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek.” Why would God use the word “daughter” if he meant men, or troops, or a male leader of troops, the army of Israel? In reference to a city it is somewhat fitting to call it by a feminine name, but not so much an army, comprised mostly if not completely of men. Therefore it might be reference to a female leader, the Princess of the Jews. Who is the “he” and “us” in “he hath laid siege against us:”, and who is the “judge of Israel” in the following verse? Micah 5:2 begins the prophesy of Lord Jesus as the messianic king of Israel, whom we know comes out of Bethlehem.

In Zephaniah 3:14-20 there is more scriptural correlation for the Princess concept. [Zephaniah 3:14] “Sing O daughter of Zion; shout, O Israel; be glad and rejoice with all the heart, O daughter of Jerusalem.” Is God addressing three different names for the people? In short the search for the true meanings of Zion and Jerusalem left me with the impression this mystery is not widely understood, but notice God addresses Zion and Jerusalem differently in [Zephaniah 3:16] “In that day it shall be said to Jerusalem, Fear thou not: and to Zion, Let not they hands be slack.” Is Jerusalem the city/princess/land (female) who might “fear”, and the spiritual outpouring (male, “thy hands”) the Zion? Or is it the word pun often used in scripture: two consecutive verses using two different words with the same person or thing indicated? And [Zephaniah 3:19] “Behold at that time I will undo all that afflict thee: and I will save her that halteth, (correlation to Micah 4:6 halteth, driven out) and gather her that was driven out; and I will get them praise and fame in every land where they have been put to shame.” The they is clearly the Jewish people suffering the remnants of the curse of Deuteronomy, but notice again it is enmeshed in the correlations to the person of the wife of the Lord, thus supporting the idea that this is a coded prophesy concerning the person of the Princess of the Jews. Finally while not as corroborative, [Zephaniah 3:17] “...he will rest in his love,” might be referring to his actual wife, the human bride of the Lamb.

One might consider the future queen of the Jewish people, (and the world) would be a significant figure, yet where is she in the scripture? More commonly known about the actual royal heiress is the brief description as the wife of the lamb, [Revelation 19:7 - 8] “...his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.” Correlates to [Luke 7:35] “But wisdom is justified of all her children.” which may also suggest she is the daughter of the Holy Spirit, the way Jesus is and is the Son of the Father.

Most of us are familiar with [Revelation 21:2] “ And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” For which scholars prove these feminine descriptions are referring to the city, people, or land, and not an individual, but the idea is not unprecedented, as we know Jesus learned about who he was and what he must do from the scriptures, thereby teaching us the importance of uncovering hidden meaning in God’s word. Consider the subtlety of the words whereby the young Jesus read and knew he must allow himself to be payment for all our sins, and that for this he would be the God of the whole earth. That wording is subtle enough that in those days and in these, the pious who spend their life pouring over the scripture, but who fail in their heart, refuse his name, even when there comes a man who clearly sits upon the throne of the earth. In likewise manner the godly but failed in honesty of this time will reject the daughter of Jerusalem, the daughter of Zion, the Princess of the Jews, but she was there foretold in scripture all along.

Psalms 45 is one of the most interesting and definitive prophesies concerning the Princess of the Jews. [Psalms 45:1] “My heart is inditing a good matter: I speak of the things touching the king: my tongue is the pen of a ready writer.” It is amazing to consider: this is the voice of God the Father speaking, describing a thing which touches the King of the earth, Lord Jesus. We know it is the Father, because his tongue is the prophets and the scribes who write the words of God. [Psalms 45:2] “Thou art fairer than the children of men:” the “fairer” is indicates a woman. The “children of men” means the natural born of the world, so that fairer than this means she is not born of a woman, but of God (her flesh is made in a different way). “Grace is poured unto thy lips:” - (“grace” is another word for Spirit, see Titus 2:11,12) she is filled with the Spirit of God, the “lips” indicate speaking, which means her description is one who speaks in the Spirit, speaking the things of God. “Therefore God has blessed thee forever.” The blessing is described as not having an end, therefore this human life is eternal, (without end, she does not die).

Next with Psalms 45:3 through 45:9 appears to be a switch from the Father talking to the Princess, to talking about the Prince, the King of Glory. [Psalms 45:3] “Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and majesty.” “Sword” appears to be another name for the Spirit, the serpent [see Amos 9:3] and it says “O most mighty” which is associated with the male person of God. [Psalms 45:4] says, “...Thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things.” Does right hand refer to the sword, and what she teaches him are the things of her profession, war? [Psalms 45:5] “Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; whereby the people fall under thee.” If it is true that the Princess of the Jews is the sword, the serpent, the instrument of war, it is interesting to consider war historically has been fought by men with but with a few rare exceptions, so perhaps there is something learned from war being kept with a woman in the eternal life. Perhaps it is safely stowed within a woman, whose glory rests in a different kind of ambition from men. I wonder if this has anything to do with [1 Corinthians 11:10] “For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels”? The most competent scholars I could find admitted openly a failure to dissolve the “power”, saying the most likely explanation is it means veil, so as not to offend the angels present, but I think it has more to do with the preceding verse [1 Corinthians 11:9] “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” Perhaps the “power” is violence, that is, of the angels, because the woman is made of the man she is as an angel for him. I would offer such isolated codes are not unprecedented, justifying a devious exploration, but consider if the power of God is a female angel, the spirit, might the power of men be their women? The idea is that, a man is of God directly, therefore he is of himself, but women are a derivative of the man, therefore they are of their man: the woman experiences a selflessness (in understanding) that her glory is not for herself, but for her man. Her glory therefore is devotion to her man, not to herself, as oppose to a man whose glory is God’s glory, but also his own glory, which individual glory is not the same experience for women. Therefore a woman knowing this does not seek to be king of her own kingdom, knowing her very glory as a woman is as a servant to her lord, her man, and not as a chief or owner. As such she is ideal as the power of man, even his military strength, for her interest is not her own, wherein she would seek to rule herself. Not to say the perfect might be overly ambitious, but if a man’s military power is kept in the hands of his angel, it might be as a check and balance. Could it be a man’s humility in the land of the living, is that women have superpower strength they do not, even if their authority over their wives is perfect? For a woman would not batter her husband nor disobey, knowing her glory is under him, and a man would not batter his wife because, he can’t! This is only a theory.

[Psalms 45:9] “King’s daughters were among thy honorable women: upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir.” In my search for the meaning of this verse I found several different explanations, none of which gives “queen” to be a person, but rather it is symbolic of the church as it relates to Christ; and the gold of Ophir is a particularly pure gold, denoting the purity and longevity of the church’s marriage to the Lamb. (Ophir is a biblical city supposed to be rich in Gold with an undetermined location, but modern scholars place it on the coasts of Pakistan or India.) But to me, this is too close not be indicating the same thing, [Psalms 45:13] “The King’s daughter is all glorious within: her clothing is of wrought gold.” Followed by [Psalms 45:14] “She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework: the virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee.” How can it not be a person? The “clothing of wrought gold” is clearly the “raiment of needlework”, which cannot be a symbol of the purity of the church or anything but actual clothing. If “queen” is the church, and we know the elect, the saved, are the 144,000 virgins clearly described in [Revelation 14:4] “...they are virgins.”, then how can it be that more virgins besides the 144,000 follow the church? (That would be saying, “The church, the elect, the virgins, wearing wrought needlework of gold of Ophir, are followed by her companions the virgins.” which does not make sense, even if everybody is running around in circles! Therefore “queen” appears be a person, and that person actually wears gold needlework clothing.

But if it is a person, how is it they stand upon his right hand (another name for the Spirit of God)? This might mean she has control of the power of God, which power I correlated to the Princess of the Jews as the serpent, wherein she can withstand the depths to fight his enemies at the bottom of the sea. (see Amos 9:3)

I would comment additionally that I continue to see several possibilities concerning Psalms 45:1-9, the first of which it is all speaking of the King, that is Lord Jesus or Yahushua, and the second is that it is all referring to the Spirit. For the former to be true it would have to be in spite of the “fairer”, which seems to indicate the feminine, so it would have to be saying the King is more beautiful than the sons of men, which is not so farfetched, beauty seeming to be valued by God, and beauty applies also to men, but then why in the translation did it not read “more beautiful”, or “more comely”, rather than “fairer” which indicates feminine beauty? As to the second possibility, that the entirety of Psalm 45 is speaking of the Spirit, [Psalms 45:4] “thy right hand shall teach thee” does not make sense, unless the right hand (the Spirit) has a right hand man, as well as God. But it would be bold to infer the Spirit is called God in the following context, [Psalms 45:6] “Thy throne O God” and [Psalms 45:7] “therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee”, but not entirely unreasonable as the Holy Spirit is known as the spirit of Yahuveh, (the Father), and most Christians agree there are three persons of God, so the Spirit is known to be God. (But nowhere do we read, “God the Mother”, or “Goddess” in scripture, but we do see “queen” and “queen of heaven”, and we do have a mother (See Proverbs), but there is a mystery why she is rather obscured.

Next God the Father says to her, [Psalms 45:10] “Harken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house;” This correlates to [Isaiah 54:4] “thou shall forget the shame of thy youth.” Starting with Psalm 45:10, I am fairly clear this is speaking to an individual, because no other explanation fits the following [Psalm 45:11] “So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty” That does not seem to fit as the people, the church, especially in light that an actual person can be derived as wearing needlework of wrought gold. I believe God is speaking to the Princess of the Jews, who as Jesus in his day, is studying the scriptures in our day, to understand who she is what she must do. As I considered this I thought, why does the Lord have to tell his daughter to harken, to consider, and incline her ear? The impression I get is, despite she is virtuous above all other daughters, (see Proverbs 31:29) perhaps in her youth she is a spirited type daughter, maybe even rebellious, who might need persuasion to listen and learn. But why does she need to forget her own people and her father’s house? Her own people are the Babylonians (Micah 4:10) in the end times, the Americans. (America is the Babylon described in [Revelation 17:1] “... the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:” No other nation in these end times fits that description, with military power based throughout the globe, see article: Babylon The Great) so there is plenty good reason to forget her own people in Babylon, of extremely ill reputation by the scripture in Revelation, Jeremiah, and elsewhere. (Does this mean forget her nationality, her own family, or the people of her village or area she has known?) If this is correlated to [Micah 4:10] “...the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thy enemies”, the Princess is currently in the hand of her enemies. The scripture describes being in someone’s hand as being a prisoner, a captive, or under control of an enemy. While the following correlation does not have a strong connection, consider the mystery scripture of King David’s [Psalm 27:10] “When my father and my mother forsake me, then the Lord will take me up.” We know Lord Jesus read the Psalms concerning himself, wherein the scripture speaks from the perspective of the person it is talking about, and so perhaps the Princess in this very time. Because we know King David was not a dependant of his parents, the words are prophesy, which might again be of the Son (but in this current time), or, since she is prophesied in Psalms, it might be the Princess of the Jews. Therefore it might be, her own family, even her father and mother, are her enemies, who she is a dependant of, being the daughter does not go out as the son, [Genesis 2:24 “...a man shall leave his father and mother”, but notice it does not say the daughter shall leave her father and mother, indicating itself despite contemporary culture, the godly daughter does not go out as the son to be her own master, but leaves her father and mother when her husband shall come for her. A daughter unmarried is in the hand of her father and mother, lest she be her own lord and say, “What man shall govern me, for I have of my own?” After all is said and done about advancing the cause of women from what is truly terrible mistreatment since the beginning (see Misogyny, by Jack Holland), the ideal of the self sustaining woman who needs no man to lord over her might be wrong because once women experience being their own master, they are not content to put on a yoke; yet another terrible ruin for women. This might be the teaching of [Revelation 18:7] “for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.” By saying “I am no widow”, God is telling us this woman sees nothing wrong that she has no lord. Again the dual meaning, the woman/nation, the nation has become Godless, they say in their hearts, “We do not need a God over us, telling us what to do, wherein we worship, and give glory, and offer our first fruits, that our land might be blessed. We make our own and God gave it not to us, because we earned it ourselves, neither do we need anything continually from him, that we need thank or obey. And where is he, this God, and who made him?” But because she is not kept by a father, neither is a husband her lord, she is become a whore, and by the deprivation of good things she turns to every abomination, purveying her wickedness throughout the world, (see Rev. 17:2).

If the daughter of Zion is the Princess of Jews, she dwells in Babylon, [Micah 4:10] “... and thou shalt dwell in the field, and thou shalt go even to Babylon; there shalt thou be delivered; ” Consider if this is speaking of a seminal moment: the redemption of the Princess of the Jews, the bride of the lamb, into eternal life. “Delivered”, and “redeemed”, indicate the entrance into life, that moment of departure from our old spirit, to the new, and from the dead into the living. What might be the significance of this taking place in Babylon? What might be important is the recognition of... Superman! (See The Spirit in Media, wherein I present a non-scriptural theory that the fictional character Superman might be a vision of the Spirit.) Notice I would have no desire to construe a misleading fantasy, but this is not an unreasonable theory: that the earth should see the first eternal life in the flesh, and that person have powers no one before has had before. Think of how exciting this will be! Is the Princess of the Jews, our first lady, the first to awaken* from the long night of the foundation? *[Proverbs 31:15] “She riseth also while it is yet night” (“Night” being before the redemption of Israel).

And why does she need to forget her father’s house, so that the king will greatly desire her? Perhaps it is because, her father must die, but she loves him and admires him, and the separation would be painful for her (a sadness for her eternal life?), and her love of his memory would make the king jealous. Therefore God wants to tell her with these words, she must forget her people, and her father’s house which she has known, that the king might desire her beauty. That is as I read it, her father, God, says to her to forget her past so as to enter into her life. Do you recognize this in those words? She will of course consent, (or else God cannot tell the beginning from the end) but perhaps he says this to her because he loves her, and enacts a kindness of informing her in these words, her memory of her people, her father’s house, and the shame of her youth) will be forgotten. I have reasoned that if God himself shall [Jeremiah 31:34] “remember their sins no more”, how much more should we forget, that painful memories not be part of our eternal lives, lest we should think back on it and wince as we do in these lives?

Considering the lengths to which God expounds to us the destruction of Babylon in the last days, (i.e. Jeremiah 50, Revelation 17) what might we take from the bride of the lamb being redeemed in that terrible place? [Micah 4:10] “O daughter of Zion…thou shall go…even to Babylon; there shalt thou be delivered”. But notice God is also telling his people who dwell in Babylon, (America) to come out of her, [Jeremiah 51:6] “Flee out of the midst of Babylon, and deliver every man his soul: be not cut off in her iniquity; for this is the time of the LORD'S vengeance; he will render unto her a recompense.” The initial thought I had was, if the Princess of the Jews is the serpent, the sword, the right hand, perhaps her entrance into life and powers in Babylon has to do with that recompense against Babylon. If it is true that she has lived in the hand of her enemies, who knows how long she suffered in the hands of the wicked people described there, and so fittingly the Lord fulfills the prophesied destruction, as well as gives the daughter of Zion what his alone to give: vengeance.

[Psalms 45:12] “And the daughter of Tyre shall be there with a gift; even the rich among the people shall entreat thy favor.” (Tyre was a wealthy merchant city on the coast of Lebanon, now gone but for a small fishing village), but this is describing the future events in the life of the Princess of the Jews. The message “even the rich shall entreat thy favor” suggests God is telling her of her glory and power, because what, and why give her a gift? The whole earth will know this woman is the love of God, his wife, his love, and the kings of the earth bow to the Holy One of Israel: the law of the whole earth goes forth of Zion. What shall men see when they see this man, the leader of the Jews who has pleaded with all flesh, and brought the nations under him? They shall see a man, and they shall see a woman standing next to him, therefore the rich, the powerful, and the royal of the earth, will entreat her favor, for who has greater influence on he who gives the rain, or withholds it? Shall they know she holds his heart, and not honor her? She is worthy of praise, therefore they shall delight to honor her, as the honoring of God is the joy of the whole world.

[Psalms 45:13] “The king’s daughter is all glorious within: her clothing is wrought of gold.” Does this mean she is also his daughter, (of God the father, The Spirit, and or the Son?) Does that mean as Jesus was the Son of God, so she is the daughter of the most high? If one considers this, and the three persons of God: the father, the son, and the holy ghost, could it be she is also the holy ghost? The holy spirit is clearly referred to as a “he” in scripture, but could it be that he becomes a she (or was always a she), and is the “princess” (human wife of the Lord), if the holy spirit lives in the world as God does? [Rev. 21:3] “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men”

What does it mean she is “all glorious within”? Perfect inside, spiritually whole? “Her clothing is of wrought gold.” Look for a woman dressed in gold, [Psalms 45:14] “She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework: the virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee.” (Lord Jesus is the king, and “thee”, therefore the narrative of God is speaking to the Son). “the virgins her companions that follow her”; the virgins might mean the saints as a whole but it seems here it means the women. [Psalms 45:15] “With gladness and rejoicing they shall be brought: they shall enter the king’s palace.” Imagine that glorious moment, the daughter of Zion, heiress of the royal family, and her friends the virgin daughters of Israel, brought in joyful celebration into the palace and unto the king and his friends, the apostles (a speculation). [Psalms 45:16] “Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth.” This seems to me to be addressing an individual woman because it again addresses a common desire of women to have children, and here she is being told her royal offspring will be princes in the earth. [Psalms 45:17] “I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee forever.” Is God assuring her, the princess, that her glory is eternal?

In further reference to the “daughter of Zion” and the “daughter of Jerusalem” in the 2 Kings scripture there is a union of these two titles which may indicate they are one and the same. [2 Kings 19:21] “This is the word that the LORD hath spoken concerning him; The virgin the daughter of Zion hath despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn; the daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee.” The scholar commentaries I read concerning this quote mention nothing of reference to an individual, but indicate the “virgin” means the holy eastern city distinct from Jerusalem, the western one, because the city of David had not been invaded or violated since David’s time, whereas Jerusalem had, and the shaking of the head is a gesture of scorn among the Hebrews, but there is disagreement amongst these voices if God’s wording indicates the inhabitants of the city at all, or that the phrases “daughter of Zion” and “daughter of Jerusalem” are mistranslated, and the correct interpretation eliminates the “of” in those names so that “Daughter” is simply in apposition, (i.e. “Daughter Zion”). This may be correct but first I would say that he who created the earth can get a correct message to the people, even the translation into English, therefore I leave the “of” in these names. Second I would say, look at the phraseology “despised thee, and laughed thee to scorn” and remember that 2 Kings 19:20 reads “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel,” which precedes these phrases and is not interrupted by descriptive scripture. Now ask: Why would God (remembering it was not the words of man) use a description of a woman despising, laughing to scorn, and shaking her head? Is there nothing personal in this phraseology? Is God teaching us there is a connection to the human wife of the Lord in the earth as she shall be seen by men, and the physical new city of Jerusalem? Look again at Isaiah 54 where I showed a clear reference to a human individual, [ Isaiah 54:6] “For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God.” Notice this may not be speaking of the people or the physical city exclusively, when it is preceded in the same description with the personal sexually exclusive reference to pregnancy and filial prosperity. [Isaiah 54:3] “For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.”

If you compare the two prophesies of Isaiah 53 and 54 as referring to the prince and princess you see they are quite different in several important respects. There appears to be a time difference for the majority of event descriptions, with the Son having his description almost exclusively in his work two thousand years ago, the sacrifice which is God’s holy method of salvation and dissemination of eternal life. The descriptions of the princess however appears to largely to take place two thousand years later toward the end, near the battle of Armageddon and redemption of the saints (this time we are in). One can discern this from the opening line of the prophesy of the princess, in which God addresses immediately his promise she will no longer be barren, but prolific as a mother, even populating once empty cities and ruling the gentiles. We know these are future events which have yet to come to pass. Further notice the difference that the princess is not a name of salvation or holy process as is the prince. She is described as a wife and mother, but her work is as that of the angel who destroys and the judge who condemns (Isaiah 45:16 - 17). Also notice her prophetic treatment has a different tone, as though God speaks differently to her than to his son. He tells her she shall forget the shame of her youth, but he says no such thing concerning the son. While we cannot know for certain it suggests the flaw of sin for her, the son we know did not fall short of anyone. Therefore she is not equal to him, but further it suggests a difference wherein we learn she is not a figure by which we grow up to as we do in Christ. The daughter of Zion however might be important to women because of the drastic differences between men and women, (they are even called a different race, where? I forgot, sorry.) or it may be she is important to both men and women to learn of only she is kept from a wider consciousness (perhaps to avoid the problem of those who would worship her to provoke God, and the scripture teaches us only God the Father and God the Son are to be worshipped.) Whatever the case I do not subscribe to theories of unfortunate prejudice or fear preventing the learning God desires, for what God intends for the mind of man shall be, and in his perfect time, for one cannot read the scripture to know God tells the beginning from the end if happenstance or sinful men could change the outcome.

The daughter of Zion is referred to throughout Lamentations and references this name often. In Lamentations is the only reference to the name princess I found, and contains the correlative description “widow” found in Isaiah 54 and Micah 4.

[Lamentations 1:1] “How does the city sit solitary...how she is become as a widow! she that was great among nations, and princess among provinces, how she is become tributary!” Who has read these words and understood? Our LORD Jesus Christ, who knew and saw what no man was able to see regarding these words, and who said what none could understand regarding them: the holy ghost could withstand not that any soul should blasphemy her, neither could the soul be forgiven, and why? I cannot understand, but the father can withstand blasphemy, and the son withstand slander, but the holy ghost cannot withstand, therefore that soul must be extinguished forever and forgotten, lest it come to mind that which cannot be withstood.

Why else call the city a her? Why not it? Because there is no it in Hebrew, but only he and she? No, for despite the trappings of language there is an it with God’s speech, and there is an it in the English language, for which language the scripture is given to many who should know God. Understand then the importance to realize, God is telling us there is a city who is a woman, and a woman who is a city, and that woman is called different names. She is the virgin, she is the virgin daughter of Judah (Lam. 1:15), she is called Jerusalem and she is also called the daughter of Jerusalem, and the daughter of Zion, but why?

Also notice the princess is a province. [Webster’s 1 a: a country or region brought under the control of the ancient Roman government:]. Therefore “princess” would mean princess of the Roman empire, if it did not say “how she is become tributary”, therefore she is not conquered before she is a princess of the provinces, but she was a province of Israel the nation. Therefore she was the princess of the nation of nation of Israel, and therefore the princess of the Jews.

[Lam 1:2] “She weepeth sore in the night, and her tears are on her cheeks: among all her lovers she hath none to comfort her:” Notice in the Authorized King James bible the italicized are and her. Is it not understood this is meaning includes a flesh and blood woman, and there is a connection between Jerusalem and a flesh and blood her? It is easy to think that the “weeping sore in the night” is but a metaphor, as I have so often past read it, and is widely understood by respected theologians as a metaphor, but it has been uncovered for me now: this is a woman, who is the holy city, the princess of the people of Israel, the daughter of the right hand, the only one of her mother (Song 6:9) “she is the only one of her mother” (Her mother is the holy ghost, represented by the staff in the hand of Moses, which becomes a serpent that swallows up the serpents of the enemies of God (Exodus 7:12).

[Lam 1:2] “all her friends have dealt treacherously with her” [Lam 1:3] “affliction”, “she dwelleth among the heathen”, [Lam 1:4] “her virgins are afflicted” [Lam 1:6] “from the daughter of Zion all her beauty is departed” [Lam 1:8] “she sigheth and turneth backward” [Lam 1:9] “Her filthiness is in her skirts; she remembereth not her last end; therefore she came down wonderfully: she had no comforter. O LORD, behold my affliction: for the enemy hath magnified himself. ” Here as most understand is the is the shame of Jerusalem for their sin, and the metaphor of a woman whose filthiness is in her skirts refers to the sin of idolatry, also known as whoredom: the worship of other Gods. Notice the first person narrative “behold my affliction” [Lam 1:11] “I am become vile” [Lam 1:12] “see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me” [Lam 1:14] “the Lord hath delivered me into their hands” (see Micah 4:10 The daughter of Zion is in the hand of her enemies) Now here is a paronomasia (pun): [Lam 1:15] The “daughter of Zion” becomes the “daughter of Judah”. Why? (Daughter of the hill is the daughter of the tribe?)

Consider the synonymy I have been suggesting with the city and the human person, the Princess of the Jews. Notice then [Lam 1:16] “I weep...because the comforter that should relieve my soul is far from me.” Imagine the human part of that synonymy, which seems to say she weeps because the holy ghost is far from her, and this because of her grievous rebellion. Next in [Lam 2:1] the Lord covers her in a cloud in his anger, and a paronomasia of “daughter of Zion” with “the beauty of Israel”. Is this a clue of female personage? “In a cloud” correlates [Lam 3:44] “a cloud, that our prayer not pass through”. Next is a reference to casting down from heaven, as Lucifer and his angels. [Lam 2:1] “and cast down from heaven unto the earth the beauty of Israel”, with yet another synonym “footstool”, [Lam 2:1] “and remembered not his footstool in the day of his anger!” Does this mean, God makes his enemy to become his friend, and is there hinted in the casting down from heaven, a connection of the princess of the Jews and the devil? [Ezekiel 28:17] “Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty” - God speaking of Satan, before he was cast from heaven. Notice I do not suggest they are one and the same, but perhaps it is a teaching that the arrogance of Satan because of his beauty is related to the sin of the daughter of Zion (The perfection of beauty), therefore we learn not be too proud in our attributes, lest our hearts be given over to rebellion.

