When the text says “recline” in Greek, it doesn’t mean “recline.” When the Greek text differentiates “recline” through repetition, it still doesn’t mean “recline,” even in translation. Even when Greek functions correctly, Greek alone is insufficient—it doesn’t work without lexicography. Without proper word study, there is no such thing as Scripture. If you merely hear the original Greek text in Greek without studying its Semitic inter-function, you are nothing more than a Greek. Jesus has not yet restored your ears, crippled by Hellenism.

What is an alabaster flask? Oh yes, you want to discuss your ancient theology of burial—wrong again. What is an alabaster flask? Do you know where your theology originates, who it was crafted for in antiquity, and how it was used? Or would you prefer to talk about how noble it is that someone as esteemed as you deigns to meet with people you perceive as lesser?

You hypocrite.

You are not Jesus; he may be least, but he is less than no one in the story. They have nothing to offer him, and he has nothing to learn from them. Your theology of reclining is silly, too.

If you disagree, it is because you still have not understood the command against patriarchy, family, institution, and Alexandrian Greco-imperialism in Genesis: you must leave your father and mother and cling to your wife.

As a long-time listener wrote in this week:

Yes…yes.

Would you rather be a lily in God's field or a slave in Solomon's brig?

He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Or, as I am wont to shout from the rooftops:

“Free Palestine!”

This week, I discuss Luke 7:36-39.

Show Notes

φάγω-ἐσθίω / א-כ-ל (aleph-kaf-lamed) / أ-ك-ل (ʾalif-kāf-lām)

To “to eat” or “consume.” أَكَلَ (akala)

κατεκλίθη / נ-פ-ל (nun-pe-lamed) / ن-ف-ل (nun-fa-lam)

From the verb κατακλίνω, κατεκλίθη means to lay down or to cause to recline. It corresponds to נפל, which indicates fall, collapse, aggressive action, to fall upon in raid, to force to lie down, bring to ruin, drop to the ground, and by extension, to give birth (the related concept of dropping something to the ground). 

κατάκειμαι / ש-כ-ב (shin-kaf-bet) / س-ك-ب (sīn-kāf-bāʼ)

From the verb κατάκειται, κατάκειμαι means to lie down or to be laid out. It aligns with שׁכב, which can indicate to lie down, lie, lie asleep, or lie sick. سَكَبَ (sakaba) to pour or spill. 

ἀλάβαστρον

The name “Alabastron” derives from the Egyptian city of the same name, where high-quality alabaster stone was quarried. The use of the alabaster flask is associated with the cult of Osiris and, by extension, Hathor. Sealed alabastrons were placed in tombs as offerings to the gods or for the deceased’s “ka” in the afterlife.

In their extreme hubris, humans believe that Luke’s admonition, “A tree is known by its fruit,” is nothing more than a proverb about being a “better parent.” But as I explained a few episodes ago, it is a warning that humans can’t parent.

It is a judgment, a mashal, a rule, a verse, a biblical sign that there is no such thing as a good human parent because the only tree that bears “good fruit” is the wisdom of God.

With this in mind, what did you go out to see in the wilderness of Luke 7? Twice?

Luke wrote the question twice.

Twice, he asked, “Are you the Expected One, or do we look for someone else?”

Twice, as if the same person were looking at himself in the mirror.

Is Jesus looking for John the Baptist, or is it the other way around? What’s the difference between the message and the messenger?

Do you study the Bible, or does the Bible study you?

Who is the reed shaken by the wind?

Is it the reed Solomon can’t use to measure John’s Palace, or the reed Isaiah’s “Bringer of Justice” refuses to break?

Who is the “Bringer of Justice?” Can you tell?

What did you go out to see, human?

A prophet? You may be indifferent to the prophet, yes, but then you hate his message, too.

You hypocrite.

I will tell you what the fruit of the Good Parent looks like.

It doesn’t eat bread, and it doesn’t drink wine, and you say it has a demon.

It eats bread and drinks its fill, and you accuse it of gluttony.

Why? Because you are a wicked human parent. You do not love God. You are like a spoiled child: impossible to please, self-serving, fickle, unresponsive, pouty, regardless of the message or the messenger.

But the children of the Good Parent, whether they fast or feast sumptuously with sinners, are deemed righteous by the Most High; the same is shown to be righteous by his children.

As Paul said:

“You are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.”

This week, I discuss Luke 7:25-35.

