Podcasts about Jabal

Hablamos con María Ángeles Nieto, portavoz de la Plataforma Ecologista Madrileña, sobre la publicación en el BOCAM del permiso para cazar jabalíes

On today's Quick Start podcast: NEWS: Nightclub Collapse in Santo Domingo – 44 dead and over 150 injured after a roof collapse at Jet Set nightclub; former MLB pitcher Octavio Dotel among the victims. New Theory on Mount Sinai – Scholars suggest Mount Sinai may be in Saudi Arabia, not Egypt, with growing support for Jabal al-Lawz as the true biblical site. FOCUS STORY: Phil Robertson is battling Hepatitis B, and his family is asking for prayer. While his diagnosis is serious, Phil says he's at peace. Meanwhile, daughter Sadie is expecting her second child and says the family is holding tightly to their faith. THE MAIN THING: Cassidy Carlisle, a senior varsity athlete in Maine, is speaking out after competing against a transgender athlete. Her story highlights the growing national debate over fairness in women's sports and the importance of protecting female athletic spaces. TODAY'S VERSE: Isaiah 40:29 – “He gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak.” SHOW LINKS JESUS AND THE PROPHECIES OF CHRISTMAS : https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jesus-and-the-prophecies-of-christmas/id1783607035 NEWSMAKERS POD: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/newsmakers/id1724061454 DC DEBRIEF POD: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/d-c-debrief/id1691121630 CBN News YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CBNnewsonline CBN News https://www2.cbn.com/news Faithwire https://www.faithwire.com

Espacio 'Una sola salud' con Manuel Bernardo 

Return of the Man-Child (3) (audio) David Eells – 3/19/25  Taking up where we left off, we read, And thou Bethlehem, land of Judah, Art in no wise least among the princes of Judah: For out of thee shall come forth a governor, Who shall be shepherd of my people Israel (Mat.2:6). We know that Jesus is always going to be the Shepherd; He's always going to be the King David over Israel. God is never going to change that, but there are some things that He might change, as we'll see. Previously, we learned that the Lord said, A body didst thou prepare for me (Heb.10:5). The Lord, Son of God, came in a body that was prepared for Him through Mary, a body of the Son of Man. We know that God's plan was for Jesus to leave an individual body and return in a corporate body so that He could minister all over the world. Today we are going to see the first-fruits of those who have fully entered into this by the grace of God. In other words, the first-fruits will be a body like the body of His temple that He spoke about when He said, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (Joh.2:19). (21) But he spake of the temple of his body. And we've discovered that's referring to His corporate body.   We know that the Lord comes in every one of us. For instance, He says, Try your own selves, whether ye are in the faith; prove your own selves. Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you? unless indeed ye be reprobate (2Co.13:5). (Col.1:27) … Christ in you, the hope of glory. Jesus Christ is in you! All through the Old Testament, Jesus was coming in vessels of honor through whom He ministered. For example, it says this: (1Pe.1:10) Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: (11) searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them. The Spirit of Christ was in great men of the Old Testament and that's what made them great men. He is the Shepherd; He is the Ruler; He is the King David and always will be, but He's going to repeat history because That which hath been is that which shall be (Ecc.1:9).   I'm reminded of a very famous text that speaks of Who Jesus is: (Isa.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, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father (or “Father of eternity,” literally), Prince of Peace. (7) Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this. God called Jesus to repeat history Himself. He was a King David in His day, Who was given, once again, the reins of government, which is in total agreement with what the Bible says about Him.   (Luk.1:31) And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (33) and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. So He would receive the throne of David forever, just as the Bible speaks about when it states, David shall never want (“lack”) a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel (Jer.33:17).   For example, the Bible says this: (Jer.33:14) Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and concerning the house of Judah. (15) In those days, and at that time, will I cause a Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David (now, this was a long time after David); and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. (16) In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is [the name] whereby she shall be called … That's a very strange text, but if nobody had changed what word was actually there in the Hebrew, that's what they would have had to translate; the word is “she.” It's strange because in Chapter 23 the word is “he,” but here it is “she.” Some people think, “Well, he made a mistake and they replaced it with ‘he.'” They didn't translate what was really there.   The word, “she” is used quite often in the Bible when referring to a corporate body of people and that's what this is. This is a corporate body, which God calls the “branch,” that is raised up as the seed of David. We know that Jesus Christ is our David on His throne all the way up through eternity, but as we saw earlier, the Spirit of Christ comes into many men and we have seen many from the beginning of Scripture to the end who are types of the Man-child. The Spirit of Christ comes into them and uses them, like a body of the son of David. (Jer.33:16) In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is [the name] whereby she shall be called: the Lord our righteousness. Notice that this is a corporate body of people, “our righteousness.” (Jer.33:17) For thus saith the Lord: David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel.   Now we know that Jesus the Son of God has been given the authority of David's throne for eternity, but the question is, what is the “man” that He abides in who does this work? This is what the branch is; it's a corporate body of men in whom the Spirit of Christ rules and reigns. (Jer.33:18) Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt-offerings, and to burn meal-offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. (19) And the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, saying, (20) Thus saith the Lord: If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, so that there shall not be day and night in their season; (21) then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he shall not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers. In other words, this is from the time of David up until the time of Christ and until our time; so it appears that He never broke His covenant with David. There was always a David upon the throne. Isn't that amazing?   I would suspect that you could not recognize this corporate body according to the flesh. (Luk.17:20) … The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. We're talking about a spiritual Israel, a spiritual Jerusalem, and a spiritual David. Many people recognize, that Jesus was the Son of David and that He was born of the seed of David according to the flesh (Rom.1:3), but He was declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit (4). What body could the Lord be choosing in our day to fulfill this covenant of a man in whom Jesus Christ lives to occupy the throne? Well, it's the body of the Man-child (Revelation 12:5), which we've spoken of. (Jer.33:22) As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured; so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.   I am sure you could look at that in a certain way, meaning multiplied throughout history, but I suspect it also means (and the Lord likes to hide things like that) that in these days there will be a great number of Davids and that this, “the Lord our righteousness,” is a very large group of people. (Jer.33:25) Thus saith the Lord: If my covenant of day and night [stand] not (Is it still in effect? I would say so.), if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; (26) then will I also cast away the seed of Jacob, and of David my servant, so that I will not take of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (The seed of David is to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.): for I will cause their captivity to return, and will have mercy on them. In these days, we know that even with the natural seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, a remnant of them is once again going to turn to the Lord God of Israel.   We read in the last study that in Revelation 12, the son of David, this Man-child is caught up to the throne of God. And here we see the Bible says, Blessed be the Lord thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for the Lord thy God (2Ch.9:8). Many people see the Man-child caught up to the throne of God in heaven, but the Lord God is calling David's throne on Earth His throne. This is the throne of God. In fact, it says here, At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord (Jer.3:17). Jeremiah is talking about the New Jerusalem on Earth. There is still a throne of David. Not in natural Israel, but you can find it in spiritual Israel because we know that Jesus Christ is the Son of David, the eternal Lord of His Kingdom. And He's also coming in a body, A body didst thou prepare for me (Heb.10:5).   You may say, “That was referring to the body of the individual Jesus.” That's true, but everything repeats and it always repeats on a larger scale. We have the Word of God for that, which cannot be broken (Joh.10:35). So we have to believe that it will be the same thing once again. The Lord told me many years ago, “Everything that has happened in the Gospels and in the Book of Acts will happen again, except the cast of characters will be multiplied many times over.” The Lord thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for the Lord thy God (2Ch.9:8) is true of Jesus. It's true of the body of Jesus and we've already spoken of the manifestation of the body of Christ, that we all claim to be by faith, and rightly so. But we've discovered that there is also a manifestation of the body of Christ, that is, those in whom Christ lives. If Christ lives in you, then you manifestly are the body of Christ. We've taught that we grow into this wonderful position 30-, 60- and 100-fold, according to Jesus Himself, so God is fulfilling it in that way.   Let me share something else with you. Remember that the Lord told me that the Gospels were a type of the first 3½ years of the Tribulation period and the Book of Acts was a type of the second 3½ years. Now we know that other types of the end-time Man-child show different similarities. For instance, Joseph brought God's people through the seven years of famine, which is a type of the seven-year Tribulation. We also know that Moses took God's people geographically halfway through the wilderness and we know that Revelation chapters 12 and 17 speak of the first and second 3½ years, respectively, and call the “wilderness” the “Tribulation.” Moses went halfway through the wilderness and then was glorified. When I say halfway, I'm not talking about time-wise, but in geographical distance. Some people, myself included, believe that the Lord brought His people across what we now call the Gulf of Suez, high up near where Succoth was, where the Gulf narrowed down quite a bit. Then He carried them across the Sinai Peninsula, where they crossed the Gulf of Aqaba, which they called the “Red Sea.”   Apostle Paul said, Mount Sinai in Arabia (Gal.4:25), not in Sinai. Arabia is east of the Gulf of Aqaba. I had heard years ago that the explorer Ron Wyatt had come across the pillar that the Israelites had erected to identify the place where the children of Israel crossed the Red Sea and it was on the eastern shore of Aqaba. They also discovered out there the mountain that Exodus 19 speaks of being burnt and charred on the top because God's presence came down on it, which was Mt. Sinai, and found it as a place called Jabal al-Lawz, which means “the Mount of the Law.” That's interesting because that's where Moses received the Law. If you look, which I have, on several maps, you can see where the Israelites left Egypt and crossed the Gulf of Suez. And if you follow that on down to Jabal al-Lawz and then follow that point and return back up to where they crossed into the Promised Land, you find that it is like an isosceles triangle (where the two legs are approximately even).   I thought the Lord was pointing out to me at that time that Moses went halfway through the wilderness (meaning 3½ years) and at that point he was glorified. Like Moses, Jesus went 3½ years through His ministry before He was glorified. I believe that Mount Sinai is Jabal al-Lawz in Arabia. Many signs seem to confirm that, even though the Saudi Arabians have fenced the mount off. They do not want Christians going in there.   By the way, at the foot of Jabal al-Lawz is the altar where the golden calf was set. Of course, the golden calf isn't there anymore, but the altar is. There are quite a few other artifacts there, including several hieroglyphics depicting the golden calf scratched into the rocks in the area of the altar. These finds make it very plain that this is the correct spot and I believe Ron Wyatt even took pictures of chariot wheels submerged in the Gulf of Aqaba, which further makes the case that it was the real Red Sea, not the Gulf of Suez. It would have taken the Israelites three months to travel from Egypt to Jabal al-Lawz. It took them a lot longer to get to the Promised Land because they were disobedient by worshipping the golden calf, but it was geographically halfway. I believe the Lord was showing me the two 3½-year periods of the wilderness Tribulation.   At any rate, we have a pretty good confirmation right here: (Exo.34:29) And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of the testimony in Moses' hand … The two tables of the Testimony are the same thing as the Tables of Witness, the Two Witnesses. The Man-child is going to give to God's people the Two Witnesses, upon whose heart the Word of God is written, not upon tables of stone. There's a fulfillment here of that. (Exo.34:29) And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of the testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses knew not that the skin of his face shone by reason of his speaking with him. In other words, Moses had come face-to-face with God. We know that we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory (2Co.3:18). This is the type and the shadow here of God's people, at least the first-fruits, coming into the Image of God. It even says, The first of the first-fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God (Exo.34:26). There is a type of the first-fruits here and it is Moses. It would have been Jesus in His time, but here it's Moses.   So after Moses came face-to-face with God, Moses manifested His glory. I believe what's being said here is that this is a glorified soul, not a glorified body. The Man-child goes through three stages of perfection. I believe that when Jesus started His ministry, He was perfected in Spirit by the Holy Spirit because He was anointed with the Holy Spirit. And when He was crucified, that's a parable about our being crucified, too, in a crucifixion of self 3½ years into the Tribulation. When a parable is first shown (and the Bible does say that Jesus was a sign (Isaiah 7:14), or in Hebrew, an uwth of something to come), it's literal, and the next time it's spiritual.   So we see that the first-fruits, who are only spiritually the Man-child and not physically, as Jesus was, are the spiritual fulfillment of this parable. In the midst of the Tribulation period, the Man-child is going to be glorified in soul because “self” has been crucified. At the end of the Tribulation period, he will be glorified in body. The progression is first spirit, then soul in the middle, and then body. These are the three stages of perfection that God is bringing Himself to in His people. In fact, When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at in all them that believed (because our testimony unto you was believed) in that day (2Th.1:10). And also, But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth (2Th.2:13).   Let's continue in Exodus. (Exo.34:30) And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him. (31) And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses spake to them. They must have run on down the road because they had to turn around and return to him. (Exo.34:32) And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the Lord had spoken with him in mount Sinai. (33) And when Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil on his face. (34) But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the veil off (because he wanted to see the Lord clearly, face-to-face), until he came out; and he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel that which he was commanded. So, Moses was in communication with God face-to-face, but with the children of Israel behind a veil.   This will also be so with the ministry of the Man-child. Jesus said, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner (Joh.5:19). Jesus was in close fellowship with the Father; He walked in the Spirit; He saw the Father and He saw the people. Yet Jesus walked also behind a veil, as the Scripture clearly shows us, and we'll see that shortly. (Exo.34:35) And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone; and Moses put the veil upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him. We're told the same thing about the first-fruits. (Heb.10:19) Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, (20) by the way which He dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh.   So we enter into the presence of God through the veil, which is to say, through His flesh. Jesus' flesh was a veil. The people did not see the real Jesus. They didn't see the glorified man underneath that veil of flesh; they saw the veil. However, when the Lord went into the presence of God, He was in Spirit where there was no veil, speaking with the Father. This is the same thing we see here with Moses. Moses was a type of Jesus and a type of the Man-child. We're getting a description here of the kind of ministry that the Man-child is going to have and it's just like Jesus' ministry.   Seeing God face-to-face makes us capable of manifesting God before His people. (2Co.3:18) But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit. From behind that body of flesh, called a veil, there was a glorified soul, ready to walk through the other half of the wilderness.   Now we know that Moses went all the way through the wilderness, but that's only part of the picture. If we look at other different types of the Man-child, they'll show other parts of the whole picture. For example, we can also see Jesus in Acts where it says, And when they were come over against Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia; and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not (Act.16:7). So Jesus was a type of the second 3½ years of the Man-child during the Tribulation. We know that because the second part of the Tribulation started at the end of Jesus' ministry when He was crucified and it ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, which was the destruction of the Harlot by the Beast. We see that the second 3½ years starts at the end of the first 3½ years and extends to the point of destruction of the Harlot by the Beast. The Book of Acts represents the 40 years between Jesus' ministry and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Forty is the number of tribulation.   We're seeing here a perfect parallel between Moses and Jesus. Some have thought that Jesus did not have a ministry after His 3½ years, but He did have a ministry of guiding His people for 3½ years, just like Moses went the other half of the distance through the wilderness to the Promised Land. Moses brought the people all the way and, in type, Jesus did that, too. His glorification in the second 3½ years represents what Moses was when “his face shone.” What we're really referring to in the end times is a glorified soul underneath a body, with the body being the veil that permitted men to look upon that which is glorified and have fellowship without being frightened. We would call it bearing fruit “100-fold.” When the Lord sows the seed of the Word in our hearts, it's to bring forth Himself in us, 30-, 60- and 100-fold (Matthew 13). That's not referring to the body; that's referring to the fruit of Christ in the soul, or in the heart, and that is what we are here for. What makes the first-fruits the first-fruits, is that they have come into this glorified soul and they have come into the crucifixion of self, which is the type that Jesus showed us.   If we look at the timing of Exodus 34, we find that it falls in the middle of the Tribulation period. How do we know that? Well, for instance, in Chapter 32, we see what happened there was, they made the image of the beast and worshipped it. That's a pretty clear sign of being the middle of the Tribulation period. What came along with worshiping the image of the Beast, according to Revelation 14, was the mark of the Beast. So we see them there in Chapter 32 bowing down to this image of the beast and we see God's rebuke of them, and we see the Tables of the Testimony were cast down and broken.   (Exo.32:19) And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. We know the two Tables of the Testimony represent the Two Witnesses corporate body because “witness” and “testimony” are the same word. So Moses the Man-child, as a type of Jesus Christ, brings the two witnesses with the Word of God written upon their heart to the people of God, which is what Jesus did with His disciples when He sent them out two-by-two. They were a corporate body of two witnesses to go to God's people and bring the Law, that was written upon their hearts, to them. It's an exact type and shadow of what we see here.   However, it says here, he saw the calf and the dancing (in other words, the people were worshiping the image of the beast): and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount (Exo.32:19). So not only did Jesus bring the Two Witnesses, but the people in their sins “broke” them. I believe that the Apostle John was the only one who died a natural death of old age. The rest of the apostles were all killed. The apostates “broke” their Two Witnesses. We see what God says about this situation a few verses later: (Exo.32:26) Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Whoso is on the Lord's side, [let him come] unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. These are the only people who did not worship the image of the beast from among the camp of God's people.   We're told that God has chosen us to be a kingdom of priests. (Exo.19:5) Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be mine own possession from among all peoples: for all the earth is mine: (6) and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation … In other words, all of God's people were called to be priests because we all offer sacrifices unto God and we especially offer up this body as a living sacrifice unto the Lord. On the altar of the fiery trial, the old flesh is burned up, which is what our sacrificial life is supposed to be.   The people who did sacrifice, the Levites, did not join in with the rest in worshiping the image of the beast. The true Levites, the tribe that followed God, were God's inheritance. It was the firstborn from among all of Israel who were His inheritance and then God changed that to be the Levites. Those priests were His inheritance, He said, and God was their inheritance. Those Levites were the ones who were on the Lord's side. (Exo.32:27) And he said unto them, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. Well, as you know, those who worship the image of the Beast are slain because they no longer belong to the body of Christ; they belong to the Beast. The mark of the Beast is the sign of his ownership and those on whom have the mark, belong to him. They are dead; they're no longer living.   The Levites will have the authority to bring great judgment on the earth and, again, we're talking about the middle of the Tribulation period because we're referring to the mark and image of the Beast being manifested. This was the time that Moses was glorified; this was the time when the Two Witnesses were beginning to be killed. (Rev.11:8) And their dead bodies [lie] in the street of the great city (that's Babylon, not Jerusalem), which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. (9) And from among the peoples and tribes and tongues and nations do [men] look upon their dead bodies three days and a half, and suffer not their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb. “Three days and a half” is half of the seven “days” of the 70th week of Daniel 9, which makes it 3½ years that the Two Witnesses will be killed. From the time of the middle of the Tribulation to the end of the Tribulation, they are being killed.   When they finish their testimony, this great group of witnesses (prophets) will be allowed by God to be killed and they're resurrected in the last trump of Revelation 11:15. But in response it is Moses, it is the Manchild, who sends the Levites forth to slay the members of the body of the Beast. (Exo.32:28) And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. (29) And Moses said, Consecrate yourselves today to the Lord, yea, every man against his son, and against his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day. (30) And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make atonement for your sin. (31) And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. (32) Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin—; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.   Moses wanted to take the place of the people, which is also what Jesus did, but how many of you know that Jesus' sacrifice will not apply to everybody in the end? (Heb.10:26) For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins, (27) but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adversaries. People who live a life of willful sin and indulgence in the world will die. As the Bible says, If ye live after the flesh, ye must die (Rom.8:13). Walking after the flesh is to take the mark of the Beast because the mind of the flesh and the works of the flesh is to take the mark. Those people who are walking in sin willfully and do so up until death will have no sacrifice.   (Exo.32:33) And the Lord said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. In other words, God would not take the sacrifice of Moses for those people who worshipped the image of the Beast and took the mark. In fact, in Revelation 14:9-11, He says that there is no sacrifice for them. This is a way of separating those people who are Christian in name only from those who are Levites, the kingdom of priests that God said would come. “Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.” That sounds like reprobation to me.   (Exo.32:34) And now go, lead the people unto [the place] of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine angel shall go before thee; nevertheless in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them. (35) And the Lord smote the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made. This is clearly referring to the time of the middle of the Tribulation period, when Moses in type as the Man-child is glorified, at least in soul underneath that body of flesh, in order to carry them all the way to the Promised Land, which in one parable we would call the “Kingdom of Heaven.” At the end of the seven years, that's exactly where God's people go. Just like Noah, they'll be in the Ark; it lifts off and they're in the Kingdom of Heaven.   I think it would make a very good study to do an Internet search for “Jabal al-Lawz” and learn about some of the things that have been discovered about this particular mountain. Again, it's not located in the middle of the wilderness by time; it's only the middle of the wilderness by geography, by distance. But that's where the altar of the golden calf was and that's where the fire burned the top of the mountain and where Moses was given the Law to give to the people. It's very interesting. Actually, the first time Moses was on the mountain was way back in Exodus 19 and this is the second time he's on the mountain because this had to fulfill the type. So we have Joseph going, as a type of the Man-child, seven years, and we have Moses, as a type of the Man-child, going through the first and the second half of the Tribulation, which were both called “the wilderness.” Now we have Jesus also going through the two halves, in the Gospels and the Book of Acts, as well.   As we said earlier, the Spirit of Jesus was surely in those disciples. Jesus said, It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life (Joh.6:63). His words went into those disciples and recreated Himself in them. The spirit in them was the Spirit of Christ. He had taken on a new body, but it was still the Spirit of Christ. When the first-fruits show up, I believe very shortly, in our day, this is what we're going to find. They are the body of the Son of David which sits upon God's throne. It's not a throne somewhere up there in the sky, but it's the throne here on the earth that spiritually is the leadership of God's people. The throne is the place of leadership.   I had quoted Jeremiah earlier, but only a part of it. It says, At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it (So you know it's not natural Jerusalem because the Gentiles are coming to it.), to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the stubbornness of their evil heart (Jer.3:17). This is the end time, obviously, because this has not been true at any time in history. It has to be the “latter days” because, truly, when these people come to the throne, God has perfected them, matured them, and made them ready for the Kingdom of Heaven.   (Jer.3:18) In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north (which was captivity) to the land that I gave for an inheritance unto your fathers. Our early church fathers were given all of the land for an inheritance, but for 2000 years we have not entered into it. It was the same with Israel. In the beginning, God gave them the whole land, which represented the Land of Promise, but I don't think they ever set foot on any more than about a third of it and actually take possession of it.   Well, in these last days, we are going to take possession of all of the land that was given to our fathers; we're going to take possession of all of the Land of Promise, representing all of the promises of God that we're going to walk in. We are going to enter into the land of rest. (Heb.4:3) For we who have believed do enter into that rest … We're actually going to keep the real Sabbath, not the shadow, and it is to walk in all of the Land of Promise that the Lord gave unto us. Once again, God's people will be walking as the early disciples walked. They'll be walking in the power of God, in the anointing of God and in the knowledge of the truth, only this time it will be the latter rain.   When he began to walk with God, Moses was the one who had the former rain (or the latter rain, in type) because God took of the anointing that was upon Moses and put it upon the 70 elders. If you remember, that's the same thing that happened to Jesus. Jesus was the One Who came with the former rain and He was the only One Who had it, but the people whom He raised up as disciples were later given this anointing. When Jesus first sent His disciples out during the first 3½ years, they didn't have that anointing. What they had was authority given by the Lord. He said, “You go and do this,” and they went out and healed the sick and cast out devils and raised the dead (Matthew 10). Jesus was their authority. But then He said that God was also going to send “another Comforter” (John 14:16) and we know that was the Holy Spirit Who came in the middle of the Tribulation, on Pentecost, in the middle of the seven years and at the end of the 3½ years of Jesus' ministry. The disciples received the former rain and went out with that anointing to do the works of Jesus.   Jesus said the Spirit of God shall take of mine, and shall declare [it] unto you (Joh.16:14). One of the jobs of the Holy Spirit is to recreate in us, through the anointing (because “Christ” means “anointed”), the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. It is impossible to do that without the anointing, which breaks the yoke (Isaiah 10:27). It is Not by might, nor by power (meaning man's might and power), but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts (Zec.4:6). The Lord is about to make this possible. The anointing that was upon Moses, the Lord later took and put upon those 70 elders. Jesus also had 70 whom He sent out and the anointing came upon them.   I especially like what it says a little further down in the text. (Jer.3:19) But I said, How I will put thee among the children, and give thee a pleasant land, a goodly heritage of the hosts of the nations! and I said, Ye shall call me My Father, and shall not turn away from following me. He had already said, “Neither shall they walk any more after the stubbornness of their evil heart.” Wow! This is awesome! I dare say, that most of the people of God do not know Him as Father. They know Him as “God,” a very distant name. But know Him as Father? This is the relationship the Lord is going to establish by bringing us into the manifestation of the sons of God (Romans 8:19). Jesus was the Son of God and always called Him “Father.” Get out your concordance and look it up. He did not call Him all the names that the Jewish Christians or the Judaized Christians wanted to call Him. Jesus called Him “Father” and this is what He says we will call Him. This is what we'll know Him as – as “Father,” like Jesus knew Him. He used the term over and over, all the way through the Gospels.   These people are going to be coming back out of the land of the north (as we see from Jeremiah 3:14 on down), out of bondage, back to Zion. Zion is the place where King David ruled and Zion is the place where Jesus ruled, not in the flesh, but in the Spirit. Jesus was ruling in a new city of Jerusalem and the Apostle Paul told the disciples that they are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Heb.12:22) while they were on the earth. So, once again, God is restoring the Kingdom.   As Jesus came to restore the Kingdom, the Man-child is coming to restore, to rebuild spiritual, heavenly Jerusalem on this earth and to sit as the body in whom the King Jesus Christ lives. God has said, David shall never want (“lack”) a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel (Jer.33:17). Inside that “man” is going to be the King of kings and He is going to get all the credit. The King of kings is coming inside the body of the Son of David. Glory be to God! Isn't it neat the way God has put this parable together over and over, so we would understand sooner or later?   Father, in the Name of Jesus, we thank You so much, Lord, for helping us to see these wondrous things and we enjoy seeing the New Testament in our time, Lord, the Gospel time period. You are going to repeat this again. Oh, what a wondrous time we are coming to! A time of great glory, a time when the Lord Himself is coming to fellowship with us and live in our midst, as He lived in the midst of the Tabernacle in the wilderness, Lord. He came in the midst of His people. Jesus is Immanuel, “God with us,” and we thank You, Lord. We want so much for You to live in our midst. Those people who bowed to the golden calf, You were angered with and said You would no longer go in the midst of those people because they were a stiff-necked people. Lord, we know that's true of those who worship the image of the Beast, but it's not true of Your true people, who are Your true Levites, Your chosen ministers. Lord, we praise You and we thank You for the privilege of having You walking in our midst. We ask You, Lord, to finish the promise that You gave us, the promise that You gave to the fathers. Cause us to walk on all of the land that You gave to them, Lord, which our forefathers lost out on during the Dark Ages all the way up until the time we are in now. Thank You for being our Father and our Savior, in Jesus' name. Amen.  

