Towards, unto, into and in Theos

For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to Theos by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in Theos through our Lord Iesous Anointed, by whom we have now received the atonement. (Romans 5.10,11)

The above passage is the only occurrence of the English word ‘atonement’ in the New Testament. The Greek noun used here is katallage (καταλλαγη) and is used on 3 other occasions in the New Testament and is translated reconciliation or reconciling. The related verb katallasso (καταλλασσω) occurs twice in the above passage and 4 further times, translated ‘reconciling’ or ‘reconciled’. We have already seen one of those occurrences in the previous blog post while discussing the difference between reconciliation and loosening and describes reconciliation of a man and his wife after being separated.

We can see, therefore, that this word is relatively rare. The other occurrence of the noun and verb coming together is in 2 Corinthians:

Therefore if any man be in anointed, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of Theos, who has reconciled us to himself by Iesous anointed, and has given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that Theos was in anointed, reconciling the kosmos unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and has committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for anointed, as though Theos did beseech you by us: we pray you in anointed’s stead, be you reconciled to Theos. (2 Corinthians 5.17-20)

So, reconciliation between Theos and man is an outcome of Theos being in Anointed. As we have seen by looking at the ark and kaporeth and the day of the atonements the mechanism by which Theos is in Anointed is by the word and it being made flesh in Anointed, because Theos is the word. Theos gave that word to Anointed so that he was in Anointed. Anointed ministered that word to the apostles who then turned and mediated the same to the believers.

The etymology of the word katallasso (καταλλασσω) is that it derives from the word allasso (αλλασσω) which is translated as ‘change’. Thus:

Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (1 Corinthians 15.51,52)

Change here is a change of substance, a change into something other than that which was before. A believer after the resurrection is changed, as a result of the moral change which they underwent in their lives prior to resurrection. This change is a profound alteration of their pre-resurrectional state, in mind and body. Change occurs in other contexts. Paulos wishes to change his voice toward the Galatians because they have been manipulated into believing in the necessity of observing the traditions of the law for the nations, even after the resurrection of Iesous. Stephanas is alleged to have said, by his accusers who then murdered him, that Iesous wished to change the Mosaic customs that they had received in respect of the worship at the temple. The children of Israel in the wilderness had changed the glory of the incorruptible Theos into the image of corruptible man. Finally the writer to the Hebrews, quoting Psalm 102 says of the old heavens and earth (figuratively the elements and embodiments of the first, or old, covenant):

And as a vesture shall thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou are the same, and thy years shall not fail. (Hebrews 1.12)

So, change is an outcome of transformation from one state to another. This is the basis of reconciliation and chimes very much with the idea of the day of the atonements. That is, that man, embodied by, firstly, ‘Aharon (and his house) and latterly Yisra’el are reconciled, joined into one, by the manifestation of ‘elohym in the faces of the kerubym. The movement of words from one to the other transforms the other into the one who first mediated the word. Reconciliation, at its heart therefore, embodies the idea of transformation into the other. Of course, we have also seen how that being face to face can also be an antithetical relationship, a relationship of fundamental disagreement and of confrontation, even conflict. In this case, the other always remains the other. The power of the kaporeth is accessed by the willing and obedient receiver and reciprocator who is willing to transform into the other, that is into Yahweh.

It is hardly surprising then that this verb ‘to change’ seems to come from a fairly common word allos (αλλος) which is usually translated ‘other’ or ‘another’. The occurrences of allos (αλλος) in the New Testament are varied. We can see it in contexts of conflicting, antithetical views and speech:

And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, No; but he deceives the people…Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the Anointed. But others said, Shall Anointed come out of Galilaias? (Ioh.7.12,40,41)

We can see in both sections of this passage that there is a conflict in opinion between at least two sections of the crowd as to who exactly Iesous is. Is he good or a deceiver? Is he Anointed, the prophet or not? Here the use of ‘others’ is depicting a face to face relationship of contrast and conflict, not of reconciliation. However, Iesous also shows us the mechanism by which he, first, and then another will manifest Theos unto the disciples that will lead to their drawing near to the Father:

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may abide with you unto the age; Even the spirit of truth; whom the kosmos cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwells with you, and shall be in you. (Ioh.14.16,17)