Show Notes

The root צ-ד-ק carries the usage “deemed just” or “deemed righteous” in Semitic languages:

• Aramaic: צְדֵק “He was righteous.”
• Syriac: זָדֵק “It is right.” Note the shift of צ to ז. (Klein)
• Ugaritic: (ṣdq) “Reliable, strong.”
• Arabic: صَدَقَ (ṣadaqa) “He spoke the truth.”
• Ethiopic: (ṣadaqa) “He was just, was righteous.”

In the Bible, there are numerous examples of this root as it pertains to God’s judgment:

In the Qur’an and Arabic, the root ص-د-ق is associated with honesty, trustworthiness, acts of charity, the fulfillment of promises, and righteousness. Compare parallel usage in the Torah and the Qur’an:

Examples of ص-د-ق in Arabic: 

• صَدِّيقٌ (ṣiddīq) – A person of high righteousness and truthfulness.
• صَدَقَةٌ (ṣadaqah) – Voluntary charity or almsgiving.
• صَادِقٌ (ṣādiq) – Truthful, honest, a righteous person.
• تَصْدِيقٌ (taṣdīq) – Affirmation or confirmation of truth.
• مُصَدِّقٌ (muṣaddiq) – One who believes in and confirms the truth.

A single, passing word is easily overlooked in translation. You could pontificate about it in abstraction, but can you observe its importance, its technicality? Of course, you can’t—not in English. No way. Not in a thousand years.

What does the word “luxury” have to do with the book of Genesis? Can you tell me how or where it connects to Genesis? What does “luxury” have to do with a dog’s vomit? Can you figure it out? Perhaps you could look up “dog’s vomit” and try to put it all back together from that hint. But by simply hearing Luke in English, you wouldn’t stand a chance. You have no hope of finding these connections. No hope, for example, of hearing what the writer is telling you about the Four Rivers in Genesis. About the difference between a tree and a human being.

Could you, in English, hear by hearing the word “luxury” what Luke is proposing? No—you would simply pontificate about the problem of “ living in luxury” because you’re not interested in lexicography. You’re interested in context, in narrative, in interpretation. The best you could do is theologize about Paradise (or your 401K savings; they are functionally the same), which puts you in league with those condemned in 2 Peter 2.

Your only way out of this dilemma is to hear Luke in the original Greek—but even that’s not enough. You will never hear what Luke is saying if you deal solely with the Greek manuscript.

You have to hear Luke in triliteral Semitic.

Can you discern from the word “luxury” in Luke 7 that you were never supposed to congregate in the first place? That there is a problem with “congregating?” That you’re supposed to spread out, to disperse? That you shouldn’t be here, safe and sound “inside?” You should be spreading out all over the earth—not gathering here in your synagogue, in your “ecclesia,” and settling down.

According to Luke, the proof of your ignorance is found in your dress and your place of habitation. The place of luxury of which God speaks does not require soft clothing, let alone fancy suburban houses.

This week, I discuss Luke 7:20-25.

Show Notes

As “calamus” or “sweet cane”

As “reed” or “measuring rod”

The Arabic term قَنًى (qanā), which refers to a reed or stalk, is from the same root as the Hebrew קָנֶה (qaneh), and is associated with “acquiring,” “creating,” or “possessing. However, in the context of plants, it refers to reeds or stalks as slender, hollow structures.

1. قَنًى (qanā): A reed or stalk, similar to the Hebrew קָנֶה (qāneh).
2. قِنِيَة (qinīyah): Related to possession or acquiring, aligning with ק-נ-ה, which can also mean “to acquire” or “possess.”
3. قَنِيَ (qaniya): The verb form meaning “to acquire” or “to obtain.”

τρυφή / ع-د-ن (‘ayin-dal-nun) / ע-ד-נ (‘ayin-dalet-nun)

Luke employs the term tryphē as a sociopolitical statement, contrasting the immorality of his opponents—condemned in 2 Peter 2 for emulating the Roman “palace”—with the gentleness of John, who is associated with the Lord God’s Eden.

The term עֵ֫דֶן (‘ēḏen) refers to the “place of delight,” “fertility,” or “pleasure.” In Hebrew, עֵ֫דֶן emphasizes delight and lushness, tied to a specific place, the Garden of Eden. In Arabic, عدن (‘adn) pertains to permanence and bliss, the abode of reward, جنة عد (jannat ‘adn), the “Garden of Eternity” or paradise. This function corresponds to τρυφή tryphē in Luke 7:25.