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc. M.Pd . - Seputar Ramadhan

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc. M.Pd . - Kiat-kiat Menghidupkan Bulan Ramadhan

Os cuento mi reciente aventura: un accidente en carretera por culpa de un jabalí que, tristemente, no sobrevivió, aunque yo estoy aquí para contarlo. A partir de esto traemos noticias, rumores y nuestras secciones favoritas llenas de información y humor. Me acompañan Carlos Prado desde México, Clara desde La Rioja, Ramón Rodríguez (con su perro Muesli) desde MAdrid y Jorge el Castillo, tambien desde México.. ¡Subíos a la moto y arrancamos! ️ ÍNDICE DEL EPISODIO -Aclaraciones : Oscar Riaño nos envía un audio con trucos para el frío. -Flash de Noticias : ️ Museo de la Moto Made in Spain : Una exposición en Alcalá de Henares sobre Motos Campeonas y Sus Pilotos (Derbi, OSSA, Montesa, Bultaco, Gas Gas). ⚡ Ebtekker Pioneer : Scooter eléctrico todo terreno presentado en EICMA 2024 (120 km/h, 150 km de autonomía). Ducati Panigale V2S para Marc Márquez : Ducati le regala una moto personalizada por su 32.º cumpleaños con el número 93. Rumores Rumores : Honda RC V3R : ¿Debutará en las 8 Horas de Suzuka 2025? BMW quiere comprar KTM : Un rumor sobre la posible reestructuración de KTM y su deuda de 3.000 millones de euros. Moto Guzzi V7 : Una V7 suspendida en Mandello del Lario anticipa algo grande por el 104.º aniversario. -Blufs : Accidente de Jorge Martín : Se pierde el Gran Premio de Tailandia por una fractura tras caerse en entrenamientos. Nürburgring prohíbe motos : El circuito alemán veta las motos en las sesiones de Touristenfahrten por seguridad. Royal Enfield Himalayan 650 : Primeras imágenes de un prototipo que genera debate por su diseño. -Secciones; - 10/11 de Ramón : Como agarra un Neumático. -Te veo en Moto (Clara) : Un repaso a las motos en Mortadelo y Filemón , con Vespas y vehículos trucados que os sacarán una sonrisa. -Segunda Oportunidad : Consejos prácticos para conducir en ciudad: cómo evitar alcances y riesgos al adelantar. -Sin Pelos en las Ruedas : Una guía para elegir motos trail según tu uso (urbano, carretera, off-road). Recomiendo la CFMOTO 450 MT, BMW F 900 GS y KTM 1390 Adventure. Encuéntranos en: Whatsapp: http://wa.me/34644020615 +34 644 020 615 Email: Damerueda@gmail.com TIENDA: https://www.latostadora.com/shop/damerueda/?shop_trk Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/@damerueda Instagram Dame Rueda: https://acortar.link/bqWGOu Instagram Bicho Raro: https://www.instagram.com/bichoraro_damerueda/?hl=es Instagram Diez-Once: https://www.instagram.com/diezonce_damerueda/?hl=es Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/damerueda Telegram: https://t.me/dameruedagrupo Blog Dame Rueda: https://damerueda.home.blog/ Email: Damerueda@gmail.com TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@damerueda?_t=8jFKY9ClhWC&_r=1 Playlist Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/4Vjp0MD30MSo3yxjcCvW1F?si=e80340f789d24ab8 #DameRueda, #PodcastMotos, #JabaliesEnCarretera, #MotosTrail, #NoticiasMoteras, #MotoGuzziV7, #BMWKTM, #EbtekkerPioneer, #MarcMarquez, #MortadeloYFilemon, #ConduccionSegura, #Moteros, #PodcastEspañol, #Nurburgring, #RoyalEnfieldHimalayan, #JorgeMartin

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc. M.Pd . - Hadits-hadits Seputar Ramadhan

Genesis 4: 1-26Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten[a] a man with the help of the Lord.” 2 And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a worker of the ground. 3 In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground, 4 and Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, 5 but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his face fell. 6 The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted?[b] And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is contrary to[c] you, but you must rule over it.”8 Cain spoke to Abel his brother.[d] And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. 9 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?” 10 And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. 11 And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. 12 When you work the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.” 13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.[e] 14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” 15 Then the Lord said to him, “Not so! If anyone kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord put a mark on Cain, lest any who found him should attack him. 16 Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of Nod,[f] east of Eden.17 Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad fathered Mehujael, and Mehujael fathered Methushael, and Methushael fathered Lamech. 19 And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20 Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. 21 His brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. 22 Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.23 Lamech said to his wives:“Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say:I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me.24 If Cain's revenge is sevenfold, then Lamech's is seventy-sevenfold.”25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, “God has appointed[g] for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him.” 26 To Seth also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. At that time people began to call upon the name of the Lord.

Los Fianna, los Dothraki de las tierras Celtas, tienen historias de héroes, de villanos, de... ¿un salmón de conocimiento?, ¿de una mujer con cara de Jabalí? Esto se está poniendo abstracto, así que no se pierdan este capítulo donde las cosas ya empiezan a ponerse bien raras. ATENTOS A ESTE CHISME.

Miguel del Pino trata de nuevo el tema de las plagas. Hoy sobre el jabalí... ¿Está enfermo el Monte Mediterráneo?

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Dusta Yang Diperbolehkan

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Disangka Riya Padahal Bukan

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Jalan Yang Lurus

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Ghibah Yang Diperbolehkan #1

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc. M.Pd . - Istighfar Dan Taubat Nasuha #1

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Hal Yang Wajib Setiap Muslim Ketahui

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Sahabat Nabi Dijamin Surga (Zubair Bin Awwam)

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Dunia Adalah Kesenangan Yang Menipu

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Istri Tidak Taat Suami

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Romantika Pergaulan Suami Istri

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Tidak Tegur Sapa

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Siksa Kubur

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Tinggalkan Kemusyrikan

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Mendatangi Dukun

Este martes se cumplen 60 años del primer abatimiento de un jabalí en suelo español. Fue en Jávea, Valencia. Por ello hablamos de las características físicas y biológicas de este animal con José Ángel Barasona, Investigador postdoctoral del programa Ramón y Cajal en el Centro de Vigilancia Sanitaria Veterinaria (VISAVET), especie a la que ha dedicado más de 10 años de investigación. Además, charlamos con Domingo,  agricultor y protagonista del documental 'Domingo, Domingo' sobre los problemas que causa este animal en una cosecha y en la fauna silvestre. 

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Berburu Kunci Surga

Este martes se cumplen 60 años del primer abatimiento de un jabalí en suelo español. Fue en Jávea, Valencia. Por ello hablamos de las características físicas y biológicas de este animal con José Ángel Barasona, Investigador postdoctoral del programa Ramón y Cajal en el Centro de Vigilancia Sanitaria Veterinaria (VISAVET), especie a la que ha dedicado más de 10 años de investigación. Además, charlamos con Domingo,  agricultor y protagonista del documental 'Domingo, Domingo' sobre los problemas que causa este animal en una cosecha y en la fauna silvestre. 

