Zion was originally a Jebusite stronghold located in or near Jerusalem or is equal to Jerusalem. King David captures this stronghold and it is renamed City Of David. David sets up the tabernacle there and Solomon retrieves it from there to place the ark and utensils in the temple [the Tabernacle shown previously]. Isaiah mentions that YHWH dwells on Mount Zion (8:18) and later writers relate the name Zion to the eternal Jerusalem (Heb: 12:22) and heaven (Rev 14:1). Because Zion was originally not Israeli, the name Zion comes to us probably from a language other than Hebrew. TWOTOT[the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament; Moody Press Chicago] mentions an Arabic root s-w-n (under #1910): “to protect, defend,” which may give Zion the meaning of ‘fortress’. Others suggest derivation from a root saha, ‘be bald’. Spelled the way it is, however, the name Zion is identical to the word or sayon (#1909b) meaning place of dryness, from the assumed root syh (#1909). Derivation (siya #1909a), dryness, drought, occurs in Psalm 105:41. Perhaps the notion of a dry place taps into the creation account, and specifically the third day, or in the Noahic flood account. A dry place is not a place where people die of thirst, but rather a place where the sea [i] is no more, after it has given all her treasures (Rev 21:1). On the Biblical canvass, the name Zion means ‘Dry Place’. Another name that means Dryness is Horeb.
Zion: What it Is and Isn’t
Zion conventionally means ‘Citadel or Fortress’. It is a term that commonly refers to the ‘City of David’, the site at which theProphet-King is supposed to have set the Ark of the Covenant within the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle itself was a rectangular tent under open skies erected on the same site where perhaps Prophet Shem once ruled the Jebusite precursor to Jerusalem, which, according to legend, ascended to heaven intact. This is Mt. Zion as it is commonly understood, but nobody knows for certain where it is. Hence, Zion is most likely neither Jerusalem nor the site of the alleged Temple Mount where stands the magnificent Al Aksa.
Since Zionism’s affected persona has successfully benumbed the consciousness of so many monotheists, in the West in particular, I thought it helpful to offer allegorical and metaphorical perspective in terms that respect eternal truths rather than mundane place names or ideations spawned by pugnacious zealotry. For this purpose, a brief review of the Torah’s symbolism is in order.
a) The monoliths of Moses represent God’s Law or Word;
b) The Ark of the Covenant represents the ‘human heart’ or seat of a man’s understanding;
c) The Tabernacle represents the well defined boundaries of a sanctified monotheist polity that submits to Divine Law both physically and metaphysically such as early Islam or the once indigenous Native Americans.
d) Mt. Moriah is the supposed site of Solomon’s Temple, a site yet to be discovered if there at all. But Mt. Moriah is neither Zion nor was/is it within the walls of what is popularly called the ‘City of David’—which is ‘said’ to have once been the urb of Prophet Shem, the son of Noah who some claim is the mysterious Melchizedek who blessed Prophet Ibrahim after he rescued Prophet Lot (Lut).
If these latter claims are true, it ostensibly appears that no prophet since Solomon actually took residence within what is now called Jerusalem. Nevertheless, several prophets have been molested tortured and even murdered there by respectable Semites of the so-called ‘Jewish’ persuasion — facts they are loathe to admit.
On Mount Moriah:
“The learned Higgins, an English judge, who for some years spent ten hours a day in antiquarian studies, Says that Moriah, of Isaiah and Abraham, is the Meru of the Hindus and the Olympus of the Greeks. Solomon [allegedly] built high places for Ashtoreth, Astarte, or Venus, which became mounts of Venus, or mons veneris. [it must be noted that Muslims do not agree with such calumny and consider these stories fabricated interpolations.] Meru and Mount Calvary are each a slightly elevated skull-shaped mount that might be represented by a bare head. Bible translators perpetuate the same idea in the word “calvaria.” Prof. Stanley denies that “Mount Calvary” took its name from its being the place of the crucifixion… Looking elsewhere and in earlier times for the bare calvaria, we find among Oriental women, the Mount of Venus, mons veneris [female appendage covering the clitoris, equivalent to the male glans penis], through motives of neatness or religious sentiment, deprived of all hirsute appendage… The priests of China, says, Mr. J. M. Peebles, continue to shave the head [tonsure]. To make a place holy, among the Hindus, Tartars, and people of Thibet, it was necessary to have a Mount Meru, a Linga-Yoni, or Arba.”
