El-Elyon — Blog - The Blame is on the Sheep

The Identity of Jesus versus the Identity of yhwh

Belem Anderson Costa — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Public source text: WLC + Nestle 1904. Translation: Belem-2025 Bible translation.

Two profiles. One presents himself saying “I brought you out of Egypt.” The other presents himself saying “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” One claims a people. The other claims the universe. And you were taught to believe they are the same entity.

If that were true, the profiles should converge. But when you open the codices and compare — line by line, attribute by attribute, claim by claim — what emerges is not convergence. It is rupture. What happens when you read with the eyes of an investigator rather than a devotee?

The Name Above Every Name

The question of divine identity forms the central axis of the Unveiling (apokálypsis) — and it is precisely here that the forensic analysis of the text reveals what centuries of theological harmonization tried to obscure.

Jesus is not presented as a prophet, angel, or subordinate mediator. Nor is he presented as the “second person” of a trinity. The Unveiling positions him as the one who holds attributes that, within the textual structure of the Hebrew Old Testament, exceed and encompass what was attributed to yhwh.

The self-declaration “I am the Alpha and the Omega” (DES 1:8; 21:6; 22:13) employs the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet to express totality, completeness, and eternity. This formulation does not stand alone — it is expanded with semantic equivalents that form a composite identity. In DES 1:17 and 2:8, Jesus declares himself “The First and the Last” — absolute priority and definitive finality. In DES 21:6 and 22:13, he declares himself “The Beginning and the End” — origin and consummation of all things. And in DES 1:4 and 1:8, he is described as “He who is, who was, and who is to come” — timeless and self-sufficient existence.

This triad of self-definition establishes a cosmic, eternal, and universal identity. The forensic analysis of the text is unambiguous: Jesus does not present himself as the representative of a regional deity, nor as a partial manifestation of a national god. He presents himself as divinity itself in its fullness.

The Forensic Distinction: yhwh as a Deity of Delimited Jurisdiction

Here lies the breaking point with all exegetical tradition subsequent to Paul — and, consequently, the forensic finding of greatest impact for understanding the Unveiling.

The name yhwh, revealed to Moses at the burning bush (Exod 3:14-15), became the distinctive designation of the god of Israel. The traditional translation “I AM WHO I AM” (ehyeh asher ehyeh) was historically interpreted as a declaration of absolute and self-sufficient existence — a reading that served the Pauline project of merging yhwh with the Father of Jesus, enabling the subsequent trinitarian doctrine.

However, the forensic analysis of the textual context reveals something radically different.

The revelation of the name occurs in a context of delimited mission: to liberate the Hebrews from Egypt. The subsequent text confirms and reinforces this jurisdictional delimitation:

“I am yhwh. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, but by my name yhwh I was not known to them. I also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan… I have also heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are enslaving, and I have remembered my covenant. Therefore, say to the Israelites: I am yhwh, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their slavery” (Exod 6:2-6).

The forensic structure of the declaration is revealing. There is a nominal identification — “I am yhwh.” There is a historical contextualization — prior appearance to the patriarchs under another name (El Shaddai). There is a specific covenant — the land of Canaan, that is, territorial jurisdiction. There is an immediate motivation — groaning under Egyptian slavery. And there is a promised action — liberation from Egypt, the founding event.

The name yhwh is inextricably bound to a particular historical event: the Exodus. And here the Desvelational Forensic School identifies the decisive textual evidence: yhwh is a god who presents himself through historical credentials, not through universal ontological attributes. He does not say “I created the heavens and the earth.” He says “I brought you out of Egypt.”

This connection is reiterated systematically throughout the Torah and the Prophets as a fixed identity formula:

“I am yhwh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (Exod 20:2; Deut 5:6).

This formula of self-identification, which opens the Decalogue, defines yhwh in terms of the Exodus. It is not an affirmation of cosmic existence, but a jurisdictional credential: “I am the one who did that, for that people, in that place.” Had you ever noticed that limitation?

The Suppressed Evidence: yhwh as a Son of El Elyon

The Desvelational Forensic School recovers here the text that the Masoretic tradition tried to obscure and that the Pauline tradition had to ignore to enable its theological project.

Deuteronomy 32:8-9, in its oldest form preserved in the Qumran manuscripts (4QDeut-g) and in the Septuagint, declares:

“When the Most High [El Elyon] distributed the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Θεός [benei Elohim]. Because yhwh’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”

The forensic evidence is devastating in its clarity. El Elyon (the Most High) distributes the nations among the sons of Θεός. yhwh receives his portion — Israel — as a hereditary lot. yhwh is not El Elyon; yhwh is one of the sons who received a nation.

The later Masoretic text altered “sons of Θεός” (benei Elohim) to “sons of Israel” (benei Yisrael), in a theological editing operation that the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls exposed. The fusion yhwh = El Elyon = Supreme God is an editorial construction, not a primary textual datum.

yhwh is therefore a designated regional deity — one of the benei Elohim (sons of Elohim) who received jurisdiction over a specific people.

Jesus as Universal Creator — The Identity That Exceeds yhwh

In absolute structural contrast, Jesus is presented not as the liberator of a specific people nor as a jurisdictional deity, but as the agent of universal creation.

John 1:1-3 opens the gospel with a declaration that positions Jesus before all history and above all jurisdiction: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Θεός, and the Word was Θεός. He was in the beginning with Θεός. All things were made through him, and without him nothing that was made was made.”

Colossians 1:16-17 expands: “For by him all things were created, in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

Hebrews 1:1-2 adds the temporal contrast: “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, Θεός spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the universe.”

The comparative forensic analysis produces a contrast that admits no harmonization. In scope of action, yhwh defines himself by the liberation from Egypt — Jesus defines himself by the creation of all things. In covenant scope, yhwh operates with Israel as a single ethnicity — Jesus operates with all nations and creatures. In territory, yhwh claims Canaan — Jesus encompasses the heavens and the earth, the universe. In temporality, yhwh presents himself since the Exodus — Jesus presents himself before all things. In relation to creation, yhwh is the patron deity of a people — Jesus is Creator and sustainer of the universe. In hierarchy, yhwh is a son of El Elyon according to Deuteronomy 32:8-9 (LXX/4Q) — Jesus is the Word who was Θεός according to John 1:1. In self-identification, yhwh says “I brought you out of Egypt” — Jesus says “I am the Alpha and the Omega.”

This distinction is not marginal; it is ontological.

If yhwh defines himself by the Exodus, his authority is bound to a datable historical event. If Jesus defines himself as universal Creator, his authority precedes all history and encompasses all reality — including the reality in which yhwh operates as a designated deity. Do you perceive the implication?

The Unveiling as Hierarchical Disclosure

Traditional Christian theology — the Pauline construction systematized in subsequent centuries — harmonized yhwh and Jesus through trinitarian doctrine, identifying the Θεός of the Old Testament with the Father of the Trinity, of whom Jesus would be the coequal eternal Son. This harmonization constitutes, from the Desvelational Forensic perspective, the greatest operation of textual concealment in Western religious history.

In the Unveiling (apokálypsis) of Jesus Χριστός, Jesus assumes titles and functions that in the Old Testament were attributed to yhwh — not through shared identity, but through hierarchical surpassing.

The title “The First and the Last” is claimed by yhwh in Isaiah 44:6 and 48:12. In Unveiling 1:17 and 22:13, Jesus assumes it as his own attribute. The forensic analysis identifies here not trinitarian sharing, but a claim of superior authority: the one who is truly the First and the Last corrects the pretension of the one who claimed the title before.

The figure of the one “coming with the clouds” appears in Daniel 7:13, where the “son of man” is explicitly distinct from the “Ancient of Days” and presents himself before him to receive authority. In Unveiling 1:7, this figure is identified with Jesus. The text of Daniel already distinguished two entities; the trinitarian tradition tried to merge them.

The holder of “the keys of death and of Hades” — supreme eschatological authority (DES 1:18) — is not attributed to yhwh in any Old Testament text. This is an exclusive prerogative of Jesus in the Unveiling.

The appropriation of these titles by Jesus in the Unveiling is read by the Desvelational Forensic School with precision: Jesus reveals himself as the supreme deity — identifiable with El Elyon or superior to the entire celestial hierarchy — who unveils the true position of yhwh as a subordinate entity. The Unveiling is not the “continuation” of the Mosaic covenant; it is its surpassing and correction. Jesus does not complete yhwh’s project — Jesus exposes the limits of that project.

The Forensic Break with the Pauline Reading

The traditional trinitarian reading — according to which Jesus, as the eternal Son, shares the divine nature with the Father (identified with yhwh) — depends entirely on the fusion operated by Paul between the Θεός of Israel and the Father of Jesus. This fusion is the cornerstone of the entire Christian edifice.

The Desvelational Forensic School identifies this fusion as the founding falsification of the Pauline project. Paul needed yhwh to give scriptural legitimacy to his new religion. Without the identification yhwh = Father of Jesus, the Old Testament would lose its function as “fulfilled prophecy” and Christianity would be left without textual anchoring.

The text of Hebrews 1:1-2 — although inserted into the Pauline-Christian canon — contains, paradoxically, the evidence that dismantles this fusion. The multiplicity and variety (“many times,” “in many ways”) of the previous revelation contrasts with the singularity and fullness of the revelation in Χριστός. The forensic analysis asks: if the previous revelation was fragmentary and multiple, how can the god who produced it be the same absolute and full Θεός who now reveals himself in the Son?

The Desvelational answer is: it cannot. The revelation “through the prophets” was the communication of a regional deity (yhwh) operating within its limited jurisdiction. The revelation “through the Son” is the manifestation of the supreme deity, who now speaks directly — no longer through the intermediaries of a lesser deity, but by itself.

The prophets were many because they served a god of limited scope, who required multiple spokesmen for multiple historically contingent situations. The Son is one because he is the fullness — he requires no repetition, variation, or supplement.

Forensic Synthesis

The Desvelational Forensic analysis of this section establishes the following textual conclusions:

Jesus self-identifies with cosmic and timeless attributes that exceed any claim made by yhwh in the Old Testament corpus.

yhwh self-identifies through historical and jurisdictional credentials — the Exodus, the land of Canaan, the covenant with Israel — which circumscribe him as a deity of limited scope.

Deuteronomy 32:8-9 (pre-Masoretic text) positions yhwh as one of the sons of El Elyon who received Israel as a portion, not as the supreme Θεός who created all things.

The Unveiling (apokálypsis) of Jesus Χριστός operates the hierarchical correction: Jesus assumes titles that yhwh claimed, not through trinitarian identity, but through ontological superiority.

The fusion yhwh = Father of Jesus is a Pauline construction, necessary to give Christianity scriptural anchoring in the Old Testament, but textually unsustainable when confronted with the forensic evidence.

The Unveiling is not continuity of the Mosaic covenant; it is its unveiling and surpassing. Jesus did not come to fulfill yhwh’s Law — he came to reveal that the Law belonged to an inferior jurisdiction, and that the true cosmic authority now manifests itself directly.

If this article shook what you thought about the relationship between yhwh and Jesus, the behavioral contrasts will deepen the rupture: The Behavioral Contrast — yhwh Kills, Jesus Saves. For the chromatic evidence of Daniel 7 and the identity of the Ancient of Days, read Attiq Yomin — The Critical Identity of Daniel 7. And the complete ontological dossier is in yhwh vs. Jesus — The Creator Against the System.

This distinction changes everything you learned. Subscribe to the newsletter and receive each dossier directly in your inbox.

The complete investigation — with all the connections between yhwh, the Beasts, and the system — is in The Little Book — A Culpa é das Ovelhas.

“You read. And the interpretation is yours.”

Public source text: WLC (Westminster Leningrad Codex) + Nestle 1904. Translation: Belem-2025 Bible translation — literal, rigid, directly from the public codices.

Desvelational Forensic School — Belem An.C., 2025

The Ancient of Days — Attiq Yomin and the Critical Identity of Daniel 7

Belem Anderson Costa — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Public source text: WLC (Westminster Leningrad Codex) + Nestle 1904. Translation: Belem-2025 Bible translation — literal, rigid, directly from the public códices.

Exclusive source: El Elyon Dossier + 4Q246 Dossier + Enigmatic Elements Catalog XIV-B (Forensic Unveiling School Belem an.C-2039).

A figure without a proper name

Daniel 7:9 introduces an entity called only by a descriptive designation — עַתִּיק יוֹמִין (Attiq Yomin, “Ancient of Days”). It is not a proper name. It is a functional title: the one who is ancient in days. The one who already existed before.

Christian tradition automatically assumes this is “God the Father” or yhwh. The Unveiling School rejects this shortcut. The text does not say who it is. It only says what it does: sits on the throne, judges, and delivers dominion to another.

The central forensic question: if Yahweh (יהוה — yhwh; trad. “Jehovah”¹) = the Sea Beast (School axiom, documented in The Sea Beast — Yahweh (yhwh) and the Patriarchal System of Israel), then Attiq Yomin is NOT yhwh. Who is it?

The Aramaic text — Daniel 7:9, 13, and 22

Three verses. Three appearances. One tribunal.

Daniel 7:9 — Attiq Yomin enthroned

חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי כׇּרְסָוָן רְמִיו וְעַתִּיק יוֹמִין יְתִב לְבוּשֵׁהּ כִּתְלַג חִוָּר וּשְׂעַר רֵאשֵׁהּ כַּעֲמַר נְקֵא כׇּרְסְיֵהּ שְׁבִיבִין דִּי־נוּר גַּלְגִּלּוֹהִי נוּר דָּלִק

“I was watching until thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His garment — white as snow. The hair of his head — like pure wool. His throne — flames of fire. Its wheels — burning fire.”

Daniel 7:13 — bar enash brought to Attiq Yomayya

חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוֵי לֵילְיָא וַאֲרוּ עִם־עָנָנֵי שְׁמַיָּא כְּבַר אֱנָשׁ אָתֵה הֲוָה וְעַד־עַתִּיק יוֹמַיָּא מְטָה וּקְדָמוֹהִי הַקְרְבוּהִי

“I was watching in the visions of the night, and behold — with the clouds of heaven like a son of man (k’var enash) was coming, and to the Ancient of Days (Attiq Yomayya) he arrived, and before him they brought him.”

Daniel 7:22 — Attiq Yomayya judges

עַד דִּי־אֲתָה עַתִּיק יוֹמַיָּא וְדִינָא יְהִב לְקַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין

“…until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High (Elyonin).”

Terminological note

Verse 9 uses Attiq Yomin (singular). Verses 13 and 22 use Attiq Yomayya — Aramaic plural of majesty, honorific form. They are not two entities. It is the same figure, with an inflection of reverence.

Critical datum: Yahweh (yhwh) does not appear in any of these verses. Daniel 7 operates entirely with three designations:

Designation	Aramaic text	Function
Attiq Yomin / Attiq Yomayya	עַתִּיק יוֹמִין / עַתִּיק יוֹמַיָּא	Enthroned judge — source of authority
bar enash	כְּבַר אֱנָשׁ	Receives dominion — recipient
Elyonin	עֶלְיוֹנִין	Saints whose kingdom is given

Yahweh (yhwh) is absent from the entire vision.

The visible hierarchy — who is above whom

The scene in Daniel 7:13-14 is unequivocal. The bar enash is brought to Attiq Yomayya. Not the reverse. He does not go on his own — וּקְדָמוֹהִי הַקְרְבוּהִי (uqodamohi haqr’vuhi) — “and before him they brought him.” Someone conducts him. Someone presents him.

And then he receives:

וְיָהִב לֵהּ שׇׁלְטָן וִיקָר וּמַלְכוּ “And to him was given dominion and honor and kingship.” — Daniel 7:14a

The hierarchy:

Position	Entity	Action
Above	Attiq Yomin	Sits on the throne. Judges. Delivers dominion.
Below	bar enash	Is brought. Is presented. Receives dominion.

If bar enash = Jesus — and he himself identifies as “Son of Man” in the Gospels (Mt 26:64, Mk 14:62, using language identical to Daniel 7:13) — then Jesus receives authority from an entity above him.

That entity is not Yahweh (yhwh) (absent from the vision). It is Attiq Yomin.

The chromatic connection — Daniel 7:9 x Unveiling 1:14

Here the text does something extraordinary. The same physical description appears in two different books, separated by centuries, in two distinct languages.

Daniel 7:9 (Aramaic)

וּשְׂעַר רֵאשֵׁהּ כַּעֲמַר נְקֵא “The hair of his head — like pure wool.”

Unveiling 1:14 (Greek)

ἡ δὲ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ αἱ τρίχες λευκαὶ ὡς ἔριον λευκόν “His head and hair white as white wool.”

Systematic parallel:

Attribute	Dan 7:9 (Attiq Yomin)	Unv 1:14 (Glorified Jesus)
Hair	like pure wool (כַּעֲמַר נְקֵא)	like white wool (ὡς ἔριον λευκόν)
Garment	white as snow (כִּתְלַג חִוָּר)	—
Eyes	—	like flame of fire (ὡς φλὸξ πυρός)
Throne	flames of fire (שְׁבִיבִין דִּי־נוּר)	—

The same physical description. Applied to two figures. In Daniel, to Attiq Yomin. In Unveiling, to glorified Jesus.

Is this editorial coincidence — or intentional identification?

The El Elyon candidate — the Most High who is not Yahweh (yhwh)

The El Elyon Dossier (27 verified evidences) documents an entity that tradition merged with Yahweh (yhwh) but that the códices treat as distinct.

In Daniel 7, the text uses Elyonin (v.18, 22, 25, 27) to qualify the saints: “saints of the Most High.” The kingdom is given to the saints of Elyon — not to the saints of yhwh.

The foundational text is Deuteronomy 32:8 (LXX and 4QDeutJ):

“When the Most High (Elyon) divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Elohim.”

The following verse (Dt 32:9): “For the portion of Yahweh (yhwh) is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”

The implication: Elyon distributes. Yahweh (yhwh) receives a portion — Israel. Elyon is above Yahweh (yhwh) in the hierarchy.

If Attiq Yomin = El Elyon, then Daniel 7 presents the same hierarchy as Deuteronomy 32: the Most High at the top, delivering dominion.

The Christological question — Jesus before the incarnation?

If Unveiling 1:14 applies Attiq Yomin’s description to Jesus, two hypotheses emerge:

Hypothesis 1 — Temporal identity

Attiq Yomin = pre-incarnate Jesus (the eternal Creator) delivering dominion to himself incarnate (bar enash). The same entity at two moments: before and after incarnation.

Evidence in favor: The chromatic convergence — Unv 1:14 uses Dan 7:9 language to describe Jesus. John is saying: this one you see is the Ancient of Days.

Problem: In the Daniel 7:13 scene, Attiq Yomin and bar enash are two distinct figures in the same room. One is seated. The other is brought to him. If they were the same, the scene would not have two characters.

Hypothesis 2 — Ontological hierarchy

Attiq Yomin = El Elyon (Father / Creator), an entity distinct from Jesus. The hierarchy is permanent, not temporal.

Evidence in favor: The Daniel 7 scene requires two separate entities. The language of Dt 32:8 confirms Elyon above yhwh. If Elyon is also above bar enash, the chain is: Elyon → Jesus → (yhwh as subordinate portion).

Problem: Unv 1:14 applies Attiq Yomin’s description to Jesus. If they are distinct entities, why does John use the same visual language?

Possible resolution

John is not saying that Jesus is Attiq Yomin. He is saying that Jesus carries the same glory — the authority received from Dan 7:14. Glorified Jesus resembles Attiq Yomin because he received from him dominion, honor, and kingship. The visual resemblance is delegation, not identity.

The axiom that changes everything — Yahweh (yhwh) ≠ Attiq Yomin

The Unveiling School axiom: Yahweh (yhwh) = the Sea Beast (Unv 13). Documented in 29 cross-evidences (E-DR-019 to E-DR-029).

If Yahweh (yhwh) = Sea Beast, and Attiq Yomin is the judge of Daniel 7’s celestial tribunal, then:

Yahweh (yhwh) is being judged, not judging.
The “little horn” of Dan 7:25 — which “changes times and law” — operates within Yahweh (yhwh)’s system.
Attiq Yomin is the entity that Yahweh (yhwh) never was — the true sovereign above the system.

This completely inverts the traditional reading of Daniel 7. Tradition reads the chapter as “Yahweh (yhwh) judges the nations.” The School reads: the Most High judges Yahweh (yhwh) and his system, and delivers true dominion to Jesus (bar enash).

Correlation map

 ATTIQ YOMIN (Dan 7:9)
עַתִּיק יוֹמִין
|
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
| | |
Candidate 1 Candidate 2 FIXED DATA
El Elyon Pre-incarnate bar enash = Jesus
(Most High) Jesus (recipient, BELOW)
Dt 32:8 Unv 1:14 Dan 7:13
27 evidences CHROMATIC IDENTIFIED
CONNECTION
| |
└──────┬──────┘
|
OPEN QUESTION:
El Elyon = Jesus?
Or distinct entities?
|
FIXED AXIOM:
yhwh ≠ Attiq Yomin
(yhwh = Sea Beast)

Stress test

Criterion	Result
Verifiable original Aramaic text (WLC)?	Yes — Dan 7:9, 13, 22
Yahweh (yhwh) absent from Daniel 7 vision?	Yes — zero occurrences in tribunal verses
Hierarchy Attiq Yomin > bar enash?	Yes — bar enash is brought to and receives from
Chromatic convergence Dan 7:9 x Unv 1:14?	Yes — hair like white wool
Compatible with Dt 32:8 (Elyon > yhwh)?	Yes — same hierarchy
Compatible with axiom Yahweh (yhwh) = Sea Beast?	Yes — Yahweh (yhwh) absent and judged, not judge
Self-sufficient (solved with the 66 Books + códices)?	Yes — zero external sources

Conclusion — the identity that redefines Daniel

Attiq Yomin is not Yahweh (yhwh). This is the minimum the text asserts: Yahweh (yhwh) is absent from the entire celestial tribunal vision of Daniel 7.

The identity remains open between El Elyon (the Most High of Dt 32:8) and pre-incarnate Jesus (because of Unv 1:14). The Forensic Unveiling School does not force premature conclusions. It records the data. It keeps the investigation open.

What Daniel 7 shows with clarity: there is an entity above everything — above Yahweh (yhwh), above the nations, above the beasts. And that entity, seated on a throne of fire with garments white as snow, chose to deliver all dominion to a “son of man” who came with the clouds.

Tradition looked at Attiq Yomin and saw yhwh. The text shows something else.

“You read. And the interpretation is yours.”

Artificial form: vowels from Adonai (אֲדֹנָי → a, o, a) placed over consonants YHWH — Masoretic qere perpetuum. Medieval Latin readers merged both, producing “YeHoVaH” — a hybrid that never existed as a Hebrew word. The most accepted academic reconstruction is Yahweh /jah.ˈweh/, based on Greek transcriptions (Ιαβε — Clement of Alexandria, ~200 AD; Ιαουε — Theodoret of Cyrus, ~450 AD), abbreviated biblical forms (Yah — הַלְלוּ יָהּ), theophoric names (Yahu/Yeho — Eliyahu, Yehoshua) and Samaritan oral tradition (Yabe/Yawe). ↩︎