The Mirror of Language: From Hamas to Samah

Why ancient words reveal the hidden truth about Middle East conflict—and the disturbing eschatological agenda that keeps peace perpetually out of reach

Photo by Timon Studler on Unsplash

Language has always been humanity’s most profound teacher, hiding truths in plain sight through the very structure of words themselves. Today, I want to explore a linguistic revelation that cuts to the heart of one of our world’s most intractable conflicts—and perhaps offers a path toward understanding that transcends the endless cycle of retribution we’ve trapped ourselves within.

But first, let me pose a disturbing question that will frame everything that follows: What if the current escalation of violence in the Middle East isn’t a failure of diplomacy, but its intended outcome? What if some actors actually want to provoke hatred and isolation because it serves a larger eschatological agenda—one that requires conflict to trigger prophetic fulfillment rather than seeking genuine peace?

This isn’t conspiracy theory; it’s documented theology. And it explains why conventional peace efforts keep failing against what appears to be an almost deliberate cultivation of international antagonism.

The Etymological Mirror

Consider this remarkable linguistic phenomenon: the word Hamas (حماس) in Arabic carries the meaning of “zeal,” “fervor,” or “enthusiasm”—a passionate intensity that can drive great achievements or terrible destruction. Yet when we examine the same root in Hebrew, hamas (חמס) means “violence,” “wrongdoing,” or “injustice.”

The etymology runs deeper still. The Hebrew hamas derives from a root meaning “to treat violently” or “to wrong,” appearing throughout ancient texts as a warning against the corruption that violence brings to both perpetrator and victim. In Arabic, the same phonetic pattern took a different evolutionary path, coming to represent the very passion and zeal that can fuel both creation and destruction.

But here’s where language becomes prophecy: reverse those letters, and you discover Samah (سماح)—an Arabic word meaning “forgiveness,” “generosity,” “tolerance,” and “permission.” Where Hamas represents the fire of zealous action, Samah embodies the grace of merciful restraint. One word burns; the other soothes. One demands; the other gives freely.

This isn’t mere coincidence. It’s a linguistic mirror that reflects a profound spiritual truth about the nature of conflict and its resolution.

The Ancient Warning

The Bible, in its unflinching examination of human nature, warned us about this very dynamic millennia ago:

“The earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with hamas (violence).” – Genesis 6:11

What followed this observation wasn’t victory or peace, but devastation—a flood that swept away civilization itself. The text serves as an eternal reminder that violence, no matter how justified it may seem, ultimately corrupts everything it touches. The Hebrew word hamas in this passage isn’t describing random brutality, but systemic violence—the kind that becomes so normalized, so institutionalized, that it fills the very earth itself.

The Illusion of Victory

Which brings us to the contemporary Middle East, where recent events have been hailed by some as decisive victories. Israel’s military campaigns have indeed demonstrated tactical superiority, technological advancement, and strategic coordination. The destruction of infrastructure, the elimination of leadership, the disruption of organizational networks—all measured by conventional metrics—these appear to be clear wins.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth that etymology teaches us: when victory is achieved through hamas (violence), it plants the seeds of future hamas (violence). Each “successful” military operation creates new grievances, new orphans, new memories of injustice that will ferment into future conflicts. The illusion lies in believing that superior firepower can solve what is fundamentally a spiritual and human problem.

But to understand why this cycle continues despite its obvious futility, we must examine a darker possibility that most analysts won’t discuss: the documented theological frameworks that actually require conflict for prophetic fulfillment..