{"id":420,"date":"2026-07-20T23:19:53","date_gmt":"2026-07-20T23:19:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/psybin.org\/hisword\/?p=420"},"modified":"2026-07-23T20:01:30","modified_gmt":"2026-07-24T01:01:30","slug":"tartaria","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/psybin.org\/hisword\/unveillance\/tartaria\/","title":{"rendered":"Tartaria Uncovered"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

<\/span>No, I won’t be having the fish tonight. Wait…<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

We aren’t talking about the sauce–not in that way at least… or that other way. Anyway…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lots of discoveries have been made about Tartaria the last several years. It’s one of those Old World (or some would say Third Age) mysteries that we refuse to forget about. It’s one that gets me particularly angry when thinking about the knowledge that has been physically and intellectually buried, regardless of its origins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article is geared toward discovering the nature and origins of Tartaria through language, rather than its physical remnants that they haven’t yet been burned to a crisp, which they instead hijacked as “founded” architecture, or masonry that has been acquired for free, as it were. There’s a word for that by the way, and that word is stolen<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Who dun diddit?<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

There are different views on what the Tartarian civilization actually is and where it came from. Many believe it is the remnants of the millennial reign of Jesus and His kingdom. There are some legitimate and logical reasons to believe it, such as the energetic bells that have been removed and melted down and buried. Then there are plenty of reasons to believe that cannot be the case, such as the list of things that simply haven’t happened in Revelation, irreconcilable timelines, and nephilim signatures in the architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One thing that no one debates is that the mud flood happened. Well some do<\/a>…<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n

The first few floors of countless buildings that are buried under street level in cities worldwide proves it beyond doubt. The debate is when it happened, and by whom it was triggered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>My take on it<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

I’ll open by stating that I believe the mud flood is the result of the biblical flood as recorded in Genesis in the Bible, the same worldwide flood that is told in the origin story of virtually every group and race of people throughout the earth, albeit with different details and names.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One example is how Noah in Genesis is Utnapishtim in the Akkadian Epic of Gilgamesh. His original Sumerian name was Ziusudra. I will always go by Noah and the Genesis account, since the Bible is true Word of God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To me, it makes the most sense that the biblical flood is the cause of the mud flood. Every city across the world has the same architectural style, truly mind-boggling works of art, all buried in the same way in practically every major city worldwide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The landscape of these cities is always a gradual slope, where the buildings are buried up to the first or second floor, sometimes deeper. This necessitates a massive amount of dirt and sediment to have settled at an increasingly slowing rate, which could only be feasible after a massive flood while the flood waters were receding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In my opinion, the view that the mud flood happened in the 19th century coincides with the post-millennial theory, both of which I believe are related psyops from the adversary. They reinforce each other, while adding confusion to where we are on God’s timeline, something that is of crucial importance in these end times, especially when it comes to the Great Tribulation<\/a> aspect. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

No it’s not a salvation issue of course, but one with a preterist belief may approach many things in life differently, specifically the post-millennial one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>I’ll have the linguini. Wait…<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
I’ll have what she’s having! The below quote is from a pdf on Tartaria<\/a> I found.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n

These photographs are said to be of Vanja K., a Tartarian who appeared at several World Fairs towards the end of the 19th century. Vanja was reported to have medical knowledge beyond contemporary understanding. She was also photographed in her ‘flying-costume’ which she said she wore when flying in her ‘rocket-vessel’.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

What I meant was, it’s time to serve up–er, dig up–the linguistic remains of Tartaria and its related words. I promise I’ll stop with the food puns at some point, after it has run its course–the second or third course perhaps!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>The etymology<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

We’ll start with a basic etymology of Tartaria and related words. Searching etymonline<\/a>, unsurprisingly there’s no entry for Tartaria<\/em>, however it has a few related words.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Tartary<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“land of the Tartars,” late 14c., from Old French tartarie<\/em> and directly from Medieval Latin Tartaria<\/em>, from Tartarus<\/em> (see Tartar<\/a><\/strong>).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

Tartar<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

late 14c., “inhabitant of Tartary (late 13c. as a surname), via Medieval Latin Tartarus<\/em>, etc., from Persian Tatar<\/em>, first used 13c. in reference to the hordes of Genghis Khan (title of Tem\u00fcjin, ca. 1160-1227), said to be ultimately from Tata<\/em>, a name of the Mongols for themselves.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