[Lam. 2:4] “slew all... in the tabernacle (dwelling) of the daughter of Zion” Note the “pleasant to the eye” might be the “beauty” of [Lam 2:1] “the beauty of Israel”. [Lam 2:5] Israel named in the feminine “her”. [Lam 2:11] Begins a first person narrative again, and I wonder if is our mother, the queen of heaven, the Holy Spirit. Notice she says, “for the destruction of the daughter of my people”. If this is a person speaking it is not the Father, for later in the same narrative it(she) says [Lam 2:17] “The Lord has done that which he devised” Further the narrative continues as the mother of a mother, [Lam 2:11] “the children and sucklings swoon in the streets” [Lam 2:12] “They say to their mothers, Where is corn and wine?” and “their soul was poured out into their mothers’ bosom.” Is that to say, their blood is poured out into the streets, the ground, her bosom? In [Lam 2:13] the paronomasia “daughter of Jerusalem” and “virgin daughter of Zion”. [Lam 2:15] We learn that Jerusalem was known at some point as “The perfection of beauty, The joy of the whole earth” to which we might think this is what the new Jerusalem might be in the future.

[Lamentations 3:1] begins a narrative “I am the man”, but this voice appears to be the same female person that spoke previously as narrative prophesy [Lam 3:4] “My flesh and my skin has he made old”. This seems to be of a person, not a city or people, or what is analogous to flesh and skin when you say “my”? [Lam 4:6] “For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people...” Could it be that the sin of an individual is one and the same as the sin of the people? Could it be that the person initiates the sin herself, and the people because they are one and the same, connected somehow, follow suit? This would be an amazing and terrifying responsibility, if indeed one soul controlled the collective, or one of the collective, could affect the person. [Lam 4:22] “The punishment of thine iniquity is accomplished, O daughter of Zion; he will no more carry thee away into captivity” Here God seems to be saying the sin of the foundation of the world (for the first fruits) is over, and assuring her, his people, his daughter, will no more be carried away into captivity.

Proverbs is one of the most exciting revelations concerning the Princess of the Jews, both for its prophesy and for the voice of who I believe is her predecessor, the holy spirit (also called the right hand, wisdom, and I believe is also the true mother of Jesus, as well as the queen of heaven (Jeremiah 44:17, 18, 19, 25)). We know we have a father in heaven, but what is this? Have I been so bereft of study I did not notice we have a mother as well? [Genesis 2:24] Adam is speaking, and he says, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother” Adam was the first created human being, so he did not have a physical father and mother. How then does he say “father and mother? It suggests his Father was God, and the “mother” was the Spirit, and these two raised him (though detail of this is not included in scripture). It has seemed to me all we had was a father, and he was called this so men could relate to what he was to them, but in fact the book of Proverbs reveals beyond doubt that we have a father and mother, and these are the parents of Jesus. Jesus himself speaks in the first person, and says as much in Proverbs, but the big mystery is: why don’t we hear more about the Mother, if there really is a mother beside the father, and if she is the holy spirit, why is she not clearly called this so men might know of it? I ask the question from the opinion God must have control over every detail of scripture given to us, or else how can he describe events of the future down to a “T”? Therefore while scripture may have obscured her, calling her a “him”, and leaving out books that identify her more clearly, I say God has done this for a reason. I wonder if it is because she is wisdom, and she has length of days in her hand, that God has kept her hidden so only the worthy might find her, similar to why Jesus spoke in parables: that only the living might understand. [Proverbs 1:2] “To know wisdom” The book of Proverbs then is for the purpose of knowing her. [Pro 1:6] “wise, and their dark sayings.” Why are the sayings of the wise dark? Isn’t knowledge and truth supposed to be a light? (Notice this is not a statement of doubt, but an asking.) [Pro 1:8] “My son” - Here is the first, first person speech. One might think this is King Solomon talking to his son, but further into the book it can be seen it is God, either the Father, Son, or the Holy Spirit. [Pro 1:8] “hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother.” Why is instruction associated with the father, and the law associated with the mother? Is there a connection to the previous verse? [Pro 1:7] “but fools despise wisdom and instruction” If Mother is wisdom, is Father instruction? Notice the commands for each parent in [Pro 1:8]: “hear” and “forsake not”. The “hear” is as though it is yet to be received, but notice “forsake not” implies it has already been received. Is this that [Jeremiah 31: 33] “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts”? The law is already written in our hearts, and we are to receive instruction (the scripture) from our father?

It is arguable if someone has something important to tell you, they will tell you the most important thing first. [Pro 1:10] “My son, if sinners entice thee, consent not.” Why is the first of instructions to avoid the enticement of sinners? Should not the answer be, that this is the greatest of perils to the soul, or the leading cause of eternal death? The key word is “entice”. Consider that one cannot entice with something not of pleasure. It has to be something you want for yourself, even if it is an action, like revenge, or lust, but beware the pleasure of pride in knowledge. Therefore to be cautious we should make a list of those things we enjoy, and be mindful they can be used as an enticement to fail. [Pro 1:15] “My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path.” I believe the entirety of success or failure is summed up in this verses, because when it says repent, it is “the way”, and “their path”. Obvious sins of adultery to theft are readily acknowledged, but who understands it is the “with them”, that also makes it “their path”, and it is the path to death? For as long as you are not with them, it cannot be “the way”. Notice it does not say “a way”. It suggests singularity, perhaps telling us it is a single path which is identifiable.

Oh how Wisdom will be a snare to the whole earth when she comes! She will be repository of deathly offenses against the holy ghost! I just got through reading the explanations for Proverbs 1:20, at Biblos.com, and none of these so-called teachers acknowledge their mother, that they might fulfill the commandment to honor their mother as well as their father. Not one of them realizes it must be a person, even the Holy Spirit, our heavenly mother. Not one. But here is where we begin to learn about her, [Pro 1:20] “Wisdom crieth without” Her name is Wisdom, God has made a person to represent a thing, and linking her forever to it. We might ask: why is the queen wisdom? Why does she cry without, and utter (speak) in the streets? [Pro 1:20] “she uttereth her voice in the streets” Notice the “without” is outdoors. Is this saying she is not to be found indoors in some sense? Is this a clue, she is not found in the church? [Pro 1:21] “She crieth in the chief place of the concourse” (meeting place in the streets) The overall meaning seems to be she does not hide herself, but speaks openly all the people, excluding no one, and may be found easily.

Now the first words we know are hers, [Pro 1:22] “How long ye simple (lacking in knowledge) ones, will you love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning (open dislike, disrespect), and fools hate knowledge?” Consider: is this not God the Holy Spirit, our heavenly mother speaking? Who says it is a metaphor for wisdom, when she says “I will pour out my spirit unto you”? And who says it is the Son Jesus, when it clearly says “she”, and “her”? Why is it important that the first thing she says in the book whereby to know her, is a question asking how long will the ignorant love will their ignorance? Is she not expressing her desire that we receive her? Is she not teaching that a fool is not merely passive to knowledge, but hates it, for if they were passive they might by some chance hear and become wise. Therefore the fool can only remain a fool, because he actually hates her, Wisdom. She is saying fools hate her, and hate her words, because she offers herself out in the open for all to hear, so only by hating can they possibly not hear. So why hate wisdom? Consider that often when we love one thing, we hate another. So why would we love ignorance? Ignorance is bliss? Consider the teaching concerning the love of worldly things, verses the things of God. Jesus says to Satan he is an offense to him, because he loves the things of the world, and not the things of God. Therefore when we love the things of the world, do we hate the things of God? Not necessarily, for some things of the world are the things of God, but what about, if we love the world as a whole? No, but God loved the world so much he gave his only begotten son that it should be saved. So there is but one culprit: sin. when we love sin, we hate good, and wisdom is good. When we love sin, we love decay and death, and are fascinated by them, filling our eyes and our thoughts with all their darkness. Sin is against knowledge, because wisdom would cause one to turn away from sin, therefore sin hates wisdom, and when sin is alive in us for our attendance to it, we share its hate of wisdom. We then block our ears from hearing her, and because she is a threat to our love of sin, we mock and discredit her words. (Therefore friends, know your enemy who know not the mother.)

[Proverbs 1:23] “Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.” We learn about Wisdom, she is one who reproves. The process then (for the successful) is that we are born in sin, and love sin for a time, but then our mother Wisdom comes and rebukes us. The reproof comes as pain, emotional and physical. Reproof is fear, terror, and shame. The reproof is injury, loss, and anguish, but not for punishment alone that justice be done, but so that we will turn, and learn forever (I think the forever part is why it must be as horrific as it is). The message becomes louder and louder until we finally hear it and stop doing the sin, or she withdraws herself from us, and because length of days are in her hand, her withdrawal means death. For we see, the pouring out of her spirit is life, and when we turn she pours ever more wisdom into us, that we become more and more perfect unto the perfect day. By turning we spiral upward, and by refusing we spiral downward. The action of success is realizing the misery of sin, realizing the pain resulting is the reproof of the Spirit, and turning our love away from the old things, and to the things of life which are in the hands of a woman, even the Spirit. Consider the importance of realizing wisdom is a person, and a person is pleased or displeased, honored or offended, proud or ashamed, loves and hates, grieves and rejoices in us, and notice the either-or character of these conditions. At any given moment, we are either-or before her, and our savior and father as well, for she is ever before them.

The pouring out of her spirit is the making known of her words to us. This thing of heeding her reproof and receiving revelation of her words is clearly the subject of this life for those hoping to see the land of the living. When the foot slips, when the bone breaks, when the pestilence strikes, and when tragedy brings weeping, what then will a soul do? Clearly there is an either-or for every soul in that moment, and clearly it will be a choice no one forced us to make, neither man nor God, but only ourselves. The soul shall hear the rebuke, and grieve for their sin, a bowing of the head in shame, a declaration of one’s foolishness, a supplication before God for his mercy (not hers); or they refuse, and to refuse one must decide it is not reproof, and it is not for sin, that pain they are in. The non-believer shall say there is no God, and no God who punishes; and the failed godly shall say God does no such thing, and I have done no wrong. But does not Wisdom say, she cries outside for every man to hear, hiding not herself inside that only some might hear? God is teaching us right here the whole secret to attaining life, for repentance itself is the action that differentiates the dead from the living. Our Lord teaches, that unlessyou are repenting, you will all likewise perish. When we turn, Wisdom makes her words known that knowledge should follow our pain, and our eyes be open henceforth. How many souls have declared their knowledge of the scripture that they should teach others, and not know that our mother, the queen, the wife of the Father, is the Holy Spirit: is the key to redemption, the door to life, and the light of understanding? Who should live that will look upon the image in which she is made, and say the things of God are exclusive to he who pisses against the wall? What man should obtain favor with the most high, who has said in himself, What have women that I should learn, and what of the race of women should I regard concerning the mystery of God? Have the same taken away honor from their mother, that men not glorify her as the spirit of truth, casting down the role of women?

[Proverbs 1:24] “Because I have called, and you have refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;” I thought in practical terms, one might acknowledge, “Who has seen a woman stretching out her hand, or heard a woman’s voice teaching wisdom, and we refused her for no man regarded? How then when the tragedy comes are we responsible?” If you say a person has called from the high parts of the city, and in the chief place of the meeting in the streets, and spoken in the travelled paths, then that does not mean the voice of the scripture itself, so as to say her calling and stretching out of the hand is the scripture. Is it then a soundless voice, a spiritual voice, or perhaps if one listens we can hear her in the events of our lives, correcting, and showing us signs? Consider in the courtroom of God, a man found guilty of refusing the offered hand of Wisdom: can he not say, “I swear I saw no hand offered? Could I pick out seemingly random events, to know it was a hand offered, and to know it was reproof when calamity happens to fool and wise alike?” Yet the scripture says, for refusing her hand, Wisdom shall laugh and mock at our calamity, desolation, and anguish, which then we shall call upon her early, but not find her. (We will surely be responsible as the scripture clearly says.)

[Pro 1:29] “they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord.” Consider if it says [Pro 1:24] “no man regarded” that it means everyone, and so we see the process of being born in sin, but corrected and offered the way of life. If no man regarded, then to some extent it means we hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord, and we experienced the calamity thereof: but the difference between the living and the dead is [Pro 1:33] “But whoso harkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.” (The harken is listen and obey, the unto is cleave to) In this matter consider the pious Jews that cried the loudest the Son of God should be put to death, which Jews lives were spent examining the words of scripture. Are they responsible for refusing the knowledge of the prophesy of Christ, and the signs thereby they should have known who he was? Therefore we who are called are made aware of a better thing then this short life and only death after, and what was the responsibility of this opportunity? Who shall enter the Gates of heaven on earth, who did not in this life realize the word of God and the study thereof was the primary responsibility? Who takes care of his career and family, and listens to a preacher when he can, or attends a church one day a week, or reads when he has time, but what? His eyes poured over the verses of scripture again and again, never asking what they really mean? Who writes down a question when he sees a mysterious verse, and a word that makes no sense to him? Consider the power and privilege of a man living a million years, without a one of sorrow or pain, and even forever. Would it be appropriate for God to expect you really know him, and he is the word?

I myself have been a rebel against reproof, and a despiser of the righteous punishments of God, for even believing I said in myself, Could this horror possibly be righteous? But if God is perfect, and righteous in all his judgments, which his word says he is, then why does my wayward spirit despise, and why am I such a fool as to rebel? Are there righteous sons and daughters of God waiting for the great day, who being better than I have not despise toward God, and hated not the reproof of the Spirit. I thought to ask, Why does she laugh and mock, rather than grieve or sorrow, at our calamity for refusing her reproof? What is the meaning here? for I perceive every word and every verse is a carful meaning woven for us to decipher. One thought is, like a person, there is a relief from anger at the witness of suffrage. She, like a human being, laughs with joy when vengeance is had. She relishes our torment by mocking, “Ha! Look at her calamity!” But the Spirit is righteous, therefore I must consider, that I have sinned against her, and refused her reproof. Would it not make you angry, if one ignored you, who were sent by God to admonish? The understanding is: if we anger our mother by ignoring her, she will take righteous vengeance upon us, and satisfy herself with good laughter and mocking in our anguish. My sin is great indeed, if I have angered her, refusing her voice like a rebel fool. Therefore in my pain and terror she laughs, a woman laughing, and mocking, and righteous therein.

[Pro 1:28] “Then they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:” The warning from God is, attain wisdom before you stumble into sin for the lack thereof. The duty of man before he is saved is to search out wisdom, seeking her early, that when the stumbling block comes we see it and step aside. Therefore renew the search for wisdom in scripture early, looking for her, watching for her voice, in the scripture, and identifying her therein. Read that passage and think, “Is this wisdom?” And if she clearly says she is in the high places of the city, and in the chief places of the concourse, and in the streets uttering her voice, then listen as you pass by, and watch for her voice. Say, “Is there wisdom in what I have just seen? Was she there, offering her teaching?” When I hear a voice passing by I sometimes ask myself, is it a message? When I turn off the television and there is a last words before the silence such as, “enough”, or “Do not drink alcoholic beverages”, I consider if it is not a message. If I have an altercation with someone, or witness, I ask if this is not an expression of something I need to look at of my own thoughts or actions, to change or grow. It is easy for me to think on the flaws of others as I watch a scene of folly, but was I standing there for her purpose, to witness my own folly? When someone does wrong to me, it is easy for me to consider their sin and the punishment that will come, but even if they have surely sinned, have I considered it still has come against me for pain, and is there something in my life I need to change, and is there a clue of it in the character of the offense? When we live our lives blaming others rather than looking inward at each event, this I believe is the setting at naught her council. I take each bump to the head as a chance to hear rebuke and turn. Maybe it is just a bump, or just an accident, or just the sin of another, but why not deeply consider, and look to that thing you love in the world wherein doubt resides?

[Pro 1:30] “they despised all my reproof.” God is teaching us in this verse exactly who the fools are. By failing to acknowledge the reproof of wisdom, the chastening of pain emotional and physical, the person chooses to be a fool. Notice the [Pro 1:29] “did not choose the fear of the Lord”. The person who chooses not to acknowledge God in all their ways, is choosing to despise the reproof of the holy spirit. They choose to despise her, rather than embrace her, that all powerful spirit that surrounds the very fabric of our lives. Be sure this applies to every human being that ever was or ever will be on the whole face of the earth: our lives are in her hands. She keeps our feet from failing, or causes them to fail, and this spirit, this magnificent force, is also a person who is pleased or displeased, and hates and loves, just like you and me. This is an abstract notion to us, a science fiction plot because we cannot see it to know for sure it exists, but this is clearly what the word of God is teaching. God’s spirit dwells in every place, and is in conscious control of all things, every moment. It seems impossible because we have nothing to compare to it: the notion of a force that never sleeps and controls everything is also a person who is pleased or displeased with us, Mother, wisdom, but the living will know.

What is the mystery of the Holy Spirit and the understanding of the living person? I think what an amazing thing this is, the revelation of our holy mother, which is kept from us all this time. We have not seen nor comprehended God the father, and all my life until this writing I did not know the Holy Spirit was our mother. She was there all this time and I am now just barely understanding. When I finally put it together a realization of its importance came: the commandment to honor our father and mother had eternal significant in the land of the living. When it says, [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.” The meaning is honor our father God, and our mother the Holy Spirit, that in eternity we forget not the duty to God; lest we be driven off the land and our days be shortened. The commandment applies to eternity, and notice there is no other commandment of the ten commandments, wherein God threatens for failure. Think then on the importance of realizing the personal: the father and mother in eternity are Lord Jesus, and the Princess of the Jews. For all of the mystery is not yet revealed, but we can derive that as the Son is the personification of the father, so is the Princess of our mother the holy ghost; And behold, we shall see the living God standing among men! Think on this glory: you see him, that man standing over there? It is God, and should you not know, it is surely God. And you see the woman standing next to him, dressed in gold, and fine white linen? It is his Holy Spirit, even the holy ghost. Consider: what man should enter the city, or please God, who fails to recognize, and honor, for they know the commandment, and succeed by study of his word, the only commandment whereby death is iterated of failure, does not say honor your father only. It says honor your father and your mother, whom we shall see with the eyes, and hear with the ears.

[Proverbs 1:31] “Therefore shall they eat the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.” Notice again the either-or nature of the situation, for when a person chooses not to see reproof as reproof, and chooses not believe in her, her power and person in our lives, ever present, ever pleased or displeased: she fills them up with their own ways, the ways of dishonor and eternal death. Now ask: does God become impatient, bringing an untimely wrath? No, but the holy ghost in the time appointed, perfect in purpose, and perfect in judgment, brings either her wisdom for the turning, or blindness to the refusing. I should offer my own failure, which looking back I was reproved, and given signs, but how stiff-necked and foolish I have been! Can I realize clearly now, when the sign comes, to realize it is the ever present spirit guiding, and immediately give up my desired thing in the world? Will I believe in the shame of my past, that our mother, the spirit of God who guides us unto the more perfect day, was angered when I refused, and chose not to believe? Will I now being aware of her, choose not to grieve her, and anger her, by failing to listen to her voice? Or will I forget, and be filled with my own devices, which devices are wickedness that brings forth ever greater wickedness, and the shame thereof in this life? I see that only the love of sin can turn me away from the voice of the spirit, and the sin is always something of the world we desire, and that thing represents a pleasure divergent from the path of life. When a soul should be redeemed he is done with an appetite for ways of death.

Conversely the fool flees from her and dies. [1:32] “For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.” The “simple” as I have understood it is because the godly man takes into account many things concerning God in his life, and the choices he makes at every turn must be measured carefully, but the simple think it is all only the law of survival, the law of animals that governs man. Notice the “prosperity of fools” is a destroyer, and correlates to all that is written concerning heaven belonging to the poor, and the rich bared from heaven. We know that prosperity itself is not wickedness since Job before and after his test with Satan was prosperous indeed, but by the beginning of the last generation it seems the world became so wicked that Jesus knew the prosperity henceforth was the prosperity of fools, for one can only achieve it with wickedness now. The righteous heart will not partake, therefore they are poor, for the chief enemy of wisdom has encircled his world with the economy of wickedness to drive out her seed. For all their vilification, persecution, and poverty, the righteous are yet sure in life, but fools teeter on the edge of destruction.

There is much more to the great teachings concerning wisdom in proverbs than I will be discussing here, but I want to focus on the person of Wisdom, as it pertains to the person of the Princess of the Jews. By understanding the mother we might know who the daughter is,, but I should be clear my position seems different than the agreed understandings of teachers and pastors I have heard. They say the speaker in Proverbs is King Solomon, when it says “I”, and “my son”, for his hand wrote the words, but I say it is God the Father and Mother, and or the Son. Look at [Proverbs 2:1] “My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;” Are the commandments Solomon’s commandments, implying he made them, therefore they are his? Are the words of scripture his words, or are they God’s words? Consider if it was Solomon speaking here to his son, he would not risk the appearance to claim the commandments are his, but he would say “the commandments”, not “my commandments”.

Now for those to whom it is revealed, I do not think God would want to confuse us, once we know who is speaking. Therefore in my opinion there is consistency when the first person speaking begins about who it is speaking, and it does not switch to another person without this clear distinction. For instance, the Lord Jesus begins speaking saying, “My son”, and starts at the numbered chapter, but notice when the Holy Spirit, who is Wisdom begins speaking, it is with the introduction of the son. Presently I am not clear if it is the Father, or the Son in all instances, or if in this case they are not separate of voice, but [Proverbs 4:3] “For I was my father's son, tender and only beloved in the sight of my mother.” This indicates to me it is the Son Jesus speaking here, and the “father” is the Father, and the “mother” the Mother, or holy ghost. Notice Proverbs 4 again claims the words and commandments are his, [Pro 4:4] “He taught me also, and said unto me, Let thine heart retain my words: keep my commandments, and live.” Again, if this was Solomon, he should say “God’s commandments” or “the commandments”, lest he claim to be God. If this is the Father speaking, then here is the only reference I have found to a mother and father of the Father, which is not impossible, but the first thought is that it is God the Son speaking here. Therefore as yet I have not found a connection between the mother and father mentioned in Proverbs 4:3, as being God the Father and the Holy Spirit, (or king and queen) but the issue might be explored further by a look at the most Wisdom, speaks, in Proverbs, 8:4.

A good question might be, Why does God continually link understanding and wisdom, using them consecutively in these chapter openings? [Pro 8:4] “Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man.” It seems safer to me to err on the side of reading too much into the wording, though it may be that no particular meanings are being given. Therefore I have to notice the absents of Wisdom speaking to women, or the daughters of mothers, though she herself clearly referred to as a she. Why? Is this linked to the mystery of [Rev 14:4] “These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.” Notice the same exclusion of women, and that this scripture seems to say only the redeemed among men are men who have not had sexual intercourse with a woman. I have not heard every argument, but the only plausible exclamation is the same (apparently) misinterpretation of the gender of the Holy Spirit in Paul’s writing, which is why most scholars I have read insist the Holy Spirit is male. Or else how can all of the 144,000 elect be men only? Now it does say “firstfruits”, which may indicate the women follow after, but if you look at the Revelation 14 opening it would rather condemning and depressing, if women were not among them. A wild and certainly outrage causing explanation might be that the women are among them, only their flesh is male. (I disclose my bias since I believe I am a woman in male flesh, and I do not mean offense toward women in female flesh.) Even if any of these explanations are true, it is still deeply troubling to women. If it is that the women follow, and are the second fruits, their glory is depressingly far away from the glory of men (not that it should be equal), and if it is misinterpretation it is sad that men cannot appoint credit to women, though the Wisdom that saves them is clearly a “she”. I say I do not know and let God reveal it.

[Pro 8:6] “Hear; for I will speak of excellent things; and the opening of my lips shall be right things.” One cannot say “the opening of my lips” does indicate an actual person. How can this be an analogy for wisdom the thing? [Pro 8:7] “For my mouth shall speak truth; and wickedness is an abomination to my lips.” Consider the [Psalm 45:9] “Kings' daughters were among thy honourable women: upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir.” Which person of the queen I called the Princess of the Jews. Because Proverbs 8:7 says “shall speak”, which might indicate a future, and that future being the Princess, the visible or human life of the Holy Spirit, but also or exclusively meaning the Holy Spirit now. [Pro 8:11] “For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.” She is speaking of wisdom as knowledge, insight, and judgment, and in this verse we learn its value is above all materials things to possess. Consider that possessing her, the person, is possessing wisdom, and this linkage to a person is necessary of salvation. When God says to hold fast to her, what would you say is the importance of realizing she is a person who loves, hates, and governs herself with discipline and reason?

[Pro 8:12] “I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.” See here she is saying she is the detective as it were, or police for the inventions of men, the indication being evil inventions she will discover and destroy. Next here is no-doubt proof it is a person [Pro 8:13] “ The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.” Inanimate objects do not hate, and an analogy of hate does not fit. She is saying the all-important fear of the Lord means to hate evil, and she hates evil. This message might be that we should actively learn to understand evil and depart from it, not accepting it as the heathen.

[Pro 8:14] “Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength.” If the personal speech is an analogy to personify wisdom, how can wisdom have sound wisdom? This is a person, the holy ghost speaking to us. She says council is mine. The fitting meanings for council in Webster’s dictionary are: consultation, advice, or discussion, deliberation. This is a key teaching: council belongs to her. The “sound” suggests that with her is sound wisdom, but without her their supposed wisdom will falter. Next here is the direct statement: She is understanding. God is the word, the Spirit is understanding. The importance to seeing the person is that if you offend her, or your ways are not pleasing to God, she will leave you, just as a woman will leave you, should your ways continually displease her. This seems impossible to us, that the emotions of a person, even the Spirit, might determine a devastating departure of understanding from our minds, but it is right here in this verse. She says, and God has her say to us for his perfect reason: “I have strength.” Was it not her, whom Moses when he lifted her up, parted the Red Sea? Was it not her, who was sent by God to slay the firstborn of Egypt, and was it not her, that slew the four hundred and forty five thousand of the king of Assyria? She is the right hand man of the Lord. Who should not fear before her, and what man shall offend her by not believing she is a person, and the Holy Spirit? Consider the hypocrites, from whom the knowledge of her existence is hidden away. Consider the false Christian who will not seek her enough to learn her gender, for if they sought her they would learn as I have: it is surely a woman, the queen of heaven, and the angel of the Lord. They shall fail in the only of the ten commandments which God threatens a destroying of off the land for failure: honor your father and mother. (Notice the order, always father first, then mother.)

