re: בַּת⁠ קוֹל
(‘daugh­ter of a voice’)

1. 1  the ‘yodh‐so­dom‐com­plex’ as a lec­ture

   1. also as a re­minder to re­spect the 1st ‘com­mand­ment’^[3] if one promised so (or even took oath), "/god does­n’t need us or our neigh­bours and may just move on. "/god just loves us,^[4] which is al­ways an in­vi­ta­tion to at least trust,
   2. but more so as a pic­ture of an un­just so-called «pa­tri­archy», ob­tain­ing the place of the (nat­ur­al) ma­triliny, pro­vid­ed as a lec­ture: a NOP pen­e­tra­tion (test) of an ‘in­trud­er’, hav­ing sent a lot of yodhs.
   3. gén­e­sis (greek: γένεσις; he­brew: בְּרֵאשִׁית; rom.: bərēʾšīṯ) 19 only serves as an epony­mous, catchy e.g., des­crib­ing one of these yodhs ‘jump­ing’ on­to some לוֹט (he­brew: lōṭ; en.: ‘veil’ or ‘cov­er­ing’), im­mo­lat­ing the right­eous ones to live in sin.
   4. oth­ers ‘jumped’ on­to or­di­nary neigh­bours, some on­to the ‘church’, in­vent­ing the mar­riage/fam­i­ly, kill­ing com­mu­ni­ty to dis­turb evo­lu­tion, still oth­ers to negate cre­ation it­self by kill­ing the ones that pre­serve, slow­ly and one by one, ‘al­ways’ pre­tend­ing their own ‘feel­ings’ got ‘hurt’ or ‘too much of a go(o)d™ (thing)’. even en­ti­ties try­ing to re­place lucifer with their very own ver­sion of a ‘dev­il’.
   5. ten righteous ones? and the moth­ers? a ‘peter fischer’^[5] tell­ing me to have seen hell. two women in there. may­be three, but thou­sands of men. sodom and gomorrha be­ing special? how big where they?
   6. most men are won­der­ful, fun’n’rock’n’roll, except when in po­si­tion of pow­er (so-called by them).

1. 2  god ap­pears female^[6]

   isaiah 66:13
   

   כְּאִ֕ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אִמֹּ֖ו תְּנַחֲמֶ֑נּוּ כֵּ֤ן אָֽנֹכִי֙ אֲנַ֣חֶמְכֶ֔ם

   (en.: as a moth­er com­forts her child, so will i com­fort you ..)

   1. af­ter hate and cru­el­ty of cow­ard­ly and in­hu­man groups of (ul­tra-)nazi ter­ror­ists^[7] made a god in­evitable (turn­ing those men in­to a beau­ti­ful al­le­go­ry of a de­gen­er­at­ed pa­tri­archy lat­er on).
   2. [השם] first en­coun­tered in june, a. d. 2025, af­ter get­ting pre­pared.^[8] re­fer­ring to her­self as «IEVE»^[9], which one please do not speak out loud:

      exodus 20 (שְׁמוֹת):6
      

      לֹא תִשָּׂא אֶת-שֵׁם-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, לַשָּׁוְא

      (en.: thou shalt not take the name of YHWH thy god in vain)

      here re­ferred to as יי (or ASCII ") for a lot more rea­sons than try­ing to avoid ridicu­lous gen­der dis­cus­sions.
   3. her face she did not show (the one paint­ing it, i want to see). the rel­e­vant part from ex­o­dus 33:20 might bet­ter be ‘trans­lat­ed’ as «.. how do you in­tend to live, are you cer­tain of me?», imho. con­vinc­ing me in lieu, most el­e­gant and un­ob­tru­sive, that she is ex­alt­ed above all,^[10]
      while 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?
   4. the bib­li­cal name of " is «הוהי»^[11], the tetra­gram­ma­ton YHWH should be writ­ten every time when the trans­lat­ed bibles speak of the name of god:
      e.g. exo­dus 20:2 and the famous 1st com­mand­ment from exo­dus 20:3:

      אָנֹכִי יהוה אֱלֹהֶיך
      ..
      לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ
      אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים
      עַל־פָּנָי

      it is writ­ten
      «i am YHWH [heb­rew: יהוה],
      your god,
      .. .
      you shall not have other gods beside me.»^[3]

      in­stead of the LORD in cap­i­tal let­ters? [amend^prs.] at least i find it dis­turb­ing to read, when i have to in­ter­po­late in every(!) church ser­vice i at­tend­ed so far. i think that e.g. the word الله (rom.: allah, en.: god) shows way more re­spect.
   5. i sus­pect that mo­ses sim­ply mis­heard the name of " (under stress, hunger, fa­tigue) and that " proves her beau­ti­ful cre­ation by the fal­li­bil­i­ty of her chil­dren:
      exo­dus 3:14:

      וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י
      יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם׃

      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.»

      an i am who you think i am i re­ceived too, but the next: the name of " seems to sound like ‘i am’ in heb­rew and מֹשֶׁה/mo­se, a heb­rew speak­er, might have missed her name: ehyeh ⇨ IEVE/YaH­WeH.
      so, by the same time, he not just prov­ed the ex­is­tence of " so au­then­tic fal­li­ble, but him­self as be­ing the great­est prophet of all times as well as the תָּנָ״ךְ (tanakh)^!? be­ing true. ❤️
   6. the name of " means ‘love’/‘pas­sion’?
      exo­dus 34:14:

      כִּ֛י לֹ֥א תִֽשְׁתַּחֲוֶ֖ה לְאֵ֣ל אַחֵ֑ר כִּ֤י יְהוָה֙ קַנָּ֣א שְׁמֹ֔ו אֵ֥ל קַנָּ֖א הֽוּא׃

      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’ and/or ‘de­sire’.^[9]
   7. ^{(7. 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 (and may­be onan sim­ply was an en­vi­ous/greedy dude).
      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.
      same goes for every (oth­er) con­tract: ‘pacta sunt ser­van­da’.
      " (via medium) in ger­man: ich brau­che kein ge­schlecht, aber für dich bin ich di­vers. (en.: i do not need a sex nor gen­der, but for you i am di­verse.), how­ever: any least at­tempt to pun­ish LOVE, finds coun­ter­bal­ance any­way.

an im­mac­u­late con­cep­tion af­ter my white sun­day, fol­lowed up by even more of this sense­less seem­ing tor­ments, but sup­ple­ment­ed by phys­i­cal tor­ture^[14] (for 40 weeks!), then flowed in­to prov­i­dence with an

1. 3 ad­vent of an ‘ebony god­dess’

   1. on feb 2nd^[15] of a. d. 2026 at around 8⁺¹ o’clock_p.m. "/her daugh­ter gets born. a first pre­server­ess, herald­ing an epoche (or ab­stract from time?):
   2. the end is neigh for an un­just and cruel pa­tri­archy. il­log­i­cal and de­gen­er­at­ed, slow­ly van­ish­ing in­to the ‘back­ground noise’.
      [amend^prs.] i hope for a (pure) ma­tri­archy,

      as it is nat­u­ral and log­i­cal (to me), ma­triliny would be a great al­ter­na­tive (there’s noth­ing to in­her­it by a man, it sim­ply does­n’t make sense at all). 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?

1. 4 ob­ser­va­tions

   dis­claimer: every­thing here is my tip of a yodh and a de­scrip­tion of very fresh ex­pe­ri­ences.
   imho, no or­di­nary (fal­li­ble) mor­tal can tell you what to be­lieve, to think, to know, to do nor to let be.^/w exc.

   1. the deter­min­ing and causative ‘sex’ is fe­male:
      eve is not made from a rib of a man, imho it's not even the other way round:

      «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).
      [amend^prs.] the תָּנָ״ךְ (tanakh) writes עלצ (zela), which can mean ‘rib‘, but more so ‘side’? cre­at­ed from soil/אדמה (he­brew, fem­i­nine: adamah; en.: ‘earth’), this אָדָם (āḏām) had no sex at all, when god does­n’t need one either? but one ‘side’ is tak­en to forge/shape a human moth­er (or to kind of come as her?), giv­ing birth to the 1st pre­server­ess of cre­ation?
      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.
      #TODO dis­cussion syn­tac­ti­cal­ly there’s just one י miss­ing in חווה (eve’s name?) to com­plete/mod­i­fy יהוה/god’s? hint?
      #TODO fun two souls weigh 42 grams, be­ing the an­swer to life, the uni­verse and every­thing?
      did god sent, in a sense of coming as, eve? when did the ser­pent trans­form in­to some­thing evil, from be­ing a sym­bol for eter­ni­ty and heal­ing? whom is an adamah blam­ing? the fal­len one got dis­graced for not bow­ing down be­fore the first ‘hu­man be­ing’?
   2. 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.
      [amend^prs.] may we relativize the god­like­ness of the son of " 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 (if they feel the need! not as a duty, which might lack respect)? to me, he’s a gift, an in­vi­ta­tion to the non-יַהֲדוּת (he­brew; rom.: yahăḏūṯ).

