In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple. Seraphs were in attendance above him; each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew. And one called to another and said:

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory.”

The pivots on the thresholds shook at the voices of those who called, and the house filled with smoke. And I said: “Woe is me! I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”

Then one of the seraphs flew to me, holding a live coal that had been taken from the altar with a pair of tongs. The seraph touched my mouth with it and said: “Now that this has touched your lips, your guilt has departed and your sin is blotted out.” Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I; send me!

——————–

This is the Old Testament reading selection for Trinity Sunday, Year B, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. This will precede the singing of Psalm 29, which says, “The voice of the Lord is a powerful voice; the voice of the Lord is a voice of splendor.” That will be read before the Epistle selection from Romans, where Paul wrote: “For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God.” All will come before the reading from John’s Gospel, where Jesus said, “Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above.”

I wrote about this reading selection in 2018. You can read it by searching this site for: Isaiah 6:1-8 – An ordinary leap of faith. I addressed this reading from a different perspective than I will take now. I stand by my insights three years ago; so, please feel free to read both and offer comments.

King Uzziah was said to have been the second greatest King of Judah since Solomon. He was an upright leader for about forty years, but then his ego took hold of him and he tried to burn incense in the Temple, which the Levite priests tried to stop. During the confrontation, a major earthquake occurred that broke open the roof over the Holy of Holies and sunlight shone on Uzziah, immediately causing him to have leprosy. He had to live in a separate house for the remaining eleven years of his life (still a king), with his son Jotham the co-ruler of Judah. Following the death of Uzziah, Jotham’s rule lasted five years. this history of Judah is all downhill after that.

[WARNING: This reading selection involves a divine vision shown to Isaiah. It appears to be a sweet story about him seeing God in all His magnificence and glory, with some kind and gentle seraphim all standing around, forever saying, “Holy Holy Holy.” That does not make sense of the reading. If all were bliss and glorious, then why would Yahweh ask Isaiah, “Who shall I send? Who will go?” I have been led to painstakingly comb through the Hebrew text and see this vision as the horror of religion being overcome by Satan. These verses paint a clear picture of the demonic spirits that have taken over the thrones of Judaism and Christianity, such that there are few left who can answer Yahweh’s question and say, “Here I am! Send me.” Christians today think Isaiah did all the work; so, they can just sit in church pews [if even that is some watery profession of faith] and then go to heaven when they die. I recommend running away now. Do not read further. This was me beginning by praying, “What does this mean?” and being led down a dark path that reflects true wickedness in this world. Just go read some crap somewhere else on the Internet and be thrilled somebody is still keeping faith in Yahweh alive.]

See the Star of David as a seraph that can hide the face of self in service to Yahweh – the leviathan of the sea of Yahweh’s hands. See the Star of David as a seraph that can hide the sins through which the feet have walked – the false prophets. See the Star of David as the presence of darkness that tries to hide the light of Christ – all religions that preach hatred.

——————–

So often when reading Scripture do we disregard something like Isaiah being divinely led to write, “In the year that King Uzziah died.” That is easily assumed to be an ancient historical dating statement, which becomes of no consequence today. We think, “Uzziah died a long, long time ago. That has nothing to do with me.” That attitude says Yahweh leads His prophets to write superfluous crap; and, that is not the case.

I say that as I was about to toss that intro out with yesterday’s garbage, and begin after that tidbit. Then, I was led to ponder the meaning of that history. That led to read the history of Uzziah, which I remembered, but had forgotten his name. The name means “Yah[weh] Is My Strength,” which is important to know [all names in divine Scripture are written with the meaning of the name being the primary intent]. By reading the history of King Uzziah, it dawned on me that Uzziah is a reflection on the whole of Judaism; and, therefore, he is a reflection on the whole of Christianity. Let me explain what I mean.

There is an axiom: As above, so below. That applies here, as King Uzziah’s history becomes a reflection of Christianity today. His history certainly was a reflection of the wrong turn Judah took, leading to its eventual demise. Uzziah is then a perfect example of how the Israelites sought to have a king lead them religiously, so they could go about the usual business of slowly evolving so far away from what Yahweh expected of them that ruin was inevitable. David was not the king the first Israelites chose. They chose an abject failure in Saul. It is a human flaw to always raise the shit of the world into power, to in turn force their subjects to eat shit and die. It is an innate sickness of being born mortal. Even David eventually let down his guard and walked away from Yahweh, proving Yahweh is the only King of merit, because all others will fail to lead the people to salvation.