The form of the word in the Western European languages was influenced from the start by association with Latin Tartarus<\/em> “hell”…<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

tartar<\/strong> (n.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“bitartrate of potash, sediment of potassium tartarate” (a deposit left during fermentation), late 14c., from Old French tartre<\/em> and directly from Medieval Latin tartarum<\/em>, from late Greek tartaron<\/em> “tartar encrusting the sides of wine casks,” a word perhaps of Semitic origin, but if so the exact source has not been identified<\/strong>; Arabic is unlikely because of the early date of the word in Latin. The explanation of the name in Paracelsus probably is fanciful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The purified substance is cream of tartar<\/em>. Used generally in 17c. of encrustations from liquid contact; the specific meaning “encrustation on teeth” (calcium phosphate) is recorded by 1806.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Unknown numb gnomes<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter, except maybe the bird.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Any time I see “unknown origin”, “not identified”, or similar, my bullshit radar starts screaming. I see this a lot when researching words outside the mainstream narrative or relating to biblical themes and ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m sure in some cases it’s absolutely true, but sometimes I find related words or other words that are undeniably related, yet not included in the etymology or just left as “unknown”, while other words list mere speculations as their official etymology. To me, that’s dubious at best. At worst it’s hypocrisy, coverup, or both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I say hypocrisy because if I offer my opinion or speculation, even if I have something solid to work from, I would get denied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I know this because I’ve been in that exact position while chatting with AI, and it’s always the same pushback. The “unknown origin” or vague speculation is just accepted as fact by the AI, but then no matter how much evidence I throw at it to back up my theory, it’s just automatic pushback. So if you know how consensus works in the real world, it would translate into getting absolutely nowhere at an academic level if it even remotely brushes up against the no-no square<\/a> 1<\/a><\/sup> of acceptability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Greek trails<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Let’s start with the most recent trails found in history and work backward from there, as I’m wont to do with these sorts of archaeolexicographic unveillances. I’m also fond of making up words<\/a>, so you’ll have to deal with that too. Just for fun, and to start off this Greek \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc<\/em>2<\/a><\/sup> right, here’s another scoop:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

hypercarcinoplasmologue<\/a><\/strong> (n.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

a word so absurdly long as to give the impression it has a cancerous tumor growing from its side<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

Tartarus<\/strong> (n.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

in Homer and older Greek mythology, the sunless abyss below Hades in which Zeus imprisoned the rebel Titans, c. 1500, from Latinized form of Greek\u00a0Tartaros<\/em>, a name of uncertain etymology<\/strong>; “prob<\/strong>. a word of imitative origin, suggestive of something frightful” [Klein]. Later in Greek cosmology a place of punishment for the souls of the wicked and almost synonymous with\u00a0Hades<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

See what I mean? It’s a name of “uncertain etymology” and “probably a word of imitative origin”, which is utter speculation. Imitating what… the gnashing of teeth, perhaps? In that case I’d say it’s possible, but obviously that’s not what Klein meant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

tortoise<\/strong> (n.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“four-footed reptile with the trunk naturally encased in a ‘shell’ of bony plates,” 1550s, tortoyse<\/em>…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is perhaps from Late Latin tartaruchus<\/em> “of the underworld” (see Tartarus<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The entries for tartar and tortoise are included because they give a hint at the history of the word–something hard and solid. The entries mentioning Hades and hell also give a big clue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Tantalus<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

First, the etymonline entry for Tantalus, which of course is a name of “uncertain origin”:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Tantalus<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Greek\u00a0Tantalos<\/em>, ancient mythical king of Phrygia, a name of uncertain origin<\/strong>, perhaps<\/strong> literally “the Bearer” or “the Sufferer,”…<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

As much as wikipedia sucks for digging up actual truth, it’s still useful enough. Let’s see what it says for related words and topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Tantalus<\/a><\/strong> (Ancient Greek: \u03a4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, romanized: T\u00e1ntalos<\/em>), also called Atys<\/strong>, was a Greek mythological figure, most famous for his punishment in Tartarus: for either revealing many secrets of the gods…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This punishment, although the best-known today, was a more unusual detail in surviving early Greek sources, where variants including a stone<\/strong> suspended above his head are more commonly recorded.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Now it’s getting interesting. Once one is aware of the nephilim of Genesis and how they came to be, one starts to realize that the Greek mythology about giants and titans isn’t just a collection of mere fabrications, but it has some truth behind it. Let’s see what the Book of Enoch says in relation to the punishment of Tantalus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>1 Enoch 10<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

