isaiah 66:16 כְּאִ֕ישׁ
אֲשֶׁ֥ר
אִמֹּ֖ו
תְּנַחֲמֶ֑נּוּ
כֵּ֤ן
אָֽנֹכִי֙
אֲנַ֣חֶמְכֶ֔ם
(en.:
as a mother comforts her child,
so will I comfort you ..)
not claiming to be god,
maybe to not insult
feelings⚠/s
or
maybe to let people have an
option to claim that my
beholdings were
nothing more but some angel,
an “ordinary”
saint,
the virgin maria,
the
angel of YHWH
or else
(being able to take me out of
time and move me through space at
will)⚠/s
or
maybe
she
is not allowed to talk
(corinthians 14:34)⚠/s
or has to be subject
(ephesians 5:22,23)⚠/s?
on
.
a preserveress being
her
daughter מיכאל
(mīkāl)?
the end is neigh for an
unjust and cruel
patriarchy.
illogically and
degenerated,
vanishing into the
“background noise”.
(personally)
i hope for a
(pure)
matriarchy,
as it seems naturally and
logically
(to me).
responsibility comes
default with a birth canal.
and has a successful mother ever been
unjust or cruel to a son of one of her
neighbours?
[
in
tempelhof]
i've
been an
agnostic
my entire life,
devoting myself more to
technology and science than
thoughts about the
possibility of an
intelligent design of the world,
even though I always wondered why
anything exists at
all.[7]
i recognized a beautiful
universe,
which seems to perfectly tare out,
but the biblical creation story
didn’t seem to make much sense,
when percepted with no time,
taken literally and abused for iconographic purposes while writing seminar papers.
until
february 22nd,
a. d.
2025,
when hate and cruelty of
(a) longtime cowardly,
misogynist,
antisemitic
and
somewhat
occult/esoteric
(satanic?)
group(s) of killers
and/or
rapists
(coercing in gen.)
as well as
(ultra)naziterrorists
from the shadows
(or
an allegory for an unjust and
degenerated
patriarchy?)[8]
made a god inevitable,
who appears
(to me)
female
however,
not only to pour the story of
creation with sense
(for me),
but to let me see.
and know,
that
"/godis
and will always be.
by all means:
my ideal of an almighty creator/creatress,
i just never was able to imagine.
Α☧
a small collection of signs/beholdings
in a beautiful universe,
"
lets us live in,
while i’ll try to interpret as
little as possible into
perception.
1st
of all:everything here is my
tip of a yodh
and a
description
of
very fresh
experiences.
imho,
no ordinary
(fallible)
mortal ever shall tell thou what
to believe,
to think,
to
know,
to
do nor to let be.
יי
gave you everything
you'll ever need.
should you wish for an advice
one day,
just ask your
mother(s)
in direct line
with
eve,
created by
(and probably having
a lot of)
her⚠ct??
(cmd.-ment)
there is but
one
god,[9]
creating you in her own
image.[10]
"s
biblical name is
«הוהי»[11]:
exodus
20:2 and the famous
1st
commandment
from exodus
20:3:
meaning: and god said to
mose,
«ehyeh-asher-ehyeh,
..»
[note:
"modern" bibles
translate
this as
«i
am that i
am»]
continuing,
«thus shall you
say to the
israelites,
ehyeh
sent me to
you.»
a kind of
i am who you think
i am,
i received
(emotionally)
too,
but the next:
"s
name seems to sound like
“i
am”
in hebrew and
מֹשֶׁה/mose,
a hebrew
speaker,
might just have missed
"s
name:
ehyeh
⇨
IEVE/YaHWeH,
but,
by the same time,
proved the
existence of
"
so authentic
fallible,
that
he
makes me a strong
believer,
because of him and the
תָּנָ״ךְ
(tanakh)!?
being true!
gets translated by modern
english bibles with
for you shall not
worship any other god,
for the lord
[note:
it is written
«YHWH»],
whose name is jealous,
is a jealous
god.
or:
whose name means
«zeal»,
a zealous
god?
هوى
(arabic h.w.y)
roots here,
where
هوايا
(arabic
hawaya),
derives from?[12]
meaning
love,
affection,
passion,
desire.[2]
the determining and
causative
“sex”
seems to be female?
eve
is not made from a rib of a
man,
imho
it's almost the other
way round?
[amendpers.]
the
תָּנָ״ךְ
(tanakh)
writes עלצ
(zela),
which can mean
rib,
but more so
side?
maybe the first human being
אָדָם
(āḏām)had no sex at all,
when god doesn’t need
one either?
created from
soil/אדמה
(adamah;
en.:
“earth”),
maybe one “side”
is taken from that first
human being
to forge/shape the woman?
defining the other side(s)? «eve»
in hebrew is
חווה
(ḥawwāh)
and is most commonly
believed
to mean "living one" or
“source of life”.
from the root
חיה
(ḥāyâ;
en.:
“to live”),
from the semitic
root
حياة
(arabic ḥyw).
biology also
reflects this idea:
the
sex-determinating
chromosome
of the male human is
euphemistically called the
y chromosome,
although there’s
more than just missing one
leg.
trinity does makes
sense,
especially under the
light of
gained
experience.
and may very well be completed
by a mother and a
daughter?
to become
GOD,
her
children
and the
holy ghost?
[amendprs.]
may we relativize the
godlikeness of
"s
son a bit?
like yēšūaʿ has very
much of ",
but is a bit human too,
so that
the christians
got one more way to speak to
"
through him?
nowadays bible
(derivatives)
is (are) for sure exciting,
but bizarre too.
i got a “vision” that
less then three percent
are
"s
word
(something i would have in common with
"
😂).
the bible might be the best
contempoary
collection of early notes
regarding everything
divine,
but when moses e.g.
(probably?)
missed"s name,
i wouldn’t call it
“the word of god”? truth
for sure is in it,
but finding it might be the
hardest
(and most exciting?)
thing.
it’s last update
yēšūaʿ:
to whom
"
came as abba.
for all the others,
not being real jews?
to invite us?
for us dudes he came to
“behave”,
imho?
living something which
unfortunately has to
be called
“feminism”
today.
(where are the female sinners?
ten righteous ones?
and the mothers?)
#TODO
mary & maria magdalenapeter’s keys to
his
kingdom:
the kingdom of god is within
you.
(luke 17:21)
the
halo/gloriole
of the depicted sacred or the
so-called holys/saints
seems to be a
“natural”
phenomenon across all
cultures.
maybe a soul “shines” the more,
the more beautiful it is?
[]
(arch)angel?
gaḇrīʾa/ēl?
(גַּבְרִיאֵל)
seems to be female too,
or at least
appears with a female voice
(in a
body of duty?),
the most beautiful i’ve ever
heard.
[amendpers.:
don’t know anything about the
others.
maybe
רְפָאֵל
(rəfāʾēl)?
but i don’t think to have
encountered her yet?]
mīkā’īl?
mi
(“who”)
kamocha
(“is like you”)
eloha?/-im
(god)?
preserveress of the creation?
[amendpers.:
like the women of the world?
preserveresses are?]
(cmd.-ment)לֹא
תִנְאָף
(one shall show respect):
“it”’s
not about so-called
«virginity»,
imho
(a social construct anyway),
but about
«grace»
(something
i noticed quite often)?
seemingly
allowed
is what contributes to joy,
for
everyone!
(even mediate?)
involved,
as long as intimacy stays
(contextually)
intimate?
so-called monogamy can evolve
adversely
(especially for the
female),
because it can interfere
with
(natural/evolutionary)
selection?[13]
one please consider an
exclusive
(monogamous)
relationship as an
excl. relationship. "
(via
medium)
in german:
ich brauche kein geschlecht,
aber für dich bin ich divers.
(en.:
i do
not need
a
sex/gender,
but
for you
i am
diverse.).
the ones trying to punish
LOVE,
may very well have to
counterbalance.
you please consider
donating
to cover working time,
hosting expenses,
running “ads” or enabling
accommodation/supply,
since “we” are running around a lot,
trying to hide,
while getting heavily
sabotaged and offended all day,
not just by humans?