Origins of the Cross, Sha Rocoo, 1874
Mount Moriah represents the place of Abraham’s Covenant and The Messenger’s assent to heaven, two significant signs indicating that the Covenant’s Stewardship was removed from Jacob (i.e., ‘Israel’) as prophesied in Genesis. We must also bear in mind that the Kibla was changed and furthermore, that the Prophet said prayers offered in Jerusalem are worth fifty percent of those offered in Mecca. Hence, when Israel does re-ascend this Mount, they will rule as Freemasonic ‘light’ bearers of Pharaoh’s fertility religion (see below). So it is, most likely, well advised to not overestimate the importance of Mt. Moriah or Jerusalem.
Phallic Concepts of the Trinitarian deity and Pharaoh’s religion: One can appreciate the Monk’s tonsure as a circumcision of sorts, although Buddhist monks shave completely. The symbolic genital union supposedly represents God’s hermaphroditic nature (Divine Dualism). Note the dog at the four-faced genital fountain; and of course, the phallus (Washington Monument), and the play on the Maltese Cross of the Papal Knights of Malta; here represented by the Egyptian Ankh, should not go unnoticed. This solar cross actually originates in Akkad.
Old Testament scriptures have many references to ‘seeking and taking refuge’ in God as a fortress, and Moses calls God ‘our Rock’ several times as a metaphor for fortress or ‘strength’. Hence, this is one of the legitimate interpretations of the word ‘Zion’. But never is it written in scripture that ‘God is in our Temple’ as say monism’s ‘Spirit Filled’ Christians, or as mimicked in the Catholic sanctuary by the red (eternal) flame of the Scythian god, Mithras, representing the Holy Spirit’s investiture in anthropophagous communion crackers. Quite the contrary is true. The Torah does record that the Presence of God (or Sakinah: whatever that is or was) rested upon the Ark — with or without the Temple. Furthermore, David mentions Zion thirty-six times in his Psalms while Jerusalem is named only seventeen times. The OT also gives many references to daughters of Zion, of Jerusalem, of Babylon, of Egypt and of Israel and so on, each referring to different generations of sectarians who all followed/follow discordant dogma.
Therefore, to understand the persistent Zionist cum Masonic cum Euro-centric crusade to retake the Temple Mount on the supposition that it is, in fact, Mount Moriah — a word that for some means ‘wind’ and thus alludes to the ‘Spirit’ of God — I found it helpful to learn about:
(1) Zion’s symbolism and geography;
(2) The purpose of prophet Isa’s advent;
(3) The purpose of Islam; and
(4) The polity of Iblis’s insignificant luminosity known as the Synagogue of Satan: the so-called metaphysical ‘Light’ offered to occult simpletons and Freemasons: fraternities that have been professionally manipulated in concert since the mid 19th Century by closeted neo-Jews, the majority of whom aren’t at all related in the least to ancient Israelite Tribes.[ii]
With this background in mind, I will now attempt to unravel or deconstruct the Mystery of Zion after a brief exposition on Mount Moriah.