4\u00a0<\/sup>And again the Lord said to Raphael, “Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks<\/strong>, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

It sounds similar enough to take notice and keep in mind, but for now let’s dig up a little more rubble on Tantalus. The wiki page goes on to say he may have been an actual historical figure, possibly the ruler of an Anatolian city named Tantal\u00eds, Tantalus, or Sipylus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He is also sometimes referred to as the King of Phrygia<\/em>, though in the more western edge of Anatolia where Lydia emerged, rather than the typical location of Phrygia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Hebrew traces<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"Tower
Chabad wonders if they can get it right this time<\/a> with AI… yikes<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

There really aren’t any words in the Bible that are close to Tartar or its variants on the surface level, but there are some words that are close in meaning, the events of which are early enough in the biblical timeline that this entire civilization could very well indeed have been antediluvian.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Genesis 10<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

25 <\/sup>And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg<\/strong>; for in his days was the earth divided<\/strong>; and his brother’s name was Joktan.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>H6389 \u05e4\u05b6\u05bc\u05dc\u05b6\u05d2 Peleg, the same as H6388<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
    \n
  1. Peleg = “division”\n
      \n
    1. son of Eber and brother of Joktan<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

      <\/span>H6388 \u05e4\u05b6\u05bc\u05dc\u05b6\u05d2 peleg, from H6385<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
      \n
        \n
      1. channel, canal<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      2. river, stream<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

        <\/span>H6385 \u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc\u05b7\u05d2 p\u00e2lag<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
        \n
          \n
        1. to divide, split\n
            \n
          1. (Niphal) to be split, be divided<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          2. (Piel)\n
              \n
            1. to split, cleave<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            2. to divide<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

              <\/span>Genesis 11<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
              \n

              8 <\/sup>So the Lord scattered<\/strong> them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

              \n

              9 <\/sup>Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter<\/strong> them abroad upon the face of all the earth.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

              <\/span>H6327 \u05e4\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e5 p\u00fbwts<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
              \n
                \n
              1. to scatter, be dispersed, be scattered\n
                  \n
                1. (Qal) to be dispersed, be scattered<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                2. (Niphal)\n
                    \n
                  1. to be scattered<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  2. to be spread abroad<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  3. (Hiphil) to scatter<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  4. (Hithpael) scatter<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  5. (Qal) to flow, overflow<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  6. to break\n
                      \n
                    1. (Polel) to shatter<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    2. (Pilpel) to dash to pieces<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      There doesn’t seem to be a clear connection yet between the Hebrew words in Genesis and the Tartar-related words, but themes of punishment from God are present in all these.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      <\/span>Esther<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                      \"\"
                      Fishtar<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
                      A preface, and sidenote about the source of the above image<\/summary>\n

                      I had already believed, figured, and discerned that the Book of Esther was false and conjured up for several reasons. I was absolutely not looking for this article on Esther<\/a> when I found the image.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      I say this to make clear that my beliefs and opinions on everything written here about Esther and related topics have been my views since before I had begun to write this article. I simply think it’s appropriate (and rather humorous) that I stumbled upon the article, especially after praying for wisdom and discernment through the Holy Spirit for all that I’m doing here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n

                      From the July-August 2024 Let the Stones Speak<\/em> Magazine Issue<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \u201cThe book of Esther \u2026 is a free composition, not a historical document. Its fictional character can be illustrated by many examples \u2026. [A]rtificialities are clear \u2026. There are many exaggerations \u2026 sarcastic implausibilities \u2026 and huge ironies.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      \n

                      In the opinion of Protestantism\u2019s founding father, Martin Luther:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \u201cI am so great an enemy<\/em> to the second book of the Maccabees, and to Esther,<\/em> that I wish they had not come to us at all\u201d (Table Talk,<\/em> published 1566; emphasis added throughout).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      I agree. I, too, am (mostly) an enemy to the book, but unlike Martin Luther, I’m actually glad in some ways that the book exists. The downsides to its existence indeed drastically outweigh the benefits, but the benefits are like polished gemstones–rubies in this case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      It shows the contrast between how the Old Testament was written before Babylonian exile and afterward, and leaves subtle clues to the agenda slithering along in the background. It’s quite glaring. The writing patterns and word choices also act as a signature of synagogue of satan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Let’s see a bit more from the article before moving on:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n