[Pro 8:15] “By me kings reign, and princes decree justice.” [Pro 8:16] “By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.” Consider that this is saying, no king, or prince, or noble nor judge, receive their authority to be such without her. God links the person of the angel to the wisdom by which authority is given to man. No man has a kingdom, who does not possess it by her. She says, “by me”. Therefore each king, and each ruler, will have his authority personally handed to him by the daughter of Zion, the Princess, she who stands next to Lord Jesus in gold of Ophir. It appears here, God has made the eternal life such that, a woman hands each man the keys to his kingdom, that each man might know, a woman is key to all he possesses. Therefore a man understands what God has made for the life, so each man understands all he has is inseparably linked to his wife. I do not understand this mystery, but I thought that if a woman is approved by the Queen, she is her friend, and if a man should disrespect a friend of hers, or fail in what he ought by her, he can lose all he has quickly, for riches and long life are in her hands; and she is all seeing.

Notice the line following, and why God has written it this way, that such a personal statement follows: [Pro 8:17] “I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me.” The same as the father who gave Moses the ten commandments, [Exodus 20:6] “And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.”, she makes reference to those that love her. Again consider the either-or nature, wherein there is not a neutral stance any man might take upon the earth: you either love her or hate her, and if one does not even acknowledge her, how can he love her? It is your mother, and what good son shall not love his mother? Now why does it say “seek me early”? Observe the or: those who do not seek her early, shall not find her. Seeking her late might be what I explored earlier, once the calamity of punishment strikes, for we see a time coming when the distress of the whole earth shall be upon men in the last days, described as a time of suffering such as was not nor will be, and those who would not seek her before it the terror struck begin to look for her frantically. Looking for her early might also mean, early in the morning.

[Pro 8:18] “Riches and honor are with me; yea, durable riches and righteousness.” We might learn, any man could attain riches, but not durable, for men’s fortunes rise and fall with the wind, and Jesus says, what profit is it if you gain the whole world and lose your soul? Notice “honor” is an “and” in that phrase, indicating they are not mutually exclusive, but with Wisdom riches with honor can be had. Therefore we learn we must love her, if we want the durable riches and honor of eternal life. “Righteousness” is the second-phrase pun for honor, and so we learn one more very important thing: Righteousness itself is with the Holy Spirit, the right hand of the Lord. No man that does not seek her early can be righteous. Think on this amazing and horrifying fact: all these godly men who deny her existence, though they preach, and study, and pray, and do all manner of godly things diligently, yet they would not seek her before the dawn of the eternal day. If the Princess of the Jews is indeed her human life in the world, will they also give her no honor, nor credit, nor seek her, nor love her? Because what they say, it is a woman we can see with our eyes, and no woman is God? Woe to these godly men I say! For I perceive it is a man of war and terror, taking terrible vengeance on those who cannot see her. I wonder as Lord Jesus read these words concerning her two thousand years ago, what he imagined his angel would be: his queen of gold and white. Think how long he has waited for her.

[Pro 8:19] “My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.” (“Revenue” - Webster’s 1 : the total income produced by a given source) If one goes beyond defining wisdom as a thing, to what God is teaching that it is a person, we might consider gold and silver as representing a measure of success in the world, whereby men say if the money is good things are good, but the indication here is that with Wisdom the person there is a better measure of wealth to be had. Notice the this better thing is not to the exclusion of gold and silver, but as we have learned, money is not happiness, but we need so much more. Notice the “source” in Webster’s definition, and Wisdom says “My fruit”, suggesting a tree or garden. Notice God has arranged these words perfectly, and here to convey the meaning again that with the person of Wisdom, (and wisdom as knowledge in perfect ways), there is a wealth that goes beyond gold and silver. Things that come to mind concerning this are happiness in love, marriage, family, work, and godliness, and these treasures durable, not succumbing to the many ruins thereof we know here in the foundation. Before the day of the kingdom we set off into the night with hope of success and happiness, but eventually we stumble and our treasure fails us. In our pain and broken heart we wait, but here God tells us that with his Wisdom are durable treasures that do not fail, and more than gold or silver is the foot that does not slip, and the heart that does not err. Here by the candle light we read there is a wealth to be had in life better than any gold and silver, and it is in the hand of God’s spirit to give or withhold, according as we shall seek her and love her. Therefore what should I say in this darkness, but what is seeking her, and what is loving her, that I might do these forever? Shall I not do these, and still enter the city? And shall I forget these, and yet hope in approval of God?

[Pro 8:20-21] “I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment: That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.” Notice “way” is singular: it does not say, “the ways of righteousness”. Therefore there is one way, and so it might compare against ways that are unrighteous. What man can say exactly what that way is, and if so can he prove it to other men, but a person might understand by his own comparison in scripture to steady himself, or depart from those godly clearly contrasting from what he has found; or else there is more than one truth. Think on the importance God has put with a woman. The spirit, who is a she, leads in the way of righteousness. God has given: she leads, we follow. Is not Christ her God, and her head? Then as God sends his spirit for enactment of various things, Christ sends his queen in the same way. God sends his spirit to guide us, teaching and leading in his way, living inside us, giving us her holy power that by it our works are acceptable to God. We learn our own power is insufficient, and did the preacher say we are leaky vessels that need continual filling of the holy ghost? Or we might say, we are children, in need of constant feeding, and to children Mother is the name of God. We differentiate by awareness of her: she is not her own God, but the servant of he who sent her. The father is the head, Christ the arm, and Wisdom the hand.

She says, “I lead in the midst of the paths of judgment:” See the “way” discussed previously is the path of judgment. Therefore the Godly understand there is not righteousness without continual judgment. If you think on everything that is wrong with our world, you should directly link it to men and women devoid of judgment. Judgment is the cleaning lady, without which our house becomes filthy and chaotic, a place of poverty, crime, sickness and violence. When men shall walk in the paths of judgment God shall lift the curse from their land. Men who see her in the word and therefore wait for her in gates shall be led in the way: the righteous path of judgment, and because of her spirit leading in them, never fail therein. Therefore the world shall see God’s worthy people at places where the shall be judged, for this is the husbandry of the life in the world. Notice people that love her love judgment, and do not scorn the warning of condemnation, for they choose the fear of the Lord; and notice those that hate Wisdom scorn the mention of judgment, to vilify men as evil who say God is a God of judgment, and terrible to man in his judgments, but these devoid of understand will be cut off from the land.

[Pro 8:21] “That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.” Notice God is leaving us no doubt that substance (home, food, wealth...) is inextricably linked to loving her, which there is zero point zero doubt it is a person we are to love. Our substance is in her hands, yeah, the holy ghost, the angel of the Lord, the Princess, her life in the world. She is speaking to the elect of the great day soon to come, whom having earned their names in the book of life, and having earned the name of our God in their foreheads, when they by loving her will certainly inherit the choice substance of the world: The choice land, the beautiful homes by the sea, and the castles in chivalrous forests of everlasting beauty; carriages and armor from around the world: the master craftsmen shall be their servants; The finest servants from everywhere shall covet to serve them; Treasures Oh great treasures! There are great treasures laid up for them, and great adventures to find it: (they should leap for joy when they hear of the adventure); And children Oh children! The elect shall inherit unfailing fruit of the womb, and their offspring shall be rulers of peace and knowledge of the Lord: they inherit no greater thing: great families of love and friendship where not one fears or despises; And too many things I am not aware to list, for no man has seen, nor heard, nor comprehended, what he has in store for those who love him. Notice her work: “I will fill their treasures”. It is she who brings to us our treasure.

[Proverbs 8:22] “The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.” Here begins some of the most interesting personal information about the spirit. The “possessed” seems a correlation between the pattern of God being the pattern of man. He possess her. This is a key understanding: she is referred to as a possession, not a co-equal partner. Is a man’s possession equals with him? No, he is master and decides what shall be done with his possession. I said to those women before, do not think to enter the city nor attain the perfect beauty of the elect woman, who think women are co-equals with their husbands, and not possessions better than rubies as God clearly teaches us. Does the Holy Spirit give orders to God? No, but she entreats him, and is obligated wheresoever he commands.

It appears she is linked to the beginning of his way, which might indicate the way of man (considering the Gods had a different kind of existence before the advent of man). We do not know what “works of old” means, but it might be the universe, built around the life of man in the earth, or maybe even long before that. The inference might be that he created her as a key component of making the life in the world. [Pro 8:26] “While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.” - Clearly at least 4.3 billion years old, the age of the earth, and perhaps older than 15 billion years, the estimated age of the universe. [Pro 8:30] “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;” Here is an indication that “LORD” might mean the Son, because it says, “as one brought up with him”, therefore this seems less likely the Father, but notice the “as” leaves room to consider, though she was his mother (Jesus), they were essentially derived of the Father in a similar time, such that they were raised together. (I only speculate, and do not know.) Notice the next line says “daily”, instead of ever, or always, possibly indicating the earth which has cycles of day and night. She was (his portion of) delight, and why tell us “rejoicing always before him”?

[Pro 8:31] “Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.” Now we really do not know what this means, because if we say it indicates she is human we know it cannot be in the sense we know, therefore “habitable” might not mean for humans, though the next line would seem to confirm it “the sons of men”. A question to ask might be, by “son” does she mean sons and daughters, or else why not say “children of men”? Does this mean her spirit was among men in the earth, or is this saying she lived among them as human? What is the importance of telling us her delights were with the sons of men? Is the meaning connected to the delight of the Lord, rejoicing before him? Is this saying in some way a parallel of delight, that her delights were the sons of men rejoicing before her, as she is the delight of the Lord, rejoicing before him? (I have yet to understand it.)

[Pro 8:32] “Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways.” She says, because of that obey me, O you children (us): for blessed are they that keep her ways. Notice she says, “O you children” and not “O my children”. If this is our mother, why not say somewhere clearly I am your mother? My initial thought is that it is because we may not literally come from her womb, as it were, but souls are created (remember God specifically tells us, he has but one begotten son) in a mechanical process of some kind (not to diminish these holy things I have no idea of), after all that would mean a lot of kids, or else souls also are created in the womb, which it is my understanding they are not, but are placed there, as we know the Holy Spirit descended upon Mary, delivering the savior to her womb.

She says “keep my ways” so I thought, what are her ways? Are they distinct from the Father’s ways, or one and the same? Are they defined in proverbs or the whole scripture, or are they yet to be fully revealed? I think on the opening line of Proverbs 8, “Does not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice?” Notice the “Does not” saying this thing is knowable, or we ought to know it. Should we think, “her voice” are the words wherein we know it is the female personage of God speaking?

[Proverbs 8:33] “Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.” Is the “Hear” for [Proverbs 8:1] “her voice”? Can there something be read it does not say, “read instruction” or “her words” but is a speaking voice heard with the ears implied? Could it be that at some point we are ready, we actually hear her voice, giving us instruction? Notice the either-or of “be wise” because our state is either wise or foolish. Therefore we are foolish until we can hear her voice. (I know I am a fool.) Could it be what happens is, as long as our hearts are separate from God through sin, or love of this world’s life, we are made deaf to the voice of Wisdom, wherein we do not know her, or hear her crying out from the streets and high places of the city? Then at some point we are ready, our hearts made willing, our ears are open to her, and we actually hear a voice? Or is that reading too much into the wording, and her voice is the teaching of wisdom in the scripture, especially Proverbs?

Notice that “refuse it not” implies on this issue we will have made a choice, and be accountable, but if this happens to me the entire process would be hidden from me, my conscious mind, even being ignorant of her existence, but I see that as a child that shouts out genuinely they did no wrong, none the less they are guilty, for their minds block out the knowledge of their own sin (The habit I have is contemplation of the sin of others when unpleasantness arises, but the candidate to be a student of wisdom immediately enters self retrospect.) I say “candidate” by the idea I outlined, wherein even though we are on the path toward becoming wise, we are yet fools, unworthy to hear her voice, which is why no man has understanding. Think on the purpose God has linked wisdom and understanding to a person, even a person which is pleased or angered, scorns and mocks, hates and loves. As humans we live and understand by human emotion and interaction: it is not a weakness causing us to depart from logic, as we find in this fallen state, but when are hearts are set aright these should lead us correctly. Therefore if I say, I search for wisdom, the scripture teaches I should be searching for a person, even our Holy Spirit, uttering her voice in the streets and crying from the high places in the city. I think if my ways are displeasing to this woman she will put herself far from me, and minister judgment against me: my foot should slip and my substance depart. If I keep her ways, my ways will be pleasing to God, and he will make even my enemy to be at peace with me. Not to be mistaken for worship, which is for God and the son of God only, not the spirit who is an angel, I might honor and say, Where is our beautiful sister, and let us entreat our kinswoman Wisdom, for God has given into her hands the ministry of our substance, yes, our castles and kingdoms, our flesh and our cattle, our gold and silver, even length of days upon the earth. Let us not offend her by ignoring her when she calls, and not answering her when she speaks to us. [Proverbs 7:4] “Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call understanding thy kinswoman:” Notice following this passage is the example of the young man devoid of understanding, and this is saying: Say to wisdom, you are my sister, and call her your kinswoman, or else what? What happens? See the either-or again: If we do not say unto her, and call her these things we become as the man devoid of understanding, which inevitably leads him to be taken in by the woman whose house is the way to hell, (Proverbs 7:27), and take note of the “house” in that passage, that the way to hell is inside a house, but wisdom is without, in the streets, and the high places of the city crying. Therefore we might be weary when we enter the houses of this world, and where they might truly lead.

[Proverbs8:33 continued] This is telling us, we need to hear her to be wise, and her is also an “it”, “refuse it not”. Wisdom is an it which we have the option of refusing and so be fools, or accept it and be wise. The “it” is instruction, which word itself denotes coming from someone. Therefore I think I should listen carefully in my life, where my sister Wisdom might be instructing me, even before I am able to hear her voice for a certainty, for perhaps by this she will be ever more invited into my life to make me wiser and increase my substance. And Oh how this fool is in need of her! Shall I give account before the judgment seat of Christ: I did not search for her early every day? It is right here in Proverbs what God is telling us to do: search for wisdom early, listen for her voice every day, for she is instruction, and we without understanding. How powerful is it I ask you, to realize what God is saying to us here? Wrath is in her hand for sin, when we continue without her instruction, even a slipping of the foot that we fall, and calamity of every sort for which she mocks and laughs, even horrible accident and affliction, for she suffers anger at our refusal. Promotion and gold and silver are in her hand for well doing, when we receive her correction, and follow her instruction, even a surety of our foot that we will not fall, and an increase in substance which she is pleased to give us, or is God is not pleased with obedient children? But I would say woe to the fool who despises he should consider himself a child; and woe to the fool devoid of acceptance we are in a woman’s hand, even a her, a she, who is God’s delight before the earth was. ( To my friends I say, see it is a woman, and to my enemies I say, if God had a queen by his side why is she not spoken of in scripture that we know it?)

[Proverbs 8:34] “Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the post of my doors.” The first part says to me, only some men are given to hear her, those blessed, but this seems to contradict the element of choice I discussed earlier, wherein I understand it is by choice we acknowledge her, or why does it say “refuse it not”? Because if God must bless then how are we accountable that we refuse? One might consider the attitude of person in the moment of calamity, aside from any belief: do they look inward, or consider their sin in that moment, and perhaps the man softened in heart is blessed because God sees heart willing to consider their ways, willing to be wrong, and are able to turn thereby.

Next notice the actions watching and waiting, and the things: gates and posts of her doors. I think this is an important message: what are these gates and posts? What is watching and waiting by them? It may be awareness of wisdom speaking in the streets, and crying from the high places allows us to hear her voice more in our lives, though we cannot see a person, and further her voice may be revealed to us further in the scripture, whereby we might come to know her better; for she is the Lord’s spirit. But another thought I had because I am realizing the importance of the connection with the person, that is, the person of the Holy Spirit, who as I said might also be the human incarnation, or daughter of the most high, the Princess of the Jews. Could what this is saying be, the gates and posts are of the future city of Jerusalem, and wisdom is the Princess living therein? So as the tabernacle of God is among men, and the city the eternal temple of God in the world, the message being blessing (rather than curse, i.e. either-or) comes to the man who watches for her, even the Princess we can see with our eyes, for she is wisdom and understanding itself. It might be asked, what purpose to forever link wisdom to a female person, if it is not for men to live in the world?

[Proverbs 3:13] “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.” If we understand God’s way is to link wisdom and understanding to a female person, what is the action we take in finding her, and getting her? Now ask yourself, Do you want to be a happy man? Is happiness something you want for yourself? Then here it is, God’s word telling us that by finding wisdom we shall be happy. Should we doubt God’s word, and say in our inward heart, becoming wise by wisdom is only a fraction of what is needed for happiness, for a man needs so much more? No, but see right here, God is not saying, “He who finds wisdom plus obtaining and doing these other things shall be a happy man.”? No, God is saying, “The man who finds wisdom shall be a happy man.” How can we measure the importance of this? Finding wisdom is happiness! And wisdom is a woman: there can be no mistake about it: wisdom is a person we are commanded to find, and wait for, and watch, and harken to her voice, and it seems to me if the queen stands upon his *right hand (Psalm 45:9 *another name for the Holy Spirit), the Princess of the Jews, dressed in needlework of pure gold of Ophir, is wisdom we can see: is understanding in the form of a person. Shall I say, What can be learned from a girl? Shall I as a Christian man say, What woman shall I search for besides the wife God has given me? No, but shall we accept what is written here with no lack of clarity: wisdom is a female person, for if God shall be a man who lives in the earth among men, and we shall worship him and honor him, even a man of flesh in the earth shall be God, then it stands to reason wisdom is the woman by his side, the understanding by which he founded the earth and established the heavens (Proverbs 3:19). Now I would not guess to anyone’s dishonor, but I saw the height of beauty for women was in their youth, the most exquisite beauty, and could the Princess be anything less? Therefore I saw a stumbling block of men, having failed in the understanding of meekness shall disregard her and enter eternal punishment. Shall they not know it is the Holy Spirit, the human form of our own soul (Proverbs 8:39), we cannot blasphemy and be forgiven? Shall we see a girl in the crowd and not regard the holy before us? Then I think a dark cloud should follow that man the rest of his days, who could not respect in his heart, neither knew the way of God, that understanding itself wears the stocking and dress, and like all girls, is delighted by the attention of men, [Pro 8:31] “and my delights were with the sons of men.”

The question remains, what is hearing her, watching daily at her gates, and waiting at the posts of her doors? Because here next seems a paramount statement from God, [Proverbs 8:35] “For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favor with the Lord.” This does not conflict with the salvation in Christ Jesus, but rather (I am guessing here) “life” is obtained once we receive his name. The order is, “father and mother”, and “Adam and Eve”, therefore we find the Lord Jesus, and through him we find her, for his blood is the first step toward finding her. When we accept the name of salvation she can begin her ministry in us: it is the Holy Spirit, our companion for eternity. As I experienced childhood in Christ, I was not yet worthy to know her, though I knew of the Holy Spirit. So then for this moment halleluiah! for what besides worthiness could cause a man to know of her, for I see she is not revealed to many great teachers of scripture (He has hidden it from wise men and revealed it unto babes). Or perhaps they also keep her hidden, that each might find her for themselves. Worth considering is that by saying “find life” we in Christ have not necessarily obtained life until we have found wisdom the person (that we might hear and watch and wait for her). Is this saying: you will obtain favor with the Lord, with or without her? Or let me ask you, should the man who says the Holy Spirit is male, and to whom it is not revealed the highest office under Christ is held by a woman, think the Lord shall smile upon him? I think not, for if a heart is worthy against the world he shall understand.

The saying, “obtain favor with the Lord” also seems the either-or, for if one does not obtain favor can it be neutral? I would say not, for who should enter into the gates of the city and not be favored of the Lord?

[Proverbs 8:36] “But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all that hate me love death.” First notice this come after the instruction we are to hear, and wait, and watch, and search for wisdom. By not doing so, are we not sinning against her? Now here I heard a minister speak, saying that why blasphemy against the Holy Spirit cannot be forgiven is that we wrong our own soul. But what is this mystery, that the person of wisdom is our soul? We are not the same person, but yet we harm our very selves by wronging her. This would seem to be tied to the synonymy God makes between the daughter of Zion, the Princess of the Jews, and the city of Israel as well as the people. She is the people of God. Does this mean, a part of her soul is part of our soul (we don’t know what a soul is)? But I think it is fair to say, the Princess of the Jews is not a figure head that represents the people, but is a person comprised of collective souls. How can you hurt yourself by hurting another person otherwise? Jesus is something different in that while he is the king, he is not the bride, or synonymous with the city and people, but they are married to him. Therefore it would seem, by loving her he loves the people, and by being a husband unto the people he is being a husband to her. Now what happens when we blasphemy the Holy Spirit, (word to desecrate or disrespect the person of the holy ghost)? It would seem akin to suicide. Our soul would certainly be harmed if we blasphemy the father or the son, but what difference of harm is it when we blasphemy the Holy Spirit, that this cannot be forgiven?

The first thought I had about the “all those that hate me love death” is the fascination with death you see in some people, like punkers with skull earrings or markings, or entertainment stories that seem to focus on death, even glorifying ghosts as people or glorifying hell or demons. But if wisdom tells us here that all those who hate her love death, then such visual signs cannot be the only marker by which we can see the character of those who hate her. We know there is an either-or people have in regard to wisdom the thing: a fool despises wisdom, and does this also apply to the person: we either love her or hate her? It seems to me the man who chooses the fear of the Lord, is someone who will receive his words, and hide his commandments (Pro 2:1) with him, will also be one to incline his ear to wisdom, and apply his heart to understanding (consider Understanding is also a person according to the Lord); she will enter our hearts, and be pleasantness to our souls (Pro 2:10). God makes a distinction between the man that searches for her, and the man that hates her, because he gives us clear warning: not searching for her results in not being delivered from the path of evil (Pro 2:12). Starting in Proverbs 2:12 is a critical teaching of the either-or nature of human beings: the default is a path of evil, for without wisdom we cannot understand the fear of the Lord, (Pro 2:5), righteousness, judgment, equity, and every good path. When we receive Wisdom into our hearts, knowledge (the thing) is pleasantness to our soul (as oppose to despise), and when she is pleasantness to us we gain the discretion (Pro 2:11) that preserves and keeps us (from the way of evil all others not receiving her shall fall into).

Discretion is the key word, because I experienced the world is filled (and always has been) with ways of wickedness which people do not perceive as wickedness, whether they be godly or not, righteousness minded, rich or poor. By receiving her, Wisdom, we are given the ability to see that hidden wickedness, those things which even the pious praying earnestly fail to realize are the thefts, the oppressions, the making of lies, and many other legal revenue streams. This is why, having not received her, the recipients of God’s continued wrath described in Revelation cease not from these sins, though the message of calamity befalling them will be obvious. This suggests that with wisdom is obedience of spirit, and without wisdom, not exalting or embracing her, comes a disobedience of spirit, wherein they are held as repenting not so as to give glory to God. We might say, it is rebellion of the spirit within that keeps us from finding her, the first barrier being knowledge wisdom is a person, even the holy ghost.

Who has read this and understood? Not me, but I had a corresponding vision which I would include in my writing “The Spirit In Media”, wherein I envisioned a princess who awakens early. Therefore when I saw the phrase [Proverbs 31:15] “She riseth also while it is still night” I considered f if this was a correlation to that vision. Proverbs 31 is loaded with what appears to be codes for various meanings God conveys to those worthy to hear them.

[Proverbs 31:10] “for her price is far above rubies.” Again here we see women compared to objects of value, and possessions. The “price” indicates she is bought, but bought by whom and what is the payment? Rubies are expensive, but what might be indicated by a red colored gem? Also notice the “far above” is not worded as “much greater” or “much higher”, and what might this mean? Now as for Proverbs 31:15, the rising while it is still night indicates to me it is speaking of the night before the imperishable day, the life everlasting to come, and so this prophesy is that the Princess of the Jews enters that life early, that is, she is redeemed in Babylon (America) from the hand of her enemy, as prophesied in Micah 4:10. My reasoning why the Proverbs 31:10 is a prophesy regarding the Princess of the Jews is that as we know, all fall short of the glory of God, that is Jesus the Christ, who did not sin, thereby we understand his greatness above all other men was measured and indicated in this way; so I reason with women the greatest among them by virtue would be the royal heiress. Therefore when it says [Proverbs 31:29] “Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.” we might reason this is speaking of the Princess of Jews, the human bride of the lamb, the queen, who stands on his right hand in Gold of Ophir (Psalm 45). Would it be fitting that some man of the kingdom be measured greater than the Lord because of his greater virtue? No, but God tells us his glory is supreme by means of the greatest accounting of virtue: being spotless of sin. Therefore also, would it be fitting if some woman of the kingdom be found greater of virtue than the queen, and therefore greater of glory? Therefore I say, this is speaking of the bride of the lamb, being as he, greatest in virtue, but in the context of among women. Or who else then is being referred to in this prophesy?

Because for years I read the scripture and many things were not revealed which now are, I realize there may be many meanings in this prophesy I do not understand. I thought perhaps this was a description of an actual woman who lived at some time, and her life was a metaphor used in the prophesy, being that some of the items as seeking wool and flax, or selling girdles to merchants, have the possibility of not containing hidden meaning. As with other prophetic words of God, they may be dispersed among specifics of the writer in their time, wherein God used the events of their life to weave prophetic teaching into the scripture.

Now if this is the queen, the princess to the Holy One of Israel, what meaning can we take from [Pro 31:11] “The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.”? We might reason if the “her” is also the people, we might think the king’s trust in his bride means that they will not as in times past sin and cause them to be spoiled by other nations. She, who is the people, the true church of Christ, will do him good and not evil all the days of his life (Proverbs 31:12). His trust in his human bride is then the trust in his people, that they shall do him good and not evil forever more.