… There is no ‘Mount Moriah’ in Genesis 22 that requires its equation with the Temple Mount which critics have supposed … Genesis only refers to a mountain range called Moriah or more accurately, land of the Moriah ([i.e., Amorites]. [iii]
… It is proper, therefore, strongly to urge the distinction between Mount Zion, the City of David, and Mount Moriah, the City of Jerusalem.[iv]
… The Greek Septuagint has ‘mountain of the Amorites recorded twice, in Genesis and again in Chronicles. The Vulgate has ‘land of vision’… linking it with the Hebrew word ra’ab. ‘to see.” [v]
Note that this name can be understood to mean, “the mountain of vision”. See Gen. 22:14: “So Abraham called that place `The Lord will see’, as it is said to this day, `On the mount of the Lord, He shall be seen.'” See also II Chron. 3:1 “… where the Lord appeared to David”). The place name Moriah is clearly derived from the Hebrew root ra’ah, “to see” by Aquila (ton katafani, “that which is clearly seen”), and by Symmachus (tis optasias, “vision”).[vi]
… While mount Zion can be identified with certainty [not true]… the land of the Moriah cannot, and none of the ancient versions transliterate as moriah… in addition, Jerusalem is not a three-day journey from Beer-sheba.[vii]
The Hebrew name, Moriah, was taken by commentators to mean ‘vision’ etymologically.[viii]
Therefore, the Mounts now called Zion and Moriah are named as such by ‘convention’ rather than certainty. However, Mount Sion (Hermon), is certainly known as such. [Also see Appendix IV]
Tree(s) and Root(s)
Isaiah 6: 11-13, KJV and English Standard Versions:
Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.
Then I said, How long, O Lord? And he said: Until cities lie waste without inhabitant, and houses without people, and the land is a desolate waste, and the Lord removes people far away, and the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land. And though a tenth remain in it, it will be burned again, like a terebinth or an oak, whose stump remains when it is felled. The holy seed is its stump.
In Psalm II, David refers to Messiah as being set as ‘King upon Zion’. I will demonstrate however, that this passage does not relate to Prophet Isa (Jesus) as is supposed by many, and that scripture actually refer to two Messiahs, each having different divinely intended purposes with respect to deliverance — what is commonly known as salvation.
In Matt 22: 44, Isa is acknowledged as ‘the son of David’ from the ‘root (stump) of Jesse’, implying that he is the promised Messiah who would restore the Throne of David so that they —the supposed physical and spiritual Israelites (Jews & Christians) — can then rule the world. Nevertheless, in the very same discourse Isa confounded the Pharisees who made this claim. He this by asking: “how then can David call his Messiah Lord or Master [ix] if Messiah is David’s son [better said: David’s consanguineous descendent?]” The question poses an oft-ignored conundrum because it Jesus clearly infers that another man — one who is not a ‘descendant of David’ — is, in fact, the promised World Messiah or “Law Giver, like unto Moses” according to Moses himself, who will, at some future date, occupy the seat of David:
“And the Lord said unto me [Moses], they have well spoken that which they have spoken, I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren [ach = cousins], like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”
Psalm II states the entire world is given to this man as his possession; a position Jews and Christians vie for as his ‘believers’. King James transcribers—under the yoke of Sir Francis Bacon (a Freemasonic Grandmaster and Rosicrucian Adept)—conveniently modified (perhaps codified in cypher) the translation of David’s words as ‘Begotten Thee’ in reference to this same Messiah. But in all truth the passage says no such thing and is better translated as: ‘this day have I declared thy lineage’ immediately after the text states, “Thou art My son.” The latter phrase is not a paternal acknowledgement but rather a clear reference to Messiah’s authenticity in the office of God’s anointed ruler or vicegerent—a person Muslims call Caliph.
For the sake of political clarification here, this distinctly means that any Messiah is chosen or appointed by Allah, which stands in complete contradistinction to any king chosen by men or any democratically elected official. In other words, God is certainly not a democrat (or Republican) or Patron of such foolishness. It must also be noted that, according to the Holy Qur’an, Allah would never have used the term ‘son’ in reference to His prophets.
Therefore, this decree, as cited and corrected above, cannot possibly refer to royal blue-genes as Merovingian ‘Lord of the Ring’ folktales would have us believe, but rather to the absolutely Autonomous Divine Appointment of a prophet from an undefiled prophetic lineage.