The Odyssey narrates Odysseus’s ten-year journey as the king of Ithaca, during which he attempts to return home after the fall of Troy. Virgil’s Aeneid chronicles the journey of Aeneas, a Trojan hero and son of the goddess Venus. Aeneas escapes the fallen city of Troy and embarks on a quest to start a settler-colonial project in Italy. 

Virgil wrote a work of total fiction, and then as if by witchcraft, Augustus traced his (and Rome’s) historical origins back to Aeneas.

In Jewish Antiquities, Josephus Flavius followed the line of Augustus, adulterating the Bible to appease the ego of his settler-colonial abuser, adopting the same Greco-Roman “literary-historicizing” framework. This may not have resonated with the Jews of the time, but man, would-be Christian imperial colonizers loved his historicizing of epic literature to “build” their apotheosis.

What good is Star Wars if lightsabers are not real, if you are not the heir of Luke Skywalker,  and the Republic is not rightfully yours to “possess?”

So, thanks to Josephus Flavius, the (sellout, Uncle Tom) closet Hasmonean, and his oversized case of Bible-wrecking Stockholm Syndrome, by now, we’ve had to deal with two millennia of Hellenized theologians who really believe that Jesus picked up where Venus and Augustus left off. 

If you want to understand the socio-political consequences of this approach, consider watching independent news media on YouTube.

If you want to be set free from the tyranny of Augustus and Josephus, hear the Gospel of Luke. 

This week, I discuss Luke 7:17-19.

Show Notes

ἔρχομαι (erchomai) ب-و-ء (bā-wāw-hamza)/ ב-ו-א (bet-waw-alef)

The Hebrew verb בוא (bo) and the Arabic verb بَاءَ (bā’a) “he returned” are cognates that trace back to a common Semitic root related to movement toward a point—be it coming or returning. This root corresponds to ἐρχόμενος (erchomoenos) in Luke 7:19, the one who is expected.

Related functions in Arabic:

• بَاءَ (bā’a) To return, to incur, to be burdened with, to bring upon oneself.

• بَوَّأَ (bawwa’a) To settle someone, to provide lodging, to assign a place.
• مُتَبَوَّأ (mutabawa’a) A dwelling place. Arabic Lexicon, Hawramani, https://arabiclexicon.hawramani.com/?p=1617&book=50#9b0b27

• تَبَاوَأَ (tabāwa’a) Used in literature to describe competition and contention between characters. The verb carries a negative connotation that implies equality. To be equal with each other. Equality in sin or punishment: state of being equally guilty.
  •  القتيلان فِي الْقصاص تعادلا (al-qatīlāni fī al-qiṣāsi ta‘ādalā)
    “Two dead, in retribution, were tied.”
    “بَوَاءٌ” Arabic Lexicon, Hawramani, https://arabiclexicon.hawramani.com/?p=63888#dbd19f

This week, Fr. Paul reiterates the importance of hearing Scripture within its historical and sociopolitical context. Beginning with Alexander the Great’s quest for divinity, he illustrates this with references to subsequent events, like the Maccabean Revolt and the resulting Roman domination of Judah. In contrast, he critiques the folly of philosophy in biblical studies, arguing that theology, under the influence of its namesake, Alexander the Great, continues the Macedonian's quest for divinity, recounting the tale of how Aristotle's pupil once halted a battle to embark on a “spiritual journey” into the desert, seeking to understand himself as an incarnate god.

What does it take to liberate people from exceptionalism? To liberate a teaching?  Such a pernicious snare, that saying of yours, “family first.” It was your fear of losing the tribe that led you to elect a king and build a city against the will of God.  So he sent his Shepherd to rescue his sheep from Cain’s cities, to liberate his people and the Torah from the stone idols fashioned by Cain’s sons.

For those who have stayed with me on the podcast all these years, let me say it plainly:

The idea that all people are created equal—an American principle—is beautiful and correct, but like the Torah, it is held hostage by identity politics. Like the preaching of the Cross under a Roman standard, it has been corrupted by a military-industrial nationalist agenda that feeds on the broken backs of impoverished women and children.

Nothing changes under the sun.

The Gospel of Luke is the Gospel to the Poor. It is a radical Gospel of Liberation. It this scroll of the Torah, the Lion of Judah, breaking free from the gilded prison of Herod's Temple—shattering the gates of brass—raging against you for your sake on behalf of the poor.

He who has ears to hear to hear, let him hear!

