Minor detours VIII – return to prerequisites? – What is between?

And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the kaporeth, from between the two kerubym which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Yisra’el. (Exodus 25.22)

There are here two axes of separation in the midst of which is the meeting and communing of ‘elohym with the man Mosheh. The first is ‘from above’ the kaporeth, that is above or upon the covering of the ark and beneath the overshadowing wings. The second is ‘from between’ the two kerubym, that is in the space that is between one kerub and the other. In the midst of these two separate orientations (top and bottom, side to side) is where, and how, the glory of ‘elohym is. The vertical axis depicts an order of top to bottom, or head to foot, while the horizontal axis depicts a face to face or ‘man unto his brother/neighbour’ relationship. Both imply directional speech and potential reciprocation while one, the vertical, stresses on superiority of the upper over the covering, while the horizontal stresses on the face to face aspect of speech leading to reciprocity and a mirror image of the first kerub created in the second.

The Hebrew for ‘between’ is bayin (בין). It denotes division and separation and is homographic for a word most commonly translated ‘understanding’. These seem to derive from the ‘build’ family of words which also includes the word for ‘son’ as well as the associated words ‘house’ and ‘daughter’, denoting the building of a familial structure. The first occurrence of bayin (בין) is in Genesis:

And ‘elohym saw the light, that it was good: and ‘elohym divided between the light and between the darkness. (Genesis 1.4)

This pattern of separation continues in the division of waters above and below the expanse (verses 6 and 7) and the division of light and dark by virtue of the lights in the heavens (verses 14 and 18). These separations, set in the context of the ‘very good’ state of the creation (before corruption set in), are indicative of ‘elohym exhibiting the positive and negative qualities at the heart of the meaning of אל (the not and the not/not). However, the separation and division that emerges in the next occurrence of bayin (בין) is indicative of a separation of ‘elohym from man rather than the use of contrast to illuminate meaning:

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and between her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his heel. (Genesis 3.15)

In the aftermath of the sin of the woman and the man and the provocation of the serpent, Yahweh indicates the fight that will occur between the woman’s offspring and that of the serpent. Hinting at the struggle of the flesh and the spirit which is an outcome of the separation of ‘elohym from man which has occurred because of the sin of the inhabitants of ‘Eden. The separation is an active phenomenon from both parties, that is to say that the separation (the ‘between’) is from the seed of the woman toward the serpent seed and from the serpent seed toward the woman’s seed, it is not an abstract gap but a gap because of the persistent and continued mind that is inherent in the struggle between spirit and flesh. Of course, within this delineation of that separation there is also the promise of the defeat of the serpent seed by the woman’s seed. This can only be done by the shutting down of the persistent mind which is alien to ‘elohym. This closing of the gap is done by ‘elohym in the willing by virtue of his understanding revealed in the woman’s seed. This closing of that separation is perhaps more clearly indicated in the next occurrence of bayin (בין):

And ‘elohym said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and between you and between every living creature that is with you, for ‘olam generations: (Genesis 9.12)

Following the further indication of the division, the distance, between man and ‘elohym and their respective values, seen in the days of Noah and Yahweh’s resolution of it by a worldwide inundation, Yahweh seeks to bridge this gap by establishing an agreement with Noah. This anticipates the agreement which Yahweh will make with all people through his drawing near unto them through the Lord Iesous, of whom Noah is a figure.

The bridging of this separation is an outcome of understanding which is given by the one and received and reciprocated by the other. It is, as in the kaporeth, a bi-directional resolve to remove the separation by reciprocal understanding that first emanates from Yahweh. It is an understanding which builds the house of Noah and, in the truth of which Noah’s is a figure, the house of Theos in anointed. This salvation, this bridging of this divide is occasioned by the salvation of the ark, which (as you will remember from an earlier post) was covered within and without with a covering (homographically the kaporeth).

The language of ‘between’ being used in covenant making settings is further emphasised in the next great covenant that Yahweh makes with man:

And I will make my covenant between me and between thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly…And I will establish my covenant between me and between thee and between thy seed after thee in their generations for an ‘olam covenant, to be ‘elohym unto thee, and to thy seed after thee…This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and between you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and between you. (Genesis 17.2,7,10,11)

The covenant is an agreement between ‘elohym and ‘Abraham with the intent to become ‘elohym unto him. ‘Between’ is not just about the divide between two entities, it is about the coming together of those entities, the bridging of that which lies between them. That bridging occurs from both parties, as it does in the kaporeth, with understanding. ‘elohym reveals the word to ‘Abraham and ‘Abraham keeps the covenant and shows that in the token of circumcision, which shows to ‘elohym, in a figure, what is going on in his mind, the cutting off of the flesh, that is the separation from the carnal mind and the separation unto ‘elohym. In this we can see why ‘between’ occurs on both sides – between me and between you.

In the case of ‘Abraham the bridging between him and ‘elohym is done via the manifestation of the ‘he’, in ‘elohym, to deliver the message of reconciliation by obedient belief. In the case of Mosheh, the mediation of the covenant is extended to another manifesting kerub, Mosheh himself. So, ‘he’ appears in ‘elohym appearing in Mosheh to the children of Yisra’el:

These are the statutes and judgments and laws, which Yahweh made between him and between the children of Yisra’el in mount Sinay by the hand of Mosheh. (Leviticus 26.46)

And:

Yahweh made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. Yahweh talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire, (I stood between Yahweh and between you at that time, to show you the word of Yahweh: for you were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount;) saying, I am Yahweh thy ‘elohym, which brought thee out of the land of Mitsraym, from the house of bondage. (Deuteronomy 5.3-6)

This mediation of the covenant from Yahweh through Mosheh unto the people is seen in the new covenant where the division/separation between Theos and man is being bridged by the willing reciprocation of Iesous anointed:

For there is one (εις) Theos, and one (εις) mediator between Theos and men, the man anointed Iesous; (1 Tim.2.5)

You will notice the homographic eis (εις) used here to translate ‘one’, although it can also function as the preposition ‘unto’. The word ‘between’ is not highlighted here as there is no separate word for ‘between’, rather it is implied in the word ‘mediator’. The Greek word ‘mediator’ is mesites (μεσιτης) and is related to the word mesos (μεσος) which is mostly translated ‘midst’ or ‘among’ and, therefore, indicates being in between or in the middle, that is in a space between, at least, two others. Here, that position is occupied by Iesous, he is in the space between Theos and man and is travelling in the direction toward man from Theos. The term mediator in the New Testament is primarily associated with Iesous but is implicitly modelled on the example of Mosheh:

Wherefore then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not of one, but Theos is one (εις). (Galatians 3.19,20)

This directly refers back to the passage above in Leviticus. Mosheh is the mediator into whose hand the covenant was delivered by the angel of Yahweh. The middle space that Mosheh occupied in between Yahweh and the children of Yisra’el was an outcome of his ministration of those words from ‘elohym towards the people and, when they showed their willing obedience, to return their reciprocity to him.

As in the kaporeth on the day of the atonements, and the blood which was sprinkled upon it, the themes of the mediation of the covenants of promise are closely tied to the redemptive work of Iesous in his offering of himself:

Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of Theos when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, says he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount. But now has he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. (Hebrews 8.5,6)

and:

But anointed being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained aionian redemption. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of anointed, who through the aionian spirit offered himself without spot to Theos, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living Theos? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new covenant, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of aionian inheritance. (Hebrews 9.11-15)

So, the law, being the figure and not the true, requires two people (Mosheh and ‘Aharon) to accomplish the work of anointed. Firstly as the mediator of the covenant in giving the pattern of the tabernacle, including the kaporeth, to be a dwelling place of ‘elohym and, secondly, in offering the sacrifices which speak of the forgiveness of sins and the promise of life for the age. Iesous is between Theos and man as Mosheh was between Yahweh and the people. In this space of between is the glory of ‘elohym revealed. The glory of Yahweh is seen in the face of Iesous anointed.

We can see in the above that ‘between’ is a space in the middle of two interactive agencies. One kerub speaks to another, the glory of Yahweh is between. The divide between the two, and the bridging of it, is an active outcome of the behaviours of the two parties. While the seed of the woman and that of the serpent are divided it is because of the active enmity between the two. Where such a divide exists between ‘elohym and man then it is because ‘elohym is, actively, spirit and man is, actively, flesh. Where closing of the gap, that is reconciliation, is possible it is because of the active direction of the spirit towards man and the willing obedient receipt and reciprocation of such spirit. When this occurs the glory of ‘elohym exists in that space of interaction. The striving of moving from a state of division to a state of union is the work of anointed and is an endeavour of such pain and suffering that, ultimately, it requires the shedding of blood, it requires the death of the flesh. If we are to hope to achieve such an aionian salvation we must attempt to walk in his steps by receiving the mediation of the new covenant and to allow it to dwell in us unto the closing of the gap between us and Theos by the destruction of the flesh by the spirit.

Published by


Leave a comment