[Proverbs 31:14] “She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar.” What is her food? Is it wisdom and the law of kindness, as in Proverbs 31:26? Is the “afar” because she comes from Babylon? [Proverbs 31:15] “She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.” What is the “meat” that she gives to her household, and is “household” the elect? Why say, “and a portion to her maidens” then? Perhaps the “maidens” are gentiles who also serve her.

[Proverbs 31:16] “She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.” A clue about what the “fruit of her hands” might be is in [Proverbs 31:31], “Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.” I cannot say if this again is the word pun in a two part phrase of scripture, but “the fruit of her hands” might be the people she has raised, because her works are the people, as indicated by “praise”. It appears the planting of the vineyard is the work of the Holy Spirit, guiding, correcting, teaching the children of God.

[Proverbs 31:21] “She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet.” This seems a clear reference to the blood of Christ: she has no fear for what might befall them for they are forever and perfectly protected being clothed in the blood of Christ.

[Proverbs 31:25] “Strength and honor are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.” Is there a correlation to the clothing of [Proverbs 31:22] “her clothing is silk and purple.” (strength - silk, honor - purple)?

[Proverbs 31:26] “She openeth her mouth with wisdom: and in her tongue is the law of kindness.” If this is referring to the Princess, then wisdom, her mother, is given to her that she may speak with her. This seems as though a teaching role might be observed of her. Then “in her tongue is the law” means she speaks of things regarding the law. The “kindness” might be another name for the law itself, because by enacting the law we are kind as opposed to cruel. Or it might have a more specific meaning, being that she teaches us more of the details of how we aught to behave toward one another: the very ways of the people in heaven.

Here I could not as yet fully decide if this was a prophesy concerning the Princess of the Jews, and certainly the meanings are mysterious. I offer conjecture on what I believe is a hidden prophesy of the son Jesus and his bride the Princess of the Jews, the daughter of wisdom, the holy ghost, which God has woven into the words of Solomon’s love song to Shulamite. In these words as I read appears an indicator it is speaking of the human bride of the lamb, the Princess of the Jews: that being what the scripture appears to offer as the defining order of glory amongst the race of women: fairness (or beauty). [Song of Solomon 1:8] “...O thou fairest among women”. We know the glory of the Son as being greatest among men because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, therefore we know that righteousness, or the success against sin is described as the attribute by which he is above all other men. (Therefore we might also understand that among men, those lesser of sin are greater than men who have greater sin.) We might learn here that beauty is a measure in regard to women, or why include in the message to the people, there is one more beautiful than all?

The first clue it is a prophesy of the son comes here: [Song 1:3] “Because of the savor of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee.” Consider: who else’s name but Jesus’ is *ointment (*a healing salve)? His name is as healing poured forth: the ministry of the son had as a theme for his work, healing. Why would this be talking about the virgins of Solomon’s time which would only be the young? No, but this is talking about the virgins of our time, that is, the elect standing close to the kingdom in the last days. The “savor” might be the knowledge in the minds of the elect of Jesus’ healing miracles, therefore we have hope in him for our own healing, the hope of life itself. The elect love him for his healing name.

As we know of the Song of Solomon scripture, the narrative takes turns between the male and female. The first to speak is the female, starting with [Song 1:2] “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.” Consider if this voice is not the Princess of the Jews, the bride of the lamb. What I mean by voice is that this prophesy is a script of sorts, wherein the meanings of the sentiments of the characters portrayed are woven into the verse. The Princess may not actually say word for word this passage, but it describes her feelings as they will be in that time, but also with eternal meanings. Notice the two persons of speech, saying to all, “Let him kiss me”, and then to him, “thy love is better than wine.” She is saying his love is in the kisses of his mouth to her, and it is more pleasurable than the intoxication of wine to her. Why does God teach us here by this comparison of love in kisses and wine? But clearly God is telling us that love in kisses is an important thing.

[Song 1:4] “Draw me, we will run after thee: the king has brought me into his chambers: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee.” This is why I think a person who calls himself God is the author of the bible. Think how powerful that verse is, and the subtlety of his character you can find throughout the scripture. Starting with “Draw me” the inference immediately is that of drawing water from a well. What connection does the princess, the queen, have with water that is drawn? She says, “we will run after thee”, which perhaps means the virgin daughter of Israel, the princess and her companions the virgins, will chase after the son. Perhaps these women follow after him as though following his path in the world, or perhaps it means following after his words in the scriptures. She says, “the king has brought me into his chambers”. Does she mean the eternal life, or the holy city: the king’s chambers in the holy city? She says, “we will be glad and rejoice in thee”, which the “in thee” seems to indicate in Christ. “we will remember thy love more than wine”, again the reference to love’s superiority over wine. “The upright love thee.”, the backsliding Christians and rebellious Jews will hate him, but the upright are the elect of God.

[Song 1:5] “I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem”. I wonder if this is the lament of the son, who perhaps is of a dark complexion: the opposite seemingly of fairness (beauty / lightness of complexion). Perhaps as all must sacrifice some characteristics to provide for individual character, the Son here laments what he shall not be, fair of complexion. Notice he says this to the daughters of Jerusalem, entreating them perhaps, wanting their love, not wishing to be rejected for his complexion. Therefore he says he is comely, that the comeliness of a darker complexion might be appreciated. This perhaps is the voice of a man who wants to be loved and accepted by the women of the kingdom. He is God, who dwells among us. He is altogether lovely. (Song 5:16)

[Song 1:6] “...: my mother’s children were angry with me;” Is this Jesus’ mother, the holy ghost, the Ruach ha Kodesh (the mother of whom Jesus said, [Thom 101] “my true mother gave me life”?) “they made me keeper of the vineyards, but my own vineyards have I not kept.” The vineyards it seems is the analogy for the people. They made him king, but his own family he has not kept? Perhaps this is referring to the anger the elect might experience, being cut off for a time from God for the transgressions, but there is an expectation to see their prince. He was made keeper of the people, but they experience anger because they suffer but do not see him.

[Song 1:7] “Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth, (This is the Son, Jesus, speaking to his human wife.) where thou feedest, (where she lives, or a deeper meaning?) where thou makest thy flock to rest at noon: (his wife is a leader of persons, she orders her flock to rest, but is the significants of noon?) for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of thy companions? (Companions: the virgins? Psalm 45:14 “the virgins her companions that follow her”. But I do have an idea what the rest of that phrase means, turning aside by the flocks... [Song 1:8] “If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, (footsteps meaning, least of them, perhaps poorest?) and feed thy kids beside the shepherds’ tents” Is “kids” her flock, or her companions, the virgins? “shepherds” might be leaders, so the princess will read this code and know to take her flock to that appointed place (I assume she will have greater powers of understanding than I do, and know what God is telling her here.) I wonder why the Son says “why should I be as one that turneth aside (turn away from the followers of her companions).

(Song 1:9, 10) I think is Solomon himself speaking of Shulamite, wherein the shape of Solomon’s life is prepared to contain the prophesy of the son and the princess, (the Lord of hosts and his wife). [Song 1:11] “We will make thee borders of gold with studs of silver.” Here is a connection between the human bride and the new city of Jerusalem descending out heaven as described in Revelation. The city is described as being paved with gold, and set with all manner of fine jewels, even the streets and the walls. It appears the woman and the city are one. Therefore when he says he will adorn her with gold and silver, that is, the city, he says this to the bride, for she is the city, and the city is the princess.

[Song 1:12] “While the king sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof.” (MerriamWebster’s 11th Collegiate: 1 a : a fragrant ointment of the ancients b : a Himalayan aromatic plant (Nardostachys jatamansi) of the valerian family from which spikenard is believed to have been derived.) As I considered this, the spikenard is rather a symbol, as oppose to her having an actual container of spikenard. It could be that, her love has a radiance perceived in her presence, likened to an odor (pheromones?), which is the good pleasure of the king to smell. Notice the “my” spikenard, as though it is a part of her. Next a reciprocation of this experience of presence [Song 1:13] “A bundle of myrrh is my well beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwix my breasts.” (Webster’s : a yellowish-brown to reddish-brown aromatic gum resin with a bitter slightly pungent taste obtained from a tree (especially Commiphora abyssinica of the family Burseraceae) of eastern Africa and Arabia;) Again the use of smell as the perception of presence, therefore his presence is as a pleasure and enticement to her, whereby she says that he shall be in her bed. Therefore her voice is saying they are intoxicating to each other, the smell indicating presence or proximity, wherein a pleasurable sensation of love emanates.

Before I move on, I thought to ask: what is the importance of this prophesy, that God included these sayings for us? Consider if love is not primary to the purpose of transition to being human (from whatever it was the gods existed as before). It seems to me as though that feeling of being in love is the reason, the purpose, for the very entirety of how the universe is created, I wildly speculate. I mean the love between a man and a woman. Why is God telling us here, about the intoxicating presence of the woman for the man, and of the man for the woman? If he wants us to be aware of this aspect of creation, why? Why should the men and women of the kingdom have in mind awareness of proximity sensation, even smell specifically, in regard to pleasure they experience? Could it be that awareness of the importance of proximity shores up against an error of excessive separation, wherein the man and woman understand God has made them to be together, not just in the same house, but in the same room? The whole purpose of love between the man and the woman in creation might be wasted wherein they are married but lead separate lives in a sense, as in fact most do in our time. The man goes off to his work, and woman to hers, only joining at night after the day.

Perhaps the meaning has more to do with a perfecting of the experience of love we have, in a literal understanding of what we are to each other. We consider God’s thoughts on this subject, while we are in the presence of our love. We consider our lord is an intoxicating odor to his wife, that she thinks upon his head between her breasts, and the princess sends forth an intoxicating smell to her husband, whereby he experiences desire for her love. Should we then observe the way of the king and queen of the whole earth, and make it our way? If you notice of Song 12, 13 “While...at his table...(then) he shall...all night,” indicates visible proximity “at his table”, during the day. Therefore we might derive that in the age to come we do not lead married but separate lives, neither should the man or woman go off on much separate adventures, or depart each to his own office during the day. Therefore as Jesus says, What God has joined together let not man separate.

Song 1:12 through 2:10 appears to be the voice of the princess. Is this the same person as “the virgin daughter of my people” (Jer 14:17)? There are probably other hidden meanings to Song 1:14, 17, but as yet I have no idea. [Song 1:15] “Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou are fair; thou hast doves’ eyes.” This strikes me as the princess saying to her husband an emphasis in relation to [Song 1:6] “Look not upon me, because I am black” which I described as the son lamenting perhaps his darker complexion, or perhaps lack of feminine type beauty, (which every man might encounter this sensation of missing). The emphasis is the assurance that he is beautiful, notice the word “fair”, normally associated with women’s beauty. Therefore as though a striking new thing is announced, the word “behold” and notice the italics of “art”, as though to say, “You are beautiful, you have doves eyes.” Because “doves eyes” also appears to be his description of her eyes, the term is one of comeliness or pleasing in appearance. [Song 1:16] “also our bed is green.” The green might indicate life, therefore the bed is fertile, their bed being fruitful of the womb.

[Song 2:1] “I am the rose of Shar’on, and the lily of the valleys.” She is saying she is two things: a rose and a lily. The etymology of rose of Sharon (MW11th) is “Plain of Sharon, Palestine, 1847”, and part of the definition of Palestine reads “coextensive with Israel and the West Bank”. Does she say, “I am the rose of Israel”? And what of “lily of the valleys”? [Song 2:2] “As the lily among the thorns, so is my love among the daughters.” Might we see here, “daughters” are the daughters of God, if we understand though scripture teaches God has but one begotten son, we are all yet called “sons and daughters” of the most high” (2Cor. 6:18). But then again “thorns” does not seem a fitting thing to call the daughter of God, yet it matches with the “sons...among the woods” of the similar following verse of [Song 2:3] “As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons.” Women that are thorns, men who are fruitless trees. This then might be saying it the heathen surrounding them, not their friends the elect. The obvious indication being they are special. [Song 2:2 cont.] “I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.” In my KJV Bible there are two correlative notes to [Gen. 3:6, Rev.22:1] “a tree...to make one wise” and “water of life...proceeding out of...the Lamb.” Is this a statement by her, that God’s fruit (perhaps word, or work) are sweet to her, the italics of “are” indicating now his words or works, or wisdom may not be as appealing, due to the inheritance of sinful nature? This might say that when she is given a pure heart, then his fruit is sweet to her taste, but before then it is as John in Revelation who eats up the little book (signifying the word) which causes bitterness in his belly (meaning the word was sweet to hear, but bitter against our own sinful nature.)

There seems to be significant symbolism to sitting under the shadow of his tree, which might reflect a shadow of glory, (as his glory is greater, therefore she is in his shadow), or it might be protection (as against the sun), but we know she sits herself down with great delight in that shadow. It is, sit down in delight and be comforted with sweet apples. [Song 2:4] “He brought me to the banqueting house, and his banner over me was love.” Is the banquet the wedding supper of the Lamb? What is his banner over her, that is love? Does God put a banner over her, the princess, as an announcement of what she stands for, as an army has banners to announce who they are? The prince brings the princess to the wedding banquet, and he puts over her a sign that says she is love?

The next sign of prophesy comes in [Song 2:6] “His left hand is under my head, and his right hand doth embrace me.” What stands out is “right hand”, an established synonym for the holy ghost. What does the “embrace” mean? And is there someone represented by the left hand? The meaning of the right hand embracing the princess might be correlated to Psalms 45:9 “upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of O’phir”, which I likened to the princess having at her disposal the powers of her mother the holy spirit (if I am correct in these things). My question would be, perhaps the left hand is the son, Jesus, and if so, what is the meaning of him being under her head? Perhaps this means he is her councilor, therefore holding her head means he is the guide of her head.

[Song 2:5] “Stay with flagons (wine), comfort me with apples: for I am sick of love.” The apples are the fruit of his tree, Lord Jesus, but what do they represent? It appears at some point there is weariness of her situation of love with the Lord, or is there some other meaning to “sick of”? Song 2:7 represents what is one of the more interesting clues and information regarding the transition to the world to come, life everlasting. When I read this verse it was particularly noticeable as speaking of the end of the old world, and the beginning of [Luke 18:30] “the world to come, life everlasting.” Here as I see it, the princess who has charge over the daughters of God, (Psalm 45:14 “the virgins her companions”,), who apparently are awake early with her, (Proverbs 31:15 “She riseth also while it is yet night”) and commands these daughters not wake Lord Yeshuah until his time. [Song 2:7] “I charge you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, by the roes, and by the hinds of the field, that ye stir not up, nor awake my love, till he please.” What is the correlating symbolism of the deer, to Song 2:17, where she likens him with “a roe or a young hart”. (MW11th: Roe: DOE: adult female of various animals (as a deer, rabbit, or kangaroo) of which the male is called a buck; hind: the female of the red deer - compare HART; hart: the male of the red deer) The immediate meaning is as a springy young beast that skips as it goes. This is telling us something, but what? Why does she charge them (the daughters) by these animals, the male and the female deer? One might picture these women who have entered into life with her, being desirous to wake the Lord, having recognized him. She repeats this charge not to wake him three times in Song of Solomon, which one could imagine these women having read the scripture are aware of this charge.

[Song 2:8] “The voice of my beloved! behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills.” In my bible there is a correlative footnote to John 10:4, Jesus speaking “And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.” That footnote confirms someone (Holman, Nashville) also believes this is a prophesy of the Lord Jesus Christ, here in Song of Solomon. But why is he leaping upon the mountains and skipping upon the hills? (large jumps for mountains, small jumps for hills: mountains first, then hills; leaping then skipping.)

In the verses of Song 2:9 - 2:17 seems an interesting reference to the transition from the darkness of the foundation of the world, the world of evil represented by the night, or the winter, to the morning, or spring of the new world: the kingdom of God in the earth. [Song 2:10] “My beloved spake, and said unto me, Rise up my love, my fair one, and come away. For, lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone.” He is saying to her, the hour of discontent is over, the time of mourning, the time of weeping, the time of sackcloth and ashes, for the breach of the daughter of his people: the transgression, the punishment, and finally the redemption of God’s people. (To be continued... )

My father was taking an early morning walk when out of nowhere a white light opened up in front of him. He did not know what this bright light was, but immediately he had a sensation of great love emanating from it. He said he does not remember the exact details, but he did remember that he was given an understanding of everything. I asked, “What do you mean ‘everything’?” He replied, “Everything. Life, why the world was the way it was, what was going to happen, etcetera, as though all mystery was banished in that moment.” He said the light was a presence, a person, and the person spoke to him asking if he wanted to leave earth, that is, die. He said he responded to the light by saying, “No, I have yet things to do here”, and so the experience was over. Though my father was an orphan brought up by Christian monks he was non-religious, telling me clearly he thought religion did more harm than good. Even so he was a decent man with a strong sense of right and wrong, and because of the white light experience he believed there was a God and an after life, but religions were a mockery of the truth.

You may have heard of similar stories, or what is referred to as “the white light experience”. I met another person while a friend of mine and I were working on the set of a movie, who had a similar experience to my father. As we waited late at night in-between takes he told his story us saying he was sitting in an Italian restaurant when God appeared right there in front of him. It was a brilliant white light (maybe where the synonym for intelligent-bright came from), and other people sitting in the restaurant with him saw it as well. I remember the guy saying about the white light, “It was God.” I cannot recall much else of what he said about the experience, but my friend and I were amazed by his story. While I cannot say I know what this is, my theory is that it is the Holy Spirit, the third person of God, the Angel of the Lord, as described in the bible. I make the connection with what my dad said about “understanding everything”, with what Jesus says regarding the Holy Spirit, that when he comes he will restore all things to our remembrance. As far as I have found there is no direct connection between the Daughter of Jerusalem, (see my report on the Princess of the Jews?) and the Holy Spirit, whom I acknowledged the problem that the person of the Holy Ghost is clearly referred to as a “he”, meaning a male rather than female person, but my conclusion is: the person of the Holy Spirit was indeed a man, or appeared as a man, but becomes female, and that woman is the wife of the Holy One of Israel, the Son, Lord Jesus (this is a theory, I do not know). Further there is a possibility that the Angel of God also appeared as female, or was female all along, as we see in 2King 20:19, The Daughter of Jerusalem laughs and shakes her head at the king of the Syrians, where we read a few verses later, the angel of Lord destroys the Syrian army, inferring a connection between the wife of the Lord (which I theorize “daughter of Zion” has a dual meaning of the land/people and the person of the princess of the Jews) and the Holy Spirit.

In this next thing I will discuss I acknowledge it is not scriptural, but since seeing it I have felt it was true. Earlier in my life before I became a Christian or had any belief in an afterlife at all, I read a book call The Undiscovered Country by Howard Merphet, which is a common-sense collection of near death experiences from every walk of life, religious to atheist, young to old, and many different nationalities. I highly recommend it to the non-believer in your life because it was the common-sense approach to discussing what all these people described about what happened when they were “clinically” dead that changed my mind about life beyond the body. There are too many commonalities to the experiences people report to chalk it up to chemical delusion as the brain shuts down; for instance, seeing the tunnel and white light, noticing they have a body that can feel and move around the same as their physical body, and other things like seeing relatives, and being totally surprised in atheist cases to find there was a whole conscious existence beyond death. I am referring to this book because there was a key line in the book which someone expressed their discovery: Our creativity comes from God, which is relevant to the unsubstantiated idea I present about divine vision having influence in art and media.

I was somewhat distressed by this as I like to think my creativity is my own, and something to take pride in developing, but I realized later it does not necessarily obviate individual creativity, but rather many people, notably successful artists you might be familiar with, receive visions to go with their talent, and these visions have a prophetic quality, while not being as the perfect prophesy of scripture. It makes sense since God seems like a creative person to me who would enjoy the beauty of visual and musical things, and so would express his inspiration through these mediums. It is no new thought that God expresses himself through the works of artists, even if we know they are tainted by man’s fallen nature. An example of this awareness was an interview I watched with musician Bob Dylan, who expressed he knew some of his lyrics did not come from his own mind, (suggesting it came from God).

When I considered the idea of God’s inspiration coming through artists I began to recognize divine footprint in art, music, and motion pictures, however I must show reason to say there is no test for this, and people see what they want to see, or believe what they want to believe, and even if some things might turn out to be right I am sure I have made mistakes and these things are fuzzy theories at best, or an over active imagination. But of these recognitions the most notable for me was the person of the holy spirit, the angel of the Lord. First I recognized him in certain people, which please understand I am not saying they are the spirit himself, but I liken it to windows of the soul, or persons who contain enough of a character so as to represent them in some way. Another possibility is that as God is omnipresent and living in all, certain elements of the person of God and other eternal souls such as the saints, show up more clearly in some individuals than in others, but they are their own person.

Do not ask exactly how I knew this, or what made me think it, but somehow I just looked at the actor/martial artist Bruce Lee, and saw in his face the character of the spirit, the same whom God sends to slay the enemies of Israel in the Old Testament. In Bruce’s face the character of the spirit is recognizable to me in the shape of the mouth, the expressions he has when speaking, and the way he shows emotion. Again I am not saying Bruce Lee is the Holy Ghost, but rather in some way reflects his character, and my theory is it is him to the extent his experience pertains to him, but notice I do not propose reincarnation. I could be completely wrong, but it has been over fifteen years since I saw it and never decided against it since. I can see clearly the argument of a skeptic who might suggest because Bruce Lee’s movies often depict him as a vengeful warrior of justice, even being named “the incomparable fighter”, I imposed my Christian imagination on him. That might be the case and I accept criticism from those who caution of heresy, only be sure I do not have it in my heart to say false or misleading things. This is a theory, which may have nothing to do with reality.

That was an actor, martial artist, and a man, but next let me tell you about a feminine recognition, and an artistic type vision. There is a famous Japanese comic artist named Masimuni Shirow who has created a number of well known graphic novels and comics, some of which have been turned into animated movies such as Ghost in the Shell. I believe this artist was found worthy to glorify the person of the holy spirit, in which she first appears as Dunan in the comic and movie adaptations Appleseed. Shirow was given an inspired vision in my opinion, though he may not have known it. However this is done, God put in his mind the character and physical characteristics in his inspired glory for Goddess, with the most notable features being the gold hair and green eyes, which while I would not say every female anime character with such features is divine inspiration, my theory is she shows up in at least several other animation works, i.e. Fate Stay Knight. For those of you not familiar with the comic Appleseed, the story is set in a post apocalyptic city Olympus, which Dunan is brought to after surviving in the badlands of war ravaged earth. She is recruited as specialized law enforcement with her fellow soldier/boyfriend Briarios, a cyborg (human with mechanical body), and they are immediately enmeshed in the dramatic futuristic politics of Olympus.

In the second movie production of Appleseed which was made using a hybrid CG and line art, a character refers to Dunan as “the goddess of war”, and there is a scene where in a desperate fight to save the city she calls out “Mother!”, the way a desperate person calls out to God. A miracle of sorts occurs right after she cries out, thus indicating a divine character to “Mother”. Also the author displays his belief in the holy scripture in a few other places, such as the opening of the movie quotes Revelation 12:4 “And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.” Appleseed the comic (manga) stands one of the best science fiction comics to this day in my opinion, both in art and story.

Fate Stay Knight (story by Kinoko Nasu) is a great anime series which takes a twist on heroes of antiquity whose spirits are summoned in the “grail wars” to fight for the granting of any wish. One such spirit is King Author, whom some time before this anime was made I made a connection to the person of the Holy Ghost. The majority of features or events based on the 5th century Romano/British king are derived of fictional additions with historian skepticism he existed at all. Yet even if much of what we know today about King Author is by the imagination of story tellers, perhaps even they were given divine inspiration to flesh out his character, because I always felt there was something true about the story. In Fate Stay Knight the twist however is taken to another level because King Author is now a woman, but there is no explanation for this, and the artist’s vision of a blond haired, green eyed warrior woman seems to match the Appleseed character Dunan. If these are inspired visions, and the angel of God is the holy spirit that was a he, who becomes a she, this might be a sort of transition inspired vision. In thinking about Fate Stay Knight I would have thought the flashbacks to Saber’s (King Author’s) past might have showed him as a man, the king, but the character is shown as a female, and Author is named Arturia instead. Part of the compelling quality of the story is the audience experience of the character Saber (King Author as a woman), and if the audience views her past as having been male the feminine character becomes diminished. This is because one might imagine the original form as male, which is less compelling of a woman’s character (generally), but another reason Kinoko might have done this is to avoid explaining the whole transgender subject which is confusing and might have distracted from the story.

Now back to manga (comic) artist Masemini Shirow for his most famous work Ghost in the Shell, a deeply thoughtful futuristic science fiction comic, movie, and television series. In the future the internet and computerization is so vast and powerful that a computer virus written for espionage becomes self aware and begins wreaking havoc for its own purposes. At first governments believe it is a person because of his (the puppet master) acts of stock manipulation, terrorism, and other crimes that appear to be humanly motivated. A specialized police agent in Japan, a woman known as “the major”, (who started out her life as human but because of an accident transfers her ghost to an all synthetic body - or cyborg), is called on with her unit to investigate the “ghost hacking” of a woman in the government ministry. There is a scene where the major is looking down at the body of the blond haired woman who was the victim of the ghost hacking. Later a naked woman is reported to have been hit by a car in the middle of the night, but it turns out it was a stolen cyborg body. They discover the factory where the synthetic bodies are made was hacked and a ghost was downloaded into the brain of a blond haired female body. Government officials attempt to contain the puppet master when the puppet master himself begins to speak from the damaged synthetic body to explain who and what he is. The Americans (who wrote the original program) attempt to steal the body from the Japanese police to hide the evidence of their out of control espionage tool who now claims to be a person, but they are foiled and the major meets up with the puppet master later. What one realizes watching is that the puppet master orchestrated the whole thing perfectly, and you hear his angry masculine voice coming from the damaged cyborg female body with blond hair. Again here is the transgender issue, where you hear a masculine voice and the character of the puppet master is male, but he chooses to download his ghost into a female body and live as a female as described further in the story. I think the connection I make with the holy ghost however has to do with why he is called the puppet master, because in that futuristic time most people have cybernetic implants allowing their minds direct access to the net, and the puppet master taking control of people seems like a characteristic of God. Could it be that the writer of this science fiction has a channel or sense of future events and so they inspire him to write stories around what he sees? If God is at work in this, what would his purpose be in this expression of the person of the holy ghost, the angel of God, or goddess? (Revelation 22:17 The Spirit and the bride say, Come!) I also theorize Jesus appears in certain inspired media, as well as a few other persons I seem to “recognize”, and if true what it might be is a tapping into of the glory of these characters of God’s family and creation.