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc. M.Pd . - Dunia Dan Akhirat

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Kekuatan Iman

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Akhlak Mulia Penuntut Ilmu

Ustadz Nizar Saad Jabal, Lc., M.Pd. - Berbicara Yang Sulit Dipahami

Today, we're meeting Dana Barqawi, a multidisciplinary artist and urban planner based in Amman, Jordan. Dana's stunning multimedia work challenges colonial narratives and explores Indigenous identities and aspects of womanhood and community.Growing up with women who painted, sewed, designed, and made art, Dana has a long-standing fascination with detail. She works from a workshop studio in Jabal al Weibdeh - one of my favorite neighborhoods in Amman – fusing elements of painting, photography, and applied materials like gold leaves and beads in her politically and socially engaged artwork. Reminder: this May, you can join my 10-day group trip to Jordan where we'll meet artists like Dana and see their art. Get more details here.What you'll learn in this episode:Dana's path from architecture and urban planning to socially engaged artThe main element in Dana's artThe stories behind Dana's latest exhibit, (Re)Narrate: A Visual Commentary on Colonial Narratives in the Levant & AfricaHow the Black Panther movement in the US is connected to the Palestinian liberation struggleFeatured on the show:Follow Dana on Instagram: @dana_barqawiLearn more about Dana's work on her websiteCheck out the (Re)Narrate exhibit Shop Dana's art postersGet more information at: Going Places website Join our Going Places newsletter to get updates on new episodes and Yulia's travel storytelling work. Subscribe at goingplacesmedia.com/newsletter!For more BTS of this podcast follow @goingplacesmedia on Instagram and check out our videos on YouTube!Please head over to Apple Podcasts and SUBSCRIBE to the show. If you enjoy this conversation, please share it with others on social and don't forget to tag us @goingplacesmedia!And show us some love, if you have a minute, by rating Going Places or leaving us a review wherever you listen. You'll be helping us to bend the arc of algorithms towards our community — thank you!Going Places with Yulia Denisyuk is a show that sparks a better understanding of people and places near and far by fostering a space for real conversations to occur. Each week, we sit down with travelers, journalists, creators, and people living and working in destinations around the world. Hosted by Yulia Denisyuk, an award-winning travel journalist, photographer, and writer who's worked with National Geographic, The New York Times, BBC Travel, and more. Learn more about our show at goingplacesmedia.com.

What would you expect to find at the REAL Mount Sinai? Could its true location be in Saudi Arabia rather than the traditional site in the Sinai Peninsula? In this podcast episode, Frank unpacks some of the details of his recent trip to Saudi Arabia, including what he and the group saw as they climbed the mountain at Jabal al-Lawz. He'll also discuss what fascinating markers distinguish this mountain as a great contender for Mount Sinai and why it's more important than ever for trained archaeologists to continue exploring the site. During the episode, Frank will answer questions like:Why was the Sinai Peninsula originally selected as Mount Sinai?How long did it take Frank and the group to get up the mountain?Why have there been so few excavations at Jabal al-Lawz?Who is Hathor and what's a possible explanation for all the cow drawings found on the mountain?What evidence exists suggesting that Jabal al-Lawz is the true Mount Sinai?What were Frank and the group AMAZED to see once they reached the top of Jabal al-Lawz?What's so special about the Split Rock of Horeb? And how many people were involved in the Exodus?While it's still too early to make a concrete conclusion on Jabal al-Lawz, the circumstantial evidence discussed in the podcast episode may cause you to seriously consider it to be the REAL Mount Sinai!Resources mentioned during the episode:Living Passages Unveils the True Mount Sinai in Saudi Arabia: http://youtu.be/JBaY--L5NPY Frank Visits the Merneptah Stele in Egypt: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gy-RanSnzik Preaching the Good News at the Giza Pyramids: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Cf4JjuRFA0Q Moses and the Split Rock of Horeb: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HLgzLDXFCB8 Was the Golden Calf HERE? https://www.youtube.com/shorts/h5yAwssDU5Y

08 25-11-24 LHDW Veterinarios: Las operaciones estéticas a perros, ¿Son necesarias? Accidentes con jabalíes en Madrid, están aumentando y cada día más peligrosas

Hacer click aquí para enviar sus comentarios a este cuento.Juan David Betancur Fernandezelnarradororal@gmail.comHoy continuamos con otra de las 12 tareas de hercules. Había una ver un héroe griego  semi dios llamado Heracles o hercules para los romanos  Heracles como veíamos hace algunos cuentos atrás  había cometido el peor de los crímenes contra su propia famila y necesitaba pedir perdón y lo obligaron a ser el esclavo de el rey Euristeo y tenía que hacer lo que este rey le ordenara.  Después de cazar al leon de nemea, a la hidra de lerna y de atrapar a la cierva de cerinia   Euristeo que ya estaba cabezon con la eficiencia de hercules le dijo.  Entonces Heracles… ahora si te voy a poner algo tenaz. Te toco ir.a atrapar el Jabali de erimanto  El jabalí que vivía en la montana de erimanto tenía fama mundial por que era bien malo,  Pero no solamente tenía que atraparlo, lo tenía que traer al palacio de el; rey Euristeo.   Debía cazar al jabalí de Erimanto y debía, ahí es nada, traerlo vivo a palacio. ¿Y qué tenía de especial este jabalí para que Euristeo lo considerase una presa tan preciada?, El jabalí era tan fuerte que era capaz de tumbar un árbol de un solo envion y tenía la fea constumbre de matar el ganadito y a los hombres que por allí se veían caminando. Ese jabalí era bien mala leche.  . Todos los días el  jabalí bajaba de su guarida en la montaña atacando, hiriendo y comiéndose cuanto se encontraba en su camino.  Una presa complicada, como siempre, a la que se debía enfrentarse Hércules. En cuanto le asignaron ese trabajito Heracles se puso en camino pero al poner la dirección en su gps se dio cuenta que eso estaba bien lejos y decidio parar donde su amigo el centauro Folos para descansar y tomarse un buen vinito.  Folos era un centauro, como quien dice mitad caballo y mitad humano. Y le fascinaba el buen vino. Y parece que tomaba bastantico. De ahí viene el dicho de bebe como un caballo.  El punto es que Heracles se sentó a tomar y a tomar vino del bueno durante la noche, pero   a medida que pasaba la noche y el vino fluia y la conversación se ponía más interesante a Heracles le fue dando mucha sed y le pidió a su amigo Folos que le regalara un poco de el vino que había escondido el dios Dionisio para ocasiones especiales  Y Folos muy amablemente saco de la cueva el vino y comenzó a servirlo. Pero como este vino era tan exquisito y producia un olor tan estupendo los demás centauros lo olieron y desde leguas a la redonda comenzaron a correr hacia donde estaba Heracles y su amigo Folos.  Y allí llegaron los demás centauros en tropel y bastante enojados porque cada que ellos le pedían a Folos que sacara el vino de Dionisio, este les decía que no que porque ese vino era solo para las visitas. Así que se aguantaran las ganas.  Y allí llegaron los centauros armados con piedras, hachas, antorchas y rodearon a Heracles y a Folos.  Pero Heracles que no era ninguna perita en dulce se levanto, tomo sus flechas envenedadas con la sandre de la hidra de lerna y saltando por los aires empezó a lanzar flechas envenenadas a diestra y siniestra.  Y allí cayeron muchos centauros y solo unos pocos escaparon con vida. Pero la suerte no acompano a Folos ya que tomo una de las flechas que habían matado a los centauros y se maravillaba que algo tan pequeño fuera tan mortal, Pero la flecha se le resbalo y le cayo en un pie. Y el veneno hizo efecto y lo mato Después de derrotar a los centauros y con el corazón

