It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Bible calls God Ehyeh (Yeh) not Yahweh! Jesus is Yehshua (Yeh saves or He Saves)

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Danbones
Or maybe it means "I don't actually exist"

"I am that I am" in this case, is alluding to the word "nothing"
edit on 2-6-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

I think people forget the the hebrew bible wasn't written in english. So your quite right, God is saying here that hesheit is the uncreated creator....(or perhaps better to say that the hebrew monotheists believe )
edit on 2-6-2013 by current93 because: just add a wee bit for clarity

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by Kgnow

There is no power in a name or a label
I would question this stand. In as far as a name having power, agreed, it has no power if used properly. With one exception, some words do tend to control people who are frightened of the concept the word is based on. For instance, a businessman hears the word "Audit", does he not get a chill down his spine? But its only a word you say? The word has power.

I personally thought the word Satan had no power, at least for me. But their are those who even today fear the mindset behind it. The word has power.

My point is not about the "semantics" of any given word, my point is how words are used, and when.

I suspect in the ancient past words may have had even more powerful meanings. But not as powerful as the intentional misuse of labels and words.

To get to the real "power" of anything is to understand it. Understand its nature. That is power.
Very true in my mind.

This original tribal God, what ever name he used, in my opinion, was not god like in the virtues we assign to a positive loving divinity. He seemed quite disrespectful to us human beings, and even to the minor detail about what name he used as a identifier to people. One country he was one name, in another country he was another. It seems to me that he really didn't want people to know his true identity, similar to a used car dealer who changes his business name to keep from getting sued.

My point is that the misuse of a name can be far more powerful in the misuse than it can in the use, in the form of deception. This "god" is quite paranoid about people seeing him for who and what he really is. The story of "Babble" and the many tongues even compounds the confusion even further.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:08 PM
reply to post by Kgnow

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
- Shakespeare, Rome and Juliet

Names and labels are a thing of semantics. Remove the name and its essence still remains.

There is no power in a name or a label, because things still exist regardless if they are named or not.

To get to the real "power" of anything is to understand it. Understand its nature. That is power.

I'm not sure you understand exactly what is meant by the phrase, "Names have power." See, it's not the name itself - it's what the name means to the people who use it. Without meaning, without a definition or a set of parameters represented by the arrangement of symbols or vibrations that speak for those parameters, names mean nothing. Just sound, just letters. Attach meaning, and suddenly, the word has an influence. It's an idea. It carries the power of intent and direction. An exploding can doesn't do much, a wave of uncontrolled force. A bullet, directed force with a specific focus, changes matters.

Take the Jews, for example. They're people, right? They are a culture, a religion, a group identified according to their beliefs and background. Now enter the Nazis. One in particular, Adolf Hitler, takes the Jews and makes a compelling argument that they should be regarded as trash, a disease, a dirt stain on the shiny white knees of the world. They are worthless. They are despicable. They should be annihilated. Until Hitler came along, the definition of the word "Jew" was the same as saying "European" or "Canadian". It brought to mind a certain cultural stereotype, but not much else. EXCEPT! Now, Hitler has used his charismatic speaking skills to redefine the image of the average Jew to become this monster, this mangy creature of filth and repugnance, an icon for everything we despise. It's a classic psychological trick.

That's where the power is. Names mean nothing, but as soon as you associate a word with an idea, it's game on. Given the right approach, the right technique, you can make any rose smell terrible and look disgusting just by breaking the previous ideological connections the word "rose" was anchored to and reworking those psychological links to include various repulsive emotions and connections that we ourselves possess deep within the sewers of our cultivated consciousness. Once those new chains have been secured, everything about the way we look at roses changes - or anything else, for that matter. A lot of psychological issues today stem from various elements of life and how we perceive them according to events we don't even remember. But like a footprint in the mud, our subconscious holds these lasting impressions and continually influences our interactions even up to the moment of our deaths.

It's really not that difficult once you get the hang of it. You can severely impact the psychological state of the mass majority of people subjected to such techniques, which is why a large portion of such knowledge is kept under lock and key by the government to be used at such a time as some really handy tricks are necessary to keep the populace under control. Understandably, they can't let us know they can do this - so they can't be obvious about it. Nice and easy does it, Bess.

So you're right. A name doesn't mean much. But once you start attaching ideas to a name, that's when the ball is in the field. So I guess when they say, "Names have power," what they really mean is, "We have the power of naming."