In Princess of the Jews I described the possible prophetic meaning in scripture in which I suggested the wife of the Lord, also called the daughter of Zion, will be given a horn of iron and hooves of brass, that she brake in pieces many people, (God will give her these powers) and she is the waster who destroys; with these possibly indicating a sort of super powered human. Now I had the thought, what if the American comic (and movies, etc.) Superman, (Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster 1932) are a vision of the angel of the Lord and his super powers? I had the idea is that the “S” on his chest might actually be the symbol for the serpent, which is associated with the staff of Moses symbolizing the power of God, the angel who parts the red sea and destroys the enemies of Israel. Superman is male and the angel if I’ve read it right is female, but if it is a vision of sorts (not prophetic like scripture) and does relate to the angel, the reason might be that for the purpose of the story Superman needed to be male. Will a person who can fly arrive on the scene, the serpentess, Supergirl, the sword the Lord sends to the depths of the sea to destroy his enemies?

I fully appreciate the skeptic of this idea as there is ample environmental documentation about how the character of Superman came into being, such as the death of Siegel’s father in a robbery shooting made him want a character that was bulletproof, and the powers and look of Superman are known to have derived from previous fiction movies and pulp fiction comics. I would say it is plenty likely this was all there was to the creation of Superman, and it is not an inspired vision of the angel, but it is interesting to note that Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster are descendants of Jewish immigrants.

I wondered if it was a vision, if the life of Clark Kent might have clues or similarities to the princess, who I believe should be living among us at this very moment, as well as the Son. For instance, did the authors of Superman receive a vision of an ordinary person with glasses who works at a local newspaper, or does he see him with glasses sitting at a typing machine, thus he made him a reporter? Superman has extraordinary powers and comes from an alien world, but why would that make him someone who never lies? Maybe this feature is what the author saw in his vision, which perhaps he thought was just his own imagination, but it was made according to divine pattern. We know that the elect, in that great moment when they are redeemed they shall be made perfect as their father is perfect, and it would be a common feature that people are incapable of lying.

There were other super heroes before Superman, but the fact is Superman was the character of modern day that started the endless wave of superheroes that followed, and as such represents an original. There are other long standing superheroes of great fame like Spiderman and Batman, but Superman despite the age of seventy years retains popularity and continued interest, even with its own ongoing television series, Smallville, (a good show!), as well as continuing comics and spin-off titles. The fact is no other superhero has had quite the impact Superman has, with the original movie Superman standing as both the original and best superhero movie to date in my opinion. An actor I also associated with the spirit was Marlin Brando, which again I have no corroborating facts even for a theory, and he does not look like Bruce Lee whom I also associated with the angel, but I thought it was interesting that he played Jor-El, Superman’s father, both before he dies on Krypton, and as his voice and image imprinted on the memory crystals of Superman’s fortress of solitude. Could it be that while God does not elaborate on the person of the princess in scripture as much, he does glorify her by giving artists inspirations, or is it just an interesting idea? Is Superman really a blond?

Who shall see what is in plain sight, and who is it that shall pray to God but despise his words which are holy? What women do we know here in the earth, and who stand among us, do know God’s way, God’s truth, and God’s life, that when God requires of them shall answer correctly, and do willingly, for the education of glory makes them useful servants; and what women shall be confounded, and answer falsely because they are ignorant in the education of glory, because they have picked and chosen among the words of God, what shall be His, and what shall be man’s? When I saw the glory that belonged to women I said, this glory is so great, who is worthy? This glory which belongs to women has built nations, and set forth armies, and blessed the land to fullness, or cursed the land to dearth. I looked at God’s creation and saw that inspiration among its artists was for no greater thing than beauty, and of beauty there was no greater thing than a woman’s beauty, no nothing greater in any world either past nor present. Who among men has appreciated this, and who has understood? Are there men who would be approved of the Lord, who shall say in themselves it is no great thing that I should regard it? What Jews raising sons who can do no wrong shall think God his friend, and what Christian ignorant his women are his glory thinks Christ shall smile upon him?

I looked around and thought about the women I saw here. Some were fat, some were beautiful, some old and wrinkled, and some young and smooth, some ordinary, some extraordinary, some misshapen, others with lovely curves, some with hair as silk, and others as old mops. Now I asked, Is there a connection between the spirit, either quality or actions, and what is seen with the eyes? Where does what is seen with the eyes stand in terms of importance? We know that great glory is for the beauty of women, for favor was given unto Esther for beauty, but we know the glory Leah surpassed that of her sister Rachel who was more beautiful to look upon, because that she had borne her husband more sons, and Rachel was buried in the way to Bethel, but Leah was buried in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron alongside Jacob. Now who can judge beauty by age, and is not beauty in the eye of the beholder, for I saw girls that were outside stunning but became ugly to me for their person was cruel. That said there is in my opinion a universal truth in regard to women, which importance is measured in the seen, for the beauty of women which is seen with eyes is greater than all glory women possess; (which truth I perceive the enemy of the living hate.) They might say, their glory is their kindness, or they might say she is glorified in righteousness, but a lifetime of labor shall not surpass the immediate glory of beauty. What woman who shall prepare her heart to meet God shall say in herself, It is not important? Who is it that does not recognize, neither see with their eyes, nor their hearts the inspiration of God, for the very purpose of light is that man might see that which is ugly, and that which is beautiful, and choose the good for himself. What excuse then have you ugly woman, and what is your reason you fat pig, that you defile the view of man? Shall you not find a good purpose for a burqa you withered hag, to put away the nausea of men? For the woman of God whose heart is pure toward God, and God has not utterly cast her out of his sight, shall in the age to come know her glory is kept with the Lord forever. Will you not dress in baggy apparel you maiden with unshapely legs, or unsexy buttocks, or neck with no grace, neither waist that calls to be touched; and should you not bow your head in appropriate shame, and minimize your voice, that you not call attention to your blight, which disgraces the kingdom and brings grief to men’s hearts? Do you not know it is the duty of women to beautiful for men? And where do you apologize for your failure, or acknowledge your shame? Were you born ugly, and what should you have done about it, seeing the righteous woman can ask anything of God and surely expect it be given? Should you shout for joy, and celebrate with noise, you homely dog, with skin that looks like a used grocery bag, or a home to insects, or whose body looks like an overstuffed sack of gelatinous grease? Shall you say there is nothing wrong, I accept what I am, and am content therewith that I need not ask of God? Surely the same will not receive, but what is this hate for the beautiful woman of God, the least of which is more stunning than the most gorgeous supermodel that ever was? She had faith, and she said, It is not enough, and I want more, and I want perfect, and I shall not leap for joy, neither celebrate, until I have without blemish, neither failure or age, that which belongs to every woman who shall make herself approvable to God; even perfect beauty to the eyes and utterly beyond reproach; for I say there is no joy for us without. Who does not believe it and want more, everyday a joy to herself, a joy to her husband, a joy to the men, and a joy to her God? Surely there is more to women than their beauty, and after all the science and spiritual knowledge we look to great things, but what is perfect but that which is neither better more, nor greater as less, and I say the sake of the Kingdom of God is for that moment a beautiful woman is seen.

Ask yourself: will the woman approvable to God approach to the judgment seat and say this scripture is the work of men, and not God, making the word of God unable to be trusted what is his and perfect, and what is man’s and flawed?

[Leviticus 27:3-4 And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if it be female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels.]

The woman of God does not deny what is plainly intended here, which is that men are of greater value than women, nor does she say, Nay, but it means something else which is not written there, but women are of equal value to men. The woman who loves Satan and prefers his kingdom to that of the Kingdom of God, has a heart which hates the truth in the scripture, and you can know she will war against the elect of God, rising in judgment against them. The same are always busy discrediting the writings of Moses, saying that these are old values and do not apply to the people of today as God would intend them to think, but [Malachi 3:6 For I am the Lord, I change not;], [Hebrews 13: 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.] The woman of God may grieve that women are of lesser value to God and to men, but she shall in faith accept it, and in time her grief will be turned to joy, for one day all shall understand these are not things of grief, but the order of joy.

[Leviticus 12:2-5 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.]

Who understands this scripture? As someone who shall be a woman forever, what should I take away that the birth of a female causes twice the uncleanness of a male? Why is this so, O God? Is it because Eve brought sin into the world? Is it because women being less worthy than men, must appropriately pay double for the sin they further bring? Is this an acknowledgment by God for men, to honor them above women, because men are the head of women, and are given authority over them? Is it because women are more evil than men, or do they contain dark or impure things that males do not, and this reality is addressed in this statute?

If you consider the reality on the ground for women, who if they have a son must not be touched by her husband for thirty three days, neither can he eat with her, nor touch any hallowed thing, and twice that long, even sixty six days if it is a female child; is this not grievous? We understand the sacrifice of Christ paid once for all who might trust by him, but imagine being a woman in those days, and wondering why this thing be so? Who is a woman reading it now, who says in her heart, this is no cause of sadness for women? Faith however gives me hope that he who promised is faithful, and true, and if he says also in his word, there shall be no more pain, nor mourning, nor death, but only everlasting joy on the heads for those who love him (his words), then I must trust that these things are a part of God’s good work to bring about the kingdom. [Deuteronomy 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.], [Isaiah 35:10 And the ransomed of the LORD shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.]

[Ephesians 5:23-24 For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.]

Should I then say, I demand equality with men? Shall I say in my heart, I deserve the same honor as men? Should I speak to men as though another man, and should I cut off his speech as though women should not overshadow men ? Will I be approved of God, if I say in myself, that man should get out of my way, and I not defer to his right as a man? How then should I expect from the same God who performs miracles, that I should obtain perfect glory, and the joy thereof forever more? Shall I say to God, It is an egotistical man who wrote Ephesians 5:23-24, and not your words, even though [Timothy II 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:]?

[1Timothy 2:11-13 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.]

Notice the enemy make all manner of deceit to block the truth of what this saying, because the noisy and irreverent women of the world cannot bear the truth. Should they acknowledge the teaching of God in this scripture they would have to relinquish the delusion which makes their haughty existence acceptable. Instead they might humble themselves and forgive their fury at God for being women, for the blessing of forgiveness comes with faith, and with faith they might know why God has said this. The beautiful girl looks at this scripture, saying in herself, Because I have read the scripture to know who God is I know that God has set men above women. Why should it be wrong to give deference in the church to men, to not overshadow them with speaking, that women’s voices be over the voice of men in the church? If I have faith that he who promised everlasting joy on our heads is faithful, and just, his ways being perfect, why would I not understand that if God has set men above women, making man the head of woman, that in all places where men are present a woman should honor the order established by he who made men and women? Who has missed that he made it for the glory of both men and women?

The ugly witches say Paul (and the word of God) contradicts himself, because later he thanks two women for holding the church at their house. [ 1 Corinthians 16:19 The churches in the province of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house.], And they say, if women are not to be teachers, why does the scripture say, [Acts 18:26 And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto [them], and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.]? (So two women are teachers here); And if women could not hold office as clergy, ministers in the things of God, then how is it [Judges 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.]; (A woman is clearly a leader and judge of Israel, arguably a teaching position in the church and a situation in which a woman has authority to speak over men.) Therefore the spirit of error makes to no effect the 1 Timothy 2 scripture, confining it as incidental, but if you look at the phraseology one notices it is not incidental, confined only to that place, but is clearly a teaching concerning women, which the women with a spirit for truth shall recognize. Clearly we know that women can be teachers, and clergy, and speak with authority over men, if God has so appointed them, (though we know much fewer women are called to these positions then men), but that does not negate that if women are not teachers, or persons given authority, then they should be mindful of the position of women to men, respecting order, and being silent in the church because women do not possess the rank by worthiness to speak out in the congregation. Paul is exactly right, it is a shame for women to make their voices heard in the church, where even the men must mostly be silent to learn from the persons of authority God has appointed, even if those authorities might be women. This is not some hard thing to remember, but each woman with a true heart will naturally understand this and not disgrace herself and all women; but the eyes of the ugly witch are closed.

So who are the ugly witches, and who are the beautiful girls? The ugly witches say, I accept the way I am. Fat is beautiful, ugly is beautiful, and visually beautiful women are not any happier. Let the woman of God say, I accept women are not equal to men, and females are twice as defiling in pregnancy, and men should be given right by women as superior whenever they are present. I accept I should obey my husband, giving him the glory of men which God has made, and written to us regarding his way.

Will not the ugly witches fall away from Christ in the day of trouble, calling not upon him anymore because their hearts were tried by fire and found untrue? I will praise God for what he has given me, yeah I will sing for none could contain the joy, no not I, and I will appreciate the great glory of women God has made. My heart is true, and I have read and understood, and drank not the spirit of error, which takes some of God’s words, and rejects others. The beautiful girl knows that all of God’s words are profitable, and seeing which disheartens them, wait with faith because he who wrote them is true, and just, and perfect in all his ways. Now what, shall it never be seen of men, and is glory upon the earth a speaking of that which is within? Nay but we shall see it, our eyes beholding it for none to refute! To recap and be clear what I say, the position of the ugly witches is: “Men and women are equal, and to be treated with equal honor and respect by all men and women. Men should not consider themselves as superior to women, and women should not consider themselves below men in rank, but speak as though an equal among men. The husband and the wife are equal partners. Women do not have to obey their husbands, neither should husbands think to command their wives. Everything in scripture that says otherwise is the error of men which wrote lies amongst his words, and each must screen out these lies in comparison to what we know today.”

Now let there be a comparison between the women who say God loves us just the way we are, women and men are equals and are equals in marriage and in public, for the scripture contains errors and old ways unprofitable for understanding God today; And the women who say God favors beautiful girls, therefore Lord make me perfect, and men are greater than women that their hearts should understand their husband and all men, for God’s word contains no error, and he has said heaven shall pass away, and the earth wax old like a garment, but his words shall not pass away. Let the first then gather together forty women of their choice, even the most beautiful they can find that hold to their view, and let the second take forty of their choice, and present the two groups for comparison before the judgment seat, and before men and women, and before God. And let us say those of the first view gather together the world’s most beautiful women, either wives, or singers, or stars, or models, as we have seen them of the world today. And then now let us behold those women of the second view, whom we have not seen yet, but they shall appear soon to be among us.

They shall look upon them and see: their skin is perfect, and smooth, more smooth and perfect than a computer generated model, yeah, even that, with no speck, nor wrinkle, stain, spot, growth, vein, indentation, scar, or blemish of any sort, neither a hair unbecoming, for it cannot be found, neither does it grow anywhere unseemly for them. The feet of the redeemed woman are lovely, each one carrying her with perfect beauty and grace. Her ankles are works of art as a chiseled stone, dainty and beautiful, neither too fat or too skinny, but in proportion to her beautiful and shapely legs; her legs are well pleasing to every eye. Her buttocks are beyond reproach, with roundness where it is perfect to be round, and firmness where it is perfect to be firm, and softness where it is perfect to be soft, so that her husband cannot see it without ravishing entering his mind, and is the joy of the life of all men; that beauty of the Lord’s hand be a joy to them forever. The hips of the woman of God are as beautiful temples, sacred, the greatest thing of beauty, a challis that is the home of man; for each approved girl it is perfect in wideness, perfect in narrowness, with muscle that is perfect, and fat that is perfect; the rise of her loins a joy for every man to see, and is her power and glory. The navel that covers her womb cries out by appearance for a man’s tongue. Her waist draws the hands of desire to grab hold, and it belongs to her. She who accepts the order of men and women has breasts one and all, utterly beyond reproach, no matter her style. Each beautiful girl deserves breasts that are a picture of love and glory, with none able to say they are too much this, or too little that, for her mind matches the reality, they are perfect. For the humble that waited on the Lord, and were contrite, her arms are as though made to carry glory itself, and only the Lord can make arms for a woman, not too fat, too thin, too muscular, or too weak, but perfect in beauty. For them who keep their peace, and speak softly in turn, her hands are a thing of beauty, works of art, and never rough, or unbecoming, neither subject to unbeautiful vein, or nail, or callous. They are made for men to desire, that they might hold them in their larger and stronger hands, desiring with the eyes that they might touch them. The Lord has made the earth, and the sea, and the stars, and plants, and the hills, and all therein, that a man might wait for the touch of his woman, living out his days with joy in expectation that his woman’s hands should finally touch him. Therefore God has given them to have hands of excellent beauty, her instruments to love. They shall say, Who has hands such as this, so perfect and beautiful, and full of grace? It has not been seen, no, not before they are redeemed.

The people seeing the face of the redeemed shall be perplexed: Is it a child? For who has such innocents and beauty? Is she of age, what lovely childishness! Yet wisdom and prudence are with her, as though a prisoner of many years. Her neck is as a swan, perfect and smooth as glass, and the character of their faces, each one, enough to stop the heart of any man who should look upon it. Their eyes of perfect and lovely, with colors we have not seen, and they are framed in lashes that require no amplification. One looks at their eyes and says, Is it a doll, for they are so lovely and perfect? The nose of the women of God is perfect, not being able less or more to add beauty, and makes for a perfectly cute profile which draws the heart. Each eyebrow is hand crafted, every hair in perfect place, a piece of her character that frames her eyes with much expression. The hair of the elect woman is like nothing we have seen, but perfection is for the patient. The women of the world shall see the hair of the redeemed, and they shall say, How can it be so shiny and so perfect, failing not one out of place, either when riding or in sleep?! Their hair is never broken or kinked, neither falls out; it cannot be found on her brush or in her sink. It is lovely precious colors God has made, with browns that melt the heart, and blacks with deeper colors hidden within. There are yellows and gold, and silver and sapphire, like jewels for men’s hands to touch, (for it is made for this) and spectacular reds, flames of fire, and orange as a sunset. All of these are the worthy frames of the most beautiful pictures of paradise, which beauty is the reason for the earth.

Now each who received these things is more beautiful than the children of men, for God has given them the reward of their patients: everlasting glory for their hearts are made perfect. The curse of blood is taken away: The Lord has paid her price. The sorrow of women is finished, they need not bleed for the sin, it is taken away forever. There is joy and gladness, rejoice you women who waited! Your wombs are all fertile soil, and your seed is good unto all generations: it shall not fail. The peace of your children is great, they shall all know the Lord, and rule them over the gentiles their inheritance.

Who were they, these women of greatest fame in the earth? The Lord made them with his hands, yeah, each one a work of art from the great artist. These are they which waited in the shadows, the darkness of obscurity and shame. Only she who waited shamefaced shall inherit everlasting perfection. They are full of sorrow, and speechless with no advocate. They are cast out by their family, misshapen, and afflicted. In their placed they are a derision. The women around them have husbands who love them, and friends to laugh, but there are those who stood alone for seasons and more. Beautiful girls frolicked in places of beauty, with wealth failed not they chose garments of beauty; but the poor looked on, and feigned that they might only sit with the people a space. Women and girls were glorified: they were stars, and singers of great fame, and wives of mighty men, and men of wealth; but the redeemed were not, even to gaze at garments in their displays only wishing, lest they be uncovered as perverse. They were monsters with strange members, and chemistry that made them evil. They were set up as villains with no chance in the script, even the bad guy who must lose. The people hated them round about, their sneers and looks of hate justified as well as unjust. They were not known to choice men, their beauty hidden. Those men whispered against them as though competitors, their teeth sharp, and their tongues much superior to the draw. The sorrowful man was weak against them, and smacked hard should his evil hope be insufficiently suppressed. They hold their loved ones close, and kiss them in front of them, for they know the sorrowful have no one. They accuse, Pervert! and Psycho! and their shame is for real, but the same are the elect women, who waited as such until the day of her redemption. Her seasons are well worn, and her countenance tempered with fasting, therefore her patients is rewarded above them that gave each other in marriage, and had children, and friends, and the love of the world.

Look what she has become, look what she has become! They are glorious through and through, the women who loved his words and stayed their hope with him. Their sorrow is taken away and replaced with gladness. Merriment is always their steps, every one of them friends with the other, neither do they whisper against anyone. Their hearts are perfect, for they have waited on the Lord. Their men shall rejoice over them, for they are a great prize, they are things given to the men that shall inherit; it is the Lord’s joy to give them to his friends to have. Unlike the haughty women of this world, they are glad to be as possessions, it is their great joy to know it, for they bless their men to give them ownership of themselves. They honor God to fulfill his mandate: they are possession for God’s men, who earned with a great labor: as gold, and land, and things seen with the eye, and held with the hand: even a girl whose heart belongs to him forever. She will do him good all his days, and she is his glory which is always with him: the honor that walks beside him. We thank you O Lord, for there is no greater thing our God has given us but love: each other. The women friends of the King all understand what is necessary, what they give, and with great joy do they sacrifice all: for that one thing which is greatest.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

[Proverbs 6:20 My son, keep thy father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother:] Do the commandments come from David, or from God? If one’s earthly mother is not the source of the law, that you should [Pro. 6:21 Bind them continually upon thine heart], but it says “your mother”, which follows “your father’s commandment” (who must be God the Father in heaven), it must be that we have a Mother in heaven, and she must be divine, or else how can she be the Mother next to the Father who is God?

[Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.] (See also Jer. 44:17,18, 19, 25) Notice while God is condemning the making of cakes to the “queen of heaven”, it is God speaking, and he says, “queen of heaven”. If there is not a queen of heaven, then why in God’s word and with God himself speaking and saying, “queen of heaven”, is there not a queen of heaven? Because God is rebuking the Israelite women doing this in regard to the queen of heaven, does not mean there is no queen of heaven, or God would have said a false queen of heaven, or perhaps an Egyptian queen of heaven, but he says only, “the queen of heaven”. Therefore while we then learn we should not worship the queen of heaven, it does not mean we should deny we have a heavenly mother, (or how many times shall you read over [Pro. 6:20 “father’s commandment”, “law of your mother”] and not realize the commandments cannot come from Solomon, David, or anyone else’s father, and the law cannot be of Solomon’s wife Shulamite or anyone else’s mother, and therefore this must be your heavenly father and mother): which means we have a heavenly mother! But the lesson regarding the queen of heaven is that worship is of the father only, and not the mother, but it does not mean: honor your Father only, and not your Mother. Therefore we must separate honor from worship in our understanding.

We learn from Jeremiah 7 and 44 we are to treat our heavenly father God differently than our heavenly mother. This is the distinction in the royal family, between the father and the mother. [Psalm 62:2 He only is my rock and my salvation;] Notice it says “he only”. Our faith we are taught here, is in him, not they, or he and she, or them, but “he only.” But, should we deny the existence of our mother, when it is written [Pro. 6:20 forsake not the law of thy mother]? How can we not forsake the law of our mother, if we deny she exists? Is it correct to say we have no mother but only a father, and we shall make no mention of any heavenly mother for there is none, neither is there a law of “our mother” (despite Proverbs 6:20), and this is contrary to the doctrine of Christ, not scriptural, and will only cause division among the saints? Let me ask this another way: Shall we say we are obedient to the word of God and not the doctrine of men, or consensus of respected theologians, and all the agreeable doctrine of every church, even the Vatican: Who all agree there is no divine mother? Are they right, and the word of God wrong?

[Exodus 20:12 Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.] Indeed this is the first commandment of promise, and for it we should rejoice, but he who shall not live a lie, and not be a hypocrite, shall know the Father, our Father God, is a hard man

who threatens both his enemies and his children. Therefore when in the fifth commandment it says that for honoring our father and mother our lives will be long in the land which the Lord our God gives to us, there is another way to read it. He who has ears, let him hear.

It is confirmed that the fifth commandment means honoring your worldly father and mother (Eph. 6:1,2), but consider if it is also honoring your heavenly father and mother, and the latter of greater import, for the promise is of relevance to the world to come, not this current life. Consider if we shall take hope in the promise, but it is only for the days remaining in this corruptible flesh, (the hour of our discontent), or is our hope in a new life beyond this one? If it says that for honoring our father and mother our days will be long, (our eternal lives), the meaning is that for all of eternity upon the earth the people who live and not die are to come to Jerusalem to worship the king (Zec. 14:17), and honor the king and the queen of the whole earth (not worship the queen), who are God the Son and the God the Spirit (our Father and Mother, the prince and princess of Israel) who shall dwell in the new Jerusalem. This means the nation that shall not bring their glory to the house of God (acknowledge the majesty on a regular basis), and shall not give the tax of the government of the whole earth (the tithe, ten percent of all income), God will withhold the rain from that nation. (See Zec. 14:17, Isa. 5:6., Amos 4:7, Jer. 3:3, 14:22, 2Chron. 7:13, Hos. 6:3...), that the drought consume them. The same should be true for the individual who shall not come and honor his father and mother in the house of God, even coming to God’s holy mountain to honor his king and queen with his glory which they gave him, for this is life to the living, and death to the dead. This continuity of family is the joy of life everlasting, to see and be seen of our Father and Mother, whose kingdom is everlasting upon the earth. Who is that most beautiful man, and insanely hot babe beside him?

