Sumer

The Mesopotamian system of government like that in Sumer has been described as "theocratic socialism." The center was the government temples, where public works like dikes and irrigation canals were financed but also food supplies were divided among the needy which was all managed by a powerful class of bureaucratic priests.
The model of these proto-states are seen in modern governments where power is increased or centralized by the people becoming dependent upon the state and its forms of civil religion which compelled contributions of its registered members with the promise of entitlements providing some form of free bread or social welfare or what has been called the dainties of these rulers.
The alternative was a network of fervent charity which was promoted by Moses and the Christ which sets the captive free rather than the Legal charity of the state which degenerates the masses while empowering rulers and tyrants.
Augustus Caesar instituted a similar system of free bread in Rome through its government temples which led to its decline and fall.
In more modern times FDR set up his New Deal and LBJ his Great Society which is presently leading to the same degeneration of the people and a corresponding decline of social bonds and fall of "Pure Religion" and loss of liberty.

Sumer and the proto-state

Sumer is one of the earliest known civilization in the historical region of southern Mesopotamia, emerging during the Chalcolithic and early Bronze Ages between the sixth and fifth millennium BC.

Biblically speaking Cain established the first city-state. A city-state, or polis, was the community structure of ancient Greece.

A city-state was often organized with an urban center in a fertile area. There might be outer walls for protection, as well as a public space that might eventually have included temples for the purposes of public welfare and government meeting places for deciding what might be important including the administration of justice and preparation for mutual defense.

One of the earliest sites of an ancient city-state is called Çatalhöyük or Catal Huyuk in southern Anatolia, which appears to be founded around 7,400 BC. Catal Huyuk was not only streetless but had entrances through the roof and covered more than 30 acres. Very little is known about the people who lived there, and it was suddenly abandoned, around 5,950 B.C., possibly because of diseases, overcrowding, and change in climate. Some believe the life span was only 3 decades.

Piecing the pieces of these ancient puzzles together can sometimes be difficult because we are still interpreting our discoveries based on limited information and our perspective or current point of view. The continued excavation of places like Sumer has revealed many tablets of written information which can give us some greater insight into the city-state administration and the how and why people lived in them.

Sumerian gods of welfare

Worshiping the ancient gods of Sumer has been promoted by the New York Times where they praise the "the welfare city-state" claiming that in that civil society "Work was a duty, but social security was an entitlement. It was personified by the Goddess Nanshe, the first real welfare queen immortalized in hymn as a benefactor who "brings the refugee to her lap, finds shelter for the weak.""

The Sumerian cuneiform system of writing as early as 3000 B.C. allowed for the direct outgrowth of the invention and development of a civil society. The earliest documents found in a Sumerian city of Erech recorded administrative accounting of a civil bureaucracy along with more and more civil laws required to regulate that growing bureaucracy and those citizens dependent upon it.

There was a rise in education evidenced by school books unearthed in Shuruppak dated around 2500 B.C.. Early on there was evidence of a wide variety of topics taught including architecture, medicine, metallurgy, mathematics, botanical, zoological, geographical, and mineralogical, as well as literature. This literary output in the Mesopotamian civilization was not the first attempt of a human to express life, its values, and its meaning using fiction and art but it was simply one of the earliest written records that has survived and we have found. They were often just recording the culture and sense of virtuous social bonds of their predecessors which they praised and the clay tablets were more survivable than other media.

Individual rights were born with the Natural Law which is why Genesis starts with a Creator and the creation of mankind. Civil law is the law that men make for themselves and has often presented a conflict between those civil laws and Freedom of Religion. This is where and often where we see a "bitter struggle for power between the temple and the palace---the “church” and the “state”--- with the citizens ... taking the side of the temple" because of their dependence upon the civil tables and dainties of rulers through their systems of legal charity.

During the reign of Urukagina there was opposition to "the wealth and criminality of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]" who had enslaved the people. It is in the historical cuneiform "document that we find the word “freedom” used for the first time in man's recorded history; the word is amargi..." which may literally be translated "return to the mother" or her womb an idea that suggest the born again comments of Jesus.

The term ama-argi or ama-gi in the cuneiform writing produced the idea of "freedom", as well as "manumission", "exemption from debts or obligations", "reversion to a previous state" Akk. anduraāru. That liberty was only found in the kingdom of God and His righteousness.

Reading Sumerian literature found in these cuneiform tablets, we find that the people were seeking someone to save them from their "animal nature". Since that animal nature often manifested with a lack of one or more socially desirable of virtues, their stories often included characters or heroes who had an abundance of those virtues. These Sumerians gods identified in these clay tablets were humans who ate, drank, sleep, marry, and have children but they often excelled in one of these virtues which the Sumerians prized and praised.

The Sumerians, Akkadians, and Babylonians in Mesopotamia had "gods many" described in their epics as humans, as wise kings who live lives, are mourned on passing and sometimes immortalized like Ishtar's lament of the people who perished in the great flood of Utnapishtim.

King or no King

Gilgamesh, king of Uruk and Sumerian hero, is mentioned in a version of The Book of Giants found at Qumran. As a heroic epic it is not merely literature is a story about the struggle of everyman with his virtuous desires and his animal nature for Gilgamesh did great things for the nation but also to its people as his power made him a despot to the masses.

The citizens “cried out to heaven” to the god of the sky, Anu, who supposedly suggested a division or balance of power by sending Enkidu to keep Gilgamesh but eventually they become allies which we see with every two party system. The real problem goes much deeper into the heart and soul of the people.

There was also an attempt to subdue or shackle the Leviathan of a bureaucracy that has developed a life and tyranny of its own. In the American colonies it was not the old King George the III who' ate out the substance of the people' but the "swarms of offices", who like locust are their own plague. Like Justice William O. Douglas said the new King George that makes a government despotic by its vast bureaucracy.

As we examine the true story of Moses and certainly Jesus Christ and The Way there are elements of their world we do not find in what has come down as the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Covenants and constitutions

Of course the Bible of Moses tells us in Deuteronomy 17: what we should put in a constitution to keep any king in check. But before that he gave you 12 Rules for Life.

In 1 Samuel 8 we are warned what manner of king any man will become any man will become with such power from the people. What would happen if the people even desired a king who offer protection which is what we see with King Saul who immediately foolishly chooses to force a sacrifice and certainly see with King Gilgamesh.

But if we also sit the tables of plenty the dainties these rulers serve will become a "snare and a trap" and a stumblingblock of recompence according to Paul and David.

Moses was setting up a different system of social welfare through living altars of stone without the civil law regulations of the social welfare states of Ur or Sumer but more in the traditions of Abraham and Able. This system included a division of power for all the social welfare was provided by freewill offerings, or the charity and love as commanded by Jesus Christ. This was contrary to the covetous practices seen in the Corban of the Pharisees set up by the civil government of Herod.

Abraham, Moses, and the prophets, as well as John the Baptist, Jesus and the warnings of the Apostles all agree and are contrary to the way of Cain, Nimrod, Sodom, Pharaoh, Caesar, and socialists like FDR and and opportunists seeking power like LBJ, or even communists like Cloward and Piven or Marx and Mao.

This same conflict is at play within every society in the reliance on individual or personal welfare versus communal welfare, trusting friendship versus cultural isolation. personal welfare versus communal welfare and about the kind of social actors that American citizens should become. Seen in this way, Social Security reform is probably intractable pending a political consensus about about fundamental moral principles. Hardy and Hazelrigg have written this book, they say, because they want a better debate about Social Security.

The Goddess of welfare

Sumer did establish a welfare to provide for their city-states where the right to social welfare was an an entitlement in a civil system symbolized by the Goddess Nanshe (see also Nanse, Nassi, Nazi) who was immortalized in their literature and in an ancient hymn as a benefactor.