                      From a Jewish perspective, the book of Esther could hardly be afforded more importance. One of Judaism\u2019s highest-esteemed rabbis and philosophers, the 12th-century Maimonides, esteemed the book of Esther as second to the Torah itself<\/strong>. The events of this book were accorded as historical by the first-century Jewish historian Josephus (as recounted in Antiquities of the Jews<\/em> 11.6)\u2014the book numbering among those others \u201cwhich contain the records of all the past times, which are justly believed to be divine<\/strong>\u201d (Against Apion<\/em> 1.8).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      Yikes… Of course they held that belief. That’s truly some disgusting blasphemy, if you ask me. They’ve elevated their Babylonian Talmud to the same divine status as well, so it’s not surprising.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

                      <\/span>False feaster aches<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                      And since you asked me, it’s all for their beloved Purim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      <\/span>Amos 5<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                      \n

                      21 <\/sup>I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                      Something I stumbled upon completely by serendipity when discussing Hanukkah with a friend, which ended up leading me straight back to this dig, were a few oddities in the Book of Esther.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      The events in the book took place from about 483-473 BC<\/a> during the reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes. Before getting into them, let’s see who Esther is, aside from what the book says about her. Let’s see who she is, linguistically, where it can be harder to bury the truth in some cases:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      <\/span>H635 \u05d0\u05b6\u05e1\u05b0\u05ea\u05b5\u05bc\u05e8 \u02bcE\u00e7t\u00ear<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                      \n
                        \n
                      1. Esther = “star”\n
                          \n
                        1. the queen of Persia, heroine of the book of Esther – daughter of Abihail, cousin and adopted daughter of Mordecai, of the tribe of Benjamin, made queen by king Ahasuerus to replace divorced queen, Vashti.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                          After seeing Esther means star<\/em>, I noticed her name looked awfully familiar–something I had been writing about lately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          <\/span>H6253 \u05e2\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b9\u05bc\u05e8\u05b6\u05ea \u02bbAsht\u00f4reth<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                          \n
                            \n
                          1. Ashtoreth = “star”\n
                              \n
                            1. the principal female deity of the Phoenicians worshipped in war and fertility\n
                                \n
                              1. also ‘Ishtar’ of Assyria and ‘Astarte’ by the Greeks and Romans<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                This specific name only appears in three verses of the Bible: 1 Kings 11:5 and 11:33 when Solomon was worshiping Ashtoreth, then in 2 Kings 23:13 when king Josiah had been destroying many idolatrous false god worship sites, notably Ashtoreth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>All roads lead to roam<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                \"\"
                                It always leads back to shekhinah, the whore of Babylon<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                Here’s another massive red herring<\/em> that the entire story isn’t historical, or at least the key aspects of it: Esther, the alleged decree of genocide, and Purim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                Ashtoreth, Asteroth, Ashtart, Astarte, Atargatis, Derceto, Dione, Ishtar, Aphrodite, Isis, Shekhinah, and the mermaid on your Starbucks coffee–they’re all the same whore of Babylon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                In Fasti, written by Ovid, the legend goes that Dione\/Derceto\/Derceti was plunged into the Euphrates, and then the Pisces pair helped her escape, but she turned into a mermaid, or siren. I believe it, primarily because of Enoch and Isaiah 13.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>1 Enoch 19<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                \n

                                2 <\/sup>And the women of the angels who went astray will become sirens<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>Isaiah 13<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                \n

                                21 <\/sup>But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls<\/strong> shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                All the English translations either say owls or ostriches for daughters<\/em> (H1323 \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea bath) in 13:21, but it’s generally known to mean sirens, as seen in Enoch 19 and on intertextual.bible<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                \"\"
                                Lovely, innit?.. The whore is everywhere…<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>2 Kings 23<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                \n

                                5 <\/sup>And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                \n

                                10 <\/sup>And he defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                \n

                                13\u00a0<\/sup>And the high places that were before Jerusalem, which were on the right hand of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had builded for Ashtoreth<\/strong> the abomination of the Zidonians, and for Chemosh the abomination of the Moabites, and for Milcom the abomination of the children of Ammon, did the king defile.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>Muzzle Tough<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                \"\"
                                I’m pretty sure God said no to astrology…<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                I included 23:5 and 10 above for a reminder of ‘planets’<\/em> and Topheth. It’s a bit of a side track, but interesting nonetheless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                <\/span>H4208 \u05de\u05b7\u05d6\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4 mazz\u00e2l\u00e2h, compare H4216<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                \n
                                  \n
                                1. constellations\n
                                    \n
                                  1. signs of zodiac (maybe)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                  2. planet<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                    <\/span>H4216 \u05de\u05b7\u05d6\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4 mazz\u00e2r\u00e2h<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                    \n
                                      \n
                                    1. Mazzaroth\n
                                        \n
                                      1. the 12 signs of the Zodiac and their 36 associated constellations<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon entry for mazzalah says rabbis called the individual signs or planets mazal (\u05de\u05b7\u05d6\u05bc\u05b8\u05dc). No wonder it sounded so similar to mazal tov! From Chabad<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        \n