Like Uzziah, Christianity began with only true Christians, as all were filled with Yahweh’s Spirit and made Saints. Then, someone decided to enter the Holy of Holies and light some incense on the Golden Altar, when that person was not a Saint. Uzziah was an upright king, until his ego took over his body of flesh, making him think he was an equal to Yahweh. Look at this like the system of popes the Roman Catholic Empire created, which led to the extermination [Inquisitions] of anyone who would challenge their rule. After true reproductions of Jesus, all Christs, began a movement that became known as Christianity, someone decided his shit don’t stink and entered the Holy of Holies to burn some incense on the Golden Altar [West]. That form of religion then became stricken with leprosy and forced to live in a house that was separate from Jerusalem: Rome.

The same model then applies to every denomination of Christianity, as all are led by men who were not Saints, because a Saint has no ego and no need to build an organization, with rules and by-laws, and pecking orders, where some are seen as closer to God, usually based on how much wealth they bring into the organization. Christianity has been stricken with leprosy. This whole reading has to begin with the concept that the religions of Christianity have died. They have no usefulness left within their carcasses. To review last week’s First Lesson from Ezekiel: Christianity has become dry bones.

This leads to another sign of Christianity being dead: It is afraid to call Yahweh by that name, thinking [using a brain is always a bad sign] “Yahweh” is the God of Israel, and Roman Catholics most certainly hate Jews, so reduce “Yahweh” to “the Lord.” The problem then comes from not having a way to differentiate “adonay” from “Yah-weh.” This inability raises its ugly head in verse 1. After recognizing that religion was dead, Isaiah is said [NRSV] to write: “I saw the Lord sitting on a throne.” That implies to the ignorant masses of the universal catholic churches that Isaiah saw God. That is not what is written.

The Hebrew of verse 1 states: “wā·’er·’eh ’eṯ-’ă·ḏō·nāy yō·šêḇ ‘al- kis·sê , rām wə·niś·śā , wə·šū·lāw mə·lê·’îm ’eṯ-ha·hê·ḵāl .” That literally translates to say, “and I saw the king sitting on a throne , exalted and lifted up , and his skirt filled the palace .”

When one realizes that “adonay” is not Yahweh [who is specifically named in verse 3], the use of “adonay” reflects back to the death of Uzziah, who was a “king.” Again, from realizing the mention of Uzziah’s death as metaphor for all religions that pretend to serve Yahweh, when they do little more than serve the leaders of those religions, “adonay” is referring to a “lord” [lower case] or a “king” that has subsequently been elevated to fil the vacancy left at the top of an organization.

When I say this, I base it on the regularity that Old Testament books use “adonay Yahweh” together in verses. It is ridiculous to translate that as “Lord Lord.” It says the “lord” of my soul is “Yahweh.” In Christian terms [none Hebrew written], “adonay” is equal to one’s soul having been merged with the soul of Jesus, so Jesus is “the lord” of one’s flesh.

On the level of Christian discipleship, Jesus was the king [who denied the world was his realm of authority] that died. This has led, since the Roman Empire’s collapse into the business of religion, to a hierarchy that built a palace [“ha·hê·ḵāl” can mean both “temple” and “palace,” so what better place does that define than Vatican City?]. None of the Saints that built a religious movement pandered for things opulent, such as thrones and long, trailing gowns or robes. Yahweh never wanted a building of stone to be caged within; and, at three o’clock the day Jesus died, Yahweh left that building. So, it is doubtful that Isaiah was led to a divine vision of Yahweh looking so ‘stately,’ meaning “adonay” does not refer to Him.

Seeing this, verse two begins with the one-word statement: “śə·rā·p̄îm,” which translates as “seraphim.” That word is followed by a long dash [“—“], isolating it from the following text that then describing this creature. This makes it most important to realize what a “seraphim” is.