The comforter is another because it is both another in that it is face to face with the receiving kerub but also it is another comforter because Iesous himself was a comforter:

My little children, these things write I unto you, that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have a comforter with the Father, Iesous anointed the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the whole kosmos. (1 Ioh.2.1,2)

So Iesous is that comforter that brings understanding to the children of Theos and allows them to be reconciled to him. The word ‘propitiation’ (ilasmos ιλασμος) is related to the word translated ‘mercyseat’ (ilasterion ιλαστηριον) in Hebrews 9.5 but is also translated ‘propitiation’ in Romans 3.25 and is related to a verb that is translated ‘be merciful’ and ‘make reconciliation for’. Here again we see a pattern of the kaporeth. The place where reconciliation is made by the face to face interaction of ‘elohym and man and its relation to the forgiveness of sins accomplished in Iesous. We will look at this theme again in the next blog post.

So there is ‘another’ comforter who is sent in Iesous’ name. There has been one kerubic relationship from Theos to Iesous, now there is another relationship from Iesous to the disciples via the holy spirit. The receiving kerub has become the mediating one and he has done it in another.

For if he that comes preaches another Iesous, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another euangelion, which you have not accepted, you might well bear with him. (2 Corinthians 11.4)

Here, another Iesous is not the same as another comforter. This other Iesous is one that is not Iesous, just as this other euangelion or other spirit are, in fact, not the spirit and not the euangelion, they are interlopers. So, ‘another’ here is a negation of the true. Only the first occurrence of ‘another’ is allos (αλλος), the two further occurrences of ‘another’ are the Greek word heteros (ετερος). This word follows a similar trajectory to allos (αλλος), stressing on that which replaces the first and, most importantly, that which is opposed to the first. Thus:

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve Theos and mammon. (Math.6.24)

and:

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4.12)

In the second passage the two words for ‘other’ (allos and heteros) come together to show that there is only one name, that of the father in the son, whereby salvation is possible. Furthermore, it is only possible to serve the one master. Therefore we can see that there is the one message, the one spirit, the one name and the one Lord and then there is that which is other than these. There is a straightforward choice between two. If we choose to conform to the one we will reject the other. An obedience to the one Lord will inevitably lead to entering into, and receiving the fruits of the obedience of, the covenants of promise.

One further interesting use of the word ‘another’, here as allos (αλλος), we see in the use of the word as an indication of a journey:

And being warned of Theos in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way. (Math.2.12)

The magoi, after visiting the baby Iesous, were instructed not to return via Herod to their own country but to choose ‘another’ route, that is one which was different to (not the same as) their route unto him. The theme of a journey is evident here as is the direction and destination and the return being something other than the outward journey.

Journeying is always present when considering Iesous’ ministry and in Maththaios 4 we see him having gone into the desert, following his baptism by Iohannes, to be tempted by the diabolos. Following on from this he goes to Galilaias. He leaves his hometown of Nazareth and comes to Kapharnaoum where, by the sea side, he meets Simon Petros and Andreas, who are brothers, and commands them to follow him, which commandment they duly obey.

And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, Iakobos the son of Zebedaios, and Iohannes his brother, in a ship with Zebedaios their father, mending their nets; and he called them. (Math.4.21)

These two sets of brothers are not in conflict with either each other or Iesous. There is one and then there is another, they are supplemental to the first. We have a journey here whose staging posts, as it were, are people. Iesous passes by, on his journeying and comes to one set of brothers, he continues his journey and passes by another set of brothers, collecting them as he goes. In the figure of journeying, which is fundamental to the theme of this blog, the journey is punctuated by stops along the way. Each stop must be achieved before progression to the next before realising the final destination. Here Iesous is on a journey collecting his twelve disciples. These disciples will be the mechanism for his imparting of the euangelion to the believers, especially after the resurrection.

So, otherness is that which is antithetical to Theos and to his plan of salvation. Therefore it is imperative for us to change into that which is other than where we came from and is toward Theos. Otherness is also the transition of the role of kerubym as one changes from receiver to giver. Otherness is also supplemental and is relevant in the progression of the journey towards Theos.