                                        Mazal tov<\/em> (\u201cgood luck\u201d) is the colloquial Jewish expression of congratulations…but what does this familiar Jewish expression really mean?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        The Talmud clearly associates the concept of mazal<\/em> not with random luck but with a kind of astrologically-based predetermination, as in \u201cThe blessings of health, children, and livelihood do not depend on merit; rather, they depend on fate (mazal<\/em>).\u201d\u2076<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        Indeed, the Jerusalem Talmud\u2077 recounts a fascinating custom practiced by the Amalekites that highlights the power of mazal<\/em>. \u201cThey would place soldiers at the frontline on their birthday in the belief that a soldier would not fall easily on his birthday.\u201d From this the Talmud derives that a person\u2019s mazal<\/em> is dominant on their birthday.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>Isaiah 47<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n

                                        13 <\/sup>Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        \n

                                        14 <\/sup>Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>Blaspheme much?<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                        It’s actually kind of mind-blowing how highly The Preacher<\/em> held himself in esteem, quite literally putting himself next to God in heaven. If the author wasn’t Solomon, my next guess would be Adonikam, but I have no real reason to believe it wasn’t, especially with his occult immersion later on in life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>Proverbs 8<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n

                                        14\u00a0<\/sup>Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom<\/strong>: I am understanding<\/strong>; I have strength.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        15\u00a0<\/sup>By me kings reign, and princes decree justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        16\u00a0<\/sup>By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        20\u00a0<\/sup>I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        22\u00a0<\/sup>The\u00a0Lord\u00a0possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        23\u00a0<\/sup>I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        24\u00a0<\/sup>When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        25\u00a0<\/sup>Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        26\u00a0<\/sup>While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        27 <\/sup>When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        28 <\/sup>When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        29 <\/sup>When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        30 <\/sup>Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        31 <\/sup>Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        32 <\/sup>Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        Yikes. Truly astounding narcissism. Now let’s see what God says about things like that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>Isaiah 47<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n

                                        10\u00a0<\/sup>For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom<\/strong> and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        13 <\/sup>Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        14 <\/sup>Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        15 <\/sup>Thus shall they be unto thee with whom thou hast laboured, even thy merchants, from thy youth: they shall wander every one to his quarter; none shall save thee.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>There is a season…<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                        Back to the false feasts and times, a new word for appointed time started to be used in Nehemiah, for a total of four times. Two are in Esther, and the last one is in Ecclesiastes. I just find it strange.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>Esther 9<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n

                                        31 <\/sup>To confirm these days of Purim in their times<\/strong> appointed, according as Mordecai the Jew and Esther the queen had enjoined them, and as they had decreed for themselves and for their seed, the matters of the fastings and their cry.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                        <\/span>H2165 \u05d6\u05b0\u05de\u05b8\u05df z\u1d49m\u00e2n<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n
                                          \n
                                        1. a set time, time<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                        2. appointed time, occasion, or season<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                          This is a later word, which seems unnecessary when there’s a perfectly good word to use for time, H6256 \u05e2\u05b5\u05ea \u02bb\u00eath. The Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon entry also makes an intriguing observation about Ecclesiastes, one which I had just made last week when writing the article about The Beast<\/a>. Gesenius also doesn’t think Solomon wrote it!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                          \"\"
                                          Gesenius entry for H2165<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                          <\/span>Ecclesiastes 3<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                          \n

                                          3 <\/strong>To every thing there is a season<\/strong>, and a time to every purpose<\/strong> under the heaven:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                          \"\"
                                          Why, Byrds, why?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                          Of all things from the Bible to write about, they wrote a song about something from Ecclesiastes. I get it–the verses kind of read like song lyrics, but it’s still odd. There’s another word The Preacher<\/em> used in Ecclesiastes that stood out to me, and it’s in the same verse: purpose. Here’s another one using it and several other of his buzzwords.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                          <\/span>Ecclesiastes 12<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                          \n

                                          9 <\/sup>And moreover, because the preacher<\/strong> was wise<\/strong>, he still taught the people knowledge<\/strong>; yea, he gave good heed, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                          \n

                                          10 <\/sup>The preacher sought to find out acceptable<\/strong> words: and that which was written was upright, even words of truth.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                          <\/span>H2656 \u05d7\u05b5\u05e4\u05b6\u05e5 ch\u00eaphets, from H2654<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                          \n
                                            \n
                                          1. delight, pleasure\n
                                              \n
                                            1. delight<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            2. desire, longing<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            3. the good pleasure<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            4. that in which one takes delight<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            5. concretely, a valuable thing<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            6. a matter (as something in mind):\u2014acceptable<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                              There’s nothing wrong with the word itself, and it is used elsewhere in the Old Testament, with its first mention in 1 Samuel, but it’s used a lot in Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, then a a handful more times in surrounding chapters. It just stands out to me, especially in Ecclesiastes 3:1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                              Its related word, which is almost the same, has a slightly more nuanced definition, where it can be of men or God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                              <\/span>H2654 \u05d7\u05b8\u05e4\u05b5\u05e5 ch\u00e2ph\u00eats<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                              \n
                                                \n
                                              1. to delight in, take pleasure in, desire, be pleased with\n
                                                  \n
                                                1. (Qal)\n
                                                    \n
                                                  1. of men\n
                                                      \n
                                                    1. to take pleasure in, delight in<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                    2. to delight, desire, be pleased to do<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                    3. of God\n
                                                        \n
                                                      1. to delight in, have pleasure in<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                      2. to be pleased to do<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                      3. to move, bend down\n
                                                          \n
                                                        1. (Qal) to bend down<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Its first mention is in Genesis, but it’s used in Esther, so it’s definitely noteworthy here. It’s also used in the Solomon range of books we’ve been discussing. It’s unclear to me exactly why they used H2656, but if I were to guess–without checking each verse’s use–it’s be explicit that it’s their desire, not God’s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          <\/span>Purim<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                                          \"\"
                                                          No, it’s him! HE smells fishy<\/a>, not me!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Sometimes it’s hard not to get sidetracked when going down these rabbit holes. There’s always something that unexpectedly pops out of the dirt, or rock in this case–maybe even leads straight to the abyss. So let’s go back to Esther 9:31 and take a look at Purim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          <\/span>H6332 \u05e4\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8 P\u00fbwr, from H6331<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                          \n
                                                            \n
                                                          1. Pur or Purim = “lot” or (broken) “piece”\n
                                                              \n
                                                            1. lot\n
                                                                \n
                                                              1. a special feast among the post-exilic Jews, to celebrate their deliverance from Haman’s destruction through queen Esther’s heroic actions<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                                                That’s a hyper-specific definition for a word! Aren’t there other perfectly good words for lot<\/em> or piece<\/em>? Indeed there are.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                                <\/span>Esther 3<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                                \n

                                                                7 <\/sup>In the first month, that is, the month Nisan, in the twelfth year of king Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that is, the lot<\/strong>, before Haman from day to day, and from month to month, to the twelfth month, that is, the month Adar.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                                                The typical word for lot<\/em> is in the same verse as Pur, which is curious. Why use the new Persian word for it? This appointed time<\/em> is the only use for the word. They made a feast unto themselves<\/a>. Here’s the normal word for lot<\/em>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                                <\/span>H1486 \u05d2\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8\u05b8\u05dc g\u00f4wr\u00e2l<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                                \n
                                                                  \n
                                                                1. lot\n
                                                                    \n
                                                                  1. lot – pebbles used for systematically making decisions<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                                  2. portion\n
                                                                      \n
                                                                    1. lot, portion (thing assigned by casting lots)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                                    2. recompense, retribution<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                                                      What I find very interesting, though a bit unrelated to this specific topic–yet also connected–is that Lot from Genesis means something entirely different.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                                      <\/span>H3876 \u05dc\u05d5\u05b9\u05d8 L\u00f4w\u1e6d, from H3875<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                                      \n
                                                                        \n
                                                                      1. Lot = “covering”\n
                                                                          \n
                                                                        1. son of Haran and Abraham’s nephew who settled in Sodom and was delivered from its destruction by God<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

                                                                          <\/span>H3875 \u05dc\u05d5\u05b9\u05d8 l\u00f4w\u1e6d, from H3874<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                                          \n