Still, the scroll of Luke is not a “liberation theology.” It is a warning that we must forsake what we have built, not build back again, but abandon what Cain built to roam freely with the Lion in his land. As Paul said:

To borrow a term from psychology (one that I’ve used before), prophetic preaching keeps the disciple in a perpetual state of cognitive dissonance, unable to fall back on the natural human instinct to reconcile our innate hypocrisies.

The teaching of Scripture is not “God is love.” The teaching of Scripture is “you are a hypocrite.”

Until you submit to this repetitive literary frame, you can’t hear what Moses said, let alone Jesus. You can’t be set free. That is why the Qur’an went to such great lengths to stress St. Paul’s teaching of submission.

Because the “children of the book” are no such thing. They still belong to Pharaoh.

This week, I discuss Luke 7:11-16.

Show Notes

The Hebrew word שַֽׁעַר (sha’ar) means “gate” or “entrance.” It corresponds to πύλη (pylē) in Luke 7:12, functional with Ruth 4:

This root relates to awareness, feeling, and literary expression in Arabic:

• شِعْر (shi‘r)—“poetry”: This is one of the most common words from this root, referring to poetry or verse, which is central to Arabic literary tradition.
• شَاعِر (shā‘ir) - “poet”: This word describes a person who composes poetry, playing a significant role in Arabic and Islamic culture.
• شَعَرَ (sha‘ara) - “to feel” or “to perceive”: This verb means to feel or become aware, capturing the idea of sensitivity or perception.
• مَشَاعِر (mashā‘ir) - “feelings” or “emotions”: This word, in the plural form, denotes feelings, emotions, or sentiments, often used to express emotional sensitivity.
• شعار (shi‘ār) “logo, emblem, or slogan”: identification or awareness through a symbol, slogan, or distinguishing mark, a “sign.”
• مَشْعَر (mash‘ar) - “place of awareness” or “sacred monument”: Used in Islamic contexts, mashʿar refers to a sacred or symbolic place, often in pilgrimage sites like Mashʿar al-Ḥarām near Mecca.

The word Ναΐν (Nain) is derived from the Hebrew word נָעִים (na'im), meaning “pleasant” or “lovely.” 

It, too, corresponds (prescriptively) to the books of Ruth נָעֳמִי (Naomi) but also to the Qur’an. For reference: 

• “Blessing,” “favor,” “bounty” (ni‘mah): نِعْمَة  “And if you count the blessings of God, you will not be able to enumerate them.” (Surah Ibrahim, 14:34)
• “Bliss,” “luxury,” “delight” (na‘īm): نَعِيم “In gardens of delight.” (Surah Al-Waqi’ah, 56:12)
• “To live in ease or comfort” (na‘ama): نَعَمَ “And for you in them are many comforts.” (Surah Al-Mu’minun, 23:21)
• “Bestower of blessings,” “benevolent one” (mun‘im): مُنْعِم “And indeed, your Lord is the Forgiving, Possessor of great bounty.” (Surah An-Najm, 53:32)
• “Soft,” “gentle,” “smooth” (nā‘im): نَاعِم “[Some] faces, that Day, will be radiant.” (Surah Al-Ghashiyah, 88:8)
• “The blessings” (al-ni‘am): النِّعَم “They recognize the favor of God; then they deny it.” (Surah An-Nahl, 16:83)
• “Softness,” “ease,” “comfort” (na‘mah): نَعْمَة “Lest His punishment should befall you if you deny his blessing.” (Surah Ibrahim, 14:7)

Elitist intellectuals are drawn to the concept of a psychological trap because others’ suffering entertains them and because their perception of another's supposed trap reinforces their sense of self-importance and permanence. Poor Sartre, poor DNC, poor duopoly.

“The fool says in his heart, There is no Judge.”

I agree, Jean-Paul: for your spiritual children, there can be “No Exit.”

The local Judean elders, who should be hearing and repeating Jesus’s words, are more concerned with manipulating the goodwill of their Roman occupiers to further their political agenda. In turn, the Roman servant, manipulated by the elders, shows zeal for the Torah. Still, his life remains in disrepair because the people of the Synagogue love their “nation” and their shiny new Synagogue more than the words—the debarim—of Isaiah.

What right do the Judeans have to call anyone “worthy” or good? Their human judgment, assessment, and feedback “build” a house that Jesus does not enter and a Synagogue that ultimately rejects him.

Is there an exit from Sartre’s hell? 

Yes. Clearly. 

French existentialism, like postmodernism, is silly.

There is only one Judge.

Stop listening to the people of Capernaum and start following Jesus. Imitate the obedience of the Centurion, who did not accept accolades from the people of Judaea but received instead the one vote that counts.