One appreciates this by referring to the original Hebrew Text and idiom rather than ciphered translations of doctrinal interpolations, including erroneous apprehension of context as well as the Trinitarian bias, which is completely pagan in nature and origin. And we must also remember that there was no ‘Dynasty’ per se when David wrote his famous Psalms. As was Saul, David and Solomon were reluctantly appointed and anointed by Prophet Samuel. Monarchial rule, as practiced by many, including the Amorites et. alia., was an adopted Judaic tradition indicating their refusal to submit to Divine Governance. This is clearly recorded by Prophet Samuel.
Hence again, if the Messiah referred to cannot be David’s son as Jesus clearly indicated in Matt: 22 as cited above, then the lineage or sovereign divine appointment was prophetically declared by clear implication, indicating that this particular Messiah was not to be of David’s Loins. Why? Because it is illogical, according to the contemporary cultural context, that Allah would have one of His prophets call a consanguineous descendent ‘Lord’ or ‘Master’, which is why Jesus posed the question to begin with. So old is the Zionist bias.
What, therefore, is this ‘Branch from Jesse’s Root’ all about?
Jesse was the son of Obed and grandson of Boaz and Ruth (Ruth 4:13-22). Jesse had eight sons and two daughters, but he is known to Bible History primarily because of his youngest son, the one who became King David. As such, Jesse was a key ancestor of Jesus Christ:
There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots … In that day the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign [sign] to the peoples; him shall the nations seek, and his dwellings shall be glorious.
(Isaiah 11:1,10 RSV)
It can be established that the Mother of Isa descended from King David. Here we take note of the erroneous Christian exposition of the passage which specifically states that the “root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign”, not the branch, which is clearly Prophet Isa (Jesus Christ). The branch merely calls all nations to attend to the root or ‘ensign’, which is the Prophetic Message itself (i.e. revealed knowledge). Hence, the ensign (root) is neither King nor blood line. This is because the holy seed is the nomos or word, meaning to say it is the divine law of God as opposed to any man. The latter is one of the reasons Christian interpolators were forced into declaring the tremendous blasphemy that Jesus was the ‘Living Word’ or God incarnate – may Allah have mercy on them.
But there is far more to this matter because the context of Isaiah’s reference to Jesse is centered on Israel’s severe judgment for its reversion to pagan idolatry, which included the sacrifice of children to idols as per Satanic ritual murder. This is to say that the tree(s)—i.e., the polity (tribes=tree=branch) of Israel/Judah—was/were to be cut down by Allah so that only the root or lineage carrying the burden of the prophetic message remained. There is no mandate for monarchy implied at all. Rather, it is all about the prophetic line that carries revealed knowledge as it rests upon the hearts of those chosen to be prophets, not kings.
Taking this a few steps further along the road of common sense, the ‘root’ or prophetic lineage is actually the Tap Root that is directly traceable to Adam minus the reprobate descendants of Cain and those who adopt the idolatry of his many false religions. Therefore, Jesse, a branch himself (not the root) is of import here only inasmuch as he relates to the branch that will give the final prophetic message to Israel & Judah, and this deed is clearly done with regard to the ‘ensign’, which is the root.
But notwithstanding the soundness of this straightforward reasoning, most of Prophet Isaiah’s Book is devoted to the details of a Divine curse placed on Bani Israel. This cursing was also endorsed by Prophets Jeremiah and Malachi. All three fellows clearly described the extent of Divine displeasure, so much so, that God summarily decided to fell the Tree of Israel (House of Jacob) once and for all. Israel was to be cut down and rejected as His vicegerent or Caliph: the cost for the continuum of their abominations and blasphemy.
Symbolically this felled ‘Tree’ represented the authentic Jewish polity in contradistinction to present Ashkenazi pretenders who are, in fact, ‘Jews’, but surely not descendants of ancient Habirus (i.e., Judaic Hebrews); those peoples who were collectively charged by Allah to establish God’s Law in the Earth according to Revealed Knowledge. After the Babylonian captivity, they threw away the Law of Moses and replaced it with their Talmud and a myth filled Halakah (Rabbinical Traditions), and these are in addition to the damnable black arts of the Kabala. Sure it is that they might read the Torah religiously, just as many Muslims read Al’Qur’an or Christians recite the Gospel, but it is clear to all who have discernment that they have eminently failed to practice the respective directives of God’s divinely revealed golden rules.
The ‘root’ giving rise to branches and trees represents God’s extension of the Tree of Life into the realms of mankind. Thus we are meant to be nourished, sustained and reserved for salvation in the next life by means of its Revealed Knowledge. Such knowledge was given to the Prophetic Lineage (God’s vicegerents, all 140,000 of them); all of whom were descended from Adam by children other than Cain. Any branch sprouting from this root bears fruit by means of the many paths of inspiration rather than magick. In turn, each branch generates additional trees by means of the seeds of sound doctrine and example, and, collectively, these generate ‘peoples’ or polities — representing the cycles of ‘seed time and harvest’ as mentioned to Prophet Noah after the deluge. Photosynthesis and osmosis are excellent metaphors for Spiritual Guidance and Sound Doctrine, which, as all can see, especially in the Romanist deformity, are avenues that can be poisoned by the toxins of sectarian accretion for the purposes of gain, which is Cain’s Creed. Hence, anyone—no matter the religion—trying to control you, your wealth, family or substance by means of religion, are followers of Cain (Khabil). This succinctly describes the New World Order. It really is that simple.
Though the glory of the former tree (polity) can never be regained, a branch or shoot from the root may still bear fruit. The fruit promised by Isaiah as cited above, was/is indeed Prophet Isa (Jesus) who brought the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. Above all else, this—as opposed to salvation by virtue of blood sacrifice—was his primary message. Knowledgeable Christians will reluctantly admit this with very little prodding. This then was the message, the seed–logos containing the last Rhemi (direct) word of revealed teaching of God’s Plan for Israel’s (i.e. Jacob’s) tree.
Isa (Jesus) further indicated that consanguineous Israelites who followed him should return to the Law of Moses and wait patiently for the Paracletos or Ahmad – the world Savior and David’s Lord or Master. Those who would do so would therefore be saved according to the Law of Moses rather than the Talmud, Halakah or Kabala, which principally derive from the post-Babylonian deviation. Jesus is thus Messiah for those who followed him then and for any among the righteous who live and repent unto Islam during the few years of his second advent.
It is, therefore, the fruit (people or polity) born of this branch that bears the seed of Revelation Knowledge: i.e. the Divine Law or Prophetic Guidance that indicates the “root” by virtue of inherent knowledge (fitrah of common sense), which is what Muslims call akhira. This is the prophetic guidance or law that is placed in the ‘ark’; this is to say the heart of understanding for those who choose to conform to it. Isa instructed his people to await the advent of Paracletos (Ahmad). Zion, therefore—with its symbolic Tabernacle (defined polity) and Ark (human heart)—represents ‘True Faith’ (iman) that is activated and establishes the Kingdom of God or Peace on Earth in the individual who anticipates, not an earthly Kingdom as it is clear the earth will be destroyed, but the kingdom of God in one’s heart and in the Hereafter, wherein evil is absent by means of divine judgment. This image was prefigured in answer to God’s promise to Abraham, not by Solomon or David, but by the “Burden” placed on Arabia and given to Mohammad as Islam. The understanding and activation of submission thereto, is, in fact, true Zion and there are many hadith to this effect:
… and in fact this is the sign of true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely…
Allah does not take away the knowledge, by taking it away from the hearts of the people, but takes it away by the death of the religious learned men till when none of them remains, people will take as their leaders ignorant persons who when consulted will give their verdict without knowledge.
(Bukhari, vol. 1, Book 3, # 004, vol. 1, Book 3, # 10)
Unfortunately, the last sentence describes democracy rather accurately. I submit, therefore, that the lack of a people’s submission to divine law causes them to be handed over to passionate ignorance and the single minded oppression of such as the present fascist World Order and the despicable Muslim leadership in league with these devils.
After the flood of Prophet Noah, Allah made a covenant with Noah that honored the principle of ‘Seed-time and Harvest’ as mentioned above:
Henceforth, all the days of the earth, seed time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night, shall not cease. – Gen. 8: 22
The reference is to God’s ‘human harvest’ or ‘holy seed’, often called ‘wheat’ or grain throughout the Biblical text; bearing in mind that holy means ‘reserved for God’. The ‘Holy Grail’, on the other hand, is a metaphor used by phallic worshipers of fertility rites in order to claim authenticity for an illegitimate blood line that is genuinely soiled with jinn. These folk hail from Cain’s Serpent Cult and claim the royal seed of King David, which, as I have demonstrated is in serious error. The scripture frequently speaks of such strong delusions being placed by God in the hearts of reprobates. God has granted full charter to Iblis to facilitate the grave deception.
Unfortunately, for those who are so deluded, after the failure of post Zerubbabel generations, Israel, as a kingdom polity or Tree of Life, was finished. Only the branch stemming from Jesse’s Adamic legacy remained to bring forth its shoot from the tap root of revealed knowledge left in the balance for the House of Jacob. This Prophet (Isa) bore no promise of restoration for Israel but rather the promise of judgment and complete desolation: lamenting: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, I would have gathered thee as a hen her chicks.” The Koran completes the curse with the promise of a third ingathering of a motley crew, which is presently and clearly attributed to the dangerous Israeli nation.
Jerusalem, like Baghdad a millennium-plus later, remains as a sign of Allah’s autonomous power and judgment in fulfillment of more ancient prophecies. Essentially, after Prophet Isa, it was every Israelite for himself as they followed in the way of Cain’s curse and the fabricated religions that sustained and maintain the unholy grail of his posterity’s political ascension via cunning, intrigue, infiltration, theft, misguidance and murder.
Nearly four thousand years after the hijra of Abraham, who rejected the Babylonian rule of Nimrud for this very reason, the 19th Century Zionist Horn blew its refrain from the Shabatean blasphemy under Illuminati direction, which is, in fact, the culmination of the Freemasonic cum Kabalistic creed of Cain’s Dragon Court mythology. This Romance deserves further review.
 The “Ten Commandments”
[i] Biblically, the ‘Sea’ refers to peoples and nations, especially in the Book of Revelations
[ii] Which includes the British Throne! See my book, The Hands of Iblis, op.cit., for a dissertation and history. As for the ‘Synagogue of Satan’, this is explained throughout the text.
[iii] The New American Commentary, Kenneth A. Matthews, B&H Pub., 2005. P. 291
[iv] Dict. Of the Holy Bible, Charles Taylor, E. Robinson, Pub. Crocker and Brewster, 1832. Harvard
[v] The Bible in the Syriac Tradition, p. 246. S. P. Brock, Gorgias Press, 2006
[vi] Encyclopaedia Biblica 5:458-460 [Hebrew]; Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. David Noel Friedman, New York, 1992, 1997), Journal of the Society for Textual Reasoning, “Midrash as Visualization,” vol 10, 2001.
[vii] The Religion of the Patriarchs, Augustine Pagolu, Continuum International, 1998, p. 68.
[viii] A Guide to Old English, Bruce Mitchell, Fred C. Robinson, Blackwell, 2001 p. 179
[ix] Psalm 110: ‘The Lord (YHWH) said unto my lord (adonai) …’ The actual Hebrew words translated as Lord are different yet Christians have rendered them as equivalents! The first Lord is actually YHWH, and represents one of the removals of God’s name, having been substituted with Jehovah. T he second word ‘lord’ is ‘adonai’ which means ‘Master’ or ‘Sovereign’. Isa confounded the scribes and Pharisees by actually telling them that David’s Messiah or Master could not then be David’s son; or to put it another way, he asked them: ‘How could David call his son or descendent Master?’ This is very simple without the twist of Trinitarian bias. — oz