Praise of the god Nanshe Who knows the orphan, who knows the widow,
Knows the oppression of man over man, is the orphan's mother,
Nanshe, who cares for the widow,
Who seeks out ... justice ... for the poorest
The queen brings the refugee to her lap,
Finds shelter for the weak

Nanshe was considered a "tutelary deity" of social justice and social welfare. Nanshe was one of the oldest known tutelary goddesses of Mesopotamian cities, along with Nisaba, Ezina, Inanna of Uruk and Inanna or Ishtar. An essential civil power to operate those social welfare systems came from her father, Enki who granted her tutelary powers under his civil authority.

As a protector and benefactor of various disadvantaged groups, such as orphans, widows or people belonging to indebted households these goddesses provided welfare through what could only be identified as civil bureaucracy in the Mesopotamian city. An administrative text lists grain rations for a widow alongside that grain meant for Nanshe's clergy who administered to these needy.

Gods of socialism

The Mesopotamian systems of government were systems of "theocratic socialism that expanded their authority and reduce the ability of the people to resist that power. The center of these systems were seen in the function of their government temples which provided a wide range of services including public works like dikes and irrigation canals which were financed by contributions of the people in the form of investments or taxation.

Like the temples of Pharaoh's Egypt they also provided and distributed food supplies which were divided among the needy which was all managed by a powerful class of bureaucratic priests.

The model of these proto-states and the modern welfare state is this legal charity through forms of of public religion or civil religion providing a social safety net through compelled offerings. This results in the bands of the bondage of Egypt where a portion of your labor is no longer yours and binds the people in the error of Balaam and the Nicolaitan.

Pure Religion created similar social bonds but only through freewill offerings. These systems were rejected and even condemned by men like Moses of Exodus and Jesus and His followers of The Way. These systems of social welfare were a snare and a trap according to David and Paul. Because those tables of social welfare through the State were considered to be covetous practices run by men who exercise authority one over the other, we were told to not be that way and that any such system of legal charity was therefore idolatry.

Many modern governments where power is increased or centralized because the masses who become accustomed to the welfare of state and its forms of civil religion funded by compelled contributions of its registered members with the promise of entitlements providing some form of free bread or social welfare or what has been called the dainties of these rulers.

The alternative was a network of fervent charity which was promoted by Moses and Jesus the Christ which sets the captive free rather than the Legal charity of the state which degenerates the masses and subjecting them in a snare of bondage while empowering rulers and tyrants.

Julius Caesar had a funded gifts gratuities and benefits of free bread to the people in Rome at the expense of their neighbor through its government temples which would lead to its decline and fall. We are warned about those practices in both Old and New Testaments, by all the prophets and by historians and poets by the Modern Church does not have eyes to see for their conscience is seared and are often under a strong delusion.

In more modern times FDR set up his New Deal and LBJ his Great Society which is presently leading to the same degeneration of the people and a corresponding decline of social bonds and fall of "Pure Religion" and loss of liberty.

The Religion of Secularism

Secularism seized the mind of the people when we changed the definition of religion and the masses sat down to eat at a table of legal charity.

The "theocratic socialism" of the modern socialist state is a form of public religion people get when they have no religion which begin with covetous practices and a departure from pure Religions with unsound doctrines and an apostacy of sophistry. The center of the temples of government is a vast bureaucracy which is managed by a powerful class of bureaucrats who provide the services of many ancient priests with little or no governing morality.

The model of these proto-states are seen in modern governments where power is increased or centralized by the people becoming dependent upon the state and its forms of civil religion which compelled contributions of its registered members with the promise of entitlements providing some form of free bread or social welfare or what has been called the dainties of these rulers.

The alternative was a network of fervent charity which was promoted by Moses and the Christ which sets the captive free rather than the Legal charity of the state which degenerates the masses while empowering rulers and tyrants.

Augustus Caesar and many of the emperors expanded that system of free bread in Rome through its government temples which led to its decline and fall.

Again, the legal charity of FDR set up his New Deal and expanded by LBJ and his Great Society promoted by Cloward and Piven would set large sections of society on a path that created an appetite for benefits and dainties of men who exercise authority. This of course did and does presently degenerate the people into perfect savages, but also merchandise, and will curse children with debt. But it will not only increase the bands of captivity but also causes a decline of social bonds and fall from "Pure Religion" and loss of liberty.

In Exodus 17:15 "And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi:" because they had been in a battle with the Amalek and the people had some trouble in the battle. Just as Moses needed help from Aaron and Hur the people also needed help and aid which the altar of Jehovahnissi would provide. The manner and means of providing the care and welfare of the Kingdom of God is a banner to help the people remember.

Jehovahnissi

The term "Jehovah-nissi" is found in Exodus 17 as a name given to an altar Moses constructed after a battle with Amalek.

There is seems to be considerable confusion among theologians, translators, and biblical commentaries as to the meaning of the word "nissi".

A modern concordance records the term is composed of the words Yëhovah-nec. Nec with the Strongs number H5251 is defined as "something lifted up". They also record the Hebrew term nec as being from the word naca which appears once and given the "dubious meaning" of "to be lifted up".

An interesting thing to note in our examination concerning the word naca which is spelled NunSamechSamech (נָסַס‎) is when given a different Strongs number it is also translated "standardbearer" one time, but defined "to be sick." It may also be noted that both appearances of the term NunSamechSamech there is a need to be saved or lifted up because someone is in need.

In the Septuagint the translators believed nissi′ to be derived from nus or nuwc (NunVavSamech (נוּס‎)) which includes the idea of "flee for refuge" and therefore they get a rendering of Yahweh nissî (יהוה ׀ נסי) as "the Lord My Refuge".

In the Vulgate the translators thought nissî (נסי) or NunSamechYod to be derived from nasas′ or nacac (NunSamechSamech (נָסַס‎)) meaning "hoist; lift up" and therefore they get a rendering of Yahweh nissî as "Jehovah Is My Exaltation".

In many modern Christian translations, such as the New International Version, the name is translated “the LORD is my banner."

But the Hebrew letters in the text are not nacac(NunSamechSamech (נָסַס‎)) nor nuwc (NunVavSamech (נוּס‎)). The letters we see are NunSamechYod which almost seem to be of foreign origin. The only other word composed of a similar combination of letters is NunSamechYodKaf (נְסִיךְ‎) and has several seemingly unrelated meanings and said to be from the root letters NunSamechKaf (נָסַךְ‎) which are given numerous Strongs numbers and definitions.

The letters NunSamechKaf produce so many words (including 05258, 05259, 05260, 05261, 05262 and meanings it can be confusing:

• נ ן Nun Heir to the Throne, Aramaic fish in the Mem (fish moving in flowing waters) or in the Hebrew the Nun may mean the kingdom with a double Nun suggesting spiritual insight in two realms. [fish moving... Activity life] (Numeric value: 50)
• ס Samech The Eternal Cycle The circular symbolizes the fundamental truth described in the mystery of the ten statements [ prop... Support, turn] (Numeric value: 60)
• כ ך Kaf K Crown: To Actualize Potential power from spiritual to physical realm [to cover, strength] (Numeric value: 20)

If you can change the meaning of a word by replacing Kaf with a Samech translated standardbearer which supposedly means to be sick or fainteth how are other words and their meaning altered with other letters?

How does changing the letter Kaf with a Yod change the meaning of the word?

• נ ן Nun Heir to the Throne, Aramaic fish in the Mem (fish moving in flowing waters) or in the Hebrew the Nun may mean the kingdom with a double Nun suggesting spiritual insight in two realms. [fish moving... Activity life] (Numeric value: 50)
• ס Samech The Eternal Cycle The circular symbolizes the fundamental truth described in the mystery of the ten statements [ prop... Support, turn] (Numeric value: 60)
• י Yod The Infinite Point of essential good. Divine spark hidden in the ט Tet. Spark of spirit. [closed hand... Deed, work, to make] (Numeric value: 10)

The altar Jehovahnissi

As an altar the term may have its origins in these same ancient altars and temples found in many other city-states like that found in Sumer that functioned like the systems of Nimrod through forms of legal charity which can be identified as covetous practices because the members develop an appetite for the dainties and benefits of rulers at the expense of others and therefore those practices can be labeled as idolatry.

The altars of Abraham and Moses were alternative systems of a social safety net or social welfare system which did not unduly mix the "milk and meat" nor exercise authority of one over the other. But unlike other nations all their offerings had to be freewill offerings according to the LORD, Jehovah.

The term "nissi" applied to the name Jehovah is spelled in the Hebrew as נִסִּי‎ NunSamechYod and could reasonably have its origins in the ancient terms like nissi which can identify a place of "sanctuary" or an "exalted place" or the term "Nassi" which identifies a sacred place or temple area. The Assyrian nisi in general means "men" or "people" and Nassi was the Goddess who provided them with justice and welfare.

So, the term nissi in the phrase "Jehovah-nissi" can be a related symbol to or the replacement of the Goddess of welfare and justice in the city-states like Sumer which provided a civil law system of social welfare through the Goddess Nanshe which was also spelled Nanse, Nassi, Nazi and who was known as the "protector of the disadvantaged" through her many temples.

It is absolutely clear from the record of history that many governments from Cain to Nimrod and from Sumer to Sodom, and Egypt to Rome developed over time systems of social welfare that were established as public religion through the civil law in order to provide for the needy and also bind the people together by some form of social compact.

In fact, the bondage of Egypt we see in Genesis and Exodus, which was a form of corvee, was the direct result of such a contract where a portion of the the citizens labor would belong to the government.

Both Abraham and Moses were setting up an alternative social safety net consisting of altars of clay and stone where the stones were not hewn but unregulated living men called out to perform these essential works of lifting up the people who might be in need. That practice of Pure Religion at the Altar of Jehovahnissi created the social bonds of a free society by weaving the people together if that welfare aid was accomplished only through the out pouring of fervent charity according to the perfect law of liberty.

These altars that differed from the Legal charity at the altars of Nissi in Sumer made Israel a peculiar people and was the banner of righteousness that that was raised up to distinguish them from the idolatry of other city-states.

The nasi

In Leviticus 4:22–26, in the rites of Corban or the sacrifices that would be desired of leaders who err. The leader of each tribe can be designated as a nasi. There is a special offering made by a "nasi" who brings a gift to the Tabernacle.

The leader of each tribe is not a ruler over the people but a ruler over what thr people choose to freely give as a freewill offering or Corban.

Numbers 7] referred to the nasi, and each one In Numbers 34:16–29, occurring 38 years later in the Biblical story, the nesi'im of each tribe are listed

The Mishnah defines the nasi in Leviticus 4 to mean the king but there was meant to be no king in Israel who could exercise authority.

The living altars of Jesusnissi

Jesus would eventually call out His little flock along with appointing His own Sanhedrin and finally appointing a kingdom to His Little flock because the priests of Judea were making the word of God to none effect by the institutions of legal charity they created through the civil law and the Temples of of Herod.

John the Baptist called the people to repent and seek the Kingdom of God and was offering an alternative system based on the righteousness of charity rather than covetousness and force.

The Called out of Christ would institute the Corban of Christ with these Lively Stones of a Living Altar and a daily ministration of Pure Religion to provide all social welfare for early Christians they would not eat at the tables of the Herod nor Caesar.

The social welfare system operated through the many temples of the Imperial Cult of Rome and Herod, according to the warnings of men like David to Paul were those dainties that were a snare and a trap. They knew that the free bread of those systems of the world were provided by men who called themselves benefactors but exercise authority one over the other.

The altar of Jehovahnissi set up by Moses was for the provision and protection of the people like all the Altars of clay and stone. But because they were based on freewill offerings, instead of the covetous practices of legal charity, they did not snare the people and degenerate the masses but strengthened the poor and set the captive free.

The priests and ministers of Moses and Jesus who was the Christ were to provide care through a daily ministration of pure Religion funded by the freewill contributions of the people. This social safety net established by Moses and eventually by Jesus provided a daily bread but through charity alone.

While His ministers were also benefactors they did not exercise authority one over the other but only love for one another according to the Divine will of God from the beginning.

---