Towards, unto, into and in Theos

As we have mentioned in a previous post the word translated ‘ark’ in, for example, Exodus 25 is not the same as the word translated ‘ark’ in Genesis 6 when applied to the boat which Noah was commanded to build. Thus:

Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shall thou make in the ark, and shall pitch it within and without with pitch. (Genesis 6.14)

The word for ‘ark’ here is tebah (תבה) which is used only of the boat that Noah was directed to build and the basketwork vessel in which Mosheh was placed, as a baby, among the bulrushes at the side of the river. The etymology of the Hebrew is unknown and there appear to be no obviously related words or homographs.

And they shall make an ark of acacia wood: [two] cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof. And thou shall overlay it with pure gold, within and without shall thou overlay it, and shall make upon it a crown of gold round about. (Exodus 25.10,11)

The word for ark here is ‘aron (ארון). With the definite article ha (ה) the word becomes an inversion of the name of the high priest ‘Aharon. This seems to indicate a relationship of juxtaposition much like with the inversions paroketh (vail) and kaporeth. The vail and the kaporeth had a relationship of proximity and the ark and the high priest similarly had a relationship of proximity. In its many occurrences in the Old Testament the word ‘aron (ארון) is used almost always to describe the ark of the covenant. The two other contexts in which it is used is, firstly, in Genesis 50 where it describes the ‘coffin’ that Yoseph was put in after his death in Mitsraym with an undertaking to take his bones up into the land when the children of Yisra’el accomplished their exodus. The second occurrence is related in both 2 kings 12 and 2 chronicles 24 where Yehoyada’ the priest positions a ‘chest’ by the gate of the house of Yahweh to receive the redemption money of the children of Yisra’el so that the house could be repaired.

In the new testament we begin to see why two different hebrew words describing two different things are both ascribed the same English word in translation. This is because they are ascribed the same New Testament Greek word – kibotos (κιβωτος). Thus:

By belief Noe, being warned of Theos of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark unto the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the kosmos, and became heir of the righteousness which is according to belief. (Hebrews 11.7)

and:

And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called holy of holies; Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; And over it the keroubim of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly. (Hebrews 9.3-5)

The ark of the covenant was known as the testimony because it contained the tables of stone, also referred to as the testimony. Furthermore, the tabernacle is also referred to as the tabernacle of testimony. The testimony, the ten commandments, the utterances of Yahweh’s spirit (in ten positive and negative propositions), is the basis for the dwelling of him in man, expressed in the figures of the ark and tabernacle. Furthermore, within it was also kept a pot of the bread from heaven, of which the children of Yisra’el ate daily, and which anticipates the fulfilment of the name of Yahweh in Iesous when he says:

I am the living bread which came down from heaven (Ioh.6.51)

Within the ark was also kept the rod of ‘Aharon which budded. This happened when the children of Yisra’el questioned who should minister before Yahweh and they sought to reject the authority of Mosheh and ‘Aharon. The judgment on the ringleaders (Korah, Dathan and Abyram) and their houses was swift and severe. The follow up to which was that the twelve heads of the tribes were to present rods, and they were to be placed before the testimony where ‘elohym met with Mosheh, with ‘Aharon’s name on the rod for the tribe of Lewy. The outcome was that a seemingly dead piece of wood sprang to life and budded and blossomed, in the place where Yahweh revealed himself to his chosen one. This would appear to be figurative of the death and resurrection of anointed, a life which blossomed from the dead wood of the stake, accomplished in the face of manifestation of the name of the father.

So, as we have seen, the ark was fundamentally a figure of the dwelling of Yahweh in man, particularly in his son, accomplished by his obedience to the words of his covenant resulting in his resurrection. This vessel which spoke of these things was overlaid within and without with gold over the structure of acacia wood. Furthermore, it was covered with the kaporeth, of which we have spoken at length. Of gold it is evident that it is comparable, but inferior, to the words of Yahweh:

Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yes, above fine gold. (Ps.119.127)

and of the response to the word, which is belief:

That the trial of your belief, being much more precious than of gold that perishes, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Iesous anointed (1 Petros 1.7)

Gold, therefore, is figurative for the pure word of Yahweh and the tried belief of those who receive and reciprocate that word. Indeed, the gold that was used to cover the ark was that which the children of Yisra’el had freely given to the work. It is therefore a good example of the pattern of reciprocity in manifestation. Yahweh told them to spoil the Mitsraym for the gold and other precious materials which he would then receive from them as a free will offering in the run up to the construction of the tabernacle.This aionian covering of that reciprocal gold over the temporal substance of wood was performed both within and without. This same language is used to describe the ark of Noah as we have already seen:

Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shall thou make in the ark, and shall pitch it within and without with pitch. (Genesis 6.14)

And Yahweh said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. (Gen.7.1)

We have already seen that the covering with which the ark of Noah was covered is the same word as the atonement, and the kaporeth, that were so ubiquitous on the day of the atonements. This ark was similarly coated within and without. The word within, as we have seen in a previous post, is the word mebayith (מבית) and is from the word for ‘house’. This word is then used in Genesis 7:

So, that which is within the ark is akin to his household. Noah’s household is reconciled to Yahweh through the righteousness of Noah and this is prefigured in the construction of the ark. Similarly, there were those that were accorded the epithet of being of the house of Yisra’el:

What man soever there be of the house of Yisra’el, that kills an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that kills it out of the camp (Leviticus 17.3)

That which is within, therefore, is that which is ‘of the house’. Therefore, that which is ‘of the house’ is reconciled in the ark of Noah and is overlaid (hidden) with gold in the ark of the covenant. Furthermore, that which is within the vail is that which is utterly reconciled with Yahweh in the reconciliatory work of the true high priest when he makes reconciliation for himself and his house, it is intimately bound up with the dwelling of ‘elohym in man.

As an antithesis to the ‘within’ is that which is ‘without’. The word for ‘without’ is mehuts (מחוץ) and comes from the word huts (חוץ). This is translated as outside, abroad and streets. Specifically, in the context of the day of the atonements, it is used to describe that which is outside of the boundaries of the camp of Yisra’el. The remains of the bodies of the animals sacrificed for the reconciliation of the high priest, his house, and the people had to be burnt outside the camp.

All the days wherein the plague shall be in him he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be. (Lev.13.46)

This describes the leper, whose disease is unclean and seems to represent the corruption that is endemic in the flesh. While he has this disease he must remain outside of the household of the people of Yahweh. Once he is cleansed he can return within that house, that is the camp. Of course there are examples where ‘without’ is better because that which is within is altered and has become, spiritually ‘without’ like when Mosheh moves the tabernacle because of the defiled state of the house of Yisra’el:

And Mosheh took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought Yahweh went out unto the tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp. (Exodus 33.7)

Here, the people who wished to seek Yahweh had to go out of that which was of the carnal Yisra’el, who had defiled themselves by worshipping the golden calf, and seek unto him which had become outside the camp. This language is taken further with regard to the offerings of the law, including those offered on yom hakipurym:

Wherefore Iesous also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. (Hebrews 13.12,13)

Iesous’ reconciliatory work was, seemingly, conducted within the house of Israel but was outside of the auspices of the Mosaic ordinances of animal sacrifice and pointed forward to salvation for all those prepared to walk beyond those ordinances whether they be of Israel or the nations.

So, we can see that the covering (hiding) of gold, within and without of the ark of the covenant, and the covering (reconciling) within and without of the ark of Noah are intricately linked. The reconciliatory work, consisting of giving and receiving of the gold of the word and reciprocal belief, of Iesous (followed by his disciples) is the salvation of the house (within) and that which is without. It can be protection from that which is within and without, the flesh, and also salvation to those of that flesh that turn to and seek Yahweh.

Finally, we should consider the role of death in both arks. In the ark of Noah that which was without died. That which was within was saved and began a new creation upon the earth. Sadly that which was within was immediately corrupted. In the ark we see the coffin of Yoseph in Genesis 50, speaking of the hope of the exodus. Similarly, in the ark of the covenant we see the death of the covenant maker:

For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives. (Hebrews 9.16,17)

Testament here is covenant. So the promise, the agreement, symbolised in the ark and kaporeth between a living ‘el and his people who obey must be effected by the death of the one who embodies, manifests, ‘el. Through the resurrection, following his death, can this agreement be fulfilled. The flesh must be slain in those who seek Yahweh, for his life to live in them. Iesous was the forerunner for this process.

Furthermore, in the ark, we see the chest which was placed by the gate of the temple to hold the redemption or ransom money which was required to repair the temple.

And at the king’s commandment they made a chest (ark), and set it without at the gate of the house of Yahweh. (2 Chronicles 24.8)

In the next post we will consider the meaning of this money which Mosheh ordained should be levied at the hands of the children of Yisra’el in the wilderness.