This week, I discuss Luke 7:1-10. 

Show Notes

ἔντιμος (éntimos) “precious,” “honored,” “honorable in rank” (Luke 7:2) aligns with יקר (yāqār) in Hebrew, which can function as “heavy,” “valuable,” “honored,” “dignified,” “dear,” or—relevant to Luke 7:2, 1 Peter 2:4 and 1 Peter 2:6—“precious.” The Arabic root و-ق-ر (waw-qaf-ra) implies dignity, and can funtion as “to honor.”

• وَقَار (waqār) — Dignity or solemnity. This word is often used to describe a person’s respectful or dignified demeanor.

• وَقِرَ (waqira) — To be weighty or important. In this form, it implies something substantial or of significant value.

• وَقَّرَ (waqqara) — To honor or respect. This is the form II verb (with shadda on the middle letter), meaning “to show respect or honor,” often used in contexts where someone honors or reveres another.

• تَوْقِير (tawqīr) — Reverence or high regard. This noun, derived from form II of the root, refers to the act of showing respect or esteem, often used in formal or respectful contexts.

• مُتَوَقِّر (mutawaqqir) — Dignified or solemn person. This adjective describes a person who carries themselves with dignity, calmness, and respectability.

• وَقُور (waqūr) — A dignified or composed person. This adjective describes someone who possesses an aura of respect, often used for people who are calm, collected, and reverent.

The Hebrew root רפא (rafa) is rich in function related to healing, repairing, and recovering, extending across various Semitic languages. Arabic uses the verb رَفَأَ, (rafa'a) “to mend or repair,” with a similar connotation. 

ἔντιμος (éntimos) also aligns to חֹר (ḥor), “free,” or “noble” 

• حُرّ (ḥurr) freeborn

• حرية (ḥurriya) “freedom” or “liberty

• حرر (ḥarrara): To liberate or set free

ἔντιμος appears only in Luke 7:2, 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:6 and Philippians 2:29. 

The folly of human construction is similar to that of large language models. Noam Chomsky talks about this in his famous critique of the current state of artificial intelligence and the absence of scientific analysis. We imagine that these expansive predictive systems are creative. Sure, they are impressive, even helpful—for good and ill—and yes, they will likely replace or change your job, but these tools are not creative. They simply regurgitate what was already found before the LLMs themselves were made functional.

LLMs validate the power of syntax. In effect, a machine is Sola Syntaxis: by merely observing word order and function at scale, it can channel the content of a written text without philosophical abstraction or creativity. LLMs do not comprehend. A machine does not tell you what it thinks, feels, or experiences. Yet, it can often accurately repeat what is found in a text, unlike theologians and philosophers, who are tripped up by human creativity and reason.

At the same time, if you ask an LLM a question about a data set, instead of analyzing the data, it will accurately repeat what other people have said about that data. In that case, it often sounds as stupid as we do.

I believe the marketing people and even some programmers when they say that they do not understand how these systems work because they are neither scientists nor grammarians. They are capitalists, digital tycoons, corporate shills, and engineers. You know, the people who control education, media, politics, and religion in the West in the service of making a buck or pursuing their dreams.

I, myself, am not an expert. The industry may or may not be close to general artificial intelligence. Then again, food, water, and medicine may or may not reach Palestinian children who may or may not be in mortal danger and who may or may not deserve the same benefits upon which you gorge yourself daily. I don't need the Holocaust media to tell me that. I heard it in the Torah.

But hey, ignorance is strength, Habibi.

Whether or not large language models become creative, I do not doubt that industry will leverage them in harmful and destructive ways as we do with all technology—as we already have in West Asia because “nothing changes under the sun.”

But that’s the point. An LLM is just a mechanism of regurgitation. Ask it a question, and you get the same old answer, just faster, at scale. It does a miraculous job of aggregating, processing, regurgitating, and predicting more of the same more efficiently. That’s what human construction is. You take something that was there at the world’s foundation—something you did not create—and rearrange it. You can’t make something new because you are not the builder. The environmental crisis is just more damage piled up. Even the nuclear bomb, as ugly and stupid as it is, is just a bigger bomb. There’s nothing to brag about. It’s not new. It’s just bigger and dumber. You, O man, can’t make one hair on your head black or white.

Or do you have an arm like God? Can you thunder with a voice like his? (Job 40:9)

Unfortunately, I’m convinced that most of you, based on where you are found in the Parable of the Sower, are convinced that you do thunder with a voice like God’s—best of luck to you.