Comparing the Hebrew of Isaiah 9.6 to most popular English translations results in some serious questions. Why have our translations changed the tense of the verbs from past to future? Why is this child called “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father”? In this presentation I work through Isaiah 9.6 line by line to help you understand the Hebrew. Next I look at interpretive options for the child as well as his complicated name. Not only will this presentation strengthen your understanding of Isaiah 9.6, but it will also equip you to explain it to others. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts —— Links —— See my other articles here Check out my class: One God Over All Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read Sean’s bio here Below is the paper presented on October 18, 2024 in Little Rock, Arkansas at the 4th annual UCA Conference. Access this paper on Academia.edu to get the pdf. Full text is below, including bibliography and end notes. Abstract Working through the grammar and syntax, I present the case that Isaiah 9:6 is the birth announcement of a historical child. After carefully analyzing the name given to the child and the major interpretive options, I make a case that the name is theophoric. Like the named children of Isaiah 7 and 8, the sign-child of Isaiah 9 prophecies what God, not the child, will do. Although I argue for Hezekiah as the original fulfillment, I also see Isaiah 9:6 as a messianic prophecy of the true and better Hezekiah through whom God will bring eternal deliverance and peace. Introduction Paul D. Wegner called Isaiah 9:6[1] “one of the most difficult problems in the study of the Old Testament.”[2] To get an initial handle on the complexities of this text, let's begin briefly by comparing the Hebrew to a typical translation. Isaiah 9:6 (BHS[3]) כִּי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמ֑וֹ וַיִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ פֶּ֠לֶא יוֹעֵץ֙ אֵ֣ל גִּבּ֔וֹר אֲבִיעַ֖ד שַׂר־שָׁלֽוֹם׃ Isaiah 9:6 (ESV) For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Curiosities abound in the differences between these two. The first two clauses in English, “For to us a child is born” and “to us a son is given,” employ the present tense while the Hebrew uses the perfect tense, i.e. “to us a child has been born.”[4] This has a significant bearing on whether we take the prophecy as a statement about a child already born in Isaiah's time or someone yet to come (or both). The ESV renders the phrase,וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo), as “and his name shall be called,” but the words literally mean “and he called his name” where the “he” is unspecified. This leaves room for the possibility of identifying the subject of the verb in the subsequent phrase, i.e. “And the wonderful counselor, the mighty God called his name…” as many Jewish translations take it.  Questions further abound regardingאֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor), which finds translations as disparate as the traditional “Mighty God”[5] to “divine warrior”[6] to “in battle God-like”[7] to “Mighty chief”[8] to “Godlike hero,”[9] to Luther's truncated “Held.”[10]  Another phrase that elicits a multiplicity of translations is אֲבִיעַד (aviad). Although most versions read “Eternal Father,”[11] others render the word, “Father-Forever,”[12] “Father for all time,”[13] “Father of perpetuity,”[14] “Father of the Eternal Age,”[15] and “Father of Future.”[16] Translators from a range of backgrounds struggle with these two phrases. Some refuse to translate them at all, preferring clunky transliterations.[17] Still, as I will show below, there's a better way forward. If we understand that the child had a theophoric name—a name that is not about him, but about God—our problems dissipate like morning fog before the rising sun. Taking the four pairs of words this way yields a two-part sentence name. As we'll see this last approach is not only the best contextual option, but it also allows us to take the Hebrew vocabulary, grammar, and syntax at face value, rather than succumbing to strained translations and interpretational gymnastics. In the end, we're left with a text literally rendered and hermeneutically robust. Called or Will Call His Name? Nearly all the major Christian versions translate וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “he has called,” as “he will be called.” This takes an active past tense verb as a passive future tense.[18] What is going on here? Since parents typically give names at birth or shortly thereafter, it wouldn't make sense to suggest the child was already born (as the beginning of Isa 9:6 clearly states), but then say he was not yet named. Additionally, וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra) is a vav-conversive plus imperfect construction that continues the same timing sequence of the preceding perfect tense verbs.[19] If the word were passive (niphal binyan) we would read וַיִּקָּרֵא (vayikarey) instead of וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra). Although some have suggested an emendation of the Masoretic vowels to make this change, Hugh Williamson notes, “there is no overriding need to prefer it.”[20] Translators may justify rendering the perfect tense as imperfect due to the idiom called a prophetic past tense (perfectum propheticum). Wilhelm Gesenius notes the possibility that a prophet “so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him.”[21] Bruce Waltke recognizes the phenomenon, calling it an accidental perfective in which “a speaker vividly and dramatically represents a future situation both as complete and independent.”[22] Still, it's up to the interpreter to determine if Isaiah employs this idiom or not. The verbs of verse 6 seem quite clear: “a child has been born for us … and the government was on his shoulder … and he has called his name…” When Isaiah uttered this prophecy, the child had already been born and named and the government rested on his shoulders. This is the straightforward reading of the grammar and therefore should be our starting point.[23] Hezekiah as the Referent One of the generally accepted principles of hermeneutics is to first ask the question, “What did this text mean in its original context?” before asking, “What does this text mean to us today?” When we examine the immediate context of Isa 9:6, we move beyond the birth announcement of a child with an exalted name to a larger prophecy of breaking the yoke of an oppressor (v4) and the ushering in of a lasting peace for the throne of David (v7). Isaiah lived in a tumultuous time. He saw the northern kingdom—the nation of Israel—uprooted from her land and carried off by the powerful and cruel Assyrian Empire. He prophesied about a child whose birth had signaled the coming freedom God would bring from the yoke of Assyria. As Jewish interpreters have long pointed out, Hezekiah nicely fits this expectation.[24] In the shadow of this looming storm, Hezekiah became king and instituted major religious reforms,[25] removing idolatry and turning the people to Yahweh. The author of kings gave him high marks: “He trusted in Yahweh, the God of Israel. After him there was no one like him among all the kings of Judah nor among those who were before him” (2 Kgs 18:5).[26] Then, during Hezekiah's reign, Sennacherib sent a large army against Judea and laid siege to Jerusalem. Hezekiah appropriately responded to the threatening Assyrian army by tearing his clothes, covering himself with sackcloth, and entering the temple to pray (2 Kings 19:1). He sent word to Isaiah, requesting prayer for the dire situation. Ultimately God brought miraculous deliverance, killing 185,000 Assyrians, which precipitated a retreat. There had not been such an acute military deliverance since the destruction of Pharaoh's army in the sea. Indeed, Hezekiah's birth did signal God's coming deliverance. In opposition to Hezekiah as the referent for Isa 9:6, Christian interpreters have pointed out that Hezekiah did not fulfill this prophecy en toto. Specifically, Hezekiah did not usher in “an endless peace” with justice and righteousness “from this time onward and forevermore” (Isa. 9:7). But, as John Roberts points out, the problem only persists if we ignore prophetic hyperbole. Here's what he says: If Hezekiah was the new king idealized in this oracle, how could Isaiah claim he would reign forever? How could Isaiah so ignore Israel's long historical experience as to expect no new source of oppression would ever arise? The language, as is typical of royal ideology, is hyperbolic, and perhaps neither Isaiah nor his original audience would have pushed it to its limits, beyond its conventional frames of reference, but the language itself invites such exploitation. If one accepts God's providential direction of history, it is hard to complain about the exegetical development this exploitation produced.[27] Evangelical scholar Ben Witherington III likewise sees a reference to both Hezekiah and a future deliverer. He writes, “[T]he use of the deliberately hyperbolic language that the prophet knew would not be fulfilled in Hezekiah left open the door quite deliberately to look for an eschatological fulfillment later.”[28] Thus, even if Isaiah's prophecy had an original referent, it left the door open for a true and better Hezekiah, who would not just defeat Assyria, but all evil, and not just for a generation, but forever. For this reason, it makes sense to take a “both-and” approach to Isa 9:6. Who Called His Name? Before going on to consider the actual name given to the child, we must consider the subject of the word וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “and he called.” Jewish interpreters have and continue to take אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor), “Mighty God,” as the subject of this verb. Here are a few examples of this rendering: Targum Jonathan (2nd century) And his name has been called from before the One Who Causes Wonderful Counsel, God the Warrior, the Eternally Existing One—the Messiah who will increase peace upon us in his days.[29] Shlomo Yitzchaki (11th century) The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah's name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.[30] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi (16th century) “For a child is born to us.” A son will be born and this is Hezekiah. Though Ahaz is an evildoer, his son Hezekiah will be a righteous king. He will be strong in his service of the Holy One. He will study Torah and the Holy One will call him, “eternal father, peaceful ruler.” In his days there will be peace and truth.[31] The Stone Edition of the Tanach (20th century) The Wondrous Adviser, Mighty God, Eternal Father, called his name Sar-shalom [Prince of Peace][32] Although sometimes Christian commentators blithely accuse Jewish scholars of avoiding the implications of calling the child “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father,” the grammar does allow multiple options here. The main question is whether Isaiah specified the subject of the verb וַיִקְרָ (vayikra) or not. If he has, then the subject must be אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor). If he has not, then the subject must be indefinite (i.e. “he” or “one”). What's more, the Masoretic punctuation of the Hebrew suggests the translation, “and the Wonderful Adviser, the Mighty God called his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace'”[33] However, Keil and Delitzsch point out problems with this view on both grammatical and contextual grounds. They write: [I]t is impossible to conceive for what precise reason such a periphrastic description of God should be employed in connection with the naming of this child, as is not only altogether different from Isaiah's usual custom, but altogether unparalleled in itself, especially without the definite article. The names of God should at least have been defined thus, הַיּוֹעֵץ פֵּלֶא הַגִּבּוֹר, so as to distinguish them from the two names of the child.”[34] Thus, though the Masoretic markings favor the Jewish translation, the grammar doesn't favor taking “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God” as the subject. It's certainly not impossible, but it is a strained reading without parallels in Isaiah and without justification in the immediate context. Let's consider another possibility. His Name Has Been Called Instead of taking אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as the subject, we can posit an indefinite subject for וַיִקְרָ (vayikra): “one has called.” Examples of this outside of Isaiah 9:6 include Gen 11:9; 25:26; Exod 15:23; and 2 Sam 2:16. The phenomenon appears in Gesenius (§144d) and Joüon and Muraoka (§155e), both of which include our text as examples. However, the translation “one has called his name” is awkward in English due to our lack of a generic pronoun like on in French or man in German. Accordingly, most translations employ the passive construction: “his name has been called,” omitting the subject.[35] This is apparently also how those who produced the Septuagint (LXX) took the Hebrew text, employing a passive rather than an active verb.[36] In conclusion, the translation “his name has been called” works best in English. Mighty Hero Now we broach the question of how to render אֵל גִּבּוֹר el gibbor. As I've already noted, a few translations prefer “mighty hero.” But this reading is problematic since it takes the two words in reverse order. Although in English we typically put an adjective before the noun it modifies, in Hebrew the noun comes first and then any adjectives that act upon it. Taking the phrase as אֵל גִּבּוֹר (gibbor el) makes “mighty” the noun and “God” the adjective. Now since the inner meaning of אֵל (el) is “strong” or “mighty,” and גִּבּוֹר gibbor means “warrior” or “hero,” we can see how translators end up with “mighty warrior” or “divine hero.” Robert Alter offers the following explanation: The most challenging epithet in this sequence is ‘el gibor [sic], which appears to say “warrior-god.” The prophet would be violating all biblical usage if he called the Davidic king “God,” and that term is best construed here as some sort of intensifier. In fact, the two words could conceivably be a scribal reversal of gibor ‘el, in which case the second word would clearly function as a suffix of intensification as it occasionally does elsewhere in the Bible.[37] Please note that Alter's motive for reversing the two words is that the text, as it stands, would violate all biblical usage by calling the Davidic king “God.” But Alter is incorrect. We have another biblical usage calling the Davidic king “God” in Psalm 45:6. We must allow the text to determine interpretation. Changing translation for the sake of theology is allowing the tail to wag the dog. Another reason to doubt “divine warrior” as a translation is that “Wherever ʾēl gibbôr occurs elsewhere in the Bible there is no doubt that the term refers to God (10:21; cf. also Deut. 10:17; Jer. 32:18),” notes John Oswalt.[38] Keil and Delitzsch likewise see Isa 10:21 as the rock upon which these translations suffer shipwreck.[39] “A remnant will return,” says Isa 10:21, “the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.” The previous verse makes it clear that “mighty God” refers to none other than “Yahweh, the holy one of Israel.” Without counter examples elsewhere in the Bible, we lack the basis to defy the traditional ordering of “God” as the noun and “mighty” or “warrior” as the adjective.[40] Mighty God-Man Did Isaiah foresee a human child who would also be the mighty God? Did he suddenly get “a glimpse of the fact that in the fullness of the Godhead there is a plurality of Persons,” as Edward Young thought?[41] Although apologists seeking to prove the deity of Christ routinely push for this reading, other evangelical scholars have expressed doubts about such a bold interpretation.[42] Even Keil and Delitzsch, after zealously batting away Jewish alternatives, admit Isaiah's language would not have suggested an incarnate deity in its original context.[43] Still, it would not be anachronistic to regard a king as a deity in the context of the ancient Near East. We find such exalted language in parallels from Egypt and Assyria in their accession oracles (proclamations given at the time a new king ascends the throne). Taking their cue from the Egyptian practices of bestowing divine throne names upon the Pharaoh's accession to the throne, G. von Rad and A. Alt envisioned a similar practice in Jerusalem. Although quite influential, Wegner has pointed out several major problems with this way of looking at our text: (1) the announcement is to the people in Isa 9:6, not the king; (2) Isa 9:6 does not use adoption language nor call the child God's son; (3) יֶלֶד (yeled), “child,” is never used in accession oracles; (4) the Egyptian parallels have five titles not four as in Isa 9:6; (5) Egyptians employ a different structure for accession oracles than Isa 9:6; and (6) we have no evidence elsewhere that Judean kings imitated the Egyptian custom of bestowing divine titles.[44] Another possibility, argued by R. A. Carlson, is to see the names as anti-Assyrian polemic.[45] Keeping in mind that Assyria was constantly threatening Judah in the lifetime of Isaiah and that the child born was to signal deliverance, it would be no surprise that Isaiah would cast the child as a deliberate counter-Assyrian hero. Still, as Oswalt points out, “[T]he Hebrews did not believe this [that their kings were gods]. They denied that the king was anything more than the representative of God.”[46] Owing to a lack of parallels within Israel and Isaiah's own penchant for strict monotheism,[47] interpreting Isa 9:6 as presenting a God-man is ad hoc at best and outright eisegesis at worst. Furthermore, as I've already noted, the grammar of the passage indicates a historical child who was already born. Thus, if Isaiah meant to teach the deity of the child, we'd have two God-men: Hezekiah and Jesus. Far from a courtly scene of coronation, Wegner makes the case that our text is really a birth announcement in form. Birth announcements have (1) a declaration of the birth, (2) an announcement of the child's name, (3) an explanation of what the name means, and (4) a further prophecy about the child's future.[48] These elements are all present in Isa 9:6, making it a much better candidate for a birth announcement than an accession or coronation oracle. As a result, we should not expect divine titles given to the king like when the Pharaohs or Assyrian kings ascended the throne; instead, we ought to look for names that somehow relate to the child's career. We will delve more into this when we broach the topic of theophoric names. Mighty God's Agent Another possibility is to retain the traditional translation of “mighty God” and see the child as God's agent who bears the title. In fact, the Bible calls Moses[49] and the judges[50] of Israel אֱלֹהִים (elohim), “god(s),” due to their role in representing God. Likewise, as I've already mentioned, the court poet called the Davidic King “god” in Ps 45:6. Additionally, the word אֵל (el), “god,” refers to representatives of Yahweh whether divine (Ps 82:1, 6) or human (John 10.34ff).[51] Thus, Isa 9:6 could be another case in which a deputized human acting as God's agent is referred to as God. The NET nicely explains: [H]aving read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king's deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God's representative on earth. …When the king's enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself.[52] Raymond Brown admits that this “may have been looked on simply as a royal title.”[53] Likewise Williamson sees this possibility as “perfectly acceptable,” though he prefers the theophoric approach.[54] Even the incarnation-affirming Keil and Delitzsch recognize that calling the child אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) is “nothing further…than this, that the Messiah would be the image of God as no other man ever had been (cf., El, Ps. 82:1), and that He would have God dwelling within Him (cf., Jer. 33:16).”[55] Edward L. Curtis similarly points out that had Isaiah meant to teach that the child would be an incarnation of Yahweh, he would have “further unfolded and made central this thought” throughout his book.[56] He likewise sees Isa 9:6 not as teaching “the incarnation of a deity” but as a case “not foreign to Hebrew usage to apply divine names to men of exalted position,” citing Exod 21:6 and Ps 82:6 as parallels.[57] Notwithstanding the lexical and scholarly support for this view, not to mention my own previous position[58] on Isa 9:6, I'm no longer convinced that this is the best explanation. It's certainly possible to call people “Gods” because they are his agents, but it is also rare. We'll come to my current view shortly, but for now, let's approach the second controversial title. Eternal Father The word אֲבִיעַד (aviad), “Eternal Father,” is another recognizable appellative for Yahweh. As I mentioned in the introduction, translators have occasionally watered down the phrase, unwilling to accept that a human could receive such a title. But humans who pioneer an activity or invent something new are fathers.[59] Walking in someone's footsteps is metaphorically recognizing him as one's father.[60] Caring for others like a father is yet another way to think about it.[61] Perhaps the child is a father in one of these figurative senses. If we follow Jerome and translate אֲבִיעַד (aviad) as Pater futuri saeculi, “Father of the future age,” we can reconfigure the title, “Eternal Father,” from eternal without beginning to eternal with a beginning but without an end. However, notes Williamson, “There is no parallel to calling the king ‘Father,' rather the king is more usually designated as God's son.”[62] Although we find Yahweh referred to as “Father” twice in Isaiah (Isa 63:16; 64:7), and several more times throughout the Old Testament,[63] the Messiah is not so called. Even in the New Testament we don't see the title applied to Jesus. Although not impossible to be taken as Jesus's fatherly role to play in the age to come, the most natural way to take אֲבִיעַד (aviad) is as a reference to Yahweh. In conclusion, both “mighty God” and “eternal Father” most naturally refer to Yahweh and not the child. If this is so, why is the child named with such divine designations? A Theophoric Name Finally, we are ready to consider the solution to our translation and interpretation woes. Israelites were fond of naming their kids with theophoric names (names that “carry God”). William Holladay explains: Israelite personal names were in general of two sorts. Some of them were descriptive names… But most Israelite personal names were theophoric; that is, they involve a name or title or designation of God, with a verb or adjective or noun which expresses a theological affirmation. Thus “Hezekiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) is my strength,” and “Isaiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) has brought salvation.” It is obvious that Isaiah is not called “Yahweh”; he bears a name which says something about Yahweh.[64] As Holladay demonstrates, when translating a theophoric name, it is customary to supplement the literal phrase with the verb, “to be.” Hezekiah = “Yah (is) my strength”; Isaiah = “Yah (is) salvation.” Similarly, Elijah means “My God (is) Yah” and Eliab, “My God (is the) Father.” Theophoric names are not about the child; they are about the God of the parents. When we imagine Elijah's mother calling him for dinner, she's literally saying “My God (is) Yah(weh), it's time for dinner.” The child's name served to remind her who her God was. Similarly, these other names spoke of God's strength, salvation, and fatherhood. To interpret the named child of Isa 9:6 correctly, we must look at the previously named children in Isa 7 and 8. In chapter 7 the boy is called “Immanuel,” meaning “God (is) with us” (Isa 7:14). This was a historical child who signaled prophecy. Isaiah said, “For before the boy knows to reject evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be abandoned” (Isa 7:16). In Isa 8:1 we encounter “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz,” or “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.”[65] This child has a two-sentence name with an attached prophecy: “For before the boy calls, ‘my father' or ‘my mother,' the strength of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off before the king of Assyria” (Isa 8:4). Both children's sign names did not describe them nor what they would do, but what God would do for his people. Immanuel is a statement of faith. The name means God has not abandoned his people; they can confidently say, “God is with us” (Isa 8:10). Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz does not mean that the child would become a warrior to sack Damascus and seize her spoils, but that God would bring about the despoiling of Judah's enemy. When we encounter a third sign-named child in as many chapters, we are on solid contextual grounds to see this new, longer name in the same light. Isaiah prophecies that this child has the government upon his shoulder, sits on the throne of David, and will establish a lasting period of justice and righteousness (Isa 9:5, 7). This child bears the name “Pele-Yoets-El-Gibbor-Aviad-Sar-Shalom.” The name describes his parents' God, the mighty God, the eternal Father. Although this perspective has not yet won the day, it is well attested in a surprising breadth of resources. Already in 1867, Samuel David Luzzatto put forward this position.[66] The Jewish Publication Society concurred in their 2014 study Bible: Semitic names often consist of sentences that describe God … These names do not describe that person who holds them but the god whom the parents worship. Similarly, the name given to the child in this v. does not describe that child or attribute divinity to him, but describes God's actions.[67] The New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV) footnote on Isa. 9:6 says, “As in many Israelite personal names, the deity, not the person named, is being described.”[68] Additional scholars advocating the view also include Holladay (1978), Wegner (1992), Goldingay (1999, 2015), and Williamson (2018). Even so, Keil and Delitzsch eschew “such a sesquipedalian name,” calling it “unskillful,” and arguing that it would be impractical “to be uttered in one breath.”