Towards, unto, into and in Theos

And over it the keroubim of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly. (Hebrews 9.5)

We have already seen that this is the only place in the New Testament where a word is used to describe the kaporeth of, for example, Exodus 25. The New Testament Greek word used here is ilasterion (ιλαστηριον) and is only used in one other place:

Whom Theos has set forth to be a propitiation through belief in his blood, to (εις) declare his righteousness through the remission of sins that are past, in the forbearance of Theos (Romans 3.25)

The link with the kaporeth is clear in Romans 3 as it is talking about belief in his blood which we can see in the blood of the animals shed and then sprinkled upon the kaporeth. While at the same time we see here the declaration of righteousness which has caused the remission of past sins. The declaration of righteousness is the mediation of one kerub to the other and, as we have seen and will see, is part of the journey of the kaporeth. This is a journey which will lead to the final destination of the utter removal of sins from man.

As we saw in the previous blog the word ilasterion (ιλαστηριον) is related to another word which is also translated ‘propitiation’ ilasmos (ιλασμος):

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 concerning our sins: and not concerning ours only, but also concerning the whole kosmos. (1 Ioh.2.1,2)

and:

He that loves not knows not Theos; for Theos is love. In this was manifested the love of Theos toward us, because that Theos sent his only begotten Son into the kosmos, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved Theos, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation concerning our sins. Beloved, if Theos so loved us, we ought also to love one another. (1 Ioh.4.8-11)

We saw, in the previous blog post, that being a propitiation is closely linked with being a comforter in the first passage. This is highly relevant as the ‘other’ comforter that was to be sent in Iesous’ name to the disciples, that is the holy spirit, was being sent to reveal truth to them, as Iesous had previously done. He had declared the righteousness of Theos, having become righteous himself. This is then linked to the issues concerning, or surrounding, our sins. That is, the need for the declaration of Theos’ righteousness in him that leads to the removal of sins in himself and in others by their also taking up the stake and following him. So, the coming together of propitiation/mercyseat and comforter goes straight to the heart of the kaporeth. That is, the sprinkling of the sacrificial blood in the place where the faces of the kerubym were toward one another.

Related to this second word translated ‘propitiation’ is the Greek word ilaskomai (ιλασκομαι) which occurs twice in the New Testament. Thus:

And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, Theos be merciful to me a sinner. (Loukas 18.13)

and:

Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to Theos (προς  τον θεον), to (εις) make reconciliation for the sins of the people. (Heb.2.17)

We noted that in the beginning of Iohannes 1 it also uses the terminology προς τον θεον to describe the reciprocal kerubic relationship between Theos and the word. The merciful and faithful high priest, Iesous (but seen figuratively in the work of ‘Aharon), is indistinguishable in his work from the kaporeth. His reciprocal relationship with Theos is the precursor to his kerubic relationship with the believers that instructs them and causes them to know, and to distance themselves from, their disobedience to the heavenly precepts. The publican in the parable is the one who, seeking to become a receiver rather than a giver, accepts that this humility is the route to reconciliation with Theos. The Pharisaios, contariwise, is intent on telling Theos about his own goodness. He has become the mediating kerub when he should, in all humility, be the one willing to receive before reciprocating.

These words for reconciliation and propitiation appear to be related to the New Testament Greek word ileos (ιλεως) which occurs in two passages and, possibly gives us the reason why the term kaporeth is translated ‘mercy seat’.

For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. (Hebrews 8.12)

Interestingly, the form ‘I will be’ (esomai εσομαι) that precedes the word ‘merciful’, which we are looking at, is the New Testament equivalent to the Hebrew ‘ehyeh (אהיה) which we saw used in Exodus 3 in the phrasing ‘I will be with thee’ and ‘I will be who I will be’ which are used for the basis of the covenantal name of Yahweh, and are set at the beginning of that first return journey into and out of Mitsraym which led the people to the foot of the mount from whence they received the covenant, embodied in the tables of testimony and the ark of the covenant with the kaporeth on top of it. Indeed, this same Greek word (esomai εσομαι) is used earlier in Hebrews 8 which, like the verse above is being quoted from Yeremyahu 31:

Behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Yisra’el, and with the house of Yehudah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Mitsraym; which my covenant they broke, although I was an husband unto them, says Yahweh: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Yisra’el; After those days, says Yahweh, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be to them for ‘elohym, and they shall be to me for a people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, says Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Yer.31.31-34)

Yahweh made an agreement with the children of Yisra’el in the wilderness which was embodied in the ark and its contents and by the kaporeth which sat on top of it and by the tabernacle in which it dwelt. They failed to keep that agreement and therefore their sin remained, their disobedience was evident. They failed to uphold the promise that is enshrined in his covenantal name. However, there is put in place a new covenant, a new agreement, which is embodied in the dwelling place of Theos in his son and the reconciling work which he undertook, firstly for himself and then for his house. This reconciliatory work, prefigured by the kaporeth, causes reconciliation with those who keep covenant with him, those who are obedient to the covenant and the meaning of it enshrined in the name of the son. These same believers, that true assembly of anointed, his bride, are the mechanism by which the new covenant is offered to, and accepted by, his natural people of Israel, who he first made covenant with. The mechanism by which this reconciliation is being offered is, of course, that which is seen in the kaporeth: mediation and reciprocation or giving and receiving.

The second occurrence of the Greek word ileos (ιλεως) is translated somewhat differently from ‘merciful’

From that time forth began Iesous to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Ierousalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Petros took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Petros, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou are an offence unto me: for thou savour not the things that be of Theos, but those that be of men. (Math.16.21-3)

This passage is very much an antagonistic kaporeth relationship. Iesous, the mediating kerub is giving understanding and the disciples should be in a position of receiving and reciprocating. Instead Petros is in a ‘not’ position, he is in opposition to Iesous’ true speech and, as such, must be rebuked with the appellation ‘satan’, an adversary to Iesous and therefore the will of Theos. The word translating ileos (ιλεως) here, which Petros uses, is translated as ‘be it far’. In what way can we see ‘be it far’ as being representative of ideas of reconciliation, to which family of words this word belongs? The answer, of course, is that reconciliation of people into a position of unity requires the removal of that which separates them. That is, the removal of antagonism or opposition, and particularly the ideas and propositions that cause it, must be accomplished in order that reconciliation may occur. Therefore, by instruction, opposing ideas can be removed, that is sin can be removed by teaching. Transgression can be removed far away, like the scapegoat and the remnants of the sacrifices were removed far from the camp. By removal of these faults far away reconciliation can occur. Thus:

Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there remember that thy brother has anything against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. (Math.5.23-24)

Reconciliation requires the removal of that which lies between the two brothers. In the kaporeth the one kerub gives to the brother that which is required to remove the other’s alienation from the first so that they may become one. Regrettably, Petros had it the wrong way round. He was attempting to remove from Iesous the true path that lay ahead of him. He was attempting to subvert the way of taking up the stake with the broad way that, based upon the easy path of the flesh, leads to destruction. Thankfully, Iesous was the ‘not/not’ standing in the way of Petros’ ‘not’ and so established the yea and the amen.