As in, we have the power to ascribe or detract any flavor of value to or from anything we choose. We possess the power of destroying or creating based simply on where we place these ideas in the vast web of our psychology. And as it turns out, some of us are more adept at this than we should be - at least, until we can comprehend the dual nature of our creative power.
edit on 2-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:27 PM
Names are very significant.A name is the nature of the thing or person named.
God told Moses his name was
אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה

Ehyeh asher ehyeh

which literally translates as "I Will Be What I Will Be"..referred more commonly as "I AM That I AM" or the tetragrammaton YHWH...(YaHWeH)

I am not writing this to try to convince anyone.These are facts..the Truth of numbers.

The Old Covenant(The Law and The Prophets) was written in Hebrew which is an alphanumeric language.The letters of Gods name sum to 543.
Jesus in Hebrew is Yahoshua or Yahshua meaning ..Yahweh is salvation.Moses is the "savior" of Israel.His name(מֹשֶׁה) sums to 345..the mirror number of 543.

The New Testament was written in Greek which is also an alphanumeric language.

In Greek
Christ=christos= Χριστός




These numbers are the Pythagorean triangle


and lastly(and this is just the tip of an atom of all the equations).These numbers sum in the most significant number sequence The Fibonacci numbers(Fn)


posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:38 PM
reply to post by arpgme

What's your take on the theory that ehyeh asher ehyeh was not spoken by YHVH, but by his consort, Ašerah?

I'm not familiar with the entire scholarly approach (as I've only stumbled across it occasionally during my study of Phoenician mythology), but, to the best of my knowledge, the theory goes something along these lines:

YHVH was an evolution of the Canaanite "supreme god" called Il, or El. This supreme god happened to have a consort, a wife, a "supreme goddess" named Ašerah. The combined worship of Il and Ašerah unified the coastal Phoenicians with the inland Canaanites, creating a Phoenician/Canaanite empire.

When the Hebrews encountered them (most likely after the Persians released them from the Babylonian captivity), they adopted and adapted Il as their own All-Father figure. This is why the Old Testament originally included the worship of Ašerah as YHVH's wife/consort.

(I'm not familiar with exact verses, but I know that by the time the Christians tacked on the New Testament, and "translated" the Old Testament, they changed Ašerah from a fully-fledged goddess, into a sacred tree found in a grove which blasphemous Jews worshiped. I know you can find mention to her by searching for the Ašerah tree in Biblical search engines.)

Anyway, getting back on track, ancient near eastern religion has an interesting pattern when it comes to the law, and who gives it.

In Sumerian literature (the oldest mythological literature on Earth) the goddess Nanše is responsible for collecting the Laws by which man is to live and be governed.

In ancient Egyptian mythology it is the goddess Maāt who aligns the Law with all living beings.

In ancient Greek mythology you have figures like Nemesis, Dike, and Themis (the literal image of blindfolded justice with a set of scales), all of whom are goddesses, and all of whom establish the Law by which man is governed.

So, the theory then is this: ehyeh asher ehyeh is actually translated as I am Ašerah, I am.

Oh, and in case you're unfamiliar with the character "š", it is called an S with a caron, and it is pronounced the same as our modern day "sh". So, Ašerah, in modern English, would be written as Asherah.

The ancient mythologies of Babylon, Egypt, Canaan, and Greece, which the Hebrews were known to have encountered, have a history of not only feminine mountain deities (see Ninḫursag from Sumer, Agdistis and Kybele from Anatolia, Uma from India, Gaia from Greece, etc) but also of feminine law-givers, like the ones I outlined above.

So, thoughts then, on the possibility that the force which introduced itself to Moses was not in fact YHVH, but Ašerah?

~ Wandering Scribe

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by Rex282

Its tricky trying to explain this sort of thing when people are looking at the literal meaning of words that have been translated from hebrew to english. A lifetime of study would just show how much one didn't know.

The 'names of power' were just that, the secret vibration, the essential essence, to know that gives mastery, yet it comes with great responsibilty. The proper pronunciation of the tetragrammaton YHVH , was passed down from rabbi to rabbi, and was never ever to be spoken (though may indeed have been used at a most perilous time).

Its not so long ago that even we were given secret names, we all had our mundane given names, but at a coming of age ceremony a secret name would be given, this would never be told to anyone, as to have that gave power over you.

