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)

Consent is the True Order of Equality, Equity and Peace

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following photo here, being shared by the page, “People’s Uprising” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

My Commentary: Renounce Statism Now. Withdraw Consent. Vote for Nobody. Statism Is Slavery. Statism is a disease.Statism is Dead.

To embrace Individual Sovereignty (also known as Self-Ownership) is to recognize this fundamental quality to exist in all of humanity through implementation of the Non-Aggression Principle. *Consent* is the true order of equality, equity and peace, while Government Is Violence with a legal monopoly on use of force. Voluntaryism is Love. Voluntaryism is Peace.

Statism Promotes Violence Against Women

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

“Remember Billy: hitting girls is wrong… unless you’re wearing a badge & a magic suit. Then, it’s totally okay.”

My Commentary: Statism is so “progressive,” promoting equal rights of the sexes!

Discussing One of the Many Fallacies of Cultural Marxism

The following correspondence originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “Cultural Marxism: Because Equality in Slavery is More Desirable Than Equality in Freedom…“…

2016-09-08-discussing-one-of-the-many-fallacies-of-cultural-marxism-1

RaynAcademic Study: Having a Loving Family is Unfair:
https://stream.org/academic-study-having-a-loving-family-unfair/

Cultural Marxism: when equality in slavery is more desirable than equality in freedom…

From the article: “One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem,” they explain, “would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.”

“‘The evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,’” they wrote.

“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,’ quips Swift.”

Sickening, pseudo-intellectual drivel…

Stacie T.:

"Tell me it isn't possible for people to be this motherfuckin' stupid"

“Tell me it isn’t possible for people to be this motherfuckin’ stupid”

Cultural Marxism: Because Equality in Slavery is More Desirable Than Equality in Freedom…

I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

2016-09-07-cultural-marxism-because-equality-in-slavery-is-more-desirable-than-equality-in-freedom

Academic Study: Having a Loving Family is Unfair:
https://stream.org/academic-study-having-a-loving-family-unfair/

(Amelia Hamilton) It seems obvious that parents should love their children, and that a loving family is something for which we should all strive. I’m not so naive as to suppose that this is always the case, but it should certainly be the goal of our society. Unfortunately, there are those who don’t feel that way. Recently, a piece in ABC Australia posed the question, “Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?” Seriously.

The piece sets out their basic argument: ”The power of the family to tilt equality hasn’t gone unnoticed, and academics and public commentators have been blowing the whistle for some time. Now, philosophers Adam Swift and Harry Brighouse have felt compelled to conduct a cool reassessment.”

(Read entire article here…)

My Commentary: Cultural Marxism: when equality in slavery is more desirable than equality in freedom…

From the article: “One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem,” they explain, “would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.”

“‘The evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,’” they wrote.

“I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,’ quips Swift.”

Sickening, pseudo-intellectual drivel…