[69] But this is to take the idea too literally. No one is going to actually call the child by this name. John Goldingay helpfully explains: So he has that complicated name, “An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Father-is-an-officer-for-well-being.” Like earlier names in Isaiah (God-is-with-us, Remains-Will-Return, Plunder-hurries-loot-rushes), the name is a sentence. None of these names are the person's everyday name—as when the New Testament says that Jesus will be called Immanuel, “God [is] with us,” without meaning this expression is Jesus' name. Rather, the person somehow stands for whatever the “name” says. God gives him a sign of the truth of the expression attached to him. The names don't mean that the person is God with us, or is the remains, or is the plunder, and likewise this new name doesn't mean the child is what the name says. Rather he is a sign and guarantee of it. It's as if he goes around bearing a billboard with that message and with the reminder that God commissioned the billboard.[70] Still, there's the question of identifying Yahweh as שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom). Since most of our translations render the phrase “Prince of Peace,” and the common meaning of a prince is someone inferior to the king, we turn away from labeling God with this title. Although HALOT mentions “representative of the king, official” for the first definition their second is “person of note, commander.”[71] The BDB glosses “chieftain, chief, ruler, official, captain, prince” as their first entry.[72] Wegner adds: “The book of Isaiah also appears to use the word sar in the general sense of “ruler.””[73] Still, we must ask, is it reasonable to think of Yahweh as a שַׂר (sar)? We find the phrase שַׂר־הַצָּבָא (sar-hatsava), “prince of hosts,” in Daniel 8:11 and שַׂר־שָׂרִים (sar-sarim), “prince of princes,” in verse 25, where both refer to God.[74]  The UBS Translators' Handbook recommends “God, the chief of the heavenly army” for verse 11 and “the greatest of all kings” for verse 25.[75] The handbook discourages using “prince,” since “the English word ‘prince' does not mean the ruler himself but rather the son of the ruler, while the Hebrew term always designates a ruler, not at all implying son of a ruler.”[76] I suggest applying this same logic to Isa 9:6. Rather than translating שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom) as “Prince of Peace,” we can render it, “Ruler of Peace” or “Ruler who brings peace.” Translating the Name Sentences Now that I've laid out the case for the theophoric approach, let's consider translation possibilities. Wegner writes, “the whole name should be divided into two parallel units each containing one theophoric element.”[77] This makes sense considering the structure of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, which translates two parallel name sentences: “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.” Here are a few options for translating the name. Jewish Publication Society (1917) Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of peace[78] William Holladay (1978) Planner of wonders; God the war hero (is) Father forever; prince of well-being[79] New Jewish Publication Society (1985) The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler[80] John Goldingay (1999) One who plans a wonder is the warrior God; the father for ever is a commander who brings peace[81] John Goldingay (2015) An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Fathers-is-an-official-for-well-being[82] Hugh Williamson (2018) A Wonderful Planner is the Mighty God, An Eternal Father is the Prince of Peace[83] My Translation (2024) The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace[84] I prefer to translate אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as “warrior God” rather than “mighty God” because the context is martial, and  גִּבּוֹר(gibbor) often refers to those fighting in war.[85] “Mighty God” is ambiguous, and easily decontextualized from the setting of Isa 9:6. After all, Isa 9:4-5 tells a great victory “as on the day of Midian”—a victory so complete that they burn “all the boots of the tramping warriors” in the fire. The word פֶּלֶא (pele), though often translated “wonderful,” is actually the word for “miracle,” and יוֹעֵץ (yoets) is a participle meaning “adviser” or “planner.” Since the context is war, this “miracle of an adviser” or “miraculous planner” refers to military plans—what we call strategy, hence, “miraculous strategist.” Amazingly, the tactic God employed in the time of Hezekiah was to send out an angel during the night who “struck down one hundred eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians” (Isa 37:36). This was evidently the warrior God's miraculous plan to remove the threat of Assyria from Jerusalem's doorstep. Prophecies about the coming day of God when he sends Jesus Christ—the true and better Hezekiah—likewise foretell of an even greater victory over the nations.[86] In fact, just two chapters later we find a messianic prophecy of one who will “strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked” (Isa 11:4). The next phrase, “The eternal Father,” needs little comment since God's eternality and fatherhood are both noncontroversial and multiply attested. Literally translated, שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar-shalom) is “Ruler of peace,” but I take the word pair as a genitive of product.[87] Williamson unpacks this meaning as “the one who is able to initiate and maintain Peace.”[88] That his actions in the time of Hezekiah brought peace is a matter of history. After a huge portion of the Assyrian army died, King Sennacherib went back to Nineveh, where his sons murdered him (Isa 37:37-38). For decades, Judah continued to live in her homeland. Thus, this child's birth signaled the beginning of the end for Assyria. In fact, the empire itself eventually imploded, a fate that, at Hezekiah's birth, must have seemed utterly unthinkable. Of course, the ultimate peace God will bring through his Messiah will far outshine what Hezekiah achieved.[89] Conclusion We began by considering the phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo). We noted that the tense is perfect, which justifies a past-tense interpretation of the child who had already been born by the time of the birth announcement. I presented the case for Hezekiah as the initial referent of Isa 9:6 based on the fact that Hezekiah’s life overlapped with Isaiah’s, that he sat on the throne of David (v7), and that his reign saw the miraculous deliverance from Assyria's army. Furthermore, I noted that identifying the child of Isa 9:6 as Hezekiah does not preclude a true and better one to come. Although Isa 9:6 does not show up in the New Testament, I agree with the majority of Christians who recognize this text as a messianic prophecy, especially when combined with verse 7. Next we puzzled over the subject for phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo.) Two options are that the phrase פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר (pele yoets el gibbor) functions as the subject or else the subject is indefinite. Although the Jewish interpreters overwhelmingly favor the former, the lack of definite articles and parallel constructions in Isaiah make me think the latter is more likely. Still, the Jewish approach to translation is a legitimate possibility. I explained how a passive voice makes sense in English since it hides the subject, and settled on “his name has been called,” as the best translation. Then we looked at the phrase אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) and considered the option of switching the order of the words and taking the first as the modifier of the second as in “mighty hero” or “divine warrior.” We explored the possibility that Isaiah was ascribing deity to the newborn child. We looked at the idea of Isaiah calling the boy “Mighty God” because he represented God. In the end we concluded that these all are less likely than taking God as the referent, especially in light of the identical phrase in Isa 10:21 where it unambiguously refers to Yahweh. Moving on to אֲבִיעַד (aviad), we considered the possibility that “father” could refer to someone who started something significant and “eternal” could merely designate a coming age. Once again, though these are both possible readings, they are strained and ad hoc, lacking any indication in the text to signal a non-straightforward reading. So, as with “Mighty God,” I also take “Eternal Father” as simple references to God and not the child. Finally, we explored the notion of theophoric names. Leaning on two mainstream Bible translations and five scholars, from Luzzatto to Williamson, we saw that this lesser-known approach is quite attractive. Not only does it take the grammar at face value, it also explains how a human being could be named “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father.” The name describes God and not the child who bears it. Lastly, drawing on the work of the Jewish Publication Society, Goldingay, and Williamson, I proposed the translation: “The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace.” This rendering preserves the martial context of Isa 9:6 and glosses each word according to its most common definition. I added in the verb “is” twice as is customary when translating theophoric names. The result is a translation that recognizes God as the focus and not the child. This fits best in the immediate context, assuming Hezekiah is the original referent. After all, his greatest moment was not charging out ahead of a column of soldiers, but his entering the house of Yahweh and praying for salvation. God took care of everything else. Likewise, the ultimate Son of David will have God's spirit influencing him: a spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and fear of God (Isa 11:2). The eternal Father will so direct his anointed that he will “not judge by what his eyes see or decide by what his ears hear” (Isa 11:3). In his days God will bring about a shalom so deep that even the animals will become peaceful (Isa 11:6-8). An advantage of this reading of Isa 9:6 is that it is compatible with the full range of christological positions Christians hold. Secondly, this approach nicely fits with the original meaning in Isaiah’s day, and it works for the prophecy’s ultimate referent in Christ Jesus. Additionally, it is the interpretation with the least amount of special pleading. Finally, it puts everything into the correct order, allowing exegesis to drive theology rather than the other way around. Bibliography Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2012. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917. The Jewish Study Bible. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler. Second ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Net Bible, Full Notes Edition. Edited by W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer. 2nd ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019. The New Oxford Annotated Bible. Edited by Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins. Third ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. The Stone Edition of the Tanach. Edited by Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz. Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996. Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. 4th, Reprint. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985. Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan. Translated by Eidon Clem. Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015. Alter, Rober. The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im. Vol. 2. 3 vols. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019. Ashkenazi, Jacob ben Isaac. Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English. Translated by Morris M. Faierstein. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017. https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Baumgartner, Ludwig Koehler and Walter. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by M. E. J. Richardson. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Brown, Raymond E. Jesus: God and Man, edited by 3. New York: Macmillan, 1967. Carlson, R. A. “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974): 130-5. Curtis, Edward L. “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7.” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 336-41. Delitzsch, C. F. Keil and F. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Finnegan, Sean. “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity.” Paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA, 2008, https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. Goldingay, John. “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6).” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 239-44. Goldingay, John. Isaiah for Everyone. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015. Holladay, William L. Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978. III, Ben Witherington. Isaiah Old and New. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. Luzzatto, Samuel David. Shi’ur Komah. Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867. O’Connor, Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990. Ogden, Graham S., and Jan Sterk. A Handbook on Isaiah. Ubs Translator's Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies, 2011. Oswalt, John. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39. Nicot. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986. Péter-Contesse, René and John Ellington. A Handbook on Daniel. Ubs Translator’s Handbooks. New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993. Roberts, J. J. M. First Isaiah. Vol. 23A. Hermeneia, edited by Peter Machinist. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Walter Bauer, Frederick W. Danker, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Wegner, Paul D. “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103-12. Williamson, H. G. M. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27. Vol. 2. International Critical Commentary, edited by G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett. New York: Bloomsbury, 2018. Yitzchaki, Shlomo. Complete Tanach with Rashi. Translated by A. J. Rosenberg. Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Young, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965. End Notes [1] Throughout I'll refer to Isaiah 9:6 based on the versification used in English translations. Hebrew Bibles shift the count by one, so the same verse is Isaiah 9:5. [2] Paul D. Wegner, “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103. [3] BHS is the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the standard Hebrew text based on the Leningrad Codex, a medieval Masoretic text. [4] In Hebrew the perfect tense roughly maps onto English past tense and the imperfect tense to future tense. [5] See NRSVUE, ESV, NASB20, NIV, NET, LSB, NLT, NKJ, ASV, KJV. [6] See translations by Robert Alter, James Moffat, and Duncan Heaster.  Also see Westminster Commentary, Cambridge Bible Commentary, New Century Bible Commentary, and The Daily Study Bible. [7] See New English Bible. [8] See Ibn Ezra. [9] See An American Testament. [10] “Held” means “hero” in German. In the Luther Bible (1545), he translated the phrase as “und er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Kraft, Held, Ewig -Vater, Friedefürst,” separating power (Kraft = El) and hero (Held = Gibbor) whereas in the 1912 revision we read, “er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Held, Ewig-Vater Friedefürst,” which reduced el gibbor to “Held” (hero). [11] See fn 4 above. [12] See New American Bible Revised Edition and An American Testament. [13] See New English Bible and James Moffatt's translation. [14] See Ibn Ezra. [15] See Duncan Heaster's New European Version. [16] See Word Biblical Commentary. [17] See Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917, the Koren Jerusalem Bible, and the Complete Jewish Bible. [18] In the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1QIsaa 8.24 reads “וקרא,” the vav-conversed form of “קרא,” translated “he will call,” an active future tense. This reading is implausible considering the unambiguous past tense of the two initial clauses that began verse 6: “a child has been born…a son has been given.” [19] “Here the Hebrew begins to use imperfect verb forms with the conjunction often rendered “and.” These verbs continue the tense of the perfect verb forms used in the previous lines. They refer to a state or situation that now exists, so they may be rendered with the present tense in English. Some translations continue to use a perfect tense here (so NJB, NJPSV, FRCL), which is better.” Graham S. Ogden, and Jan Sterk, A Handbook on Isaiah, Ubs Translator's Handbooks (New York: United Bible Societies, 2011). [20] H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27, vol. 2, International Critical Commentary, ed. G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett (New York: Bloomsbury, 2018), 371. [21] Wilhelm Gesenius, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), §106n. [22] Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990), §30.5.1e. [23] John Goldingay takes a “both-and” position, recognizing that Isaiah was speaking by faith of what God would do in the future, but also seeing the birth of the son to the king as having already happened by the time of the prophecy. John Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015), 42. [24] Jewish authors include Rashi, A. E. Kimchi, Abravanel, Malbim, and Luzzatto. [25] See 2 Kings 18:3-7. [26] Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own. [27] J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, vol. 23A, Hermeneia, ed. Peter Machinist (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 153. [28] Ben Witherington III, Isaiah Old and New (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017), 95-6, 99-100. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. [29] Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan, trans. Eidon Clem (Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015). [30] Shlomo Yitzchaki, Complete Tanach with Rashi, trans. A. J. Rosenberg (Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998). https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [31] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi, Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English, trans. Morris M. Faierstein (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017). https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [32] Square brackets in original. The Stone Edition of the Tanach, ed. Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz (Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996). [33] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, ed. W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019), 1266. [34] C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 249-50. [35] As mentioned above, the Hebrew is not actually passive. [36] The LXX reads “καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ” (kai kaleitai to onoma autou), which means “and his name is called.” [37] Rober Alter, The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im, vol. 2, 3 vols. (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019), 651. [38] John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, Nicot (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 247. [39] Delitzsch, 252. [40] The אֵלֵי גִבּוֹרִים (eley gibborim) of Ezek 32.21 although morphologically suggestive of a plural form of el gibbor, is not a suitable parallel to Isa 9:6 since אֵלֵי (eley) is the plural of אַיִל (ayil), meaning “chief” not אֵל (el). Thus, the translation “mighty chiefs” or “warrior rulers” takes eley as the noun and gibborim as the adjective and does not actually reverse them. [41] Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965), 338. [42] Translator's note A on Isa 9:6 in the NET states, “[I]t is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way.” Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [43] “The Messiah is the corporeal presence of this mighty God; for He is with Him, He is in Him, and in Him He is with Israel. The expression did not preclude the fact that the Messiah would be God and man in one person; but it did not penetrate to this depth, so far as the Old Testament consciousness was concerned.” Delitzsch, 253. [44] See Wegner 104-5. [45] See R. A. Carlson, “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974). [46] Oswalt, 246. [47] Isa 43:10-11; 44:6, 8; 45:5-6, 18, 21-22; 46:9. Deut 17:14-20 lays out the expectations for an Israelite king, many of which limit his power and restrict his exaltation, making deification untenable. [48] Wegner 108. [49] See Exod 4:16; 7:1. The word “God” can apply to “any person characterized by greatness or power: mighty one, great one, judge,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament.. The BDAG concurs, adding that a God is “that which is nontranscendent but considered worthy of special reverence or respect… of humans θεοί (as אֱלֹהִים) J[ohn] 10:34f (Ps 81:6; humans are called θ. in the OT also Ex 7:1; 22:27,” s.v. “θεός” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. [50] See Exod 21.6; 22:8-9. The BDB includes the definition, “rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [51] Thayer points this out in his lexicon: “Hebraistically, equivalent to God’s representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges, John 10:34f after Ps. 81:6 (Ps. 82:6)” s.v. “θέος” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. [52] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [53] Raymond E. Brown, Jesus: God and Man, ed. 3 (New York: Macmillan, 1967), 25. [54] Williamson, 397. [55] Delitzsch, 253. See also fn 40 above. [56] Edward L. Curtis, “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7,” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 339. [57] Ibid. [58] Sean Finnegan, “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity” (paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA2008), https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. [59] Jabal was the father of those who live in tents and have livestock (Gen 4:20) and Jubal was the father of those who play the lyre and the pipe (Gen 4:21). [60] Jesus told his critics, “You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father's desires” (John 8:44). [61] Job called himself “a father to the needy” (Job 29:16) and Isaiah prophesied that Eliakim would be “a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (Isa 22:21). [62] Williamson, 397. [63] For references to Yahweh as father to the people see Deut 32:6; Ps 103:13; Prov 3:12; Jer 3:4; 31.9; Mal 1.6; 2:10. For Yahweh as father to the messiah see 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chron 7:13; 28:6; Ps 89:27. [64] William L. Holladay, Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978), 108. [65] See NRSVUE fn on Isa 8:1. [66] והנה המכוון במאמר פלא יועץ וגו’ הוא כי האל הגבור שהוא אבי עד ואדון השלום, הוא יועץ וגוזר לעשות פלא לישראל בזמן ממלכת הילד הנולד היום, ואח”כ מפרש למרבה המשרה וגו’. ולפי הפירוש הזה לא לחנם האריך כאן בתארי האל, כי כוונת הנביא לרמוז כי בבוא הפלא שהאל יועץ וגוזר עתה, יוודע שהוא אל גבור ובעל היכולת ושהוא אב לעד, ולא יפר בריתו עם בניו בני ישראל, ולא ישכח את ברית אבותם. ושהוא אדון השלום ואוהב השלום, ולא יאהב העריצים אשר כל חפצם לנתוש ולנתוץ ולהאביד ולהרוס, אבל הוא משפילם עד עפר, ונותן שלום בארץ, כמו שראינו בכל הדורות. Chat GPT translation: “And behold, the intention in the phrase ‘Wonderful Counselor’ and so on is that the mighty God, who is the Eternal Father and the Prince of Peace, is the Counselor and decrees to perform a wonder for Israel at the time of the reign of the child born today. Afterwards, it is explained as ‘to increase the dominion’ and so on. According to this interpretation, it is not in vain that the prophet elaborates on the attributes of God here, for the prophet’s intention is to hint that when the wonder that God now advises and decrees comes about, it will be known that He is the Mighty God and possesses the ability and that He is the Eternal Father. He will not break His covenant with His sons, the children of Israel, nor forget the covenant of their ancestors. He is the Prince of Peace and loves peace, and He will not favor the oppressors whose every desire is to tear apart, destroy, and obliterate, but He will humble them to the dust and grant peace to the land, as we have seen throughout the generations.” Samuel David Luzzatto, Shi’ur Komah (Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867). Accessible at Sefaria and the National Library of Israel. [67]The Jewish Study Bible, ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, Second ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 784. [68] The New Oxford Annotated Bible, ed. Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins, Third ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 991. [69] Delitzsch, 249. [70] Goldingay, 42-3. [71] Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. M. E. J. Richardson (Leiden: Brill, 2000). [72] See s.v. “שַׂר” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [73] Wegner 112. [74] Keil and Delitzsch say the sar of Dan 8:11 refers to “the God of heaven and the King of Israel, the Prince of princes, as He is called in v. 25,” Delitzsch, 297. [75] René and John Ellington Péter-Contesse, A Handbook on Daniel, Ubs Translator’s Handbooks (New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993). [76] Ibid. [77] Wegner 110-1. [78] The main text transliterates “Pele-joez-el-gibbor-/Abi-ad-sar-shalom,” while the footnote translates as indicated above. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917), 575. [79] Holladay, 109. [80] Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text (4th: repr., Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985), 634. [81] John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6),” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 243. [82] Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone, 40. [83] Williamson, 355. [84] An alternative is “The warrior God is planning a miracle; the eternal Father is the ruler of peace.” [85] For גִּבּוֹר in a military context, see 1 Sam 17:51; 2 Sam 20.7; 2 Kgs 24:16; Isa 21.17; Jer 48:41; Eze 39:20; and Joel 2:7; 3:9. [86] See 2 Thess 2:8 and Rev 19:11-21 (cp. Dan 7:13-14). [87] See Gesenius § 128q, which describes a genitive of “statements of the purpose for which something is intended.” [88] Williamson, 401. [89] Isaiah tells of a time when God will “judge between nations,” resulting in the conversion of the weapons of war into the tools of agriculture and a lasting era when “nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more” (Isa 2:4).