There are secrets and keys in the numbers, what you read isn't always the real message.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by Wandering Scribe

Thats certainly an interesting concept, and one that would make sense in a matriarchal tribe. It would make sense also that as the patriarchs grew in power, then the texts and knowledge of a mother god would fade as it was deliberately erased by the new priesthood.

The fierce and patently unbalanced Jehovah of the old testament, has lost the nurturing yet also magically terrifying female aspect.

Does it sound more feminine to read the line as "I will be what I will be" ? One must watch for putting an unconscious bias into scripture, but to me it almost hints at a future hidden even from God.

Just ignore all the unconscious bias I've just put in here lol
edit on 2-6-2013 by current93 because: a small addition

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 03:15 PM
reply to post by arpgme

"I am that I am" is a title, not a proper name. His Name is YHVH, and the oldest pieces of the OT in existence have YHVH for the Name of God.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 03:30 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical

"I am that I am" is a title, not a proper name. His Name is YHVH, and the oldest pieces of the OT in existence have YHVH for the Name of God.

Are you familiar with Nassim Haramein's work?

Interestingly, his research reveals startling parallels going all the way back to Sumerian legend - namely, the wisdom stone. Additionally, his research reveals notes that support a theory stating the Ark of the Covenant is actually a device that contains a power associated with "God" but was an Egyptian technology before Moses ever got hold of it.

All of this fits into a vast web defining the contours of YHWH's actual nature...which is somewhat dissimilar to what is commonly agreed upon today. At the very least, it is not anthropomorphic nor is it even three dimensional. We are only able to observe its three dimensional effects.
edit on 2-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 03:47 PM
reply to post by current93

Thanks for your response.I see what you are saying however...There is no "magic" secret power in saying Yahweh or Yahoshuas name (or any name)correctly."God is not a magician and his name is not an incantation.When the apostles were saying "in the name of" it was declarative of who and what was behind the power that was happening....They were saying In the "name" of the salvation (deliverance) of Yahweh"(Yahoshua)... be healed.The did it to show they weren't healing anyone or performing magic tricks as Simon the magician thought it was a "secret" and wanted to buy it.

Yes... we all have names we don't know yet...meaning we have a nature we are not aware of because we haven't grown into it yet.Most are a dormant seed sown in infertile soil(soil/dirt/clay is the meaning of Adam...adamah)Salvation is a process not an event.Salvation is the deliverance from the realm we are in ...the valley of the shadow of death.Everything physical will it can grow(stand up..the meaning of resurrection).

That is the power of the name of Yahoshua....the salvation of Yahweh.It is not just for the chosen few. It is for ALL of creation(...the material existence including ALL of mankind).It is ALL BEING saved.Saying words does not cause that.It is ALL an infinite equation that is perfectly summed by Yahweh and Yahweh alone.

All Gods are false Gods.There is(and can only be) One Yahweh.Yahoshua said this very clearly(for those with ears to hear) The Father and I are ONE.He was stating an equation not esoteric metaphysics.It is all in the Fibonacci sequence and so simple a child could understand it and so infinitely complex that no one can understand it all(or even a small part)

Here is Fn0-Fn12

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89, infinity

The equation:

Fn0=0=The void...nothing
Fn1=1=God the Father
Fn2=1=God the Son

It is the 1st(beginning which means... first fruits) ...of the great equation of ALL things unseen and seen.EVERYTHING is "written" by signs and symbols...Math!!Yahweh is not playing dice with the universe.Everything is perfectly ordered rather we can see it or not.....atoms have very poor vision.
edit on 2-6-2013 by Rex282 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 03:51 PM
reply to post by current93

Just ignore all the unconscious bias I've just put in here lol

No worries, bias is a part of human nature. It helps us survive.

Thats certainly an interesting concept, and one that would make sense in a matriarchal tribe.

Interestingly enough, the Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians, Canaanites, and various groups of Anatolia and Greece were predominantly patriarchal.

Their supreme gods—including Enlil, Marduk, Amun-Rē, Il, Ba'al, Tarhunt, Tešub, and Zeus—were all masculine.

The Sumerians had a High King, the Egyptians had a Pharaoh, the Canaanites had a Bull-King, and the Greeks had independent Kings.

So, despite the feminine law-giving nature, the cultures were predominantly patriarchal.

It would make sense also that as the patriarchs grew in power, then the texts and knowledge of a mother god would fade as it was deliberately erased by the new priesthood.

I've no qualms with this. The Hebrews were not only patriarchal, but quite misogynistic. Women's place in Hebrew culture was tightly defined. This type of gender bias extended into Christianity, and very noticeably in Islam.

I think a large part of that has to do with the Queen of Heaven motiff, found throughout the ancient Near East in the guise of figures like Inanna, Ištar, Isis, Astarte, Anat, Šauška, and Hera.

The Queen of Heaven was quick to look at the authority of the supreme god, and then say: "Nah, I think I'll go do my own thing instead."

To a figure like YHVH, who absolutely covets power, having an "uppity" goddess who defied him at inopportune times was a bad thing.

Unfortunately, such wild abandon is Nature incarnate. So, despite the efforts of the priests, and later the Roman Emperor, the Queen of Heaven just couldn't be contained. Perhaps much of the Old and New Testament's dislike of women stems from this?

The fierce and patently unbalanced Jehovah of the old testament, has lost the nurturing yet also magically terrifying female aspect.


Instead of punishing as a means of helping his subjects grow, he punishes out of wrath, anger, and jealousy.

When the goddess punished someone, it was often done so that they saw the error of their ways, and grew in strength, wisdom, and experience.

When YHVH punishes someone, it is because they have done something he, personally, doesn't like. Often the only lesson learned is: "fear Me, for I am the Lord, and I will destroy you if you disobey."

Does it sound more feminine to read the line as "I will be what I will be" ? One must watch for putting an unconscious bias into scripture, but to me it almost hints at a future hidden even from God.

If we're looking at the quote as having come from the Queen of Heaven, a force of pure, unadulterated Nature, then yeah. I can definitely see Inanna, Ištar, Isis, or Ašerah saying something like that. Not so much because God doesn't know the future, but because Nature is chaotic, wild, and free; meaning that, for all your observations and plots, you cannot map its course.

And those would be my learned biases concerning the subject matter, ha ha.

~ Wandering Scribe

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 04:03 PM
reply to post by Rex282

Its good to get a pleasant discussion on religion, but we will have to differ on the power of the ineffable name lol, the rabbi's really did believe that to utter the tetragrammaton correctly would end the universe and all creation. It wasn't so much magic more the resonant frequency of put a modern slant on it.

There is so much tied up in the 'names of power' and their gematrial values. Its a shame that SuperString theory looks to be falling by the way side, as the vibrational resonance and dimensional projections do tie in perfectly with the sacred names (vibration) and their supposed powers.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 04:23 PM
reply to post by Rex282

Interesting theory. I do like the way you're outlining the Fibonacci sequence. I haven't seen that before. It's sparked a curiosity in my mind, something like this:

Here is Fn0-Fn12

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89, infinity

Fn0 = 0 = the Void.

This I completely agree with. In Sumerian mythology the principle force is Nammu, the Great Empty Sea. In Egyptian mythology it is Nun, the Watery Abyss. In Celtic mythology before any beings come to be, there is just the Sea which divides the Earth from the Otherworld. As the Bible says, the beginning was simply a Void.

Fn1 = 1 = the first force.
Fn 2 = 1 = the second force.

You attribute these to God the Father, and God the Son. I'm seeing something different. Here we have two independent forces, with the same value and importance: a 1, and another 1. Male and Female: Mother and Father; Supreme God and Supreme Goddess. An and Anšar from Sumer; Nut and Geb from Egypt; Tiamat and Apsu from Babylon; YHVH and Ašerah from the Hebrews, and so on.

Both forces are of equal value, but different.

Fn3 = 2 = states of being?

That which is alive, and that which has died, maybe? Dilmun (paradise) and Irkalla (the Underworld) from Sumerian mythology; Egypt (land of the living) and the Fields of Osiris (land of the blessed dead) from Egyptian mythology; Shamayim and Sheol in the Old Testament; Tartarus and the Elysian Isle from Greeco Roman mythology; Earth and Tir na nÓg from the Celtic myths.

After the principle pair arrive, then comes the World, and the Realm of the Dead, which they separate, and which each, respectively takes command over. In Sumerian mythology Enlil rules the living; Ereškigal the dead. In Greek mythology Amun-Rē rules the living, while the goddess Maāt determines the fate of the dead. In Greco-Roman mythology Zeus rules over the living, while figures like Themis, Hecate, and Persephone determine the dead (Hades was tricked into the Underworld, remember, he's not its original ruler). The masculine force governs the living; the feminine force governs the dead.

