Is Iniquity Sin?
As a generalization, the connotations of sin cover a broad range of errors, from simple mistakes to instances of gross malfeasance. When rendered into English, afj, the Hebrew word for sin, has greater clarity in common usage than does the Hebrew root for iniquity nwo. The explanation for this effect is fundamentally visceral: the concept of iniquity touches upon and cannot long avoid the mystery of Lucifer, the fallen angel.
Most will admit to a negative reaction to “iniquity,” but the word’s actual meanings remain unclear. Even though mention of iniquity might send chills along the spine when it’s raised in conversation, not many are troubled enough by their reactions to settle their concerns about its implications.
The opening illustration presents definitions for “sin,” as written in Torah’s original language. They don’t refute standard etymology; rather, they expand upon it, opening the seals of its rich subtexts to inquisitive minds.
The Moses Script is also known as Sinaitic Hebrew. The bones of all Western alphabets are at play in the vernacular language of Egypt at the Exodus. The alefbet served as the written language of Y'SharAL beyond the reign of King David, unto the rise of the Ezra script. Never wholly forgotten, it is still in use today in isolated villages of rural Yemen.
At his death, David was gathered to his fathers, among whom he remains; and the spiritual kingdom he once led awaits restoration. His kingdom, the Kingdom of Heaven—of Names—is the state of being in which blameless intention blossoms. God’s Kingdom is the reality behind mythical Camelot; and the father is calling upon a new generation to rebuild David’s Tabernacle: not his buildings, but the ambiance of his world view. Whether or not we are privileged to share in that restoration, we ought to have interest in how David saw his world and, also, in how he approached the scriptures upon which his world was founded.
The shepherd king of Yerushaliem read the Lively Oracles written in an alefbet whose twenty-two letters are ciphers derived from the grid of the pattern mandated on Sinai. That pattern, from which Moses was not permitted to deviate, is the sigil of the Logos of which John the Baptist testified.
The root of all language and mathematics, the divine pattern that became known as “the Word” springs from the purity of the father’s heart. Projected by the eternal father, that purity has been shed abroad upon the children of men.
If the father’s sacrifice is received and lifted up in the hearts of believers, it restores the reins of intellectual calculation; and the mind escapes the rodeo of speculation by receiving direct spiritual revelation, which determines the cant and the pace of ambivalent thought as it is brought into alignment with the mind that was in Y’shua, the anointed servant of Yahushua.
A spell of approximations is cast upon Torah now when “iniquity” is read as the English “in-nick-quit-tea.” Thought that is conjured entirely by recollection of memorized phonemes is inherently tribal. Sarah is not subservient to Hagar. Like the ancient dust clouds that arose with collapse of Babylon’s great tower, sound-based language raises a confused cacophony of impressions. Holy names are not monikers. They’re sacred keys to the book that was sealed.
Language is the first fruit of the Tree of Life, and the alphabets of mankind are its rinds: they have purpose. Passed from Eden to Ararat and from Babel to the Mediterranean in the days of Moses, the oracular language was adapted by traders based in what became modern Venice. They relied upon it to conduct business; and, therefore, the alefbet of Adam became known as the Phoenician alefbet
Within the rulers of Egypt relied on the hieroglyph for matters of state, but they had great respect for the language of Phoenicia, whose merchant fleets brought both goods and cohesion to its masses. the dynasties.
If the higher applications of the script’s alphanumeric symbolism was lost on the common man, that detail was of no importance in the markets. With ancillary words spoken in tribal tongues and with down-to-business gestures, consumers completed transactions.
Raised in this disorderly context by Pharaoh’s daughter, Moses was schooled in all the arts of Egypt. He was a masterful adept of the Phoenician emblems, which he would later use in the compilation of Torah on behalf of the mixed multitude that accompanied Y’SharAL into the desert. That there was to be one law for all required that it should be written down and understood in one language.
Because of our experience with modern languages, we tend to think of the alphanumeric script as integers that are either letters or numbers, our minds putting the difference between them. In truth, however, these functions of oracular emblems operate simultaneously, both within words and within groups of words. HaShem speaks once; yes, twice, and man does not perceive the message. Every word has its number, which are words whose interpretation must support the core definition of the parent word, confirming that the interpretation is reliable.
Both verbal and numerical expressions, the meanings of Torah’s words within a narrative are understood through the seamless interplay between their literary and mathematical properties. This complexity was the background of the deliberations between the Egyptian priesthood and Moshe and Aharon as the brothers petitioned Pharaoh for the release of the people of HaShem hwhy.
When we reverse-engineer the biblical narrative, after having restored the original script, we can regain understanding, God willing. The priests of Egypt had rudimentary skills when using the alefbet of Adam, but those skills were dwarfed by the expertise of Moses and Aaron.
Aaron’s rod— his tongue— behaved like a serpent: it wove concepts with spiritual magic that swallowed up the limp phrases sliding off the tongues of Egyptian priests. The Hebrew brothers used Adam’s language to tap into new dimensions, unearthing new thoughts and extending horizons, whereas Egyptian flaunted thought mired in trappings of the past.
Sinaitic Hebrew is also known as Paleo, the name I’ll be using in this document, The difference between biblical Paleo and secular Phoenician is one of interpretation. The gospel teaching is, “If you had seen me” (invisible spirit, a gift of perception), “you had seen the father, also” (you would have comprehended the nature of your ability to perceive).
If we are blind to the world that appears, we see without error; for our sightless faculties are focused not on appearances, but on auras, by whose hues we can trace contours within the invisible realm; but should we claim we see what is invisible, our mistake remains; for the fullness of the spiritual world is beyond perception. Egyptian magicians worked wonders with their serpentine tongues trained, rod-like, on issues pertaining to the material realm of Pharaoh; but higher understandings, drawn to earth by Aaron, overwhelmed concepts born of natural abilities.
We wrestle with bondage, a reward of sin. The precursor to our error is iniquity; and because sin is essentially a state of being, iniquity’s inroads are subtle, patient, ubiquitous, persistent.
Iniquity is a miasma that crowds upon productive thought as doubt, and it debilitates and immobilizes by means of disheartening depression. The soul whose focus is centered in messiah, however, is able to countermand the pitfalls of iniquity by bringing the spiritual eye to bear on issues that underlie circumstance.
The remedy is guaranteed, but it isn’t simple; for the ditches exposed by iniquity were plowed by personal bias; and, having commandeered intentions to better oneself, iniquity takes root in concerns about election and piety, concepts that rank self in comparison with others.
Ambivalence accompanies doubt, and so the soul weighed down by piety elevates focus on personal standing above its focus on God. With that done, every seeming step forward is a stumble to the rear; for, desperate for justification, thoughts will succumbs to zeal, which the soul mistakes for guidance by the holy spirit.
Doctrines that defy common sense are hammered by Goliaths of pulpits, synagogues, and mosques of the world to trample the spiritual freedom that comes with direct experience. Whether apologists scold from their platforms or plead from their knees, they peddle thoughts that cloud the mind; and we can no longer surrender to their leadership.
Tall King Shaul killed his thousands and found no peace at the head of his armies, nor even in his own house. If we are to do better, we must emulate David; and our questions must stir the golden dust clouds of Ophir rpo: our thought o must reflect p clarity r by tightening o debate p about what we think we know r. Opinions will not fill our slings against Goliath. Effective answer is hidden in stones unearthed from grounds we truly know.
map
menu