Now, this brings us to our subject, the Theocratic Sanctuary of יהוה, the day we were formed. How would you define the essence of a theocracy? This rephrased question aims to explore the core principles of a theocratic system. It uses a more evocative verb ("define the essence") and a noun ("core principles") that suggest a deeper, more impactful understanding than a simple definition.  The sentence structure is also different, posing a direct question to the reader rather than a declarative statement. The term "theocratic" originates from the Ancient Greek word θεοκρατία (theokratia), which literally means "the rule of God".

 

The word is a compound of two Greek roots: θεός (theos), meaning "god," and κρατέω (krateo) or κράτος (kratos), meaning "to rule," "power," or "strength". When combined as theokratía, it signifies a system in which divine authority governs, as seen in ancient Yisrael, where יהוה was considered the direct ruler, or in modern interpretations, where religious figures hold political power.  

 

The Greek term for "Israel" in The New Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance (G2474, pronounced "is-rah-ale") signifies Jacob's adopted name and his descendants. The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines "adopted" it implies a selection made over or in place of an original. 

​

This suggests a conscious preference for the name Israel over another, signifying a higher regard or a deliberate selection. This pioneering rendering, a radical break from prior understandings, illuminates the foundational identity, reference 3478 "Yisrael" (ישראל), in its original Hebrew form. This precise inscription weaves a uniquely potent tapestry of meaning, echoing the distinct pronunciation "yis-raw-ale," which articulates the profound prima facie of "he will rule as יהוה.

 

This served as a symbolic designation for the descendants of Jacob. The narrative highlights that the Greek form "Israel" became the favoured designation for a community identifying itself as Jews. However, according to Debar Torah Revelation 2:9, this self-identification is challenged: "I know your deeds and your suffering and your poverty—yet you are rich!—and the slander of those who say they are Jews but are not, and are instead the synagogue of Satan."

​

I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

​

Highlighting the dehumanizing aspect of oppression. The passage lays bare a shocking divergence, a profound rift between two individuals: one whose existence is defined by abject poverty, profound suffering, and agonizing distress, a grim inheritance from four centuries of systematic

dehumanization through oppression and persecution. See S. Concurrent. Resolution . 26 on page 1, and it quotes “ Whereas Africans forced into slavery were brutalized, humiliated, dehumanized, and subjected to the indignity of being stripped of their names and heritage.” Debar Torah  Psalm 83:1-12....

 

Contrary to their claims, those who adopted the designation of Jew are not descendants of  Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the narrative of their four-century subjugation is unsubstantiated. The very fabric of their claimed lineage, woven from the threads of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, unravels under scrutiny. The stories they retell, the epics of a four-century sojourn under oppressive rule, crumble like ancient dust when subjected to the harsh light of objective examination. Their narrative, meticulously preserved and passed down through generations, stands as a testament to a constructed identity rather than an inherited truth.

 

This perceived subjugation, a cornerstone of their collective memory, lacks the corroborating evidence one would expect from such a prolonged period of hardship. The meticulously documented histories of neighboring peoples and empires offer no trace of this singular, protracted oppression. Instead, the tale appears to be a sophisticated embellishment, a carefully crafted mythos designed to solidify a shared sense of victimhood and purpose.

​

The designation itself, "Jew," becomes a cloak, worn by those who seek to align themselves with a historical narrative that, upon closer inspection, appears to be a sophisticated fabrication, 
detached from the ancestral bloodline and the documented trials they so fervently espouse. Individuals identifying as Jewish are, in fact, European Zionists who have adopted the 
appellation of Israel. The appellation of Israel, therefore, is not a birthright, but a chosen mantle, donned by those who, for reasons of political expediency or ideological fervor, have embraced a narrative that serves their present ambitions.

​

This adoption of a historical guise, however elaborate, does not magically conjure the ancestral bloodline of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, nor does it legitimize the unsubstantiated tales of four centuries of subjugation. The meticulous construction of this identity, so readily accepted by many, betrays a profound disconnect from the very origins they claim to embody. What  is this constructed identity, this adopted appellation? It is a modern construct, a geopolitical strategy veiled in ancient scripture, designed to carve out a distinct territorial and political space.