One Flesh, Not One Master: How ‘Ba’al’ Was Used to Smuggle Ownership Into Matrimony

The following article was inspired by my post, “Curse of Adam“, with most scripture references sourced from Word-of-Yah.org using the The Scriptures 2009 (TS2009) translation.

(Special thanks to my sister in Yeshua Mashiyach, Flora, for pointing out the root connection between ‘marriage’ and ‘ba’al’, among other considerations, and to my family at Kingdom of Heaven Assembly for many edifying discussions that helped shape this work.)

In the beginning, matrimony was never a hierarchy of master and possession. It was a covenant of shared substance. When YHWH brings the woman to the man in Genesis 2, the man’s response is not a claim of ownership — it’s a recognition of identity: “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman [אשׁה, ishshah], because she was taken out of Man [אישׁ, ish]” (Genesis 2:23). The two words are not separate categories of “owner” and “owned” — ishshah is the feminine form of ish. The text is built on a grammar of sameness, and it ends not with a transaction but with union: “they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Scripture soon supplies the very word for how that union is enacted: יָדַע, yada, “to know.” “Adam knew [yada] Chawwah [Eve] his wife, and she conceived” (Genesis 4:1). Yada is not a euphemism reaching for a word the language lacked — it is the ordinary Hebrew term for knowing a person or a fact, applied here, without embarrassment, to the most intimate act two people share. The vocabulary makes no distinction between the physical and the personal way a modern reader might expect one; to know a spouse in this grammar is at once to be joined in body and disclosed in self, one word carrying both. That word will carry the same weight forward, later in Scripture, into how YHWH describes being known by His own people.

(Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

Democracy Violates Consent

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “An Anarchist Conversation,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

“If John told you that you had to obey him or he would violate you, that would be wrong. Even if John claims that because he and his friends are in the majority, you must obey or be punished, that would still be wrong. Even Iif John and his friendsvie to have an institution work on their behalf and that you must obey its dictates or be punished, that would still be wrong. If you understand this basic concept then you understand that government neither has the legitimate or lawful right to violate you just because some people decided to vote for it.”

My Commentary: Your public education camp instructor might have taught you otherwise, but this is not how consent actually works.

The Spontaneously-Ordered Nature of True Life

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Positive Anarchy,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

“Has anarchy ever been tried? This all too common question contains a logical fallacy. Anarchy cannot be ‘tried.’ Anarchy is not a social or political system. Anarchy is the fundamental state of nature into which you were born. Anarchy exists every single time you voluntarily interact with other people. Anarchy factually informs the vast majority of your daily activities, even in today’s mad world.” – Roberty Eschauzier (Positive Anarchy)

My Commentary: The various institutionalized reprogramming campaigns working towards transforming human beings into human batteries are so pervasive, the average individual is clueless about the nature of their own consciousness. And, even fewer embrace the Spontaneous Order inherent to truly “living.” Mention Self-OwnershipFreedom Through Non-Aggression, and present all Consensual Interaction as Voluntaryism In Action, and most will attempt to justify the illegitimacy of centralized institutions of coercion by either disavowing their own freedom, attacking everyone else’s, or some combination of the two Yet, the truth is that FREEDOM IS NOT SLAVERY; COERCION IS! No one has the right to control innocent, peaceful individuals

“No matter how they spin it, freedom is not extreme; control is.” Ⓐ

“Suspicion is the companion of mean souls, and the bane of all good society.” – Thomas Paine

A few examples of spontaneous order…

Billionaire Uses His $25 Million Yacht to Deliver Supplies To Stranded Malibu Wildfire Victims – After His Own Winery Was Destroyed By The Flames – When State Refuses His Ship Entry to Port, SURFERS Team Up to Deliver His Supplies to Shore:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6389141/Billionaire-25million-yacht-teams-surfers-deliver-supplies-Malibu-wildfire-victims.html

After Man Collapses, 20 People Take Turns Performing CPR For 96 Minutes:
https://truththeory.com/2018/02/27/man-collapses-20-people-take-turns-performing-cpr-96-minutes/

At Least 80 People Form Human Chain to Rescue Stranded Group in Gulf of Mexico:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/80-people-form-human-chain-rescue-gulf-of-mexico-florida

Accident-Free Zone: The German Town Which Scrapped All Traffic Lights and Road Signs:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1028740/Accident-free-zone-The-German-town-scrapped-traffic-lights-road-signs.html

Rejecting Arranged Marriage to Controlling, Abusive, Violent State

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following quote, being shared by an acquaintance, and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

“Anarchists relationship with the state is akin to an arranged marriage. We didn’t want any part of it, yet here we are. Even worse, our spouse is the fat, Neanderthalic, useless, abusive dirtbag who chases brown kids off the lawn with a broom. Unfortunately we can’t run because they can find us anywhere, can access our bank account and have superior firepower.

This is why we cheat every chance we get with that sexy mistress known as freedom. Any creative way to circumvent the rules of this relationship are as euphoric as the blossoming of a new love affair after years of misery, and we will continue to do so until we eventually find a way to get rid of it once and for all.

Statists are the ones with Stockholm syndrome that embrace this relationship. Just like many victims, they don’t want to listen to our advice because they’re comfortable and complacent. These are the friends we generally avoid because we dislike their spouse.

Libertarianism is simply the spouse loving you back but still not allowing you to leave the house unsupervised.

That’s why it’s said ‘Anarchy is for lovers’.  ”

~Elizabeth Rae

My CommentaryAnarchy is for Lovers Consensual Interaction is the currency of co-existence! Peace Love and Anarchy!

A Vulgar Superstition

As I scrolled through my Facebook memories, I discovered the following artwork, which I originally shared to my wall in February of 2016, in my post, “The Majority Cannot Give Consent for the Minority,” and decidedly re-shared it, along with a new commentary…

My Original Commentary:

“Democracy is based on the idea that the
majority can give consent for the minority.
But consent doesn’t work like that.”

“Yo, Dawg! We heard that you don’t like the tyranny of the majority over minority groups…
So, we legitimized the authority of an ultra-minority through a voting majority, so they can tyrannically rule over everybody, accordingly, while you formally select the next elect minority of tyranny to fully control your humanity, in perpetuity!”
(Artwork by Rayn, and originally located here)

My New Commentary: A vulgar superstition.

(note: though I previously shared a different picture of this quote in February of 2016, within my post, “The Majority Cannot Give Consent for the Minority,” I still felt compelled to offer up an alternative commentary when I saw it again, due to the inspiring nature of these words)