09 28-10-24 LHDW Veterinarios: ¿Habrá una pandemia que afecte a nuestras mascotas? ¿Que hacer con un jabalí en la ciudad?, protocolos absurdos que no permite dispararlos

The Music Authority Podcast...listen, like, comment, download, share, repeat…heard daily on Podchaser, Deezer, Amazon Music, Audible, Listen Notes, Mixcloud, Player FM, Tune In, Podcast Addict, Cast Box, Radio Public, Pocket Cast, APPLE iTunes, and direct for the source distribution site: *Podcast - https://themusicauthority.transistor.fm/  AND NOW there is a website! TheMusicAuthority.comThe Music Authority Podcast! Special Recorded Network Shows, too! Different than my daily show! Seeing that I'm gone from FB now…Follow me on “X” Jim Prell@TMusicAuthority*Radio Candy Radio Monday Wednesday, & Friday 7PM ET, 4PM PT*Rockin' The KOR Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday at 7PM UK time, 2PM ET, 11AM PT  www.koradio.rocks*Pop Radio UK Friday, Saturday, & Sunday 6PM UK, 1PM ET, 10AM PT! *The Sole Of Indie https://soleofindie.rocks/ Monday Through Friday 6-7PM EST!*AltPhillie.Rocks Sunday, Thursday, & Saturday At 11:00AM ET!October 22, 2024, Tuesday, row two…@Fairmont - Ashes To Ashes [I Wish I Was Stupid]@The Directory - Old Nectarine [Shutdown & The Centre For Useless Splendour] (@Subjangle)@Disintegration - A Thousand Clouds of Static [Shiver In A Weak Light]@Red Spot Rhythm Section - Refugee (feat. @Jabal & Livingston) [Won't Back Down – A Roots Tribute To Tom Petty]@The Mommyheads - One Eyed Band [One Eyed Band]@Christopher Lee Lewis - What It Is [They Still Haven't Figured Out What's Wrong With Me]@Librarians With Hickeys - Hello Operator [How To Make Friends By Telephone] (@Big Stir Records)@Indonesian Junk - I Don't Mind [Living In A Nightmare] (@Rum Bar Records)@The Strange Encounters - Long Lost Days [All in The Mind] (@Subjangle)@Heath McNease - Talbot Castle [Out Of The Hollow]@I Do You Do Karate - Plywood To The Moon [III]@Hotbox - Way Ahead Of Me [Hotbox] (@Rum Bar Records)@Papa Schmapa - What You Gonna Do [Where Are You Now?]@The Girl Who Sold The World - Three Key West [Blue Songs - EP]@Sister Thieves – Patron Saint [Crawl]@The Chefs – land Ho [The long lost Second Album] (@Damaged Goods Records)@The Linda Brady Revival – Lizzy Use Your Head [Deep Brain Stimulator]