According to the Wikipedia article entitled “Seraph” the following is written: “The word saraph/seraphim appears four times in the Book of Isaiah (6:2–6, 14:29, 30:6). In Isaiah 6:2–6 the term is used to describe a type of celestial being or angel. The other uses of the word refer to serpents.” The word “seraph” is defined by Strong’s as “fiery serpent.” The Biblical presence of a serpent is not always associated with leading human beings [or souls] to do the right thing.

After having been led just a couple of days ago to see the “leviathan” as the Spirit of Yahweh that filled the “sea” of souls that had become the “hands” of Yahweh, I saw how that word is equally defined in frightful words: “sea monster, sea serpent, dragon.” In my analysis then, I presented how spiritual possession could be both divine [righteousness of a body of flesh and salvation of a soul] and demonic [sinful wasting of a body and soul]. I feel that the seraphim [multiple seraph] in this vision, seen after Uzziah had died and a “lord” sat stately upon a “throne” (which presumably a king ruling Judah), says the “seraph” Christians revere might not be all that glitters, that a serpent is given credit for.

Following the long dash Is written “ō·mə·ḏîm,” which is followed by a “׀” mark, indicating a statement directly relative to a “seraph.” The “׀” mark I read as a “stop” sign. The Hebrew means “it stood,” with the root verb meaning “to stand, remain, endure, take one’s stand.” Whereas the verb indicating “to stand” implies rising to a divine state of being, such that Job was described as being “upright,” here the addition as a clarifying element of the “seraphim” is “it remains,” to assist the “throne,” following the “death” of Uzziah. Knowing that a “seraphim” is a heavenly creature [spiritual, not material], it is doubtful that elevation is possible in that realm, although religious scholars enjoy determining a ‘pecking order’ for angels, such as “seraphim.”

The “׀” mark, which seems to me to end the combination “seraphim — omedim,” is followed by words that say, “above it” or “upwards it” [from “mim·ma·‘al- lōw”]. These words are separated from the “׀” mark and the words that follow, by a comma mark, making them be a separate statement relative to the seraphim. While that could lead one to see the standing as being relative to an elevated position, the stop bar [the opposite of a long dash] begins a new line of thought. This leads me to see the seraphim as the new king’s source of spirituality, which makes it be less a divine possession like the leviathan. The leviathan was beneath and unseen, not above.

This then leads to the repetition of “six wings,” which the NRSV translation has reduced to only one. The literal translation says, “six wings six wings had one.” In this, the number “six” is significant as the number of days the world or universe was created. That aligns the number “six” with the physical realm, not the spiritual realm, where seven is holy. Additionally, man was created on the sixth day, which makes man represent the number six, rather than the soul of man. Finally, in Revelation 13:18, John wrote the number of the beast was “six hundred, sixty, and six” [“hexakosioi hexēkonta hex”]. That is “six” on three levels of awareness: one, ten, and one hundred. Thus, “six” being repeated is not a positive sign.

As for the Hebrew word “kə·nā·p̄a·yim” [plural number of “kanaph”], the word can mean “wings,” with that being descriptive of a garment, such as it is the “extremities” of a “skirt, corner, or loose flowing end.” [Brown-Driver-Briggs] When the word is used in reference to the earth, “wings” becomes a statement about the ends of the earth. When one recalls Isaiah writing “wə·šū·lāw,” which was translated as the “skirt” of the “king” that “filled the palace,” “wings” can be seen as mirroring that usage.

In the repetition, where there is some flexibility in translation, the words translated as “six wings six wings had one,” the same words can now be read as “six extremities six free-flowing ends in one.” When the directions of the winds are numbered as four: north, south, east, and west; the addition of two more directions would then be above and beneath. However, when the number “six” is seen to keep this in the material realm only, above would be the atmosphere of the earth, with beneath being that within the earth, beneath the surface. This would lean me towards seeing this “seraphim” as akin to Satan, more than Yahweh, where the “six” becomes descriptive of where their power is limited.

The remainder of verse 2 then is divided into three segments that each begin with the words “with two.” In the use of “two,” one cannot see the repetition as disappearing, as three times two equals six. Each use of “two” must be read as a duality being expressed. Man is the duality of flesh and soul – matter and spirit. Still, in regard to Elisha requesting a “double share of Elijah’s spirit,” the Hebrew of “double portion” is “pî-šə·na·yim,” whereas here “with two” is written as “biš·ta·yim,” with both pulling from the same root meaning “two.” The reason I mention this, is the duality can mean a spirit joined with a soul.

Seeing those possibilities, the three segments say: “with two was covered his face,” “with two was covered his feet,” and “with two he flew.” From a duality involving “face” and “feet,” it is easy to see that as being relative to the “face” of Yahweh and those Yahweh sends out into the world (His “feet”). In respect to the “face covered,” it should be remembered that Moses talked with Yahweh in the tent of meeting and afterwards his face shone brightly. The Israelites feared seeing that glow on Moses’ “face,” so they demanded he wear a veil, to “cover his face.” That denotes a halo surrounding the “face” of Yahweh’s wives, which is depicted in art as the Saints of Christianity. Thus, that can be a sign of one joined with Yahweh’s Spirit.

As to the covering of “feet,” this seems to be at odds with symbolism of doing Yahweh’s work. When Jesus sent out the seventy in pairs, he told them to take no purse or sandals, meaning their feet must be uncovered. Still, in the act of washing “feet,” Peter reacted badly to the thought that anyone but him handle them, because “feet” are always dirty from walking. To “cover his feet” is then a sign that one does nothing to become dirty, which can also mean failure to enter ministry as Jesus expected.

In all three where “covered” is found, that word can mean “conceal, hide, and shroud.” When a “face is covered” this can mean a mask is worn over the “face,” to keep the true face underneath “covered,” so the true “face” is not seen. As to the “feet” being “covered,” this can be seen as an anointment or washing, such as Mary Magdalene did to Jesus’ “feet.” When Jesus washed the “feet” of his disciples, he said that was a way of treating each other as equals, where the “feet” were always the dirtiest parts of the body, so it was up to all to keep one another clean. That symbolism goes beyond physical “feet,” to metaphor for keeping one another free from sin. Therefore to “cover his feet” means one of royalty that is protected from getting dirty, while never cleaning anything of anyone else.

The aspect of flying must be seen as something human beings were incapable of, in ancient times. Birds flew with wings, but there is no reason for a human being to be expected to literally fly. Angels have no need to use wings to fly, as they simply appear where needed. As such, the Hebrew word “yə·‘ō·w·p̄êp̄” [from “uwph”] has the figurative definitions: “(by implication of dimness) to faint (from the darkness of swooning): – brandish, be (wax) faint, flee away, fly (away – ).” This means the word “to fly” can mean “to be exhausted, to be dark, or to vanish.”

Because the central theme of verse 2 is the details of the “seraphim,” it must be seen as finding it powers only possible within the earthly realm. All of the duality says it can go either way, as far as spirit possession is concerned. It can be joined with one’s face, so one serves Yahweh, only wearing His face. It can be joined with one’s feet, making it a demonic possession that a serpent is known most for doing. The third ability can go both ways, as the ability to escape the worldly realm by divine possession, or to never see heaven because one always flees the responsibility of commitment to serve Yahweh, instead hiding in darkness.

This view of the “seraphim” then leads to verse three, which immediately begins by stating, “and cried this,” where the Hebrew word “wə·qā·rā” means “to proclaim, to call unto.” The word attached to that [“zeh”] adds, “this, here,” but is relative to “he,” as a statement of “(self) same,” which is a “soul.” As this vision is ethereal, like a dream, the “seraphim” is a Spirit, to which the “soul” of Isaiah “called out to.”

It is then identified that it was the “seraphim” who “said, ‘holy,’” with the first use of “qā·ḏō·wōš” [“holy, sacred”] followed by another “׀” mark, indicating an emphasis on what the soul of Isaiah heard the “seraphim” saying. This then follows with Isaiah writing of the dream: “holy holy,” where the repetition can use different translations, such as “sacred holy,” or “saintly sacred.”

One Hebrew translation site says [of the first two presentations of “qā·ḏō·wōš” [ignoring the stop mark], “holy of holies,” which would revert back to the “palace” as the “temple” of Solomon. If that is allowed [to make one of three uses of “qā·ḏō·wōš” be in the possessive, as “of holy”], then the second and third uses could be “holy of holies,” with the first use [leading to the stop] translate as “sanctuary.” It has been my finding in divine texts, when repetition of one word is found, it is more informative to translate each use with a different [yet viable] translation, rather than simply repeat the same translation multiple times.

Following a comma mark of separation, Isaiah wrote “Yahweh,” which is the name of his One God. After that name, he wrote “ṣə·ḇā·’ō·wṯ,” which is translated as “of hosts.” That second word is rooted in “tsaba,” such that a “host” is defined as “army, war, warfare.” The same word is found in Genesis, referring to all Creation. It is found elsewhere as being relative to the “sun, moon and stars.” According to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, the word can mean: “appointed time, army, battle, company, host, service, soldiers, waiting upon.”

As one word following “Yahweh,” this acts as a defining aspect of “Yahweh,” as He is not only the Creator of everything known to mankind [all within the visible universe], but he is also the Creator of Spirits, including “seraphim.” These spirits [Jewish scholars do not classify them as angels, although they are of spiritual essence] are then an “army” of “seraphim” [a plural number of “seraph”] that are created by Yahweh.

This identification has nothing to do with the “seraphim” saying “sanctuary ׀ holy of holies.” It can only be understood that Yahweh is the Most Holy, such that defining Him as “holy” is unnecessary. Only those created by the hand of Yahweh, as those having received His Spirit, can then be termed “holy.” Yahweh’s “army” of “holy” entities implies a “sea of saints,” as that is where David said the leviathan swam.

Following a comma mark that separates “Yahweh of hosts” from the last segment of words is found “mə·lō,” meaning “full, fullness, that which fills.” This needs to be seen as a verb that is now describing the “host” of “Yahweh,” which are “filled” with His Spirit. The remaining words in this segment then say, “all the earth his glory.” In that, the word “kə·ḇō·ḏōw” [from “kabowd”] means “glorious, abundance, riches, dignity of position, honor, reputation, character of a man, and reverence” [Brown-Driver-Briggs], which is like the use of “holy.” Yahweh is exempt from all goodness that He bestows “on the earth.” When united with the verb stating “full,” as having been “filled,” the Spirit of Yahweh is what brings all these qualities into the world.

Verse 5 then begins by stating, “and were shaken the posts of the door.” In that, the Hebrew words “’am·mō·wṯ has·sip·pîm” can also be translated as saying “the cubits of the basin” or “cubits of the goblet” [from the roots “ammah caph”]. It is secondary translations that make this become a statement that makes this segment speak of “a door-base” and “a threshold.” This can further be read as a statement about the “measure” or the “limits” of “doorposts,” which in the Israelite history has to be seen as the blood of the lambs spread over the doorposts in the first Passover. It was that blood that kept the firstborn males from dying.

Now, Isaiah is telling that there came a “trembling, wavering, or quivering,” not of fear, but of a “disturbance” in the past, which has made “to be gone away” all “measures” of “doorposts” still being so covered in sacrificial blood. Relative to the history of King Uzziah, when he entered the Holy of Holies to burn incense on the Golden Altar, an earthquake opened the ceiling and light shone upon him, giving him leprosy. This statement by Isaiah must be seen as metaphor for that change having come upon Judah.

Following a comma mark that separates that statement about a “measure” of change to escaping death [the promise of eternal life], Isaiah wrote of the “voice” or “the sound” of “him who cried out.” This refers one back to verse 3, which began “and cried this” or “called out soul.” That was the “seraphim” that was “proclaiming” everything relative to “holy” and the “host of Yahweh.” Now, “shaken” by the “change of measure” that deems a soul saved, it is the seraphim making proclamations, which are part of this change.

Following a comma mark of separation, we learn that the proclamations of the seraphim have “filled the house with smoke.” Here, the word “yim·mā·lê” becomes a progression of “mə·lō,” where the “measure of the goblet” [a viable translation of “has·sip·pîm,” rather than “threshold”] has changed from “all that is glory on earth” to “the house was filled with smoke.” Whereas this too can make one recall the sinful actions of King Uzziah attempting to burn incense [smoke] in the Golden Altar, the use of “smoke” must be seen as a destructive burning of the House of Israel, including Judah.

This then leads to verse 5, where Isaiah first speaks. The first words say, “so I said woe me for I am destroyed.” In that, the Hebrew word “niḏ·mê·ṯî” [from “damah”] means, “to cease, cause to cease, cut off, destroy.” To translate this as “undone” is mild, to say the least. The implication is “to perish,” which says the “limits” set by the blood of the lamb on the “doorposts,” which spared one from death, has now been removed and Isaiah feared the loss of his soul.

Following a comma mark of separation, Isaiah then wrote the segment of words that stated: “that man of unclean speech I.” In that, the words “ṭə·mê- śə·p̄ā·ṯā·yim” [from “tame saphah”] have been translated as “unclean lips,” but the implication is more about what rolls off the “lips,” as “speech” or “language.” The aspect of “’îš” [“ish”] then becomes a statement of a “man,” not the Word of Yahweh. This then implies that the changes of “measurement” are relative to that “spoken” by the one who replaced King Uzziah, whose regality has (along with self-love) been surrounded by “fiery serpent spirits.” It is that presence that has brought about the destruction of Yahweh “man,” those who had been “glorified” by His Spirit.

The last word in this segment is “’ā·nō·ḵî,” which is a statement of “I” [not a stop bar sign].
When one is truly a leader of Yahweh’s people, one has submitted to His Will, such that the “I” of self has been lost. For this to be the last word in this segment of words about “that man of unclean speech,” the element that makes it “unclean” or “defiled” is “that man” expresses personal opinions, relative to the “I” of self-ego. That means one having turned away from Yahweh, not wearing His “face,” but worshiping “self” as a god. In that way, everything said is “unclean,” with nothing “holy.”

This realization is then furthered by the segment that follows the comma after “I,” which says, “and in the midst of people of unclean lips.” This becomes a statement that says, “As goes the head, so goes the rest.” As a king on a throne, whose skirt reaches in all directions, those under his influence are following the guidance of unholy words. As an extra element, following a comma mark of separation, one finds a one-word statement that repeats “’ā·nō·ḵî,” or “I,” which says that the “people” have all followed the lead of this king, such that none of them serve Yahweh through marriage and submission of their souls. It has become a land where everyone is for himself or herself.

Following the one-word statement of “I” is a semi-colon, denoting a new statement of relative context. It is relative to these “people,” as they are said to “dwell for the king.” Here, the Hebrew word “ham·me·leḵ” [from “melek”] refers one back to verse 1, where “adonay” was the “lord sitting on a throne.” As “king” is now stated, this leader must be seen as the replacement for King Uzziah [on a literal, historical sense], while also representing the one who has become the “leader of the people of unclean lips.” When the “measure” of righteousness, which saves a soul from reincarnation, is the sacrifice of the “I” unto Yahweh, the “king” is now who “the people dwell for.” They “inhabit” the “I” of self, such that none of their souls have been sacrificed unto Yahweh. This is a statement of a great lack of souls who will serve Him as His messengers [Apostles].

Following a comma mark that separates the segment of words ending with “king” comes a segment that begins with the naming (a second time) of “Yahweh.” The two words being presented sequentially, as “king , Yahweh” gives the impression that “Yahweh” has been named as “king,” but the comma prevents that association. The “king” is now claiming to be one of “Yahweh’s hosts,” whose claims of “I” now include, “my eyes have seen Yahweh.” Rather than hear Isaiah saying this, one must hear them stating the sacrilege of a “king,” who is a “man” now claiming to be god on earth, as a human deity – as was the presentation of a Roman emperor’s reason for rule.

This then leads to verse 6 beginning with the words that translate to say, “and flew towards me,” where “’ê·lay” is a form of “el,” meaning a “motion” that is “to, into, towards me.” This implicates Isaiah as a soul then recognized as one of “the people,” such that the seraphim was a spirit that sensed a presence that was not of the “I” teaching. As such, the word “el” acts as a statement of rules or standards being enforced, where “flew” [from “way·yā·‘āp̄”] becomes a presence of “darkness” that surrounded the soul of Isaiah.

Following a comma mark of separation, the next segment of words say, “one from the seraphim,” which says the seraphim were relative to this darkness, all of which has surrounded the “king,” the “people,” and influenced the changes of “measure” of the “goblet” or “threshold.”

At that point comes another comma mark, leading to the next segment of words that say, “and in his hand having a live coal.” Here, the Hebrew word “ū·ḇə·yā·ḏōw” [from “yad”] brings out the human characteristic of “a hand,” when the seraphim had been detailed as having “wings” or “extremities,” which “hid” the “face” and “feet,” with nothing mentioned about “hands.” It is now “in his hand” that the seraphim is “holding a live coal.”

In that, the Hebrew word “riṣ·pāh” [from “ritspah”] means “glowing hot stone,” which is not the same as a piece of burnt wood, reduced to a “hot coal.” When the implication is a “stone,” with the “measure” or “limit” of the “goblet” or “doorpost” being relative to that which would lead Moses to bring down the “stone” tablets with the Covenant, this says the original Covenant had been placed into the Golden Altar to destroy it.

Next, following another comma mark of separation, Isaiah wrote, “with the tongs he had taken from the altar.” This implies that the seraph, which is a spirit and not flesh, so it should not be burnt by physical fires, was not allowed to touch the “stone” that was “red hot.” It says the priests of the Temple had “tongs” that were used for the purpose of removing the charred remains of sacrificial animals, for the purpose of those remains being eaten. Thus, the use of “altar tongs” for the removal of a “glowing hot stone” means the “stone” was sacrificed upon the altar. If the “stone” is the “tablet” of Mosaic Law, that marriage agreement between the Israelites and Yahweh was being sacrificed, with its charred remains intended to be served to the pilgrims who came to worship “I” and consume the burnt offering that had been the Covenant to marriage with Yahweh.

Verse 7 then begins by Isaiah writing, “and he reached over my mouth,” where the Hebrew words “way·yag·ga ‘al-pi” can also be translated to say, “and he touched upon my mouth.” This does not mean there was actual touching, but the implication of that nearness leads to the next separate segment.

That is the single Hebrew word “way·yō·mer” [from “amar”], meaning “said.” This form is in the third person singular vav-consecutive imperfect (hence past tense), which then implies the seraphim spoke; but because this word follows the word “mouth” [“peh”], it can be read as words coming from the “mouth” of Isaiah, as “it said.”

This is then followed by another single-word statement, which is “behold!” [from “hin·nêh”]. This should then be seen as the importance of the words spoken, as they need to be grasped as important.

Following the comma mark at the end of “behold!,” Isaiah wrote, “reached here upon your speech,” where again the Hebrew word “nā·ḡa‘” reflects back on the use as “way·yag·ga,” where “reached, touched, or stricken” can be the implication. Once more, the translation of “lips” can equally mean “speech” or “language.” As words flow from the “mouth,” what rolls off the “lips” becomes “speech.”

Following a comma mark at that point, a new two-word statement is shown as “wə·sār ‘ă·wō·ne·ḵā,” which is translated as “is taken away your inequity.” While this translation gives the impression of the burning of lips becomes an act of purification, that cannot be the case when the “mouth” has “uttered” words worthy of “beholding.” The literal translation of “wə·sār” [from “sur”] is “to turn aside” or “to take away,” as meaning “removed, departed, or put aside.” When that is implied to be the “removal of inequity” from words “spoken,” then the presence of the “stone” had evoked “holy” words to come forth, which were not “sinful.”

This then leads to the last two words of verse 7, which state: “and your sin has been covered over.” Here, the use of “tə·ḵup·pār” [from “kaphar”] refers one back to the two uses of “yə·ḵas·she” [each from “kasah”], where the “extremities” of the “seraphim covered the face” and “covered the feet.” This says the “feet” are the source of “sin” or “iniquity,” so the covering of “sin” is based on words “spoken” that still express the Covenant as having not been destroyed. No matter how hot the altar had been stoked, the Covenant being consumed [as words spoken from it] purified Isaiah’s soul. This has nothing to do with the seraphim [a spirit of both divine and demonic spiritual influence, thus neutral] purifying the lips of Isaiah, as the presence of the “glowing hot stone” or “coal” would elicit the truth of a soul. This becomes symbolic of a test, as to whether one cried out “I” or bowed in submission to Yahweh.

Seeing this playing out over seven verses, verse 8 begins with Isaiah saying, “and I heard the voice of adonay.” This is the second of three uses of “adonay” in this chapter. It matches the three uses of “Yahweh” also found written in his sixth chapter. In the first use, in verse 1, following the announced death of Uzziah, the “lord” was seen sitting on a throne. Because “was seen” [from “wā·’er·’eh”] implies a vision of a “lord” that was external to Isaiah’s soul, that use can be generic for one pretending to rule as god’s extension on earth [see the history of popes]. Now, “I heard” implies an inner voice that is with the soul of Isaiah, rather than a voice projected to him [which would be “I saw” – “he said,” rather than “I heard”]. As such, this second use of “adonay” suggests the covering of Isaiah’s feet, left his face so it projected Yahweh as his “lord.” Thus, what Isaiah “heard” was the “voice” of Yahweh, who his soul had married, making Yahweh be his “lord.” In Christian terms, this “lord” would be the soul of Jesus resurrected within.

Following a comma mark of separation is a one-word statement: “’ō·mêr.” That word is the present participle of “amar,” which was seen in the previous verse, as “way·yō·mer,” as “and it said,” referencing the “mouth” of Isaiah. Now, the “voice of the lord” is “saying,” which means there is significance in what is being said within Isaiah.

What Yahweh was “saying” was two questions, separated by comma marks, although there are no question marks written. The first askes, “whom shall I send”. This is followed by “and who will go to.” In that, the Hebrew word “’eš·laḥ” [from “shalach”] has connotations that says “who shall I grow long” or “shoot (forth),” where the question is relative to a vine or new growth. In that, the implication is the “dead stump of Jesse,” which was the death of Israel and Judah. From that dead tree, there would come few who would speak the Word of the “hot stone” when it was placed near their “mouths.” Thus, the questions are relative to being “sent” by Yahweh into ministry, to keep alive the truth of His Spirit.

To these questions, the soul of Isaiah answered, “behold! Send me.” This becomes the mantra of all priests of Yahweh, who do not enter ministry unprepared, as “men” and “women” “filled with the power of I.” They do not go out to present an agenda demanded by a “man on a throne” above them, not Yahweh. They go out as pure servants of Yahweh, speaking only His Word.

As the first lesson after graduation day – Pentecost Sunday – this reading, known popularly as “the commission of Isaiah,” should be the mantra of all who identify as priests, ministers, pastors, preachers, or rabbis. God has not died and left someone of “man” in charge, speaking what “I” wants for oneself. Ministry for Yahweh must be seen as amid the weeds and vines that grow wild grapes, producing only the good fruit that is filled with the truth of a Covenant. Isaiah’s soul was shown the necessity of keeping alive the true Spirit of Yahweh, because the death of Uzziah ushered in the beginning of the end for Judaism. That same end is now reflected in Christianity, a corrupt version that preaches all the lies and inconsistencies of an “I” agenda.

As a Sunday designated as Trinity Sunday, the aspect of the Trinity has to be known. It is not some flowery word that has no truth to its meaning. The Trinity is the union of the Father with the Son [Yahweh and soul], which the point of union is where the Spirit that makes a soul Holy connects those two. The Holy Spirit is then the presence within of Jesus resurrected. The Ordinary time after Pentecost is when only those in possession of Yahweh – His divine possession in Spirit – enter ministry. Please not that the truth of the Trinity symbol is a cross, where the intersection of vertical [Yahweh] and horizontal [soul-flesh] occurs at one point, which is unseen because if blends the two together. In the picture I have attached to this commentary, one will see the Star of David has two triangles intersecting. The triangle cannot be seen as a symbol for the Trinity, because all sides are separate and equal; and, the son is nothing more than man, without marriage to Yahweh and His Spirit.