This week, I discuss Luke, chapter 6, verses 46 to 49.

Show Notes

In the original consonantal Hebrew, “sin” and “shin” are not differentiated; the reader must infer the correct pronunciation. Is Paul, the self-proclaimed “ἀρχιτέκτων” of 1 Corinthians 3:10, the חֶ֫רֶשׁ (ḥeresh)—the expert “artisan” or the wise חֶֽרֶשׂ (ḥeres), “earthen vessel” of Isaiah 3:3?

The Arabic function ح-ر-ش (ḥāʾ-rāʾ-shīn) conveys usages that relate to pottery, for example, “to scratch” or “to be rough” but functions more broadly concerning acts of incitement, provocation, and can mean “to stir up.” 

• حَرَشَ (ḥarasha)– to incite or stir up (as in creating conflict).
• تحريش (taḥrīsh) – incitement, provocation, or stirring up discord.

The Greek term πλήμμυρα (plēmmyra), “flood,” occurs only once in the New Testament (Luke 6:48) and only once in the LXX:

In Arabic, عَسَقَ (‘asaq) means “to commit injustice” or “to oppress” and extends to wrongful treatment or exploitation.

This week, Fr. Paul underscores how the Septuagint’s different ordering and classification of texts impact our ability to hear the words of God correctly, shifting Chronicles from the Ketubim to historical books, reframing them as historical events rather than wisdom writings. The same can be seen with Daniel’s placement between Ezekiel and the Twelve, which undermines its resonance as wisdom literature. (Episode 330)

For all you lost souls, reading books about how to be a better parent; For all you disciples of neoliberalism, believers in the new fascism, the elitist colonialism repackaged in a delusion tailor-made for people lured by the flattery of progress, fooled by a “new world” where the enlightened trample on the dead, comforted by the lie that they know better than all those who have ever lived, I have news for you:

It’s not “good” news; it’s just news, but if you insist on labeling it, please consider it “bad news.”

According to the Gospel of Luke, “a tree is known by its fruit.”

Now, before you get together with your breakfast buddies and start gossiping about each other’s children, again, I have “news” for you, Habibi.

You are gossiping.

Oops!

Like Jesus said, there is no such thing as a “good” teacher or a “good” parent because, as far as the eye can see, there has never been a family tree that has produced a “good” result.

You, Habibi, are the blind guide, just like the rest of us.

Let’s assume for a moment that the Platonic principle of the “moral arc of history” isn’t wishful thinking and make the wild assumption that you are an improvement on your parents, an incremental step forward, part of the sum total of history your ancestors and your society have achieved.

What’s the result?

What’s happening now in the world after everything supposedly learned by man less than a century ago? What did we learn? Did the war ever stop?

Did we “grow” in humility? Never mind that you can’t “grow” into something small. It’s a foolish statement, an antinomy.

No, our behavior has not improved, as evidenced by your parents’ fruit and yours.

We used to use religion to whitewash our tombs. Now, we use liberal values, which cynically ridicule religion while embracing the fiction of religious nationalism in West Asia to justify the desperate agenda of the dollar. In the end, the mechanism—the function—is the same. In the modern West, our heartfelt, introspective, socially conscious, “normie” liberal values are leveraged as the new opium of the people: “bread and circuses” as the elitist machine rages forward.

Luke’s message is clear: There is no such thing as progress. We are no better than our parents; the judgment of Genesis 6 is written, and God almighty has spoken the truth. We dare not test him.

No human tree ever bears good fruit. If there is any hope, we must put our hope in him.

This week, I discuss Luke 6:43-45.

Show Notes

The Hebrew עֵץ (‘eṣ) can refer to “tree,” “timber,” “wood,” or even a “handle.” It has a functional connection to עצה (‘eṣah), which pertains to advice or counsel. In Arabic عِضَاه (‘iḍāh) can refer to thorny trees and shrubs commonly found in arid or desert regions. Aligns to δένδρον (dendron) in Luke 6:43. 

In Arabic, sanan (سنن) is multi-functional. Though not directly used as “thorn” or “bush,” its root س-ن-ن (sīn-nūn-nūn) pertains to things like “point” or “sharp edge” and can relate to the idea of something pointed or thorn-like. The plural form, sunan, refers to “customs” or “practices,” particularly those of the Prophet Muhammad, known as Sunnah (سُنَّة), recalling, from the Bible, that wisdom has an edge and cuts against the grain: