Herb Montgomery, Malkav reborn

As my variegated existence has unfolded here, for more than half a century, I have on occasions sampled some of the cultural offerings available to me as a dividend of my American citizenship.  Many of these Hors de ouvre have been the plethora of films that have been proffered generously by Tinseltown and others; a good deal of apertifs have come from the music industry. The dish that provided some of my most intense pleasures, however, was the RPG, or Role Playing Game, the grand-daddy of which was D&D. A good amount of my creative energy went into the boundless adventures it provided, which were limited only by the mind.

The success of Dungeons and Dragons opened a plethora  of avenues for new formats to emerge, ranging from space, old west, and superhero games.  All of them had a common characteristic: you would generate a character using the rules, and enter him into the imaginary world created by the Referee, who acted as the arbiter of decisions in the game.  Along with these games, I brushed up against a rather unique experiment: Vampire the Masquerade.  In this genre, you made an actual Vampire to play, complete with powers to use, and disadvantages to overcome.


This introduction, while arcane, is necessary to explain our good Mr Montgomery, for he strikes me as one of the main orders, or bloodlines, of Vampires, the Malkavians, who bear the name of their sire, Malkav.  This breed has a power available only to them: dementation.  This investment allows them to use madness itself, to see what no one else can.  And that is what I experience frequently when listening to Herb.

I am sure he means no harm; he seems like a good soul.  But his theories possess a quality of frenetic circumambulation that I have only seen Peter Parker perform while exerting his famed acrobatics.  Herb pulls verse after verse from the Scriptures, darting like a mamba from point to point, charged with obsessive dynamics that were once labeled ‘religious ecstasy’.  All the while, he is drawing you in, mesmerized by the sheer magnitude both of his passion, and his detachment from reality.

At times, he goes into raw madness, uttering the patently absurd, that cannot survive a cursory examination of the whole Bible.  Many are the times I have been struck by the Dementation of Malkav, unable to comprehend how he could transcend mere factuality with so little effort.  Then, just as I am scoffing (scoff, I tell you! harumph!), he detonates in a quasar of sheer brilliance, effulgent in its’ superlativity to mere intellect.  Bathed in the scintillation of the infant star, I stand diffused from comprehension, as I rasp from my throat “Hey-that was actually right”.

This does not occur on regular points: it emerges on complex, machinated hypotheses and theories, that require massive cogitation to master.  Ideas born of years of study, deliberation, and scrutiny by the Scientific and Socratic methods suddenly strike forth, from a mouth that had only a moment before committed sophomoric inaccuracy.  Thus, my quandary: how can this be?  How can they proceed from the same mind?  The answer, I have concluded, lies with Malkav.

Herb has reached genius conclusions at times: he is absolutely correct in decrying empire, in the age of Constantine dooming the Church, and in the rotten behavior of the Church making the Gospel anathema to mankind.  In fact, it is right to say that anyone touched by John Calvin actually helped Satan destroy the world.  His observations on the dark side of the American super system, based on the Swift system domination of Earth, are quite accurate.  His compulsion to follow Jesus, even against cultural norms, is Biblically accurate.  These are not trivial achievements: these conclusions are the product of massive sums of data being studied intently over long periods of time.

So, when he utters the incongruities so prevalent in his theory-such as Yahweh not being violent-I cannot explain the disparity in modality, except as a side effect of his  Malkavian dementation, which is both a power and a curse to his line.  In some cases, like this one, Herb is utterly wrong in reality, but his theory absolutely correct.  El would never be violent, in a world where humans never fell.  It is El’s desire to withhold judgment and destruction.  But humans have a nasty streak that, on occasions, require Yeshua to get ugly with them.  I am using the divine terms interchangeably, since we know Yahweh is One.

Mr Montgomery’s primary notion-that the Book of Revelation is a missive designed to convince Christians not to long for Nero, or the resurrection of his Rome, is just to baffling to contemplate.  Further, he suggests that many of the phrases refer to events already gone by.  This simply cannot make sense.  For Herb’s theory to be correct, the following must be so.

One, Jesus called John to write down a history lesson.  This is ruinous to consider.  Why would the Messiah appear, in glory, to tell John to write and exhaustive drama, when it would been simpler to reiterate the actual of recent history? Half the book disappears if John writes ‘Nero was a bad guy, but he’s gone.  Since we know the history of Rome, we know what happened.” Okay, but Herb says that the legend of Nero might be frightening people.  That might, actually, have been true.

Even so, John could excise the other half of the book by saying “If Nero returns, follow the Lamb. Nero is a man, so he cannot return from the dead.  So stay steadfast in what you have been taught.  The Kingdom of the Lamb will prevail.”  Other than the letters to the churches, his entire ‘revelation’ can be summed in a paragraph or two.  Also, no one in the upper class was impressed by Nero.  He was a drooling imbecile, noted for his corruption, ineptitude, and lack of redeeming character.  He might have impressed the plebians, but the power set regarded him as an embarrassment to Rome and Romanism alike.

Herb says that the ‘revelation’ is a passion play for the Christians, using the Scriptures to create a high drama of sorts.  That condemns Christianity to oblivion.  If the Revelation is not, if it is bunk, a sham, a conceit, then the men of Nicaea made an erroneous testament.  They warped the Word of God, and threw mankind into darkness.  Without an accurate product emerging from the councils, over seven decades of study and review yielded a lie.  We simply, at this point, cannot know God, if His Word is corrupt.

My heart goes out to Herb.  He is passionate, driven, obsessed with an ideal, and these help him to spin wildly through the Scriptures to create his grand illusion.  What he teaches people is ethical and upright, without regard to his accuracy or sanity.  Therefore, I am content to let great Malkav peer into the darkness, and in his madness, forge genius.  His labyrinthine convocations are as vivid as what he claims John’s ‘revelation’ was; they have dizzied and subjected to vertigo my mere Greek reasoning, many, many times.  But I have also learned much in his presentations, and therefore do not hold them valueless.  So, as Malkav peers into the beyond, I will listen still, for that moment of apotheosis that makes the madness worth enduring.

The Tall Man Cometh: The Phantasm of Herb Montgomery

During the last convocation, when we listened to Herb’s latest exposition, a lively round of discussions broke out on Revelation, which led to me employing my time honored idiom of making movie references to explain my points. In fact, one of the brethren remarked, jovially, “to understand Dave, you have to have seen every movie ever made”.  While technically untrue, since I would never willingly see a rom-com without sexual enticement, it is symbolic of my totem and tribe.  I do frequently use film to express a deeper, metaphorical idea, as I am about to now.  In this post, I will referencing a movie long buried in past, whose villain, The Tall Man, must arise from his slumber and serve as a simulacrum for our good Mr Montgomery.  The movie in question is Phantasm.

The eponymous character was not a person, in the traditional sense.  Rather, it was flying weapon, whose role, like Nemesis of old, was to hunt down and punish the wicked-or the teenaged.  Phantasm was semi-sentient, able to, upon being sent my the Tall Man, seek out a victim-and, upon finding one, exude a sharp metal blade from its’ frame.  The silvery sphere would then fly straightway into the victim’s forehead, causing the death of the mark.  What fortune, to be felled so quickly.

I, on the other hand, was pursued by far more agonizing a hunter than this. My Tall Man, Mr Montgomery, unleashed an argentine assassin all his own, a Phantasm to run me down without mercy.  It came when he tried to explain that El was not violent, but was only violent when humans made Him be.  Just like the film, I could not escape: the dreaded harbinger hunted me down, and slammed its’ wicked blade in my skull.

Or, at least, it felt that way.  I have no better way of describing my dumb-founded shock at hearing the lecturer say something so utterly ludicrous that I was stunned that no one called him on it.  Perhaps they, too, had a Phantasm all their own, burrowing vigorously into their now-disjointed mind.  Whatever the case, I was utterly unable to believe that he really meant it.  But the presenter of the material confirmed that this was a position that Montgomery held not only consistently, but with fervor. El was really a Lamb; only man made Him get destructive.

The Bible is a rampage of violence, some of which is very definitely sponsored by El.  6 chapters into the book, Yahweh drowns a planet.  The whole planet.  Wherever Noah was from, that world’s entire bio-matrix was abluted in sum toto.  Later, He would obliterate the 5 cities of the plains, including the headliners, Sodom and Gamorrah.  Then, when Israel is called into the desert, they make an idol, which gets 3000 of them killed by the sword.

Shortly, the ground opened up and swallowed 3000 more. 14000 are killed in a plague from Yah.  Finally, they are showed the Promised Land-which must be purified by genocide.  Now, people will respond ‘see, He was just passing right judgment’. Ok, but the animals of Noah’s world were judged for the sins of man.  The chabbabs, or bosom-nursers, of Amalek were ordered slain. When Sennacherib threatened Judah, his army was destroyed. not him. By the blast of the trumpet, 185,000 men died on the spot.

Which leads then to the howler of the night: Jesus didn’t actually threaten anyone in the Temple.  Rather, He chased the animals out, in a display of non-violent resistance (Herb’s penchant for revisionism is flush and vivid indeed).  Here, the lightning orb slams full into my skull, and from it shall not depart.  I have been Phantasmed, with no escape possible.  His attempts to turn an I shudder absolute monarch into a hippie revolutionary are febrile, but useless. Equally so is this Ghandi Jesus.

I have to have some pity for the Tall Man, even though his assertions lodge metal fury into my brain-for he, too, is a victim.  He was Phantasmed, the same as I: only in his case, the object smacking him in the cranium was reality.  Living in absolute denial of the collision between his assertions and the Bible, he refuses to give up.  I guess I have to respect that.  But Herb;s talents are being wasted in this enterprise.  His creative genius would be well-rewarded in Hollywood, where they are down to making movies about board games.

I certainly don’t want to hurt Mr Montgomery as a person.  But I also don’t want to have to run screaming down the hall, when I hear the signature whine of the Phantasm.  I shudder to think of what might lie ahead: for in the sequel, the Tall  Man captures the teen heroes, even when they thought it was all over. It remains to be see if he will part the curtain, at the end, and declare “No: it’s not!”


On Rev 13: Authority and Endurance


In reviewing Mr Montgomery’s exposition on Revelation–which reminds me, in an Impressionistic way, of the mad Dervishs of the sands, or Olympic gymnasts–I must oppose his rendition of these events with a patently perpendicular perspective.  I hold that the majority of the events described are future tense,  and, more significantly, less optimistic for humanity at large.  Much of my purview centers on the 13th chapter of the work.

The 13th chapter tells us of the rise of the Beast, which is certainly a spiritual creature.  This will not appear in our world as it is described; I will address this in another post, but for now, I must assert that the Antichrist must appear human, and ask that it be accepted as a given for this article.  Daniel makes use of such imagery when alluding to political engines; this Beast should be seen in the same vein.  What is important here are two words: exousia, and huponome.

Exousia, in Strongs (1849), is offered as ‘the liberty to do as one pleases’. Also, it conveys might, right, and state power.  We might refocus these delineations as ‘disposition’ to act. This word implies something else; formality of power, not just raw power (except in case 2: 1, 3, and 4 are linked to formal power).  This demands another attribute emerge, one which only modern men have evaluated, and that is legitimacy of power.  Legitimacy is the right of power to use Exousia. Paul speaks of this concept in Romans 13, that El authorized the governments.  Paul has a very narrow grasp of the idea, so I find it necessary to borrow from a modern source, President William Henry Harrison.

President Harrison, in his inaugural address, made this statement:

“The only legitimate government derives from a mandate by the governed.”

This, of course, is a democratic point of view. Jesus is a monarch, which renders the plebiscite quite invalid.  However, while Yeshua is not bound to a contract as existed for Mr Harrison, He does recognize the central thematic idea of his speech as correct.  To wield might, you must have right.  Abram asks Yeshua ‘Shall not the judge of all the Earth do rightly (strongs 4941, mishpat). In other words, while Jehovah can do what He pleases–exousia–He holds fast to legitimate use of that power. Mishpat means to judge a case or litigation, with justice.  This will come back to haunt us later.

The Beast of Rev 13 is given exousia many times; 4, in fact.  He is given authority over all the world, all tribes and tongues, and, lastly, over the Saints themselves.  Here, in verse 7, begins the war against the Saints, and the Beast is given authority over them, to kill them.  This word, given, is used in all the cases in this chapter.  This exousia was not purloined, or taken by force: it was bestowed.  And there was only one agency that could bestow it. Satan had acquired the authority of the Ten Kings–they swore allegiance to Lucifer for power.  That would give Satan the world; but for power over the Saints, it could only come from the Saints themselves.

Consider the dire warning of the end of the chapter: (as per Biblehub’s greek interlinear) “if anyone {is to go} into captivity, into captivity he must go: if anyone with [the] sword is to be killed,  it is necessary by [the] sword for him to be killed.”  Notice, there is no ‘karmic’ link here in the immediate.  Rather, the Saints are required to have patient endurance–huponome (strong 5281), or, as it is sometimes rendered, perseverance.  This means to endure what is not right, or to persist through what must be.

Now, if Satan was given authority over the Saints, which he loaned out to the Beast, what is the source of that acquisition?  All authority was given to Christ (Matt 28), who gave it to the Church (Matt 16).  Christ gave the Church the authority to bind in Heaven as on Earth–and said the Gates of Hell would not prevail against it.  Yet, here in the Revelation, that is happening.  How, then can this be?

Let’s look at Mr Montgomery’s take on the verse, of swords and captivity.  He has a good deal of support from translations that make it direct, Newtonian causality.  If you x,  then x happens to you.  This does not fit the connotative direction of the statement. If this is cause and effect, only people who have killed would be killed.  Only those who capture would be captured.  But that is not what is occurring.  This is a war against all the Saints, some of whom would surely not be individually involved in either of these.

Rather, this is a corporate action.  The whole Body of Christ–the Church, the Ecclesia–is being attacked.  This is not suffering as with an affliction.  Peter uses pascho (strong 3958) to warn against suffering ‘as a murderer’, and pathema (3804) for innocent suffering in 1 Peter 4.  But in Rev 13, the Church is told to hupomone, to endure.  Jesus uses this word in Luke 21, about the end times: He says: “By your endurance you will gain your lives.”  Again, in Matt 24, “He who endures to end will be saved.”

So, what is happening to the Church, that they must endure, with patience? It is not innocent suffering, nor guilty suffering.  Rather, it must be. It must be endured.  This act reverses what Yeshua said about the authority of the Church, and the subjectivity of the Kingdom of Hell.  This could only happen if the latter usurped the former.  What is happening to the Church had to be a right judgement against her, in a writ secured by the Prosecutor of the Brethren, which is, Satan.

The Church had to have committed an offense too egregious, that Yahweh had to allow His Church to be scourged.  They had to have used their authority to bind on Earth what was so depraved, that Satan was able to argue before El that they had forfeited their authority to him–and Jehovah had to agree.  He had to, as a right judgment, declare the case against the Church was valid, and surrender their authority to Satan.  What this was–or, will be–I will argue another time.

The mechanics are valid, even if the Alpha Event is nebulous.  Look at the verbiage.  The whole church is being afflicted, not just some transgressors.  If the warnings are just a system of karma, then they are meaningless to those who did not transgress.  Also, it would not be hupomone to suffer what you should for doing evil.  If you are being killed by the sword for using the sword, that is justice.  Satan is clearly not doing justice in Rev 13.  You would not need perseverance to endure what is lawful as a punishment.

You need endurance to go through what was not your crime as a person, but was a crime of your species.  If you were innocent a s a person, but belonged to a group that was judged, you would need to persevere.  Consider the Tanakh; how many tocsins did Yahweh levy against all of Israel, when but one or few sinned?  Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?  He has proscribed the whole before, when the sins of Israel needed to be scourged from them.  This is simply the final application of that justice.

So, what Satan is doing in Rev 13 is a function of a justice corrupted by human hands.  The Church did something that caused her to lose her authority, and surrender it to Lucifer–and Jehovah had to agree that bringing them under the scourge was right, as a punishment for what they did.  So, in a sense, it is justice: but, Satan wars against the entire Church, in which are numbered the personally blameless, which El said He would not do, even against Sodom.  Therefore, it is not just.  Since this was bound in Heaven by the Church, it must be a dark mirror of what they did to be scourged–a group punishment against a few sinners, in which the innocent were abluted.

It would require much more space to address the imaginative speculations of Mr Montgomery’s theory.  He is to be credited for his wizardly command of arcane and diverse material; such conjurings are the work of the brilliant and artistic.  This is but one critique of his theory; if space and time permits, perhaps more can be deconstructed.  It would be an undertaking worth pursuing to unravel his elaborate musings, as it pays the dividend of watching the creative, dervish muse ply his craft.