Fn4 = 3 = the Universal Triad.

Salt, Sulphur, Mercury. The element of temperance (salt), the element of destruction (sulphur), and mutable element between (mercury). The alchemist believed that Creation, Balance, and Destruction were the forces of the Universe. Similar to Brahma (salt), Shiva (sulphur), and Krishna (mercury) in Hindu mythology. It occurs elsewhere in mythology, where you have a triad of forces which create life, govern life, and end life, occupying the space between Fn1 and Fn2, Birth and Death.

Fn5 = 5 = elements.

Fire, Water, Air, Earth, and Spirit/Soul. The classical elements which compose the living entities operating within the microcosm. Mythology is rife with the "gift of fire" and the healing powers of water, with the necessity for earth which rejuvenates yearly to take care of man, and other such motifs. After the establishment of forces which allow life to rise, decay, and die, the next necessary step will be to arm that life with the tools it needs to evolve and prosper: fire for hunting, protection, and cooking; water for sustenance, cleanliness, and purification; air fro breath, communication, and thoughts; earth for fertility, food, and support; and spirit for a connection to Nature, and the divine.


I didn't really look too much further, but, I know that in Egyptiain myth there is the Ogdoad, 8 forces which come together and help create something or other, and Fn6 = 8. Fn7 = 13 could refer to various pantheons (like the Olympians) who tend to have 12 members, and then one extra who serves as the progenitor of the whole host, and so on, and so forth.

My thoughts may not be quite clear, as I really just noticed the pattern as I typed this up. I decided to write this up while I was inspired though. So, thank you for pointing out the Fibonacci!

~ Wandering Scribe

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 04:32 PM

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by arpgme

Well spotted. Still doesn't tell us who or what he is.

Oh yes it does............

Eyah Asher Eyah, is commonly know as "I am that I am", but the clincher here is that "Asher" in Akkadian is the word for the annunaki god Enki.

So dear friends, he is saying "I am Enki"

All three Yahwehisms are BS, read Dr. Joseph P Farrell' book "Yahweh The Two Faced God" available from his web site.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 04:32 PM
reply to post by Wandering Scribe

The mystery schools teach that mankinds' spiritual evolution comes in phases. If they are correct, they place a matriarchal age before the present patriarchal one. I've spoken to one heretical rabbi who believes that the ancient hebrews were a matriarchal tribe, and the taboo of pork stems from an elder pig mother goddess with teats aplenty.

To be the patriarchal faiths almost seem desperately patriarchal if that makes sense in that they seek to deny woman any place at all in the temple or in the ability to approach the godhead. There is a deep mistrust of the female powers, and the god head becomes solely male...yet nature tends to need the seed from the male and female to create (tends to...but nature always finds a way - the beauty of Chaos).

Its sad that our histories and archaeology tend to be Greek and Roman centred, as I feel we are missing most of the story by not concentrating on the Sumerians/Persian and also the Kelts etc. This is where our beliefs really came from and to understand cultures like these is to understand ourselves.

There have been so many dark ages in our short history of recent civilizations...each winning sect rewrites to suit their belief structure and to demonise the faiths of the past.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:28 PM
Not this crap again...

Yehweh. If you want to get technical with it, hebrew is an all consonant language. We'll never know the exact pronunciation of his name, it was lost to time. Something Moses is going to have to tell us, or Elijah since they actually know his name. But the only name under heaven whereby men must be saved is Yeshua, or Jesus in english.
edit on 2-6-2013 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:34 PM
reply to post by downunderET

So "Enki" must be the dark brother.

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:37 PM
EhYah = EA/A'ah = ENKI = Lord of the Sweet Waters, or symbol of the astrological age: Pisces

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:53 PM
reply to post by purplemonkeydishwasher

And what age does Enlil represent?
edit on 2-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:54 PM

Originally posted by purplemonkeydishwasher
EhYah = EA/A'ah = ENKI = Lord of the Sweet Waters, or symbol of the astrological age: Pisces

One problem with that theory, or hyptheosis. No one knows how to pronounce EA's name, Sumerian hasn't been spoken in 4000 years at least. No way to know how to pronounce any of those names. You could be making that stuff up. Buuuut, you probably read some of Zechariah Sitchins books and believed every word of it.

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in