Le détroit de Gibraltar doit son nom à des événements historiques et à une figure militaire clé liée à la conquête islamique de la péninsule ibérique au VIIIe siècle. Ce passage maritime étroit, qui sépare l'Europe (Espagne) de l'Afrique (Maroc) et relie la mer Méditerranée à l'océan Atlantique, a joué un rôle stratégique tout au long de l'histoire. Le nom "Gibraltar" est une déformation du nom arabe Jabal Ṭāriq, qui signifie "Montagne de Tariq", en référence au général berbère Tariq ibn Ziyad. 1. Contexte historique : la conquête islamiqueEn 711 après J.-C., Tariq ibn Ziyad, un général sous les ordres du gouverneur omeyyade de l'Afrique du Nord, Moussa Ibn Noçaïr, conduisit une armée à traverser le détroit depuis le Maroc vers l'Espagne pour commencer la conquête de la péninsule ibérique. Ce fut le début de la domination musulmane sur une grande partie de l'Espagne, qui allait durer plusieurs siècles. Selon les récits historiques, Tariq aurait débarqué près d'une montagne située à l'extrémité nord du détroit. Cette montagne a pris le nom de Jabal Tariq (la montagne de Tariq), en hommage au général, et c'est de là que dérive le nom "Gibraltar". 2. Étymologie et évolution du nomLe terme "Jabal" signifie "montagne" en arabe, et "Tariq" fait référence au général qui a dirigé cette expédition. Au fil du temps, le nom arabe a évolué sous l'influence des langues locales, notamment du castillan (l'une des langues de la péninsule ibérique), pour devenir Gibraltar. La montagne que Tariq ibn Ziyad a escaladée est aujourd'hui connue sous le nom de Rocher de Gibraltar, un symbole emblématique du détroit. 3. Importance stratégique du détroitLe détroit de Gibraltar, avec une largeur d'environ 14 kilomètres à son point le plus étroit, a toujours été un lieu de grande importance stratégique. Il contrôle l'accès à la Méditerranée depuis l'Atlantique, ce qui en a fait un point névralgique pour les puissances maritimes tout au long de l'histoire. Les Phéniciens, les Romains, les Carthaginois, et plus tard les musulmans, ont tous reconnu l'importance de cette zone. Aujourd'hui, il demeure un passage maritime international de premier plan. 4. L'héritage du nomLe nom Gibraltar, issu de l'histoire de la conquête islamique de l'Espagne, continue d'évoquer les racines historiques de la région et souligne l'importance géopolitique du lieu. Le détroit de Gibraltar est non seulement un site stratégique, mais aussi un symbole des interactions complexes entre les cultures, les civilisations et les empires à travers les siècles. En résumé, le détroit tire son nom de Tariq ibn Ziyad, un général musulman qui a initié la conquête de l'Espagne depuis cet endroit, et son nom reflète cet héritage historique. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

08 14-10-24 LHDW Veterinarios: ¿Los perros sueñan? , la longevidad de los perros grandes. El jabalí y el parásito que transmite a los humanos. Enfermedades de animales

What Happens When A Society Rejects God?Grace Christian Fellowship Mikey Brannon October 13, 2024 [Gen 4:16 ESV] 16 Then Cain went away from the presence of the LORD and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. • Went away from the presence of the Lord.o 4:6-7 Cain is filled with rage against his brother, but is gracious to him and gives him an opportunity to repent.o How sin is conceived (like a baby) in Gen 4:6-7, James 1:14-15o God uses vivid language to describe his sin (4:7) “crouching desire”. (ref. 1 Peter 5:8)o Cain's biggest issue Cain conceived the sin of murder in his heart His desire for sin was greater than his desire for God While cain was religious, fundamentally he was a non-believer!• Knows God personally• Talks with God• Still does not trust God's words Cain is the first cursed person. (4:11-12) The result of the curse is that Cain is forced to become a wanderer, a nomad, a homeless vagabond. Notice Cain willingly gives up religion and relationship with God, in order to rid himself of the precepts that come along with it. This is the choice of the sinner.o “East of Eden” – Genesis language shows that as one moves Eastward they are moving further from the presence of God.o “Land of Nod” Nod means wanderer, exile, or fugitive. [Gen 4:17 ESV] 17 Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. • Even this vile sinner found a wife to marry. Cain obviously married one of his sisters. Together they have a son named Enoch.• “Built a City” - It is not what we expect the vagabond to do, establish a city. It is as if he says, I'll show you God, I'll settle my on place and I don't need you to help. But even the name of the city suggest it is futile.• The Hebrew verb tense suggests that Cain didn't just build a city, but that he was continually building a city. Essentially we can picture Cain endlessly working to buid this city, but never finishing it, until he eventually turns it over to his son to whom it is named Enoch.• This city that Cain would build would be common a city of apostasy and of the inhabatens present and future would be rejecters of God, and they will eventually be drowned.[Gen 4:18 ESV] 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad fathered Mehujael, and Mehujael fathered Methushael, and Methushael fathered Lamech. • Our sin doesn't just affect us but it affects others around us, and even future generations.• In Chapter 5 and 6 we get 2 genealogies here in our text we have a genealogy of Cain, and in the next chapter we have the genealogy of Seth. More on that later.• This geneology traces Cain to one of his descendants Lamech. Lamech is the arch type evil representative of what has come from Cain's apostasy.• Enoch means “dedicated”. Cain running from the curse God has placed on him attempts to build a city and he names his Son and his city “dedicated”. He dedicates his son to his city. As if his son may finally be able to stop running and wandering.• Talk about how sinners try to find comfort somewhere other than God.• Enoch is cains big dillusion.• Our kids are not fooled by our dillusions are they, its very interesting what Enoch names his son, Irad, which can be loosely translated city dweller• Then you have Mejujael and Methusahael, which scholars say means something like, God Blots out and violence to God• Do you see the direction from cain to -> city dweller-> outright violence to God this is trendline of the society.[Gen 4:19 ESV] 19 And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. • The apostate generation culminates with a picture of a man named Lamech (conquerer).• Instantly we encounter an issue with Lamech. He has 2 wives.• We know that God has already established marriage as a union between 1 man and 1 woman. Any other version of this union is a sinful corruption. (Gen. 2:24)• Some people encounter polygamy in the OT and they say see the Bible is wrong it condones things like that. Or that the Bible is inconsistent on its view on marriage. Not true.• Whenever polygamy is shown in the OT it always results in hurt and devastation. (Abraham)• As we can see here in our example text the Bible doesn't come out and make a moral statement about polygamy here. Because it doesn't need to. That is the entire point of this geneology. [Gen 4:20 ESV] 20 Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. • The “bal” brothers: Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal• Stem bal means to produce• Society was a great at producing things• We have world leading agriculture, invention of music, of musical instruments, iron working, bronze instruments of all kinds• Jabal was a shepherd who likely tended sheep. People in the city need someone else to produce meat and garments, so what we see here is the first glimmering of the agricultural industry.• Discussion about how long they lived in this society Adam lived 930 years. In fact did you ever realize Adam almost lived long enough to see the birth of Noah. Cain lived 730 years.[Gen 4:21 ESV] 21 His brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. • Jubal, invented music, and the first instruments. Can you imagine what an accomplishment, Chris Karpus level stuff here. They had likely had figured out things like scales, and chords, and how to construct various instruments to create harmonies.• Now many of us in this room are musicians. How many of you feel like you have enough time to practice your instrument? How many of you feel like you have mastered it and there is nothing else to learn? Imagine if you had 700 years to work on it. Do you think you would be pretty good?[Gen 4:22 ESV] 22 Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah. • Tubal-cain in a similar way had perfected the art of metal working. He is the father of blacksmithing and was the master of the craft. In a similar way having so much time on the earth to master the craft.• These 3 sons were epic leaders of a godless city.• Application: I wonder what outsiders would have said about the city of Nod as they passed by. Great city! Technological leaders, Innovative, Wealthy, luxurious? Does this sound like a cursed city to you?• A society without God is striving to find satisfaction in something else, but they will ever find is emptiness.• This is a society who works and works for the one thing they will never have, rest. Sabbath. Because they have rejected the ultimate rest. (Matthew 12:8)[Gen 4:23 ESV] 23 Lamech said to his wives: "Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say: I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me. • Lamech becomes the poster boy for how far from God this society has come. • Brags to his wives about his murderous rampageo Notice how he speaks to his wives. How far has this Godless society gotten from what Adam first spoke, “bone of my bone flesh of my flesh”o Murder of mano Murder of a childo In both instances Lamech brags about his brutality o What we can observe here in this society that is far from God there is no longer an appreciation for human life.o Why is murder such a heinous crime in the first place?o Gen. 1:27, Gen.9:6o So what we see in a society that is far from God, there is a loss of appreciation for human lifeo Another way to say this is that the value you we place on one another comes from the value that we place in God.o Another way to say this is, Love God, Love People[Gen 4:24 ESV] 24 If Cain's revenge is sevenfold, then Lamech's is seventy-sevenfold." • The reference here is back to verse 4:15.• Remember God had promised Cain protection of his life. Word got around.• In hindsight now that we have studied this passage I think God allowed Cain to live just so that the fullness of his wickedness would play out. It would have been to easy for him to die. So Cain spends hundreds of years trying to outrun the curse, only to die in his futile attempts. It is a much more worthy punishment.• Lamech makes a mockery of God's curse. He is vile, and wicked, he even brags about his wickedness. This city is lost indeed.• What a terrible story if it ended here![Gen 4:25 ESV] 25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, "God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him." • Able the presumed line of redemption is dead. Cain is unfit and cursed. The last time things looked this dark were after the fall.• We think back to the promise (Gen. 3:14). And in God's graciousness we find hope. This verse gives us hope.• Adam and Eve have another son who can help fulfill the promise of Genesis 3:14, Seth.• Seth is not the one to crush the head of the serpant, but we will find out in the next chapter exactly where is line will lead, ultimately to Christ, the ultimate head crusher. Luke 3:38[Gen 4:26 ESV] 26 To Seth also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. At that time people began to call upon the name of the LORD. • Even in the early days apparently outside of the line of Cain people had begun to stray from God• Enosh marks a period of revival where people began to again call upon the name of the Lord.

*) Israel attacks UN peacekeepers in Lebanon Global leaders have expressed outrage and called for accountability after Israel attacked the UN peacekeeper's headquarters in south Lebanon. The mission said at least two peacekeepers were wounded when an Israeli military's Merkava tank directly hit an observation tower at its headquarters in Naqura.  The UN peacekeepers have accused Israel of "repeatedly" hitting their positions deliberately.  *) Israeli launches deadly strikes in occupied West Bank Meanwhile, Israeli drones have fired missiles that killed two Palestinians in the northern occupied West Bank. According to the official Palestinian news agency WAFA, two Palestinians were killed in an Israeli drone strike on a vehicle in the Jabal al Salihin area, east of Tulkarem.  Israeli forces immediately stormed the area after the strike, retrieved the bodies of the men, and withdrew from the location.
 *) UN accuses Israel of destroying Gaza health care system A UN inquiry has found that Israel carried out a concerted policy of destroying Gaza's health care system in its war on Gaza. This amounts to both war crimes and crimes against humanity.  A statement by the ex-UN High Commissioner for Human Rights accused Israel of "relentless and deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities" in its war on Gaza.  According to the report that will be presented to the UN General Assembly on October 30, children in particular have borne the brunt of these attacks.
 *) Mpox continues to be major health issue: African health body Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (ADC) has said mpox is still a major public health issue in Africa, A total of 3,186 new cases were reported in the past week, with 489 confirmed and 53 deaths.  According to ADC, there is a need to accelerate several interventions, including vaccination, to stop the spread, amid surging cases.  *) Unilever finally exits Russia, sells subsidiary British consumer goods giant Unilever has completed the sale of Unilever Russia, finally joining many other multinationals in exiting the country following the Ukraine war.  Unilever said in a statement that it had offloaded the subsidiary to Arnest Group, a Russian manufacturer, for an undisclosed amount.
 Unilever said its business in Russia's close ally Belarus was included in the sale.

Episode Description Episode Description Sign up to receive this Unreached of the Day podcast sent to you:  https://unreachedoftheday.org/resources/podcast/ People Group Summary: https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/12306/LY #PrayforZERO is a podcast Sponsor.         https://prayforzero.com/ Take your place in history! We could be the generation to translate God's Word into every language. YOUR prayers can make this happen.  Take your first step and sign the Prayer Wall to receive the weekly Pray For Zero Journal:  https://prayforzero.com/prayer-wall/#join Pray for the largest Frontier People Groups (FPG): Visit JoshuaProject.net/frontier#podcast provides links to podcast recordings of the prayer guide for the 31 largest FPGs.  Go31.org/FREE provides the printed prayer guide for the largest 31 FPGs along with resources to support those wanting to enlist others in prayer for FPGs

Vanessa Vallecillo aborda cómo la prohibición de la caza obliga a gastar más para acabar con la tuberculosis en Extremadura.

*) Illegal settlers, Israeli soldiers raid West Bank villages Illegal Israeli settlers and soldiers stormed several villages and towns in the occupied West Bank overnight, leading to confrontations with Palestinian residents. Palestinian Television reported that one person was injured during a raid by settlers who were protected by the army in the village of Umm Safa in northern Ramallah. The head of the local village council, Marwan Sabah, said settlers positioned at Jabal al-Ras attacked the village and fired live ammunition at homes, with the backing of the Israeli army. *) Missile from Yemen fell in central Israel — Israeli army The Israeli military said a missile fired from Yemen crossed into central Israel and "fell in an open area". The army said in a statement that "a surface-to-surface missile was identified crossing into central Israel from the East and fell in an open area. No injuries were reported." *) Türkiye urges int'l investigation into Israel's killing of Turkish activist Turkish Presidency's Director of Communications Fahrettin Altun has called on the US to investigate Israel's killing of activist Aysenur Ezgi Eygi. Altun said on his official X account, "Israel targeted her to silence those who raise their voices against its brutal oppression of the Palestinian people." Türkiye has launched an investigation into Israel's killing of the dual Turkish-American citizen. *) Head of NATO military committee backs Kiev's right to strike inside Russia Admiral Rob Bauer, head of NATO's military committee, said that Ukraine has the right to strike deep into Russia for combat advantage. This stance reflects the views of several US allies, though the Biden administration is cautious about allowing such strikes with American-made weapons. Bauer asserted that nations under attack have the right to defend themselves beyond their borders. He also highlighted that countries can impose limits on the weapons they supply to Ukraine. *) Maldives says no need for IMF bailout Maldives Foreign Minister Moosa Zameer announced that the tropical paradise is moving forward with tax hikes to handle its debt. Zameer reassured reporters that their bilateral partners are understanding their situation. He said, “We're not looking to the IMF right now,” noting that their current reserve dip is just a temporary issue, reforms and streamlining state-owned enterprises will boost liquidity.

## Introduction - **Overview:** The host, Ken Primus, introduces the focus of the episode on the family line from which the Nephilim emerged, touching upon biblical and extra-biblical sources. - **Previous Episode:** Brief recap of the previous episode's exploration of the first generation of Nephilim. ## The Days of Jared - **Significance of Jared:** Importance of Jared in the timeline, with his name meaning "descent," correlating with the descent of the angels. - **Timeline:** Overview of the first generation of Nephilim and their reign for 500 years and the continuation until the flood, totaling around 1200 years. ## The Seed War - **Genesis Context:** Explanation of the seed war beginning in Genesis Chapter 3, with Lucifer aware of a prophecy about being defeated by the woman's offspring. - **Cain vs. Abel:** Examination of Cain's attitude and actions leading to the murder of Abel, resulting in God's punishment and Cain becoming a wanderer. ## Lineage of Cain - **Cain's Descendants:** Exploring Cain's lineage, including his descendants Enoch, Irad, and Lamech, who is noted for practicing polygamy. - **Significance of Cities:** Cain building a city named after his son Enoch, with cities generally representing sin. ## The Role of Nama - **Introduction of Nama:** Importance of Nama in Cain's lineage, being one of the few women named in genealogies. - **Marriage to Angels:** Theory that Nama was the first woman to sleep with the angels, making a deal for divine knowledge. ## Knowledge Exchange - **Supernatural Knowledge:** Details on the knowledge received by Nama's brothers Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal Cain, enhancing their skills and wealth. - **Tubal Cain's Skills:** Specific reference to Azazel, a watcher who taught humans about metallurgy, aligning with Tubal Cain's role as the first blacksmith. ## The Impact of Corruption - **Effects on Society:** The spread of knowledge causing societal changes and corruption. - **Divine Judgment:** Discussion on God's judgment, including the flood, targeting the corrupted descendants, but also partly due to the corrupted bloodline even among Seth's lineage.

Host Jamie McGoldrick speaks with Omima Jabal on Sudan. She's an Emergency Response Rooms member for Khartoum. Jamie asks her how ERR's in Sudan are navigating the challenges in getting aid to communities while war continues. Jamie also asks her how international organizations are supporting local NGO's and if they could be doing more to support civilian groups. Omima is hopeful for Sudan and believes the country can rebuild once the violence ends.