This is a fair question, even if we know failure to understand is not an excuse from obedience. A woman might consider if is it really a plot by men who have control over the scripture to keep women subjugate, and worship should be equally to the Mother? No, this would be contrary to God’s word. The teaching of Jeremiah 7 and 44 makes the exclusivity of worship of the Father clear. In fact the first god of concern in the first commandment is the queen of heaven. [Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.] Is God’s purpose for obscuring the queen of heaven in scripture, to avoid confusion of unified worship? I would say no, because then the point might be more clearly illustrated, if in the scripture it might say: Be sure therefore of your mother which is beside your father, God, the king of heaven, that you not worship the queen your mother, but honor her.

But why is it wrong to worship our mother in heaven, if [Gen. 1:27 male and female created he them], and [1:26 Let us make man in our image]? (This writer does not understand), but consider if the difference between honor and worship is acknowledgement and swearing of fealty. Then it is because there is but one ruler (not a two party system )? But is not God three persons, and all of them holy God? [Mat. 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:] In reality no one understands, but I do not find in the scripture approval of worship of the Holy Spirit individually, but only the Father and the Son. It might be that the king and the prince are like the head (they are one in a different way than all three), and the spirit is more like the hand. Therefore we do not worship the hand, but the head.

Consider if worship of the king actually is the honor of our mother? Is any wife honored when her husband is honored, he being her pride, (and not quite the same opposite)? If the honoring of our mother is fulfilled by worship of the king then there would be no need for us to do anything additional to enact honor of our Mother, but consider a human analogy: A man and his wife are standing together at a party, and a man comes and greets the husband, honoring him, but says nothing to the woman beside him, neither looks at her, as though she is not there. Will she not be offended? Taking that analogy further, suppose a king and queen are standing together at a royal ball, and one of their sons comes up them, and he kneels to worship and praise the king, but says nothing to the queen standing beside him, neither greets her, neither looks at her, for he does not even see her. Has that son fulfilled the commandment? And what if that son after honoring his king, does see a woman standing beside him, but knowing he has no mother nor queen says, “Lord, might I ask who this woman is?” Will not his mother be offended, and the king wroth? Or will Jesus being ever patient kindly explain, “She caught my eye and we’ve been dating for a while.”? No, because the same that do not know her do not know him, for if her spirit is in them, they must know her. Then I think, that son will see the Jesus no one wants to see.

[Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.] Notice this is Adam speaking here, and Adam is saying “his father and mother”. So I ask you: How is it Adam speaks concerning leaving one’s father and mother, (and there were no human beings before him), and he had only a father, but not a mother to compare, whereby he speaks as having knowledge of a father and a mother? Therefore consider if wisdom, who was with God in the beginning of his way [Pro. 8:24], was not the mother of Adam whereby he was able to speak concerning a mother?

[Proverbs 8:12 I wisdom dwell with prudence,], [8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;

8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.] These scriptures make clear that “wisdom” is a person also, besides (in addition to) a knowledge, or a way men might know. Turn the question around: How can one read this scripture to say that wisdom is not a person? Does knowledge or a way itself rejoice or have delight, or require to be in the habitable parts of the earth? Or ask: is there instruction we might receive, or understanding in an analogy of a person in these phrases, whereby that understanding is more effectively conveyed in the description of a person (she, her, mother, sister, kinswoman, anger, delight, habitable parts of the earth), but there is no actual person involved?

If you realize we have a mother in heaven, and the fifth commandment means honoring her as well as your father God, how do we honor her? To honor her is to acknowledge her, obey her teachings and correction, and wait at her gaits continually (watching for her messages of instruction in our lives) and to thank her; (which honor is not worship, nor distraction from Jesus Christ: In fact I say she is necessary…). The first step is to know her, and therefore search scripture for her. If you realize we have a heavenly mother, an initial observance draws the conclusion the Holy Spirit is the person of our mother, the same wisdom described in Proverbs. But why doesn’t the word of God say this, and the Holy Spirit is clearly referenced as a “he” in scripture? If I am right, I believe (not know) God has hidden her from wise men, and revealed her unto little children for his purpose. Through imperfect men the scripture has come to us in no way outside of God’s planning, (as I believe in the inerrancy of the scripture) it is no error the Holy Spirit is called “he” or “him”.

[Proverbs 1:23 I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.] Who else is “I” who pours out their spirit; and who inspires the scripture that she says “make known my words”? (Notice 1:20 “wisdom”, “she, saying”, “my spirit”, “make known my words”) The person “wisdom” in Proverbs is seems is the Holy Spirit, and the “law of your mother”(Pro. 6:20), is our mother, whom it would seem is the queen of heaven (Jer. 7:18, 44:17-25), or who else is it beside the king in heaven? [Pro. 1:23 Turn you at my reproof; 1:24 I have called, and ye refused; 1:25 ye have set at naught all my council] Whose mind will hear her words, and hear her council, to notice wisdom is a “she” and who else can it be? [Pro. 1:20 Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets] and when God’s word says, [Pro. 1:8 My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:] “father” is clearly our Father in heaven, (not any earthly father, Solomon’s or otherwise), and “mother” it seems is our Mother in heaven, whom I believe God has purposefully hidden that she not be exalted by fools, nor blasphemed by rebels.

For those obedient to God’s word (not the sayings of men), and discovering this for the first time, what to do about this? Let us start with what to call her, and as always turn to the word of God [Proverbs 7:4 Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call understanding thy kinswoman.] Now why if she is clearly called “your mother”, do we then receive instruction to call her, “my sister”; and, “My kinswoman”? [Proverbs 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.] This is important to read carefully, for who says the Holy Spirit is equal to God? Is a possession equal to its owner? Of the same topic, does Jesus say to his father, [Luk. 22.42 nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.] and the Son is equal with the Father? I say it is an error to say they are equal, for God the Father is king, and a king is ruler over all, including his queen and his son. The problem with saying they are equal is such negates the teaching relevant to the human tabernacle of God, which order necessitates authority of the father over the mother, (the man is head of the woman, as God is the head of man), and is head over his sons and daughters as well (us), and are they equal with him?

Notice we do not read she was created, but [Pro. 8:24 “brought forth” (another way of saying born)], [Pro. 8:23 I was set up from everlasting].

[Pro. 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him] Notice it almost sounds like she was a sister to God, except notice also the “as”. She existed however before creation, or the earth (4.3 Billion years old) at least, but if it says “from everlasting” it indicates time, and thus before the universe (15 billion years old). But this is amazing in that she seems to possess a human form, or else why say [Pro. 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable parts of the earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.]? Now “sons of men” means human beings, and it seems appearing human also, but it might mean indwelling.

Did the Holy Spirit exist before the Son? Yes, for she is his mother. [Pro. 4:3 For I was my father’s son, tender and only beloved in the sight of my mother.] This must be God the Son speaking to us his children, as a father, for there is no correlation or mention of a father of the Father (although there could be). The Son is speaking to us here, and he is relaying what his Father said to him, “keep my commandments and live”(4:4). Ask: do the commandments come from God or from David? (Can David properly say, “keep my commandments”? No, but he must say “the commandments”, therefore this can only be God the Father speaking to God the Son, and this is the son relaying this conversation to us.)

Proverbs teaches us that wisdom is both a person and a thing. This can only mean that by embracing the person wisdom we embrace the thing wisdom, and if we reject the person we reject the thing. Can we embrace the person, if we say there is no person, neither regard a person in our hearts? This likely is why she is hidden, for the wise are wise in their own conceit, but if you be born again as little children (who are humble, able to be wrong, and learn something new), then they should receive knowledge of her that they might love her and exalt her. Is promotion receiving connectivity in our minds that we must certainly have a divine mother, and nothing replaces honoring and loving her? If we just acknowledge the triune of God, saying God the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit, and we refer to the Holy Spirit only as “he”, and not “my sister”, “my kinswoman”, thus acknowledging her feminine personage, then are we fulfilling the commandment which says to love her? [Pro: 4:6 love her, and she shall keep thee], [Pro. 4:8 Exalt her, and she shall promote thee] Notice it does not say, “Love her if you agree she is there.”

Do we see God’s wisdom in hiding her? For if the many that are called and not chosen receive knowledge of her, they also will have access to the *tree of life (*Gen. 2:9, Rev. 22:2) [Pro. 3:18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her:] Realize what is happening here: those who will not see a her, that they might love a her, and exalt a her, (for wisdom is incontrovertibly a female, and a person), the same will die for want of the tree of life. If you read the words “tree of life”, (and we know it is in the new city of Jerusalem, which bears twelve kinds of fruit every month Rev. 22:2), it seems to say without the fruit of that tree of life, we die. Should we realize God has connected continuance of life to a tree, and access to that tree a privilege contingent on knowing and honoring our mother?

As I am not perfect, nor has the Holy Spirit been given to me that I speak tongues, or cast out demons: what if I am wrong concerning the Holy Spirit, who is a he, and appears as a male being (Gen. 18:2), and wisdom of Proverbs is not this person, nor if there is a queen of heaven, is it the Holy Spirit, and therefore this a misleading concept? God forbid and I would not disseminate a lie, nor blasphemy (especially that which cannot be forgiven). I read recently about a preacher whose son came near to death and was able to recount what he saw in heaven (Burpo), which witness I believed, though not a scriptural source. When asked to describe the Holy Spirit, he said, “That is a tough one. He appears sort of blue.” But he says “he”. That would mean in heaven as well he appears male, and how can this then be the queen of heaven? I show reason to say I could be wrong, and if people desire to believe something they can impose all kinds of things on God’s word, but consider the following startling and incomprehensible multi-personage of God. We know God is three persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and we also know God is omni-present, as in the Holy Spirit living and working in all the saints, and Jesus says Split a piece of wood and I am there. Lift up a stone and you will find me there, therefore we learn the incredible and incomprehensible truth that God exists in differing places, even everywhere at once. But consider if God cannot also appear as different persons simultaneously. That boy who says he went to heaven and saw God also said he saw Jesus, even describing the marks on his hands and feet from the crucifixion, he wore a purple sash, and had the most beautiful eyes, but he also said to those facing death, not to worry because Jesus is the first person you will see. Because thousands of people die every day we know then that somehow Jesus must exist as a visible person to many people at once as they depart the flesh, therefore he has a simultaneous visible personage. This is confusing from a scientific standpoint (as I agree there is a scientific explanation for everything), for what is it? some kind of computer that can put out copies of a person who are linked and update instantly? The computer analogy is crude and I do not mean to call God a “copy” or program, since we have no idea what is really happening and we must respect the holy, but for our limited understanding we might realize however this is done, God who is the same today, yesterday and forever can appear in different places simultaneously.

Now extend this understanding to the Holy Spirit, and consider if he not only appears simultaneously, but simultaneously as male and female. Could it be in heaven there is a female appearing person who is God’s queen (Jer. 7,44), and a male appearing person who is the spirit, yet they are (ultimately) one person? Is that one person the physical, visible wife of the Lamb (I mean a woman)? Consider this scripture: [Rev. 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come.] Is that what this is telling us, the spirit, he, and the bride, she, are one? Is this the queen, the daughter dressed in gold, who is God most mighty? (Psalms 45)

To better understand the mother we might look at some information regarding her daughter, of whom there seems to be more information. You reading this for the first time might be offended I am telling you the spirit, and therefore God, has a daughter, which thing you believe is not scriptural; but in fact your eyes have not been opened, as mine were not until recently. I first discovered it in Isaiah 54, which while she is obscured and arguably non-existent in those verses (the daughter of Jerusalem being only a femininemetaphor), once you realize it is a person also (in addition to a physical city, land, and people), you will find confirming correlation throughout scripture. One of the most dramatic of these is the Psalms 45 prophesy, which I debated in myself if this was divided between speaking of the prince or king, and the princess or daughter, but I decided all of Psalms 45 regards the daughter, the princess of the Jews, and the human wife of the Lamb.

Observe these excerpts from Psalms 45, which I believe prophesies God the woman. [Psalm 45: touching the king; art fairer; most mighty; therefore God, thy God hath anointed thee; the queen in gold of O’phir; Harken, O daughter; so shall the king greatly desire thy beauty; The king’s daughter; her clothing is of wrought gold; the virgins her companions; thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth; the people praise thee forever]. This is the daughter of God. The “king” here is God the Father, and the daughter is the daughter of God: the human manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Her mother then is the mother in [Song of Solomon 6:9 “she is the only one of her mother”], which might correlate to Jesus being the only begotten son of the Father.

[Romans 8:27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.]; and [John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.]; If I am saying here the spirit is actually a “she” that is in direct contradiction to scripture, and so am I refuting God’s word? No, listen carefully, for I do not say that God’s message to us is beyond God’s power to include or exclude a single word apart from his perfect will. Therefore if it says “he” in regard to the Holy Spirit it is no mistake, error, misinterpretation, or flaw of man thwarting the will of God. We have received God’s word being perfect toward us, that we might not distrust His word in all matters regarding the faith, for if we could not trust the word of God, then one might have excuse before the judgment.

Before I discuss the supposed contradiction I am going to refer to one more important scripture I believe describes the male gender of the person of the holy ghost. [Genesis 18:2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,] In the context of this verse, it is clear that three men represent God, for he bows himself down to them, calling them “My Lord”, for he knew they were God. These three men could only have been the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and notice it does not say two men and one woman. If one of them were female this would have been too important a detail to exclude from God’s word, and God’s word would contain a lie. Therefore we know it was three men.

To be clear, I do not profess to know this mystery, but consider the following. There is evidence in scripture to indicate the divide of male and female is more relevant to the earth than heaven, though we know there are male and female identities described in heaven. We might look to this scripture as evidence of this: [Mark 12:26 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.] Consider also that the sum of God’s word is: there was a different type of being that was God and the gods before, and the purpose for the foundation of the world and the earth is to make a new dwelling place for God and his people. [Revelation 21:3 Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.] Notice it says “with men” as though that thing had not been before, and it follows that God shall be a man among them. Was not Jesus God, and was he not a man? But we know the stumbling block of personal divinity, for if Judas Iscariot had known Jesus, this man of flesh and blood, who had feelings like a man, and yes, an ego of a man, was also God, would he have betrayed him? I predict at Jesus’ return will the false stumble again at his humanity, unable to accept that this man is holy God. How much the more will they stumble at the spirit, who precedes him in the dawn?

[Genesis 1:27 male and female created he them] We know that God created man in his image, and we know [Gen. 1:26 Let us make man in our image] that God is written as being both “he” and “us” (the same as Gen 18:2, where the three men are referred to as “My Lord”, which is singular in reference to three persons), but the point I make is that Genesis 1:27 might indicate an emphasis that the divide of male and female is more relevant to man, than the form before the advent of man.

The other possibility I considered is that the person of the Holy Spirit living and working in all the saints is more accurately called a he because the spirit is God’s spirit, and God’s spirit is understood as being a father and therefore male. If “she” was used to describe God’s indwelling spirit it might not accurately reflect what it actually is. Additionally it might be the case that use of a female description of the spirit would cause confusion in the faith, because humans are not ready or able to understand certain elements of the gender divide; so we were given a male gender to describe the personal aspect of the holy spirit. Might man’s faith be hindered, if he looked at women and girls in the world, and considered that creation, the word, and same giving him his power are of this female image also? Or might it be simultaneously that men unable to accept the image whereby we fell, Eve, is also the form that gave us the scripture, and is the hand of God whereby creation itself came into being? “And should we look at little girls, and harlots, and nagging mothers, and see this? Nay, but let us write he instead of she, lest God be discredited.” And that a sin by the scribes, but taking place in God’s perfect plan? That idea might be supported by [Mat. 23:13 But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for you neither go in yourselves, neither suffer you them that are entering to go in.]

[Revelation 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women;] Notice this scripture cannot be accepted by the whole of scholars, theologians, clergy, or other married or non-virgin Christians as meaning what is says. They cannot accept that the firstfruits, the elect of God, are not only virgins, exactly as it says, not having had sexual intercourse with a woman ever, (what “virgin” means, and not some falsehood about chastity as it regards sin; and cannot mean after they are washed clean in the blood of the Lamb [Rev. 14:3,4 were redeemed from the earth; were not defiled]) but are one and all men; not one of the 144,000 are women. Oh the non-acceptance-of-fact answers you see from respected authorities with their doctorates in theology and many books! Their brains shut down from accepting “virgin” certainly means sex even once with a woman, and that if it says “with women” there cannot be women among them. Therefore in the question of why the Holy Spirit is a “he”, rather than the “she” of Proverbs, the answer might be because in the foundation women were not ready for that honor, (as part of the necessary foundation process?). Therefore it needs be the Holy Spirit be male, but perhaps in the age to come women will be able to complete the full image of divinity. Of the question of women in the foundation, notice the scarcity of women as holy prophets compared to men, and rulers of Israel there was but one (righteous), [Judges 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.] And according to the New Testament there was not one woman among Jesus’ apostles.

[Leviticus 27:3-4 And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if it be female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels.] The context is the offing of money in lieu of persons offered to God, the summation appearing that a woman is valued at three fifths of a man, roughly half the value. I say it is an error to read that any other way, than the hard truth that women are not as worthy as men, indeed being about half as worthy, and should people say men and women are equal and deserve equal everything, including respect among men? It seems to me however in the purpose of friendship that is love in the age to come, life everlasting, that a woman closer to a man in worthiness might make for a better friend. I have thought it might be the case that for the experience of the foundation women be proportionately lesser in spiritual attribute, (like forgiveness, long suffering, etc.) than they will be in the age to come. I have thought of the foundation of the world as the “experiences of perfection”, liken not only to lessons (like when God tells us not to eat something), but also experiences that cannot be defined as lessons, but rather “avenues of imperfection”, such as curiosity in souls for that which would subtract from harmony and happiness among the people in heaven (earth). For instance adultery, where people might have an understandable curiosity about relations with someone other than their man or woman God made them for, and such avenues of imperfection secured against might be experiences of failed marriages of various souls, the result being without actual memory of, perfected souls in heaven retain in an inner experience and thus are not drawn by these avenues, even as an inner curiosity. One might consider for such experiences to take place certain factors may be required which do not accurately reflect eternal reality.

I believe in eternity men shall be understood as being larger of spiritual attribute than women, but I speculate an even greater imbalance was required for the perfecting experiences of the foundation (or maybe the low end of imperfection looks so bad to me…). One experiencing marriage might appreciate the difficulty of the great divide, and scripture even refers to women as a “race”, but I say the successful also know Solomon and Shulamite in Song of Solomon represent God, the Son and the Daughter, even the King of kings and his queen, and we know God created man to dwell among, then we might conclude the entire purpose he made them male and female, was that he might [Zephaniah 3:17 rest in his love.] Will not the hypocrites balk if I say the purpose of the world is love between the man and the woman? And God made the world for no higher purpose that he might be in love with his woman, and his friends be in love with their men? But you with ears to hear and hearts to know, the divide which is hard is also what makes possible that feeling. It seems to me thatfeeling of love is the primary purpose of the world, of which all else is secondary. I like to say, The universe created fifteen billion years ago is built around the moment of love making between the man and the woman.

There is more on the mystery of the great divide and apparent imbalance, but I offer a radical theory: that because we know we are divided, though one be greater and one lesser, and one that is made from the other, and the other the source, and one that is stronger, and one weaker, and one that is follower, and one that rules, for God has made it so: but are half of the firstfruits [Rev 14:4] women? (Let he who has observed men understand). If they appear as they are not, and will appear holy at daybreak, then might also the spirit be among these? I say, if half the firstfruits of God be male flesh transformed into female flesh when entering heaven on earth, then might also the spirit in the world be once male and now female, according the plan of God? If that is the case, then we understand why the spirit is accurately called “he”. If the firstfruits who are women enter eternal life having lived in male flesh until then, then might the same be the case for the spirit?

I understand if this idea is troubling, even hateful to some as misogyny or blasphemy, (only men are elect, and the holy spirit a transsexual or bisexual), but compare logic and scripture. If we observe among men those who would be women, and women who would be men, (homosexual, bisexual, transsexual: and I am clear on God’s law regarding the lifestyle of, if not the underlying cause), we might find a purpose with God for this, and not assign wholly to the punishment of confusion (Variance Gal. 5:20), or the destructive influence of the enemy. Without a full explanation in the word of God we cannot but speculate, but we can phrase the question like this: If we know the dwelling place of God is among men, and Jesus was a man, and therefore shall take a wife, so there will be women, and God made man in His image, male and female made he them; and if “among men” certainly means human beings, which must include men with male members, it must be there is a woman for each man; And if so there be [Rev 14:1] an hundred and forty and four thousand who stand with the Lamb on Mount Zion, having His father’s name written in their foreheads: can it be the wives of these men are not among these, but are an additional hundred and forty and four thousand aside from these, who do not have God’s name written in their foreheads, and who do not follow the Lamb whithersoever he goes?

This is not to say there can be no other interpretation, but if we ask: If we are made in God’s image as male and female, and of the trinity of God we read the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: Where is our mother, if surely God tells us several times in his word (Proverbs 1:8, 6:20) we have a mother who is next to our father God? Why do we not read about our mother in heaven when there appears evidence in the scripture she exists; Or who is [Jer. 7:18 the queen of heaven], and who is the female person wisdom in Proverbs besides our mother? And why be a man in the world with a male member, male ego, and male desire, if there are no women, and then being divided beings we not honor women as holy, neither assign women in our minds critical to understanding and honoring God? Though one be greater and one lesser, if they be two that are one (the them of Gen. 1:27, and “created man”, therefore man includes male and female), can the lesser be so much lesser as to not have the name of God written in their forehead as their men, nor follow their men as they follow the Lamb whithersoever he goes? Notice the exclusivity of [Revelation 14:4 they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth], which appears to say only these hundred and forty four thousand follow Jesus wherever he goes.

Therefore I propose, the hundred and forty four thousand are half of them women, whoso upon receiving their lives will be made whole; (the outside made as the inside, the body as the soul). Let the zealous mock, but will he find a wedding garment? To clarify, am I really suggesting the outrageous and possibly blasphemous idea, that half of the 144,000 elect are sexual deviants, in the category of being gay, bisexual, or transsexual? Yes I am, but I make a distinction. I am clear that behavior outside what God’s word allows is wrong and punishable. God who is the same today as the day he gave his word to Moses in the law, clearly prohibits and makes wrong deviant behavior such as 1. sexual relations between two people of the same sex, 2. dressing in the attire of the opposite sex, and even 3. behaving like the opposite sex.

1. [Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.]

2. [Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.]

3. [1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (gay sex)]

Violators read those above scriptures to mean other than what they clearly mean: it is wrong to do, and belief on the name will not save for continuance. Be clear what I am saying because we know Jesus says I am not come to destroy the law (Mat. 5:17) and there could be no exception. Therefore if half the firstfruits are spiritually women, it must be that these have within them that which makes for deviant sexuality, but refrain (are virgins) from defiling themselves through enactment; the same as the other half which are truly male refrain themselves from women.

Clearly it is a radical departure from widely accepted doctrine since the establishment of Christianity, to say half the 144,000 elect are transsexual men, (women in male flesh), who are transformed when they receive their lives into female flesh, and the daughter of the spirit among these, but what other explanation? Summary: (Tabernacle(home dwelling) of God is among men, there cannot be men without women, of 144,000 with the name of God in their foreheads and who follow the Lamb: the women must be among these. [Mat. 19:6 What therefore hath God joined together, let not man put asunder.])

But consider the instruction of this amazing revelation: [Rev. 22.17 And the Spirit and bride say, Come.] My impression reading, is this is one person who contains two persons, a he and a she, who is a she we see! No really I think this is the case, and that when we see a woman we are looking at both a man and a woman who are a woman, or a woman who contains a male component to her being; in a way a man does not. There is a perspective gleaned that these women begin their life as men, but men not so beginning their life as women. Without scriptural backing I tend to think both men and women contain subconscious or essence-of-experience as both, but consider the exclusivity of women beginning their lives before entering the kingdom as male flesh. That itself might be meaningless if I am right about eternal souls containing experience of being things they are not in eternity, as beginning life in male flesh for these female souls was but one more such experience, but I am speaking to the symbolism perhaps, or what interesting fact is derived from this difference of entry into life eternal.

I am not unaware the proposed notion is offensive to women now reading, but could the fact be for these firstfruits (elect Jews) to be worthy of the kingdom, they needed this conscious memory of being male? Like from the movie My Fair Lady, the line “Why can’t a woman, be more like a man?” But the thought I have is women might need a conscious component to their experience, necessitated by awareness of the effect of women’s behavior on men. Such conscious relevance might be the experience of a man hurt by the dirty look of a woman, or jealousy, or favoritism, or failure of recognition the status of manhood. They become conscious eternal enemies of wrong feminine behavior, thus being perfect joy among men. Another thought is satisfaction, wherein the noticed feeling of victimization of being born a woman in a man’s world, is offset by not being what they are, yearning for it, and observing it with appreciation from the outside. Finally it might be a necessity of survival, wherein the risk of defilement was too great.

I can imagine Christians of every ilk in an uproar over this proposed transsexual identity of the half the elect and the even the Spirit, but maybe this is what wisdom means when she cries, [Pro. 1:22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity?] Is it too complex a notion, to think women are men in women’s flesh? Can the heavenly man accept that women contain a male spirit of sorts, and a female soul, which both reside in a female flesh? Or is it better to say, a character component or memory of life as man (and therefore a man) are part of woman forever, being they were boys and men to start their lives, and not girls or women? Are we looking at a boy in a woman’s body?

A lesson from scripture is the “either or” nature of life, and of these choices we learn people are servants of God or Satan, even to the extent those thinking they serve neither are in fact serving one or the other. We know this because if Satan can offer Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, the kingdoms of the world are his to offer, therefore to live but not for God means service to Satan’s kingdom, but are God and Satan not two men? What if as these ruling male entities, there are ruling female entities representing a choice, and recognition of this personal choice critical to an inevitable either or of life?

(Woman 1.) [Proverbs 3:16 Length of days is in her right hand;], [3:18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her:], [4:6 Forsake her not, and she shall preserve thee: love her, and she shall keep thee.] [3:10 Hear, O my son, and receive my sayings; and the years of thy life shall be many.], [3:13 Take fast hold of instruction; let her not go: keep her; for she is thy life.] [4:20 (Our Mother wisdom says:) My son, attend to my words...], [3:22 For they are life to those that find them, and health to all their flesh.] (either or), [8:14 Council is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength.], [8:17 I love them that love me;], [8:18 Riches and honor are with me;]

(Woman 2.) [Proverbs 2:16 ... the strange woman which flattereth with her words;] [2:17 Which forsake the guide of her youth, and forgetteth the covenant of her God.], [3:18 For her house inclineth unto death, and her paths unto the dead.], [3:19 None that go in unto her return again, neither take they hold the paths of life.], [5:3 For the lips of a strange woman drop as an honeycomb,], [5:4 her end is bitter as wormwood], [5:5 Her feet go down to death], [5:8 Remove thy way far from her, and come not nigh to the door of her house], [6:23 the commandment is a lamp], [6:24 to keep thee from the evil woman.], [6:25 Lust not after her beauty], [9:16 Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither:]

Could it be these are Jerusalem and Babylon? Consider if God has a purpose in a personal reference to something such as wisdom, or a city (the spirit of the people and the land?) [Ezekiel 16:2,34 ...Jerusalem, other women...], [Rev. 17:5 BABYLON THE GREAT, MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS] One might ask what is the necessary of reference to a person? Is it only an analogy for people to understand, and we should not become confused to ponder if these feminine names are persons also? Could it be the secret of life, whereby [Mat. 22:14 many are called but few are chosen], and those “few” recognize we choose one of two men, and one of two women (as our king and queen?)

When I talk about the daughter of God I say Judas Iscariot must have spent his entire time with this man of flesh and a male ego and never figured out it was God. Think if the religious zealots of Jesus’ day stumbled at the flesh of a man, how much more today the flesh of a woman, and if she is a hot babe with a child’s face? Think how those religious goons, those double-chinned hypocrites, theologians, pastors praised among men (but prideful, not little children), shall utterly deny her. These same chose iniquity (the world) rather than righteousness, because they have not bound the law of their mother to their hearts. For they say there is no law of their mother, (and no divine mother), that they might have truly known the law at all, but Jesus warns us, [Mat. 5:18 Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.]

Now I speak of the godly and I mean Christians and Jews, but consider if the religious authorities who saw the miracles Jesus did, (the blind see, the lame walk), but shouted the louder that Barabbas the murderous thief should go free and Jesus be hanged, how much more the same today might condemn the daughter of Jerusalem, the only one of her mother (Song. 6:9), who is the hand, the law, and the spirit?

[John 10:30 I and my Father are one.] It makes sense the mother and the daughter are likewise one. It may be the spirit as a human being will not be what people expect, even if she appears as someone’s teenage daughter, but know she stands upon her mother’s powers (Psalm 45:9) which are the same as killed the firstborn of Egypt, parted the Red Sea, killed four hundred thousand soldiers, lives in and chastens the saints, inspired the scripture, and the wisdom by which the earth itself was created. I always wondered why my mother inspired terror when she got mad at me, but consider if the Father is terrible, so is the daughter [Song. 6:10 terrible as an army with banners]. But the revelation of the daughter is relevant to the perception of women, for when it is established the angel of God and the life of the spirit is a woman, there might be a tad more thought of those people who wear pantyhose and lipstick, but could it be for man that after the pattern of his God, his wife is also his angel with power on her head? (1 Cor. 11:10) Perhaps this is why we associate angels with women.

[Rev. 16:17,18 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. 18 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come.] Is Jesus’ angel the daughter of Jerusalem, the daughter of Zion, which titles are both a person and a spirit who lives in the people, and is the land and the tabernacle of the government, (the Jewish persons of the government of the most high god)?

There is plenty room for confusion as this mystery is not revealed, but we can learn there is distinction in the meaning of I and my Father are one; there being two separate persons. Likewise the mother and daughter share meaning but are different people.

Consider if the woman of Revelation 12 with the crown of twelve stars is not also the Holy Spirit and wisdom (Mother). If she gives birth to Jesus, the [Rev. 12:5 man child, who was rule all nations], and [12:17 her seed (are) the saints which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ] this must be our mother. We are her children, and the glory of her crown (the stars) must be the twelve tribes of Israel [Mat. 11:19 wisdom is justified of all her children.] Why does Jesus say her children justify her? It is as though she has done something questionable, but the church she has hewn proves the necessity. [Pro. 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars] Could it be Jesus understood much of the pain and sorrow of the foundation is rightly accredited to the Holy Spirit, the hand of chastening required to graft her (wisdom) into the children of God; and the deliverer of the curse, the disease, which afflicted the whole world for Jews sake, and the wager of vengeance and war against their enemies? Even if the righteous love her and seek her, I imagine nothing dissolves the doubt in the heart of every saint lived through the horror of the foundation. Perhaps it is easy to say one forgives with complete understanding (we will be given), but when you think upon a person whose occupation includes dashing the flesh of children upon rocks, the crippling accident, and the withering disease, there is pause to say, What end?

[Pro. 31:2 What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows?] Is this our mother, (the most beautiful angel in heaven, [Song. 1:8 fairest among women] like daughter like mother), saying to us, What? Because we question her terror, but she says, My son, the son of my womb, the son of my vows (to our father God), to tell us there can be no greater and unfailing love, than that of a mother for the children of her womb. Think we have gone all this time not knowing her, not loving her, nor praising her, but she quietly glorifies her husband the king, and brings souls to her son, our Lord Jesus. For we have scarcely understood our father (I speak for myself), an invisible abstract notion we believe and fear, but do not see, nor know what he looks like, nor understand; and we have studied, praised, and worshipped her son, even the son of her womb, she gave him life, even our Lord Jesus, she gave him life, (not Mary), yet we have been taught we have no mother, nor divine mother, nor mother who is beside our father, and no high image of women in heaven. I have not known, nor understood, nor asked until now, if God made man in his image, is there no holy, nor divine, nor highest, nor authority, nor credit, the visage of a woman? Can we know anything, or become anything, or be gods with understanding rather than dogs, absent of knowledge our holy mother, and devoid a fulfillment of divine feminine in our lives? Think all this time, even since the very beginning or ever the earth was, she was there, a person, living, watching, feeling human feelings, our mother, yet we have not written, nor called, nor thanked, nor loved, nor honored, and I imagine perhaps, for so long, and so badly, she has wanted to be seen, she has wanted her own children to see her. Has she wanted so badly to say to us, “Here I am, my son and my daughter, here I am! Yes, I am your mother! I love you so much, but you do not know me, nor even of me, but I am even your mother! I care so much about you. I know every detail about you. I have raised you, swaddled you, fed you on my breasts, and dandled you on my knees. I have beat you and brought you low, and my hand took you from dark places, and I instructed you, but I could not reveal my face.”

Might then I say, “Oh Mother, Oh Mother! I’ve not understood, nor asked, nor seen you. Forgive me Mother, and show me your face. [Pro. 31:31 let her own works praise her in the gates.]

** If have not known God through His Son say this prayer: “God I repent of my sin, the wages for which are death. I accept the blood of your Son Jesus on the cross as everlasting payment instead, and invite you Jesus come and be the Lord of my life.” **

I had my second conversation with a pastor who said “we have no divine mother”, but I saw his pause as I showed him the scriptures of Proverbs 6:20 and 8:30,31, wherein I explained David cannot say “my commandments” and therefore this is God speaking, and if it says (1.)“father’s commandment” then (2.)“law of thy mother”, then “mother” must be a person also. [Proverbs 8:30,31 “I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him.”], and [“Rejoicing in the habitable parts of the earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.”] The pastor explained that the Proverbs 8:30,31 references that appear to be human are in fact a metaphor so that man will understand wisdom is like a person we should always keep close. I nodded and said that makes sense, but I said I do not see how you can say “delight”, “rejoicing” and “habitable parts of the earth”, if this not a person. The pastor’s reply was that “You should not read too much into it, because then you have to get into the question of whether we have a mother or not, and we know there is no divine mother. There is only the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.” He said there is doctrine going around about worship of the heavenly mother which we want to avoid. I was quick to answer that I had heard about that and was against it, for I believe worship is of the Father and Son only, not a mother or feminine image, or “Mother Mary”, or “Holy Virgin”, as some mistaken do. But I showed him the Jeremiah 7:18 scripture, which while condemning the worship of the queen of heaven, did seem to say there was in fact a queen of heaven. The pastor commented that the name “queen of heaven” was as much a false god as Baal or others, and pointed out that in that same verse it says “other gods”. Therefore “queen of heaven” is yet another false, non-existent god. I agreed with him it was a good argument and reiterated I was not in the camp of those who think we should worship anyone but the Father and the Son, or that I approve of “Goddess” or “Great Mother” (and such) worship whatsoever. The conversation ended there as we began church service, but I was clear on my logic we in fact do have a mother in heaven, and one we must bind on our hearts in order to fulfill the law (Pro. 6:21), as well as honor or else we fail to honor our father and mother as the law and fifth commandment requires (Exodus 20:12).

I wondered if the pastor might ever hear this startling revelation, or if no matter how long I talked with him about it he would never change his mind, even becoming irate and walking away from me. In the first conversation with a pastor on this subject I got the sense of a “wall”, though I did not attempt to breach it with midrash (Hebrew term: homiletic scriptural exegesis; I use it here: in-depth scriptural debate.) but the sense I got was a rigidity of certified concept, similar to what this current pastor demonstrated by disinterest “you have to get into the question of whether we have a mother”.

But I like to show reason by asking the question: could I be wrong, and could my underlying motives be against the Lord, (because one is an enemy who thinks they are a friend of God, but really they fret against truth and find all manner of excuses or distractions, errors or divisions), or just plain mistaken? Let me be clear, if the discussion of “mother” is either distraction, misleading, or unnecessary, I have no desire to spend time on it. I am in agreement that focus should be on the Jesus Christ and the teachings of scripture to save souls from hell; but if the truth we teach is not the whole truth, then it is flawed, which very flaw may turn souls away who visit the church, sensing something is wrong. (I myself sense something is wrong.) Take the instance there is in fact is no divine mother as I have found: let us then be prepared with scriptural argument to address this legitimate question of students, or means of distraction by the enemy.

The answer of the pastor did not surprise me. The doctrine of our mother who is wisdom and the law, and the mother next to our father, is contrary to most any church and its authorities I have heard, perhaps with the exception of those wicked who try to resurrect “Goddess” or “Great Mother”, even Christians or others approving incontrovertible conflict with the message of the scripture. It is important then to make the point the knowledge of our mother is not contrary to anything that is written, for because something might be (supposedly) absent from scripture, does not mean it does not exist. For instance, the scripture does not say “we have no divine mother in heaven”, and the scripture does not say “there is no queen of heaven beside the king”. Does Jesus, or Paul, or anyone say, (in any fashion or order) “There is no mother in heaven, nor divine mother, nor person called our mother, but there is only a father, the king, and there is no queen beside him, nor feminine ascribed personage of deity, but only the Son and the Spirit(a “he”) beside the Father in the only three persons of scriptural divinity.”? No, you will not find this statement against it in scripture (though it is indicated by “he”, “him” and Gen. 18:2 “three men”), but indication is not the same as statement against. Therefore in fact the door is left open to debate for an understanding which in my humble opinion is not optional to salvation.

The fact as I see it is, our mother is mentioned clearly in Proverbs 6:20, because as inconvenient as it may be, you cannot say [Pro. 6:20 “My son, keep your father’s commandment, And do not forsake the law of your mother.”] without realizing the “father” is incontrovertibly God, and “mother” must also be a person. And again, [Proverbs 4:4 “Keep my commandments, and live.] David cannot say “my commandments”, but if it was David speaking (to Solomon his son) and not God, he would have to say “God’s commandments”, lest he say the law comes from himself and not God. (The commandments are God’s, and are not possessed by anyone else that they might say “my commandments” but they must say either “the commandments” or “God’s commandments”.)

The same for Proverbs 8:30,31: if wisdom is only a way or knowledge, you cannot say it “rejoices” in the “habitable parts of the earth”, neither assign any teaching for the purpose of these person-specific details as a metaphor, because: Without any scripture saying these uses are metaphorical, combined with the fact there is a person “mother” beside God almighty, it does not make sense to say it is only a metaphor. Wisdom itself does not rejoice. Wisdom itself does not require “habitable parts of the earth”. Wisdom or knowledge itself does not have emotions such as delight, or delight with the sons of men. It would have to be a massive interpretation error, which would not conform with the required-of-faith *inerrancy of the scripture (*in meaning). Unless there is a meaningful error in the words themselves this must be a person, and once you make that single connection, you see it is clearly our mother, the spirit, and the queen of heaven beside the king, even if it is extremely perplexing that this has not been widely understood since the birth of Christianity.

I propose of this however, that Jesus was clearly aware of his mother in heaven, and honored her fulfilling the fifth commandment, as he was perfect in the law. I reason thus, that if he says [Luke 14:26 “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother...”], it means that Jesus Himself did not fulfill the law by honoring his worldly parents, for if a man honors that which he hates it is not honor. Jesus was perfect in his heart, and if he clearly said he hated his parents Joseph and Mary, it does not make sense that he would honor those worthy of hate. If he hated them they were dishonorable, for the honorable cannot be hated by the honorable, for honorable means they have achieved lawfulness and retained it, and any who keeps the law of God is an honorable man. Such cannot be hated by any except those who do not keep the law, for the unlawful in his shameful rebellion hates God and His law, for if he loved God he would also keep His commandments. Therefore the honorable are hated only by the dishonorable, but can one who is honorable bring honor to one who is dishonorable, say arguably for the purpose of fulfilling the law to honor our father and mother? This would be contrary to the teaching of the law, which makes clear [Proverbs 26:1,8 1. honor is not seemly for a fool, 8. As he that binds a stone in a sling, so is he that gives honor to a fool.] Therefore I say Lord Jesus did not honor his worldly father and mother, but because they were dishonorable did this excuse him from the required action of the whole law, for which not one jot or one tittle shall in any wise pass (Matt 5:18) until all prophesy be fulfilled, even kingdom come? No, reason yourself here, for God surely knew parents in this world would be unlawful and therefore fools, and God would not provide a law of no effect. Does it sound right to say, “Well, they are lawless dogs, therefore I am excused from the fifth commandment”? Consider that in all of the ten commandments there are only two of which contain positive actions, that is, telling you to do something, as oppose to not do something, and those are the fourth and fifth commandments: 4th Remember the sabbath, 5th Honor your father and your mother, and notice the total of three positive actions: 1. Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy. 2. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, and 3. Honor your father and your mother.

Consider then if fulfilling the ten commandments is required to be honorable and wise, (as oppose to dishonorable and foolish, and no interim state) and many would have parents that were unlawful fools, would one of only two commandments a person must do to *enter heaven be null and void? (*Notice rebels say the writings of Paul are contrary to Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:18, saying the law is void) No, but if you are disobedient in the first commandment of positive action, how shall you understand the second? Does not one unlawful act lead to another, of which Jesus said he who is guilty in one point of the law is guilty of all? Is there an order of obedience to the law, wherein obeying the first commandment means you are given to know and obey the second? Why does God make the first of His ten commandments, that you shall have no other gods before Him? Why not murder, or adultery, which would seem to be greater sins? As an example, notice it does not say, “Put God first in your life”. It just says to not put any other gods before Him. Could it be that if a man is true in his heart, he will not only hate his worldly father and mother, who are gods, (Psalm 82:6) but he shall also hate other gods to the extent he shall not serve them, thus in obedience against all manner of worldly pressure he can then be promoted to depart idolatry, the second commandment? And after he has been tempted in all manner, even unto death, then might his prayer in the name of God not be useless for his unbelief, (for he will then properly understand the law, and not be as the masses of ignorant rebel believers writing “G-d”, or thinking it has to do with flippant use.) This is why I believe our sister Wisdom tells us with her words: the beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord. For if you have not experienced the terror of God and known it was such, you will not fear Him that you should obey His commandments. Show me one favored to enter the straight and narrow gate, who says they have not been severely chastened with unspeakable horror to the weeping before God for forgiveness of their sin, knowing it was His hand upon them; and I will say there is a surprise in store. But when they fear, then they will obey, and not before, each rebel who despises God’s law, and then shall they be given to see our sister Wisdom, our kinswoman, when they shall hear her call, regard her hand, set on high her council, and take all her reproof to heart (Pro. 1:24,25). But what soul that has not know the terror of His hand can be promoted to the next step in repentance? This is why there be few that find it (Matt. 7:14), or shall rebel pastors continue to teach men unto their condemnation, they are safe because they call upon the name of the Lord? Have they rebelled against God to the extent they ignore the obvious: that unlawful dogs are like the seed not fallen on good ground, and the same God who put the name in their heart shall not put it back when it falls out for tribulation? Thus shall the scripture be fulfilled, that whosoever believes in Jesus Christ shall be saved (John 11:26).

But why if it is so important to understand our sister wisdom is a person is she obscured from accepted doctrine, and nowhere do we read “your mother in heaven” or “your divine mother”, or “holy mother”, nor is there teaching (it appears) of any obligation of the saved godly person, to do anything in regard to this feminine divine personage? There was plenty of scripture which foretold the messiah, the king, the savior Jesus, but were not the words foretelling his coming also obscured from men, and hidden from religious authorities, that when Christ did finally arrive on the scene they did not recognize him? Were not scriptures such as Isaiah 53 in plain sight to the same scribes and Pharisees who sought to kill him, and finally did? Did not those same respected authorities read the words whereby they should have known who they were condemning, and yet two thousand years later do they still deny the person of Jesus as God? Will also the Christians in the end times make the same mistake of Isaiah 54, and for the same reason? The same today as then, God has hidden from the proud, and wise in their own conceit, and revealed it unto the lowly, and the little children able to hear something new. Then as now, God will use the person as the stumbling block, and that which is fallen upon to grind to dust. But in order to hide something one must hide it in a different way for each era, lest the wicked by reason of what was hidden before discover what only the worthy hearts should see. For if the daughter was prophesied in the same way as the son, then might she have been widespread knowledge among the hypocrites of this time, the weak hearts which must be led also to the scripture. Even if I write it clearly here, or declare it in the churches, the accepted authorities will reject it, and say, “No, there is no mother.” But the poor and afflicted, the dumb and the invalid, and the person of no regard, will see her, and honor her, and love her face.

But the pastor, the loved and respected, confirmed in the doctrine by worldly certificate, surrounded by friends, (for they are loved by each other, the acceptable friends of the world), who one and all worship the name of Jesus Christ, and pray earnestly, who also receive miracles, even miracles from God, visitations, and words from God, even God; Shall say No, and No, there is no divine mother, nor do we have a mother, but only a father, for this is what the bible says. And they will say, See this one, who talks about a “queen of heaven”, and a “mother” beside the father, and an image of feminine divinity, to lead souls astray from the Lord, for we Christians know, all we need is the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved, and certainly we do not need some false, non-scriptural “sister”, or “mother”, or “Goddess”, to revert to ancient ways and false religions, such as were before the holy father was revealed through his word to the Jews.

To which I answer, Alrighty then, you go on as you go on, and I will go on as I will go on, but one of us might be fretting against His word all the while; And one of us might be acceptable, for he obeyed God’s commands. And I say we both of us Christians, who take hope in the blood of Jesus Christ, shall stand before him, even the person of God, and he shall judge between us which son was obedient, for if when the affliction came, and the calamity, and the rending of the heart, the loss, terror, pain, and most bitter anguish of the soul: there was one who heard me, and did see my hand, and turned; and there was one simple who heard me not, neither saw rebuke that he might turn from his ways. For surely my instruction does speak, and as surely my wisdom has a voice, (or I would not say she cries from the high places), and if you were obedient to my commandments: You would have heard her, and seen her, and you would know her work, and love her voice, for she saved you, even my hand, from the path of destruction, though now you were made sorrowful. The obedient son is rewarded for his obedience, for first is obedience, then all things after, and when you have not rebelled against my chastening, but rent your heart before me, then I might promote you (notice I paraphrase), and lo, I have given it to your sister. And if you will not honor her, neither embrace her, much less love her, can she very well promote you, making known her words, by *pouring out her spirit, that you remain not a fool? (*Pro. 1:23) For the want of wisdom a man is a fool. It is either or, wise or fool.

Shall a fool enter the kingdom of God, and how can one be wise and not know his sister wisdom? How can we: *search for her, get her, love her, exalt her, embrace her, keep her law, and not forsake her, as God clearly instructs us, when we refuse her person? Can a soul be saved, if he says Jesus is only a metaphor, a way but not a person? Do not be afraid of what your family, church, or entire Christian world thinks if you find this. Fear God His word, and your own eternal soul. In all your getting, wisdom is the principal thing (Understand wisdom is both a person and a thing.) [*Pro. 3:13 Happy is the man that finds wisdom.] Rejoice, the misery and darkness of foolishness is near an end for you. And when you bring your honor to the house of God, do not forget your sister. [Pro. 7:4 “You are my sister.”]

Through obedience my eyes are opened to her, our sister wisdom, by which knowledge and person created God the earth, and is also his right hand, and the Holy Spirit. Now my understanding is little at best, and doubt and confusion are injected by the question of gender and the lack of clear identity in the scripture; but if I hold to the facts of scripture now revealed, I know we have a mother who is beside the father, and that the law is associated with her, and is the light of the lamp (instruction of the law), the hand, wisdom, and a person with feelings, even delight and anger, as is clearly written, and a female person we will see with our eyes (the daughter of Jerusalem, “tower of the flock”, and first ruler of the kingdom Micah 4:8). In fact while we live by faith and not sight, I think it is necessary we acknowledge (honor) a female person of God, while retaining understanding: prayer nor worship is to the Holy Spirit, but the Father and the Son (the King of heaven and His son the Prince of Peace, Jesus). Now observe these scriptures which outline the necessity of the way of life, for I say by them a man shall live or die in the land which the Lord God gives to him.

[Proverbs 2:28 Then shall they call upon me] Nowhere have I found in scripture is the teaching to worship or pray to the holy ghost, (though from all I have missed...). But, if it is true that wisdom is the Holy Spirit, this verse may indicate that prayer to the Holy Spirit is correct. For if we read [Pro. 1:28 “Then shall they call upon me”], it means it was right to call upon her, and calling upon her (God) is prayer. Can we say, “Holy Spirit of God, give to me your wisdom, and lift me from my trouble” and it not be prayer to God? Pro. 1:28 continues, [“but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me.”] This indicates God not answering a prayer, and a seeking of God but not finding. So then am I wrong in my above writing, that worship is to the Father and Son only? If the Holy spirit is indeed divinity, then is praise and worship correct, along with calling upon her? But notice if Jesus teaches the apostles how to pray saying, “Father who art in heaven...” and this does not include himself or the Holy Spirit, but only the father, God Almighty who sits on the throne, the indication is that prayer is not to the Holy Spirit. So then taking the instance that the Proverbs 1:28 calling on her is not prayer, then what is it? For wisdom says, [Pro. 1:24 “Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;”] We might take from this, that calling upon the person of the Holy Spirit, Wisdom, is not prayer, and not worship, yet calling out to her appears a correct action. Consider these words are prophetic (Pro. 1:26-28), describing a time where people who must have at least known about her, and refused her, now in their calamity call upon her, and now in their distress seek her diligently, but the time for that correct choice has passed. I take this important meaning to be, that the Holy Spirit is ever consciously working in our lives, teaching us with rebukes of instruction, but what happens is that because we have stiff necks and hard stony hearts, we do not recognize the pain as rebuke, yet it is clear we are responsible as though we knew and refused, that is, rebelled. I believe those rebukes are painful things that happen to us, be it accident, loss, affliction, distress, etcetera, and these are signs in which if our hearts were listening we would both know a person has rebuked us, (wisdom, the Holy Spirit), and that the pain of that incident was both a punishment, a warning, and a message for us to turn from the sin we were committing.

It probably seems unfair to us for two things: first, how can we know it is God rebuking us, from simple accident or chance, or perhaps the enemy coming against us for good we are doing? Second, it might seem unfair because if you do realize it was punishment, the harshness of it might seem cruel (unfair), especially if there did not appear to be any warning, but this I think is the difference between those successfully walking the straight and narrow path, and the failed who fall by the way. If God is a god of providence, that is having full intimate control over all aspects of our lives, and whereas in our thinking it seems unlikely, with God there is no fatigue, or lack of energy to put into every detail of control of events, then really when calamity comes, even if it is fully from the enemy, God has allowed it to happen to us. Secondly, God is perfect and perfect in righteousness, therefore there is no unfair rebuke, and no punishment more than was perfectly righteous if not lenient toward you, neither was their pain or sorrow beyond what was necessary. Therefore the attitude of the successful is recognition of God’s hand, realizing the rebuke and contemplation of one’s ways, turning from that sin revealed, and thanking God who has chastened you, a beloved son or daughter. But the failure of the failed is turning away from the rebuke: [Pro. 1:32 “For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, And the complacency of fools will destroy them.”] So when the horrible car accident, or the grievous quarrel with the wife, or the heart rending loss comes, the simple say in effect, “It was the sin of others” but the wise say, “What sin of mine?”

But a question might be, if the failed (fools refusing her rebuke) call upon her (wisdom) in the hour of terror as they near destruction (Pro. 1:27), and the calling upon “me” is the female person of wisdom, then were these same responsible as knowing a female person of God named wisdom, had been calling upon them, and they knew about her and chose to ignore her? Therefore she is not some cruel person laughing at the terror and anguish of death, but righteous God satisfied with justice? (Imagine if you were sent by the Father to warn people from their sin which leads to death, and they would not hear you: you would be righteously angry at that soul.) If an acknowledgement of a person is key to receiving rebuke and responding appropriately, is the knowing that person is a she, critical to that acknowledge-ment, or implicit of it? I think we can know a chastening is from God and repent without knowing the person of the hand, (wisdom, our sister) was directly responsible, but I think along the path of the living who do this, God will pour out her spirit on us, (Pro. 1:23) that we know her, and know her words. In other words, for obedience we are promoted to awareness of her person, and therewith we might seek, acknowledge, embrace, honor, and love her, the person of wisdom, that we might through a personal relationship come into life by full departure from foolishness. [John 6:63 “It is the Spirit who gives life;”]

Notice the process: obedience to the law of our mother (the law is the ten commandments), leads to the next step required of promotion: exalting her, because if a person has not departed from lawlessness, they remain foolish, and by disobedience (not fulfilling the entire law of the ten commandments, not breaking even one of them), they cannot be made wise through knowledge of her. This is why she is hidden from them. It was hidden from me all these years, of the same intelligence I possess now. For many years I read those words in Proverbs which clearly speak of a divine female figure named wisdom, who is our divine mother and the queen of heaven (Jer. 7 and 44) and the Holy Spirit, even the same called “he” correctly in scripture: the only explanation being that the Holy Spirit is both male and female, or truly bisexual, but ultimately female in the new heaven on earth, her daughter, see Princess of the Jews. I had not departed from disobedience, therefore she was hidden from me. My mind did not ask the question: Who is this female person clearly described, and without a logical denial it is a person (proverbs 8)? And I did not say to myself in previous years reading the bible, “Who is this female person?” Nor did I say to myself, “Wait a minute! Can David, Solomon’s father, correctly say ‘my commandments’ (Pro. 2:1, 3:1)?!” (Therefore this can only be God speaking, and if it is God our father in heaven, and he says Pro. 6:20 “My son, keep your father’s commandments, And do not forsake the law of your mother.”, there is no doubt, no question, no refuting, no other explanation, no excuse, and no denial that holds water whatsoever, nor will hold up in the courtroom of God, that we indeed have a mother in heaven, who is clearly a female person, clearly our mother, and must be queen if God is a king. Therefore this is the queen of heaven, as written in Jeremiah 7 and 44, and this must be the Holy Spirit, and cannot be anyone else because: We know that God is three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This is the holy trinity of God, each of these distinct persons being also God. Therefore it does not make sense, that the mother beside the father, our mother who is also wisdom, instruction, justice (enforcement of the law), judgment (trial and prosecution), and equity (distribution of substance) (Proverbs 1:2,3), would be outside this trinity, when we know the image of God is both male and female (Gen. 1:27). Therefore it no longer makes sense to say the three persons of God do not contain a female person, when we know there is a mother beside the father (Pro. 2:1, 3:1, 6:20), and her work described in Proverbs matches the work described of the Holy Spirit, which in the New Testament we read, John 14:26 “He will teach you all things”, John 16:8 “He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”, 2nd Peter 1:21 “prophesy...holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”, 2 Cor. 3:6 “the Spirit gives life.”

I know someone reading might be dismayed thinking if they did accept this their previous understanding was all wrong, and those with doctorates or other forms of certification doubting their validity as pastors, but notice if a truth newly found does not contradict truths previously understood of God, then there is no need to be dismayed. Ask yourself, does the knowledge of our Holy Spirit being a woman make void any the teachings of women in the bible, or any other teachings for that matter? For as I have looked I have found nothing contrary whatsoever, rather praise to God: a great and joyous revelation is given to us. Indeed, happy is the man who finds wisdom. Save for the understanding of the law to honor our father and mother, there is no change to the teachings and understandings of scripture, but rather a new thing is added, or does God tell us everything in the scripture? Certainly he does not, and what then should we not expect new things revealed to those worthy to find them?

But when I first realized this and started to address it in my prayer, I did indeed feel awkward, wondering if I was venturing out on some vain or Satanic fringe, or being mistaken about that which cannot be blasphemed and think to receive the forgiveness of Jesus. When I prayed, of course I prayed for understanding, that God should make me to understand if I was right, and I should thank the third person of the divine trinity, calling her my sister, as is commanded. [Proverbs 7:4 Say to wisdom, “You are my sister;”] This brings me to the question why do we call wisdom our sister, and not our mother? Here is the relevance of the world, for if we understand that God is making for us a life in the world, and all things are made by Him, for Him, and he shall be a man in the world among men, consider what we know about men, and the life of men in the world. Shall we not consider the glory of God important to the new heaven in the world, and the understanding of the things of God? So then, when you see one not born of a woman (you should be able to tell be looking), know that one is your father, but ask yourself this: would he want to be addressed as “Father”? In fact he will be the prince, and His father is the true father, for the father brought forth a son that God might live in the world as a man. Therefore we see the Son Jesus and understand it is the Father in a sense, it is the Father as a man, but I see that though indeed He is God among us His desire is not that we call him Father, as though he is our parent, rather he wants us to call him a friend, if even we say Lord. For a man’s glory among men is not perfect that the people think of him as a parent, or call him by such, rather that they think of him as a fellow man [Rev. 21:3 among men]. Consider that the whole of man’s life is glory, and the whole of his glory is in his distinction as a man. That whole glory then would be non-existent if there was not that which he was distinct from, so you see, the glory of God and the glory men is not separate from the glory of women. And what is the glory of distinction for a man among women? It is that women are not men, and possess not the glory of man, but that which is particular to women. Therefore the whole purpose of God’s glory in the world is contained in the sight of women, even when they see Him with their eyes, and hear Him with their ears, even a woman’s eyes, and a woman’s ears. Is it too simplistic or farfetched to say, a man’s glory is to be seen, and heard, and thought of by women? I say let every woman understand her importance to the whole purpose of the world, which is that God be glorified in the sight of women. Let women understand their witness of Him is required, or Adam should not have come into being. Are we really going entrust the glory of God to the judgment of women, even that he be judged by women daily? It is a little late to back out now, so be sure the hearts are true and the minds clear, lest in His fury He dump us all into hell. There men, is another reason not to stumble in the problem of pissing off your wife, lest in her slight dissatisfaction she round the corner and judge Him accordingly.

Now apply the relevance of the world to the understanding of our holy sister wisdom, the third person of God, the Holy Spirit, who is the hand, the right hand, instruction, wisdom, and bearer of the law. In the question of objection I know will come: how can we also think of the Holy Spirit clearly and correctly called a “he” in scripture, be in fact a woman and the mother beside the father, even our mother, and furthermore how is it we call her our sister and not mother? Here is where it pays not to be simple, and to be righteous according to the law, for the wicked flee when no man pursues (God will condemn us if we go against the church, and follow the scripture), but the righteous are bold as a lion, (I will honor my mother who is surely God also, that my days may be prolonged, and that it go well with me, in the land my God has given to me). For if our Holy Spirit the mighty hand of God, guided by the stretched out arm, the Son, did bring us out of bondage from the land of Egypt, thus signifying our mother and father have broken the bondage of captivity to sin and death, (slavery and labor in pain), then we know it is our mother and father who give us rest in the land. (Deut. 5:15,16) For by honoring the seventh day we honor our Father and Mother, our prince and princess, who gave us rest in the land.

If God has created Himself in the image of male and female, then shall you continue man of God, not honoring your Father and Mother by honoring the seventh day, and resting that day as it is commanded? If you have not seen the hand, how shall you see the arm, and will you then be gathered into the armies that shall fight against Him the latter days? For if you were not righteous in the sabbath should you stumble at the flesh of God, not believing for widespread disobedience among the believers, being dumb dogs following after the blind. But he who feared trembling at His word was given the heart of a lion, and wrath poured upon him near to death he turned at the hand upon him; for which she made her words known unto him. And when he knew her words he knew her, and feared, understanding at last the fulfillment of divinity in the image of a woman.

If you have understood that God must appear as a woman, then our experience in the world is relevant to understanding God. Now when I read she wants to tell us, and it is perfect with God’s perfect word that she tell us, “my delights were with the sons of men”, do I understand why God makes clear: call wisdom your sister, your kinswoman, for as a man’s glory is made perfect in the beholding of women, so is a woman’s glory is fulfilled in the eyes of men. Tell me, is it not a woman’s glory to be judged by men daily? The same as our Lord then, she does not wish to be thought of as a parent, or called by such, but she wants to be our friend, and a woman among women, our sister, even if she is the princess, the only royal heiress. [See (Jeremiah 6:2-27), (2 Kings 19:21-35), (Isaiah 54), (Micah 4:6, 5:1), (Zephaniah 3:14-20), (Psalms 45), (Revelation (19:7,8), (21:2,3-9), (22:17), (12:1-6), (12:13-17)), (Lamentations), (Proverbs), (Song of Solomon), (Ezekiel 16,19)]

A question that arises is, if we consider the princess of the Jews is the life of the mother, and the Holy Spirit in the world, the same way the Son is the life of the father, God Almighty in the world, and it is a woman that we shall see with our eyes; is she then the daughter of the Father and Mother, and if so the 1. sister of her 2. husband to be, Jesus Christ? (1. Isaiah 54:5 thy maker is they husband; 2. Song 4:9 my sister, my spouse) But the law is clear, [Leviticus 18:6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.]

[Lev 18:9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.] I do not imply a contradiction, but rather seek understanding, and this is God rather than man, for which the same might not apply, but there is further reference in Genesis for sibling betrothal, [Gen 20:12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. (Sarah and Abraham)] Now this might have meant they share only one parent, but this scripture [Psalms 45:13 The king’s daughter is all glorious within: her clothing is of wrought gold.] indicates she is the daughter of God, for the “king” here seems to be the Father, not the Son, for in Psalm 45 it appears “king” is used for both the Father God, and the Son God, for it is Jesus who desires her beauty: [Psalms 45:11 So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty.] Notice again the multi-existential quality of the daughter of God, as a person, a people, (the spirit in the people?), a city, a land (hill-temple?), Zion. Unless this means she is Jesus’ daughter, which would be even more scandalous from a human perspective, but again I do not judge, rather I seek to understand.

We know there is a form of birth for the type of being that God is, for He informs us the messiah is His only begotten son (John 3:16), therefore we know the rest of the gods (human beings) are creations, and while semantic I would notice God’s word does not say “only begotten”, it says “only begotten son”, leaving the possibility of a daughter of the royal family. But scandalous or exceptional of His law regarding humanity, the fact is it appears there would be a royal heiress, or else the Son of God who must marry would marry a woman who was not at the time, or called as at the time, of royal status, such as a princess. [Rev. 19:7 the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife hath made herself ready.] As I observe Psalm 45, it appears to say God the Father is telling His daughter, 10 “Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline your ear;” for His son our Lord Jesus the Christ shall 13 “greatly desire your beauty”. One cannot consider God’s full teaching here without keeping in mind He is also speaking of the New Jerusalem on earth, the one with streets of transparent gold, as well as the saints, [Isaiah 54:17 this is the heritage of the servants of the LORD], whose spirit it appears is also the human wife of the Lamb.

I can imagine the indignant faces of those with their various seminary certifications in an uproar of vehement contempt, being that such a revelation might discredit the authority of their learnedness whereby they enter pastoral or other roles of authority, but how many of them have minds to think the law of the sabbath passed one jot or one tittle from Mount Sinai until now? Will the same hear, there is a woman who will come, even a woman, and that woman is God? For if you look at this the scripture of Psalm 45:6 and 7, and realize it would not make sense for God to confuse the Son and the Daughter in this chapter. [Psalm 45:6 Your throne, O God, is forever and ever:] But how do we know this is talking about a person besides the king? [Psalm 45:1 “I (God) speak of the things which I have made touching the king:”] It cannot be the person of the king being addressed in this chapter, because if it is “touching” the king, it is not the king. And how do we know it is a woman, not a man, and not the king, and not Jesus Christ or His father being addressed in this chapter of the bible? [Psalm 45:2 You are fairer than the children of men, 45:9 the queen in gold, 45:13 her clothing is of wrought gold 45:14 She shall be brought into the king; the virgins her companions]

The first thought I had reading this is that when it says, [45:6 “Your throne, O God,”] it must be the Lamb, and that this chapter switches from speaking to the Son [Psalm 45:6 “Your throne, O God,”], to the daughter, [45:10 “Hearken, O daughter,”], but if we know that God does not use words of frivolous value, and they are all profitable for reproof, correction, and instruction (2 Tim. 3:16), and God’s thoughts and teachings make sense and are clear in their logic (when they are revealed to us), therefore it does not make sense that this is switching back and forth from God the Father speaking to and about the Son, from speaking to and about the Daughter. The whole of Psalm 45 is talking about the Daughter of God, God the woman, heiress to the throne of God, beside her husband the King of kings, and Lord of Lords, the lion of the tribe of Judah. This is His lioness, His sister, His spouse.

It is arguable that Psalm 45:2 “fairer” does necessarily imply feminine beauty though it appears that way, but notice the matching prophesy in [Song of Solomon 1:8 “you fairest among women”] Notice throughout the bible, “beauty” was used in possible reference to the Son [Isaiah 53:2 there is no beauty that we should desire him.], but nowhere have I seen “fair” or “fairer” in the King James Version of the bible, as reference to a male. Therefore when in the next verse it says [Psalm 45:3 O most mighty], and talking about someone who does something for the king, not the king [Psalm 45:5 “Your arrows are sharp in heart of the king’s enemies;”], this means it is God the woman, and Her mother is the *Hand, the *right hand (*the reference to the Holy Spirit), teaches her terrible things (Psalm 45:4).

But another consideration in regard to the question of the princess being His sister is: is she created, as oppose to begotten as the Son? Ah, the awesome sci-fi scenario of falling in love with an android! (i.e. Bladerunner) The [Pro. 45:1 “... I have made”] might indicate the process whereby she is brought into being is different than how the Son of God came to be. In fact this may not counter the scripture [Psalms 45:13 The king’s daughter is all glorious within:] indicating it His (the Father’s) daughter, because we understand the important distinction that while Jesus is the only begotten son of God, the rest of the gods (us) are understood as being created. Yet we are also referred to as the sons and daughters of God in scripture. [2Cor. 6:18 And I will be a Father unto you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.] Therefore the daughter might in fact be created, though we do not understand one or the other that we might know the difference except as a concept. But we know God is a maker of robots, with names, numbers, and remote control.

Consider the sister correlation of the mother, our sister Wisdom. [Pro. 8:30 “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him:”] The “brought up with him” is like a sister. She was like a sister to God the Father. Consider the similarity of “only” in relation to the parent, between the Son Jesus, and the princess of the Jews. [John 1:14 “the only begotten of the father”], and [Song. 6:9 she is the only one of her mother] (Notice that Solomon and Shulamite are prophetic stand-ins for the Son and the princess of the Jews, and this is the primary purpose of the teaching of God in this book.) Song. 6:9 continues, “she is the choice one of her that bare her. The daughters saw her, and blessed her;” The “bare” might indicate a “begotten” type exclusivity of coming into being (the her that bare her being wisdom, Pro. 8:12 “I wisdom”). Yet the “choice one” and “The daughters” might indicate the same process of coming into being. It seems to me, these are holy matters which fearing God we must be very careful in our speech concerning, but on one point I am clear: there shall be no such thing as a simpleton who shall turn his ear from the instruction of his mother, and enter life also.

SHOULD WE ACKNOWLEDGE ANY FEMALE PERSONAGE AS DIVINITY, OR LET GOD REVEAL IT IN DUE SEASON?

I discussed my opinion I think rebellious hearts will not be given to know our Holy Spirit is our Mother, which really if you take that question and examine the book of Proverbs one finds it is the logical conclusion, but what before anyone knows anything for sure, and apart from any church or established theological authority, should I do concerning this revelation? Should I wait for God, who can surely deliver any message to anyone, at any time, to then make known to me what is right? But we walk by faith, not sight, and is there even a required leap here? The question to ask really, is can we enter the kingdom of God not acknowledging a female person of God? In other words, can a person say, even if the Holy Spirit is a she, [Pro. 1:23, I will pour out my spirit”]; and [Joel 2:28 “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh”] how can I blamed in the matter when the scripture describes the Holy Spirit as a “he”, [John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth]? This is a fair question, and I can certainly imagine a man of God saying he need not follow after obscure doctrine which might be confusion from the more weighty matters of salvation? (Being one has understood God has given no man guarantee he won’t be cast into hell until he has judged him. - Matt. 7:21,22, and are not iniquitous dogs who misconstrue the writings of Paul to mean that the law is not effectual every jot and tittle until the very last of prophesy be fulfilled (Matt 5:18), and teach also “you can know for sure you are saved”, and thus do whatever they want like the godless and enter heaven even so because just having the name of salvation is the same as the keeping of the whole law. But does the daughter of Jerusalem shake her head and laugh at you?)

IS IT CORRECT TO DISAVOW THE CONCEPT OF FEMININE DIVINITY? LET US BE PREPARED TO ANSWER

But why not say, I will just play it safe and say “Holy Spirit” in my prayer, and not something unconfirmed like “Mother” or “Sister”? Would God really shut me out of heaven, or better put, would I be found wanting in the judgment, for not calling the Spirit “my sister”, or “my kinswoman”, honoring a divine feminine, when Jesus nor anyone else in the bible said to do so, and we know that the fifth commandment means honoring one’s earthly mother and father? (Eph. 6:1,2)

Let us for argument’s sake take that position as correct; which is to say we will not acknowledge nor honor a heavenly mother beside the Father, nor ascribe there a female person of divinity, neither refer to nor regard as female, or our mother, the Holy Spirit, because nowhere is the Holy Spirit referred to as female in the scripture, but is he is referred to as a male. (Romans 8:27, John 16:13)

So with that being correct we should be prepared to answer souls seeking salvation, because whether they have a genuine, non-rebellious question in regard to this, or perhaps they are well versed scholars of subversion (their hearts love their true father, the devil), we as keepers of the faith ought to be prepared in the answer to this legitimate question in either case. For I say that, whether they be blind followers, or blind leaders, the scripturally blind cannot enter life, so if one bold approaches and asks this unusual question, it means they have thought for themselves concerning the word of God, and at least asked the question of something not understood. That one has potential to find the straight gate and narrow way, (Matt. 7:14 “straight” means not curving, not changing, and “narrow” means it is limited in worldly activity.) Because the of the either / or of life (heaven or hell, right or wrong, saved or unsaved, blameless or guilty), we know that the cowardly, nor the soul who will not think for themselves concerning the words, can withstand the face of Christ in the accounting of his flesh.

If we are not prepared as teachers for the question of feminine divinity, then the soul that reads the words of wisdom in Proverbs, and who then asks the question, being dissatisfied without a clear and logical answer, may conclude the truth is not in us, that we not teach it at our church. As an example, a soul who is a seeker, and asker of questions, might think that because the “heavenly mother” or supposed true feminine identity of the Spirit is not revealed to them, those teachers are in fact blind and ignorant by rebellion, because they have chosen this life rather than the next. That seeker, that soul brave enough to ask, might then be turned away from our church, whereas they might have been a bold and thinking contributor. Further if we thinking to enter heaven and thus made appropriate effort to read and understand God’s word, do not pass over or subvert the inescapable conclusion: salvation is in the keeping of God’s commandments, or else a contradiction in the summery of scripture: [Revelation 12:17, 14:12 “her seed which keep the commandments of God”, and “the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God,”] Then if someone comes to us and says, “Pastor, can you teach me where then the law to remember sabbath was changed from being the seventh day (Saturday), to the first day (Sunday), as such a change in the law we are required to keep should not be an unsure matter?”, we should not give some hazy answer that leaves any doubt about the message of God, for God, or whether there is a God or salvation, or heaven or hell, or life eternal is uncertain, and hazy, (we cannot see nor understand them), but in the matter of our behavior or the whole of salvation whereby we are accounted to trust (even if one’s theology is belief alone and not keeping the law is required), is not hazy, nor unclear, lest in the judgment the least woman argue it was hard to understand the law, and a confusing change in it was not clear. A change in the law (despite what God says about it not changing - Matt. 5:18), would certainly have to be clear, not some unsure matter of faith, where because Jesus rose on a Sunday, or Jesus changed the law, or Christians departed from Jews by observing Sunday as the sabbath, as a sign of Christianity apart from Judaism. Therefore because most of the churches and pastors agree and do this, it is correct.

So then in the matter of shoring up against, and being prepared against, an upstart deviant, or true curious seeker, let us have answers ready for the following questions regarding proposed feminine divinity:

1. Is the book of Proverbs the word of God or not? Or, was it tragically misinterpreted from the Hebrew, to appear as though describing a feminine personage: “mother, sister, kinswoman, she, her”, but in fact there is no person, neither is there a feminine person? If there is not an unfortunate interpretation error or misunderstanding, and the “her” is a her, and the “sister” sister, and “kinswoman” could not be “kinswoman”, and there is no person involved, then these uses of feminine description can only be metaphoric. God must have a purpose for using the feminine personage lest we think God’s word contains frivolous information to make it sound better, or that man added his own words along the way, in addition to or replacing any word God intended for us to hear.

Therefore I ask, if there is no actual person God is teaching us about, can you give me a clear, logical, and hopefully scriptural explanation, as it regards the purpose of reproof, instruction, and teaching in the things of God, for each of these following quotes which sound like a person speaking:

[“my council, my reproof”; “I will laugh”; “Then shall they call upon me”; “But whoso hearkens unto me”; “I wisdom dwell with prudence”, “I love them that love me”, “I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;”, “Rejoicing in the habitable parts of the earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.”]

In particular, what is the teaching of [Proverbs 8:31 “Rejoicing in the habitable parts of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.”] that does not contain an actual person?

2. If we have no mother in heaven, and there is only a father, how then does the sacred, true, and holy word of God say: [Pro. 1:8 the instruction of your father; the law of your mother:], and [Pro. 6:20 keep your father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of your mother:], and the “father” in 6:20 can only be God, for no man can say “my commandments”, and mean the ten commandments, but must certainly say “the commandments” lest anyone think the law comes from himself? Then right after it clearly says “your mother”, and whose mother can I ask, is associated with God’s law to the extent it is correct to say the law is of her? Can you please explain to me clearly and scripturally, why this still means we have no mother, but only a father? Put another way, can you explain then why a switch from speaking of the person of God the Father, to a metaphorical mother?

3. Is the “father” of Proverbs 4:1 not Jesus Christ (he is our father), who is the “He” in Proverbs 4:4, who said, “Let your heart retain my words: keep my commandments and live.”? For again we know no man can say, “keep my commandments”, but a man who is not God must say “the commandments”, lest any think the commandments are given by him. So if we decide it cannot be Solomon talking to us about his father David, but it is a son talking about who must be the Father God who made the commandments, who else is that son besides Jesus Christ who died for our sins, since we know he is the only begotten son of God? How then if you can clearly see it is Jesus Christ saying, [Pro. 4:2 “For I was my father’s son, tender and only beloved in the sight of my mother.”], do you explain yet our Lord Jesus had no mother, and the use of “mother” here is metaphoric? Can you teach me why we switch from teaching about the person of God, the father, to a metaphor “mother”, because either way that is confusing?

4. If you might be willing to agree there is a slight, vague, very small chance there is beside the Father God, a mother, (excluding momentarily the question of divinity), would you not think it prudent to explore the question for yourself, if keeping the commandments means understanding the fifth command to honor your father and mother, might mean your heavenly father and mother, as well as your earthly? Can you show me a proving of a negative in scripture, (A statement against, saying, “there is no mother in heaven, and no divine mother, and the fifth commandment does not mean honoring the heavenly, but only the earthly), whereby you should not at least once in prayer to God, asked if we have a mother in heaven?

5. If the female person of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs is not God and the Holy Spirit, could you explain how that (Pro. 1:23) we are to turn at her reproof, and she will pour out her spirit unto us, and make her words known to us? (shoring up your position for me, that there is no female person of God) And can you please instruct me, Who is it besides God who can say, [Pro. 1:33 “But whoso hearkens unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from evil.”?] Is she some mighty angel not mentioned anywhere else in scripture? Or if you say this is God the Father now speaking, where do you see since [Pro. 1:20 Wisdom cries without; she utters her voice] does it clearly switch from her talking [Pro. 1:21 she utters her words saying,] to another person besides her speaking?

6. Now a question of worldly reference, being that man is made in the image of God. Do you know any woman, be it a sister, mother, daughter, or wife: to whom it is acceptable, you behave as though she does not exist?

7. In the question of why if it is true we have a mother in heaven, and she must be divine, is the trinity of God not: “The Father, The Mother, and the Son”, and nowhere do we read in scripture “honor your father and mother in heaven”, and the Holy Spirit is referred to as “he”; Could it be a possibility that this obscuring of our mother in heaven, and the obscuring of the true identity of the holy ghost, intentional with God so that only those demonstrating what it takes to overcome might receive the “making known” of her words, that they might fulfill the commandment and find the path (as oppose to not understanding), and taking it straight to the gate? Is that a possibility, and why not be a seeker to ask the question, because I think that as our sister wisdom, the book of Proverbs cannot be denied.

I think there is a profound teaching of manhood in the instruction concerning our sister wisdom. It seems to me the man who does not find a woman in the likeness of God shall also not find the likeness of manhood in himself, for when we honor the feminine as holy, and divine, the eternal mystery of the fullness of God makes known the way of life. I think each man who shall be successful to enter life shall understand the instruction regarding women, that he may also understand his manhood, and how shall he understand women, that he deny the identity of God? If a man looking upon a woman sees also the holy image of God, then might he understand his own flesh whereby he is responsible as a head, to care for properly his own female flesh, his wife which God gives to him? If then each man is a king, how wise his rule that he not count the appearance of femininity, the image of the divine, whereby he honors so it may be well with him, and his days be long in the land which his God gives to him?