   3. the halo/glo­ri­ole of the de­pict­ed sa­cred or the so-called holys/saints seems to be a ‘nat­ur­al’ phe­nom­e­non across all cul­tures. a soul ‘shines’ the more, the more beauti­ful it is.
   4. [ian, a. i.æ 1]

      

      (arch)an­gel)^? גַּבְרִיאֵל (gaḇrīʾa/ēl)^? is fe­male too, or at least ap­pears with a fe­male voice (in a body of duty?), the most beauti­ful i’ve ever heard.
      [amend^prs.: do­n’t know any­thing about the others. may­be רְפָאֵל (rəfāʾēl)? but i do­n’t think to have en­coun­tered her yet.]
      מיכאל (mīkā’īl)? mi (‘who’) kamocha (‘is like you’) eloha^?/-im (god)? pre­server­ess of the cre­ation?
      [amend^prs.: like the moth­ers of the world? pre­server­esses are?]
   5. Ω seems to be Α + in­for­ma­tion gain?
      "/god does­n’t need time.

      it’s just a vec­tor as part of the gen­er­at­ing sys­tem of a room that still spans. we are in­her­ent­ly bound to a spe­cif­ic lo­ca­tion. for us, there is only one time.
   6. nowa­days bible (de­riv­a­tives) is (are) for sure ex­cit­ing, but bizarre too.
      
      i got a ‘vi­sion’ that less then three per­cent are the word of "

      (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 the name of ", 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?)
      [john 20:11] is mary of magdala in­tend­ed as suc­ces­sor for him?

      [amend^prs.] i mean, they were not just lov­ing each other. this must have been one of the most beau­ti­ful re­la­tion­ships bet­ween two souls ever? i con­sid­er it a dis­grace how yeshua and his other soul have been treat­ed. mag­da­lene at his grave mourn­ing? pretty sure not be­cause of doubt.
      #TODO mary
   7. [pe­ter’s keys] a «peter fischer» some­times claimed to have es­caped hell, hav­ing seen two, may­be three women in there, but thou­sands of men.
      the al­le­go­ry is in­ter­est­ing though:

      math­ew 16:19

      and i will give unto thee the keys of the king­dom of heav­en: and what­so­ever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heav­en: and what­so­ever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heav­en.

      may­be yēšūaʿ spoke of an en­trance for every­one:
      luke 17:20

      .. ‘the king­dom of god does not come with ob­ser­va­tion’; ..

      luke 17:21

      .. the king­dom of god is with­in you.

      mathew 16:22

      .. and said un­to pe­ter, get thee be­hind me, satan: thou art an of­fence unto me: for thou savour­est not the things that be of god, but those that be of men. ..

      [pe­ter’s cross ⸸] is an in­vert­ed cross,

      thus si­mon petrus, 1st bish­op of the ear­ly chris­tians, got cru­ci­fied up­side down? for what rea­son, when every oth­er cru­ci­fied hu­man be­ing was wor­thy dy­ing the way yēšūaʿ did?
      [disclaimer] simon petrus here as an e.g.,

      [amend^prs.] i do­n’t knew him and all his life he might have been con­vinced to hold ‘the keys’. es­pe­cial­ly the term ‘śāṭān’ ini­tial­ly means noth­ing more than an op­po­nent first and fore­most.

   8. 

      φως­φό­ρος/LV­CIFER/לוציפר, venus, the son of the au­ro­ra & her­ald of the light is no διάβολος (diabolos/devil) nor a שָׂטָן (śāṭān) &c. per sē.
      but may­be demon to some, a fallen an­gel to the same (sin­ners & sa­tanists).

      yəšaʿyāhū 14:12:
      

      אֵ֛יךְ נָפַ֥לְתָּ מִשָּׁמַ֖יִם הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָּׁ֑חַר נִגְדַּ֣עְתָּ לָאָ֔רֶץ חוֹלֵ֖שׁ עַל־גּוֹיִֽם:

      (en.: how you have fall­en from heav­en, said hillel ben-sahar; you have been brought down to the earth, a bur­den to the na­tions.) the story is about a fal­len king of baby­lon.
      does lu­cifer even ap­pear in the old tes­ta­ment?
      [amend^prs.] his hole (known) iden­ti­ty is man made. why should there be a fight bet­ween an­gels? "/el is שדאי (om­nipo­tent). it’s the pre­server­esses of the cre­ation who ban­ish sa­tans to hell every day.

      rea­gan once stated: it takes two to tango. no light with­out dark­ness? no good with­out evil? no great­ness with­out small squares?
      on a more reg­u­lar ba­sis: venvs to some, devil to others.

      did he lead the kings to yēšūaʿ? did he vis­it maria, be­cause of an an­gel be­ing male?