Find me and the show on social media @DrWilmerLeon on X (Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube Facebook page is www.facebook.com/Drwilmerleonctd   FULL TRANSCRIPT Wilmer Leon (00:00:00): As I'm sure most of you know by now, according to Iran State Media, Iran's President Ibrahim Raisi, the country's foreign minister, Hussein Amir Abdulah, have died in a helicopter crash. There are a number of questions that this unfortunate turn of events presents. Was this simply an unfortunate accident as their helicopter traveled in dense fog along Iran's border with Azerbaijan, was the helicopter taken down? What's next for Iran? What's next for the region? Announcer (00:00:43): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge. Wilmer Leon (00:00:51): Welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Dr. Wilmer Leon. I'm Wilmer Leon. We have a tendency to view current events as though they occur in a vacuum, failing to understand the broader historical context in which most events take place. During each episode of this program, my guests and I have probing, provocative and in-depth discussions that connect the dots between the events and the broader historic context in which they occur. This enables you to better understand and analyze these events that impact the global village in which we live. For insight into these issues, let's go to Beirut Lebanon. Let my guest, he's an award-winning broadcaster and independent journalist based in Beirut Lebanon. He's a policy consultant with the Community Media Advocacy Center, and you can find him and his work at Free Palestine dot video. He's Laith Marouf Laith. As always, welcome back. Laith Marouf (00:01:53): Thank you for having me. It's always a pleasure to be with you. Wilmer Leon (00:01:56): So let me start with who was former president Ibrahim Raisi. The western media describes him in less than glowing terms as a religious hardliner. He's seen as a potential successor to Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Hamani. He was a former judge and allegedly a member of what the West calls the death commission, which forcibly disappeared and traditionally executed in secret thousands of political dissidents. Those are the allegations who was former President Ibrahim Raisi. Laith Marouf (00:02:41): Well, definitely he was part of the first generation that lived the Islamic Revolution and were on the front lines during the massacres that Iraq and the West commissioned in Iran, the use of chemical weapons against Iranians paid for by the Germans and the us. So he has that credential of living that revolution, and he was a judge and the accusations that are keep on being repeated there of thousands of prisoners being executed, we're talking about the terrorists that are part of the Mujah, the MEK terrorist organization that was housed in Iraq and funded by the West and is now housed in Albania that was responsible for the killing of almost 70,000 people in Iran through their terror campaign. That includes the killing of ministers and the government officials at the time. So the accusation against him is that he crushed the vessels, the terrorists that work for the CIA, that's his accusation against him and otherwise he was a judge and very respected within the country because of this background. Actually, whatever accusation that the west has against him as a discrediting thing, in reality, it is a positive thing for his reputation in Iran because of how he defended Iran against the terrorist. (00:04:31): The hype that we saw over the last month or so in the media about Rasi being going to be the next ayatollah after Hamina steps down, that there is no truth to that in terms of any speaking of that in Iranian society or Iranian media. In fact, we should take it as an indicator of that he was going to be assassinated. There's something that say it has the Sid Hasan Astra, the Secretary General of Hezbollah after the assassination of General Soleimani in 2020 by Trump. So Sid Hasan Asra a speech. He spoke about how when the media in the West suddenly gives attention to a leader in the region out of the blue and start giving them very high stature, that is maybe true, but it's not. That's an indicator of an assassination coming and that he spoke to General Soleimani the day before he was assassinated while he was in Beirut about that and warned him as he was flying to Baghdad on a domestic flight that this is actually even more worrisome that he was on a domestic flight given all this attention. So now we see kind of the same thing happening here, all this hype being pumped about Raisi in the month before the assassination, specifically since the retaliation of Iran against the assassination of its diplomats in the Damascus. So I see it as actually an indicator that he was going to be assassinated and now that's what actually happened. Wilmer Leon (00:06:26): To your point that this was an assassination, there are a couple of things that as soon as I heard that the helicopter went down that came to mind. One was, was it taken down? Apparently there were three helicopters flying in formation and his helicopter was one of the three, and it seems as though it just dropped out of the sky. They keep talking about the terrain, they keep talking about the fog. I know some US military trained helicopter pilot certified helicopter pilots. The first thing I did was call them and ask them when you heard fog, when you heard terrain, when you heard the helicopter went down. I said, what's the first thing that came to your mind? They all said, oh, they took that thing out the sky and they said, first of all, they all said to me as certified pilots, we would never have crashed our helicopter. That just was not going to happen short of some catastrophic mechanical failure. They said, which by the way, we are trained to deal with. They told me the quality of pilots that they have in Iran that those pilots, they say this goes all the way back to when Iran was an ally of the United States during the Shaw's time and that the protocols that were in place then are many of the same protocols that they follow today. (00:08:03): So there was a lot of information opinion that they gave to me, which said, and then they even mentioned, you got to understand the MEK along that region, that Azerbaijan is an ally of Israel or that there are elements within Azerbaijan that are so connect some of those dots for me please. Are these just the opinions of Ill-informed individuals or they said for the fact that the thing dropped out the sky without it, even a mayday call indicates that something was wrong here? Laith Marouf (00:08:43): Yeah, I mean, you mentioned a lot of important things. So first off, obviously there was no made call as you said. So we don't have any information about some problem happening on the helicopter. The other is that there was two other helicopters with it and they continued to reach their target and destination and they reached it. That's the question also, why didn't they stop and fly back and look for the other helicopter? That's a big indicator that there's something wrong that happened there that is not just a regular crash. The other thing is that the Iranian government took a very long time to really show us what happened and tell us that Rasi and his companions were dead. In fact, the hours after the crash, the Minister of Internal Security told the whole world that they received two calls from survivors on the plane, on the helicopter, and later on all the way around 2:00 AM PA on time, again, the minister of internal claim that they received a call from one of the crew members on the helicopter all the way that late saying that they were hearing the ambulances or the sirens in the area. (00:10:13): So while all of this was happening, the minute the helicopter crash was announced and called a soft landing, and then it took so long, I mean, this is Iran that has satellites. This is Iran that has drones that can fly and reach Israel and hit their targets thousands of kilometers away. I thought in my mind that either from the first minute that Raisi and his team were assassinated and they're dead, and the Iranians were delaying the announcements so they can tidy up their house and prepare for the transition and think about what they want to do if there's an actual assassination or that the Iranians were hiding the fact that he was alive and they were just milking it for support. This is what I thought during the whole night as they were doing this search, and obviously for them to finally tell us they're dead, that's in me confirmed that there was an assassination. (00:11:21): None of the stories that came from the Iranian government to the media during the quote search made any sense. And so now we know they're killed. I believe the Iranian government knows that they were killed and how they were killed, and I think given the fact that the Israelis have a tendency of assassinating political leaders as retaliation for their failures on the battlefield, this is historic. Look at how even recently, look at how they assassinated Hamas leadership in Beirut because they were failing on the ground in Gaza and they failed in the battle with Iran after they targeted the embassy in Damascus and Iran landed a huge blow on them and they were not able to retaliate. So their only usual behavior is to assassinate political leaders, and that's what we saw. The question is because Netanyahu attempted last month when attacking the embassy to drag the United States into a war because he sees Israel losing the battle on the ground. (00:12:47): He sees that Israel cannot even fight Hezbollah if a bigger war starts with Lebanon. He needs the United States to be around on the battlefield with him. He wanted to drag Iran into that war with the attack on the embassy, and they didn't retaliate in a way that created a war. And now he did this to try to drag again Iran into this war. But this is not what Iran wants. Iran has a clear plan with the access of resistance that we're seeing unfold over the last seven months, which is to chisel away at Israel slowly and cook it like a frog, a live frog boiling where it collapses internally, where all this support from the world collapses externally, and there's no need for a war for this Zionist colony to collapse, but Netanyahu wants a war. So I think the Iranians are not going to admit that this is an assassination because if they admit this an assassination, they have no choice but to carpet bomb the hell out of the Zionist colony, and that would derail the plan and will take it to the stage that Netanyahu wants it. So I think they're going to just bite the bullet and continue on their set plan and will not be dragged into, it's very sad. I mean, it's very sad that this is going to be what's going to happen, but that's the only thing path forward I see. Otherwise, if Iran decides to retaliate, we're going to be in World War three immediately. Wilmer Leon (00:14:24): And I think it's important for people to understand that there's a much longer term vision here, that the axis of resistance, they have a different worldview. We know that if the situation were reversed and either if somebody had shot an Netanyahu's playing out the sky or if this had happened to Tony Blinken while he was traveling in the region, that the bombs would be exploding by now. But I think there are economic concerns here that those in the region are taking into account war. As I said to Godfather, war is messy business war is very expensive. And with their economies under sanctioned, with their now finding ways to move and operate without the sanctions to go into a war right now, whether it's the Russian economy, whether it's the Chinese economy, whether it's the Iranian economy, they don't want that economic stress on their economies. They also know that I think going into a World War which, or at least a regional conflict, would shut off oil transport through both the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, which would then collapse the world economy. They don't want do that. I don't think I'm conflating their concern for world welfare. I think they're looking much, much longer. Am I connecting some dots here? Laith Marouf (00:16:04): Yes, yes, you definitely are. And although most of the access of resistance and China, Russia, and most of Africa and Latin America want to see an end to American imperialism, no one wants the whole world to burn in the process. Okay? It's no one's interest to have a World War. People want to clip the wings of the United States, bring it back to its natural size, and the same thing for Europe and balance humanity. There's no interest in these countries to see the United States burn and Europe become a wasteland. And so there's the difference. The difference is people in the south and the East just want the foot of America off their neck. They don't want to put their own foot on America's neck. And so we will see, as we are seeing right now, both in the battlefield in Ukraine, or what's happening around Taiwan or what's happening here right now in the Western Asia battlefield is the constant attempt by the access of resistance and others around the world to take things slow, to allow time to be the biggest weapon. Wilmer Leon (00:17:33): Hence the adage. You have the watches, we have the time. So with all of this, what's next for Iran? Laith Marouf (00:17:43): Yeah, I mean, we already know that they have to have an election within 50 days. That was announced yesterday, and the current vice president was appointed as temporary president until elections happen. Iran as a constitutional democracy will fill these positions as fast as possible, even though these individuals leave a huge gap behind them because of their knowledge and portfolios. abd Ian being the youngest foreign affairs minister of Iran's history, and because of his relations in Africa and Latin America and Rasi with the relationships that he built. So where should expect that this is going to happen this election. But look at one thing, the Israelis, at least what they got from this is at least now a distraction for the next three, five days in Iran and World News while they intensify the massacres in Gaza and in the West Bank last night, for instance, eight people were killed in Janine, so Palestinians. (00:19:06): So there's a lot that we can't really predict what's going to happen. The other thing is that it's very possible that Iran, although they don't announce that this was an assassination and that they don't put the finger on Israel, that they actually conduct clandestine actions that are in kind and something nasty happens to some Israeli official, and nobody can say who it is. So those are possibilities. But I think the most probable thing is that Iran will try to stay the course that the support fronts in Lebanon and Yemen will intensify rapidly to a different level. Wilmer Leon (00:19:49): That's my next question. What happens in the region? Laith Marouf (00:19:53): Yes. Yes. So we're already seeing an intensification even before this assassination. We had a change in the tactics on the Lebanese front with Hezbollah conducting multilayered complex operations that include drones, guided missiles, and achieving huge hits. Much of the air defenses that Israel has downing two huge surveillance balloons. One of them is the biggest in the world, this Zeppelin balloon, there's only two of them in the Zionist colony, one around the Una reactor, one in the north. And the Israelis had put this one in the north because of the destruction of all of their surveillance equipment on the border with Lebanon. So to see Hezbollah not only down these drones, but also film the after from, sorry, not only down these balloons, but also film with surveillance, drones after effect of the destruction and coming back with their images, 100% high HD 4K images of the, so we're already passed into a new stage now in Lebanon, and I expect it to only intensify. And similarly with Yemen, I think that in the next 24 hours, we will see Yemen starting to attack shipping in the Mediterranean, and that will add another sea under Yemeni sovereignty. It's not only going to be the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, and the Indian Ocean, you'll have also the Mediterranean, and that will be the smartest thing that Iran can do with the access of resistance is to intensify the battle on these fronts without addressing the issue of the assassination of Raisi. Wilmer Leon (00:21:55): When we look at the recent dynamics, and what I mean by that is if we go back to October 7th, in fact not even that, I'm sorry. What I mean is China gets involved with the Saudis, the Saudis wind up talking to Iran. There's reproach mom between Iran and the Saudis haven't heard much from the Crown Prince Ben Salman. In all of these most recent developments, are there things coming out of Saudi Arabia that are not being reported in the West, particularly now as it relates to the death of former President Raisi? And is Bin Salman concerned about his longevity? Laith Marouf (00:22:54): I think everybody is right now worried about their longevity. We've seen the assassination attempt on the Czech president, so we saw the attempted coup, all of this within 24 hours in Congo. Again, American Israeli mercenaries trying to overthrow the president of La Congo. So we're right now entering a new stage in the global battle, not only in Western Asia, we're seeing the West do the maximum they can with the hybrid war. So it's not only a media war, it's not only a sanctions war, it's not only direct confrontations or military confrontations. We're seeing these assassinations and cos and so on, intensified by the United States and its vessel states. So the Saudis issued an official statement condolences to Iran on the assassination. In fact, all of the Gulf countries, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Emirate, Oman, Saudi, all of them send their condolences. There is three days of mourning in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iraq, in Pakistan, in India, and in Tajikistan and in Turkey. And this is things that are unheard of. Maybe it was expected as Syria or Iraq, but Lebanon and Pakistan and Turkey, this is so we can see that the whole region is worried about the results of this assassination. What does it also mean to, what are the rules of the game now? What is allowed to be done? Because if you are allowed to assassinate presidents now, this means there's no rules. Wilmer Leon (00:25:05): Lemme just quickly say to that point, that reminds me of a comment that President Putin made maybe a year ago as people were talking about, oh, is Russia going to assassinate the president of Ukraine? And Putin said, no. He said, no, no, no, we don't do that. So people need to understand that there's a, I hate to use it. There's a decorum, there's a protocol. There are certain things you're not supposed to do even in the rules of war, even in warfare, you don't assassinate the leader of your opposing country. So you are making that comment just made me think about the point that Laith Marouf (00:25:57): By the way, president Putin is on the way right now on the flight to the Harran, and he's flying with escorts of Soho 35 to the Harran, and he will be there tomorrow during the funeral procession led by the Illah. Wilmer Leon (00:26:19): What is that signal? In my mind that's huge because that's huge on a couple of fronts. One, his country is in the midst of a conflict with NATO slash the United States slash the West. So he must feel incredibly comfortable to leave as he did when he went to China in the midst of this conflict. I can leave my country. I'm not concerned about a being assassinated. I'm not concerned about something happening domestically. B, he's flying into a war zone. He's flying into a country whose president was just killed, many believe assassinated. So on a number of fronts, that to me speaks volumes. Laith Marouf (00:27:07): Yes. And there's the ICC arrest warrant Wilmer Leon (00:27:10): Against that too. Laith Marouf (00:27:11): It's the National Criminal Court. So we know that yesterday, the minute the announcement was made that the crash happened, the President Putin called in the ambassador of Iran to Moscow into almost a six hour meeting with all the heads, the intelligence military in foreign affairs of Russia. It was like a special kind of war council almost. And we don't know what happened in this meeting. So what information did Russia share with Iran? What are their points that were made in that meeting? And immediately we see this visit by President Putin being confirmed, and he's flying over the Caspian Sea directly into Iran from Russian territory to Iranian territory with the military escorts. We will clearly that this indicates a lot of things. And he's flying with him the top cater of the Russian military intelligence and foreign affairs to Iran. So there's something that's going to happen there. (00:28:34): We don't know what's the exchange that's going to happen in these meetings. And to go back to the issue of assassinations, the access of resistance members have never assassinated any Israeli leadership. Not because they can't. In fact, the only time that there was any assassination of an Israeli official is the Minister of settlements during the second in the Father in 2002 was conducted by the popular front for the liberation of Palestine in retaliation for the assassination of the leader of the PLFP AB mufa when the Israelis fired missile from a helicopter into his official office. So historically, the axis of resistance does not do assassinations like this. Why? Because number one, and this is true for Russia, by the way, number one, our enemies don't have any heroes. They only got lunatics, stupid leaders. And if you kill them, Wilmer Leon (00:29:42): You martyr them. Laith Marouf (00:29:43): You create the martyrs, right? The Israelis, Wilmer Leon (00:29:48): You inflate them to an artificial sense of value in power. Laith Marouf (00:29:56): Exactly. So there's no need to create martyrs for the Ukrainians or the Israelis. These are all goals. They should never be allowed to reach that status of martyrdom. The second issue, and this is true again for Ukraine, is because we're gifted as an axis of resistance. And Russia is gifted with the stupidest kind of enemy. Why would you want to kill Zelinsky if he's so dumb? Or Netanyahu is making so many stupid mistakes. If you kill them, maybe somebody smarter will come, you'll be even cursed. And in fact, if you look at the Israelis assassinating over and over, leaderships in the axis of resistance, every time they assassinated somebody, somebody even more cunning and more ready to fight them, gets into the position. Look at Hezbollah. Say Hasan came into his position as Secretary General after the assassination by Israel of Del Mu, the former First Secretary General of Hezbollah who was very moderate, soft spoken. And then you get sala and look at what so assassinations don't work on those two grounds. So it's a stupid thing that the Israelis did, this assassination of sei, and it's just going to bring somebody more in power. And now Iran has a president as a martyr on the path of liberation of Palestine. What glory does Iran have? No other nation lost a president in defense of Palestine, not even the Palestinian authority. You see, Wilmer Leon (00:31:49): You're laying out. That logic also goes back to some fundamental organizational constructs, as in organizations that are personality led versus organizations that are structurally led. So what I understand you to be saying is that this resistance is not based upon the personality in charge, that there is a structure here. There is an ideology here that, as we've said a number of times on a number of shows, you can't kill an ideology with a military. You can only defeat an ideology with a better ideology. And so you can assassinate all the leaders you want to, but there are people right behind them that are waiting to take charge. Laith Marouf (00:32:48): Yes, it is institutionalized. Obviously, we don't want to undermine the human factor, like a human factor is very important in all of these things. And people's personalities and connections make a difference. And so yes, these losses are always big, but because of this institutionalization, hopefully the, and because of the actual human factor, this new person that will fill, will bring new openings, new connections with them. Yes, the human factor is very important and institutionalization is as important. Wilmer Leon (00:33:28): Switching gears a bit, the ICC, the International Criminal Court is seeking arrest warrants for the leader of Hamas, Yaya Sanir, as well as the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on charges of war crimes, crimes against humanity. And it seems to be centered around the October 7th retaliation by Hamas on Israel. President Biden has denounced as outrageous the request for these warrants. Biden has said, let me be clear. Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no evidence none between Israel and Hamas. Biden said that this is a false equivocation. A couple of things. One, people need to understand that the ICC, the prosecutor is seeking arrest warrants. No warrants have been issued yet. I also find it interesting that they are tying all of this back to the October 7th response by the resistance as though October 7th is actually the beginning of something as opposed to the continuation of something. And then I'd like to get your take on, as I understand international law, the actions taken by Hamas on October 7th do not violate international law because Hamas is, Hamas represents the occupied, Israel is the occupier. And in international law, the occupied can do anything in its power to resist occupation. There is no right to defend oneself when you are the occupier. Laith. Maro your thoughts on that analysis? Laith Marouf (00:35:35): Yeah, I mean, I agree with everything that you said, and I would add to it, can you imagine if during the Vietnam War, Vietnam was, and the Vietnamese resistance were taken to the international criminal court and their leadership were declared terrorists for defending themself against French and American occupation, or the Algerian resistance being called terrorists at the ICC for defending themself against the massacres of the French or the French resistance against the Nazis Wilmer Leon (00:36:13): Or the A NC in South Africa Laith Marouf (00:36:15): Or the A NC? So I personally think the collaboration is Palestinian Authority on purpose launched this case at the ICC because they wanted the leadership of the resistance in Hamas to be charged with war crimes. Okay, Wilmer Leon (00:36:43): Wait a minute. Start that again because man, I never saw that one coming. Start that one again, please. Laith Marouf (00:36:52): Yes, yes. I know it's sometimes hard for people to make these connections, but you see there's never been, that's why Wilmer Leon (00:36:58): You're wrong. Connecting the dots. Laith Marouf (00:37:00): Yes. There's never been in history international criminal court case of the occupied taking their occupier into court and the occupied being charged with crimes against their occupier. And it was the Palestinian authority that pursued this case. Okay? And I think it was done on purpose by Abbas Wilmer Leon (00:37:29): Mah. Abba did this Laith Marouf (00:37:31): Mahmud, Abba and his collaborationist goons to dirty the reputation of the resistance to make their resistance equal to the crimes of the occupier. Okay? And I add to it even more the these arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Ganz, who's going to actually enforce them? No Western country will stop Netanyahu from flying over its airspace or landing on its territory, that's for sure, 100%. But you know who's going to be a target? It's a smile Nia, who's sitting in Qatar, right? SSIR and Aldi are in Gaza. The Israelis can't even kill them or assassinate them. They can't reach them, let alone try to arrest them for ICC charges. But smile, Nia, the head of Hamas in foreign political borough is now the number one target. He's probably right now running to find a place that he can hide than Qatar, because Qatar is a vessel state, and they will hand them over to the Americans at any moment. Okay? So in reality, this is one of the worst things that ever happened to the Palestinians. This ICC case, there's nothing to celebrate about it. And if you notice the limitations of this case that it only, as you said, starts October 7th, Wilmer Leon (00:39:03): They don't mention genocide, Laith Marouf (00:39:05): Okay? And not only that, the case is only for crimes inside Ga Gaza, none of the historical Palestine, west Bank, east Jerusalem, any of that will be included in this. And this is not only to protect Israel from accusations of apartheid and the settlement building that is one of the biggest war crimes possible, but also to hide the fact that all these internment camps that have been built since October 7th, were thousands of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip were abducted and sent into these Guantanamo and being tortured, raped, and killed on mass, disappeared completely, because nobody even knows that they're in this. And the fact that VE turned all the Israeli prisons into that same model, 12,000 Palestinian prisoners since October 7th, have been living in these internment camps, tortured, raped, and killed with hundreds, hundreds of testimonies of rape and torture by men, women, and children coming out of these dungeons. And if you notice the docket of these requests for arrest warrants, this house, slave Han, who is a puppet of the United States and Israel, who came as a replacement to the ICC chief prosecutor before him, who got humiliated and death threats and banned from entering the United States and so on, because she even dare thought about charges Wilmer Leon (00:40:56): Even his family was under. Yes, Laith Marouf (00:40:58): Yes. So now, what does this guy do? If you look at the charges when he's talking about Hamas crimes, he speaks of them as if they're facts that rapes happen. We have no, Wilmer Leon (00:41:17): No evidence Laith Marouf (00:41:18): Any rape that babies were killed. No evidence, no evidence killed. But when he talks about the crimes of the Zionist, Wilmer Leon (00:41:27): He uses a minute, just to that point, going back to President Putin, I remember him saying, if you have evidence of these crimes, please show the world. He was very emphatic on that point. You have made these allegations. If you have evidence, please show the world. And no matter how many times Joe Biden, no matter how many times Tony Blinken wants to talk about these atrocities, they've never even pierce Morgan. I know you saw the interview with Dr. Morandi and Pi Morgan, where Morandi just cut him a new one. He said, Pierce, where's the evidence? And Pi Morgan just kept chatting, just kept chirping. Go ahead, I'm sorry. Laith Marouf (00:42:30): Yes, yes. I mean, the evidence is like you have to take the word of the chosen people for fact. What are you antisemitic, Wilmer. You don't believe every word that comes out of a chosen person mouth. I mean, that's it. That's all evidence you need. So Wilmer Leon (00:42:48): If I was antisemitic, I wouldn't be talking to you. Laith Marouf (00:42:50): Exactly. Exactly. But we're joking about it. But truly, this guy, this sock puppet had, he went down to Israel after October 7th and sat down with the families and unquote survivors, and visited the colonies that were attacked, but refused to enter Gaza Amass, opened the door for him, invited him to come and see Joe evidence, the war crimes. He refused to go to Gaza, okay? And then now he's coming and he's writing in his docket that these crimes happened by Hamas. But when he's talking about the crimes accusations against Israel, he says reasonable grounds before every accusation he is already, you could see how tainted this case is and what is its ultimate goal. I mean, yesterday, the spokesperson for the American government, I can't remember his name, the thin white guy. He was being interviewed, sorry, asked in the question period about this issue, and the guy claimed that the Palestinians have no right to go to the ICC and that their only courts that have jurisdiction are Israeli or American courts. He wants the Palestinians to come and beg at American courts, which even shows you how Israel is a colony, a vessel of the United States. But yes, this is where Wilmer Leon (00:44:32): Matthew Miller, Laith Marouf (00:44:35): Yes, Matthew Pillar, and people call him Matthew Killer. Yes, Wilmer Leon (00:44:38): Right. Matthew Miller. Laith Marouf (00:44:39): Yeah, yeah, yeah. Wilmer Leon (00:44:42): So I'm sorry, I interrupted you. You're saying he was saying that they need to come to American courts? Laith Marouf (00:44:47): Yes. That they have no right to go to the ICC, and the only place that has jurisdiction is the US or Israel over crimes in Gaza, Wilmer Leon (00:45:00): Which is also very telling in that the United States is not as signatory to the ICC, but seems to want to either use it when it's convenient or condemn it when it's convenient. But in fact, excuse me, there's a standing American law, and people can look this up, that if an American is brought before the Hague, the United States reserves the right to invade it. I might even be called the Hague Invasion Act. I'm drawing a blank on the name, but people, folks, you need to look this up. The United States has a standing American law saying, we will invade the Hague if an American is arrested and held accountable for crime. Laith Marouf (00:45:59): Yes, it's ally known as the Hague Invasion Act. And in fact, if you look at the ICC record, 42 out of the 42 people that were convicted of crimes at the ICC were African African leaders, and then add to it that the charges against President Putin. So this ICC is the most captured, un affiliated organism captured by the West, along with the International Atomic Energy Organization and the Chemical and Weapons Organization. These are the least trusted three organs of the un. And we're seeing, I believe these indictments, or if there is an arrest warrant issued, I mean, I don't see anything good coming to the Palestinians from this. Wilmer Leon (00:47:08): Wow. That's a perspective and a level of analysis that I did not see coming. But what you're saying makes sense. Bring us up to date, please on what's happening in Rafa. According to the new Arab, there are by 1.4 million Palestinians there. And that around the 7th of May, they were told that they had to leave. And the number I see is about 80,000 people have fled, but there's, I guess a slow boiling Israeli incursion into the area. What's going on in Rafa now? Laith Marouf (00:48:02): Yeah, I mean, the Israelis are doing what they call belts, fire belts. It's like bombardment from the land, from the sea, from the air on straight lines, and then going next straight line and so on. This is what they've been doing since last week. They haven't yet attempted invading Rafa. They have been stuck in Jabal since last week in the longest and fiercest battle on the ground of Gaza since the beginning of the war. The Israelis lost, according to their own media, at least 10 officers there. That includes a field general, the highest ranking military officer on the field of any army, and along with all his commanders. So we've seen the videos come out from this Jabali battle every day, two or three videos coming out from Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others that showed us tens of Israeli tanks destroyed APCs and bulldozers. So they're receiving a beating, a whipping in the battlefield of Jabal. (00:49:21): So I don't think they're going to invade RA anytime soon. They'll continue bombing from the air. But this has also happened at the same time as yesterday or the day before the Americans finished building the pier, right? Right. And we already now have images of this spear with American air defenses, radars and tanks and ABCs waiting in the landing ships. So clearly the sphere is not about delivering any aid, and it's definitely not about the mass expulsion of Palestinians. This is an invasion, beachfront landing zone in the case of total collapse of the Israeli military on the battlefield. And that's what we are seeing right now happening. Wilmer Leon (00:50:11): And is it a coincidence or should we connect dots that the pier was completed right around the same time that it was announced that, what was it, 1.2 billion more of weaponry has been approved. And so is that a coincidence or am I wrong to connect these dots? Laith Marouf (00:50:34): No, it's not a coincidence. It's also not a coincidence that it was finished the day they assassinated rasi. You see, all of these are time things. It's same thing. It's not a coincidence that the sock puppet Han announced the ICC arrest warrants at the same day of the assassination. So all of this is clearly timed together, and we now saw in the last 48 hours, the cards of the West put on the table, have opened. Now their hand, they just opened their hand with these three moves. The Wilmer Leon (00:51:15): But wait a minute, president Biden is calling for a ceasefire. How can this be true? Laith Maro, when President Biden, when he was at Morehouse giving his commencement address, he's calling for a cease fire. Help me understand this, because obviously you didn't hear him. And so now that you understand, Joe Biden wants to cease fire, how can everything that you've just said be true? Laith Marouf (00:51:44): Isn't it one of the most disgusting things that Biden could do is to lie to the black students and the administration of the university say that he will not use their black faces in his promotional materials for his election? That was one of the conditions to allow him to speak to the students who were going to demonstrate. But because their administration found a middle ground and told them, okay, you can demonstrate without, Wilmer Leon (00:52:15): Don't make any noise, shut Laith Marouf (00:52:16): Down, don't make any noise, and so on. And this guy is not going to use your faces for his election. And now he goes around and immediately, immediately releases a promotional video of using these students to try to get sympathy from the black communities in America. This is, and obviously anybody that believes American leaders should go and ask the indigenous people about all the treaties and their promises. I mean, there's 400 years of record of broken promises and broken treaties. There's not one treaty I think the United States ever abided by with anyone. Have Wilmer Leon (00:53:04): You seen this Washington Post article from last week? The Washington Post reported about a WhatsApp chat stream where New York mayor Eric Adams was chatting with a number of American multimillion and billionaires, such as the former founder of Starbucks and the CEO of Dell and a number of other financiers where they were demanding that Eric Adams send the NYPD into Columbia University. They offered campaign contributions, they offered to fund private investigators to look into the students. And he is now, of course, denying that this took place. But the Washington Post has the transcript of the WhatsApp communications, and they named these individuals by name. And it seems as though their whole concern or motivation behind this is they're losing control of the narrative. Your thoughts, lath maus. Laith Marouf (00:54:21): Yeah. I mean, it's 100% a fact that this happened. No matter what the mayor says, who was another sock puppet? And if me and you have enough money, we can buy American politicians if we want to. They're very cheap. They'll sell you their mamas if you have enough money. Okay? So it's not a surprise. It's actually great that it got leaked, and I'm sure the Washington Post only published it because it was going to be all around the internet anyways, and they needed to have a scoop to stay on top of the story. But this is the truth. The political class and the economic elite are abusing the police in the United States, abusing the power they have over the police, forcing the police to become political police, to suppress the students and the communities that are demonstrating for the liberation of Palestine. I mean, I watched these images over the weekend. The beatings that the NYPD was giving to these youth was, I mean, very similar to who Wilmer Leon (00:55:36): Were peacefully protesting, Laith Marouf (00:55:37): Peacefully protesting, being jumped and taken to the ground and punching women in the face while having your legs on their necks. I mean, it is very similar to how they treat on a daily basis, the black community, specifically black men. But now we're seeing it on a daily scale of people not being accused of any crime or just speaking out or demonstrating. And that's what was happening to the black community in the sixties and the seventies and or the Black Lives Matter movement during the Obama years. Now we are gearing up to this summer of discontent all across the west as these youth finished their exams in the universities and pour into the streets. And we should expect maximum suppression from the political class, and they will be abusing the police to do so because they can't use the courts. Look, in Canada, there's been now two court cases where Zionist students went to court to try to force the police to remove a student encampment from McGill University in Montreal. (00:57:01): McGill University is the Ivy League University in Canada, and they lost. The judge said, no, the students have a right. And then the university administration itself appealed and went to the court to also asked the court to tell the police to remove the students. And again, the court said no. And therefore, this is what's happening. The Zionists in Canada were stupid enough to think that they can win this in court. They thought like, oh, we have all the media, we have all the politicians. We can rip apart the Bill of Rights in Canada. But the Zionists in the United States are a little bit smarter. They know that if they go to court First Amendment, they cannot remove these students. Therefore, they skipped all the legal process and went immediately into abusing their access to power by moving the police, setting them like dogs on the students. Wilmer Leon (00:58:03): Laith Maro, my brother. As always, I got to thank you for joining me today. And let me reiterate to folks that they need to go to Free Palestine video. Go to Free Palestine video. You can see if you could quickly just explain to the audience what you're doing there on the ground, real time in Beirut with free Palestine video. Laith Marouf (00:58:33): So yeah, as a volunteer community television, we're teaching youth and students to produce content in English. We're also doing everyday almost reporting from the south of Lebanon, from the Warfront exclusive coverage of what's happening there, interviews of people on the ground. And we're doing weekly episode of a special show called Wartime Cafe with the biggest intellectual and political leaders in Lebanon in English. Last time, the last episode of wartime Cafe was with Ibrahim Al Mu, who is a member of Parliament, but also the former spokesperson for Hezbollah. He hasn't spoken in English media for a long time. So this is the kind of content that you will get. Please support us donations. We need membership. If there's possible, so people subscribe for monthly donation, that will be amazing. And you can add on our website, free pass. Send the video. You have the links to all our socials, so Twitter, telegram, Instagram, YouTube, brumble. Please watch the content and help us through donations. Wilmer Leon (00:59:49): My brother, my dear brother, lathe Maru, thank you so much for joining me today. Laith Marouf (00:59:54): Thank you for having me. Wilmer Leon (00:59:56): Look forward to having you back. Folks. Thank you all so much for listening to the Connecting the Dots podcast with me, Dr. Wimer Leon. Stay tuned for new episodes every week. Also, please follow and subscribe. Please leave a review, share the show, and you can follow us on social media. You'll find all the links below to the show description, contribute to this effort if you can. Nothing is too small and we know nothing is too large. We greatly, greatly appreciate the contributions that are helping to keep this program on the air. Remember, this is where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge because talk without analysis is just chatter, and we don't chatter here on connecting the dots. See you again next time. Until then, I'm Dr. Wilmer Leon. Have a great one. Peace. I'm out Announcer (01:00:59): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge.