Towards, unto, into and in Theos

We established in the previous post that in both offerings on the day of the atonements that a ram was involved each time. Firstly, in the bullock offering for the sins of ‘Aharon and his house a ram is also mentioned. Secondly in the offering of the two kid goats for the sins of the children of Yisra’el there is also a ram mentioned. When we looked at the 5 homographic meanings of ‘el (אל), besides the title used by the creator in certain instances to describe himself, we saw that a relation of the word אל is the word for ‘ram’ (‘ayil – איל). The ram, as we mused at that time, carries the sense of direction and impetus, as rams mate and fight, but also the sense of strength and power, which we saw applied to the homographic אל when it is used to depict control where control is an outcome of power. So, we can see that at the heart of the two offerings is the presence of an animal whose title is a relation to the directional (and occasionally negative) אל.

The ram is used in both instances as a ‘burnt offering’ (‘olah עלה) which comes from the common word ‘upon’ or ‘by’ (על) which is used in the same chapter to describe the placing of the incense ‘upon’ the fire to create the cloud of incense to go into the holy of holies so that ‘Aharon does not die. It is also used to describe the placing of the blood upon the kaporeth when ‘Aharon kills the offerings. Homographically עלה is also used to describe ‘going up’, ‘exalting’ ‘arising’ etc. The idea of the ‘burnt offering’ therefore is that of something which is placed upon and something which is lifted up. This, like the kaporeth, describes the mediation of the spirit of Yahweh and its subsequent reception and reciprocation. The animal is placed upon, firstly in having the hands of those associated with it placed upon its head and then, after its slaughter, being placed upon the altar. It is exalted inasmuch as, sometimes, it was lifted up and heaved and waived in the direction of the heavens and it was then exalted inasmuch as the sweet savour of the smoke of the fire of its consumption rose upwards. The axis of the ‘burnt offering’ is vertical, up and down, while in the kaporeth it is horizontal, face to face, but the principle is the same: there is an unto/unto relationship in the parties involved. There is a bi-directional involvement in the offering and the offerer and then in the offering and he unto whom it is offered.

So, intimately bound up with the two sacrifices is the notion of direction and, in particular the bi-directional phenomenon of manifestation. Therefore, it may be as well to look at Leviticus 16 and the events of the day of the atonements in the light of ‘el (אל).

And Yahweh spake unto Mosheh after the death of the two sons of ‘Aharon, when they offered before (literally, to the faces of) Yahweh, and died; (Leviticus 16.1)

As we have seen ‘unto’ is very often used in the direction of speech, firstly from Yahweh unto Mosheh and then vice-versa. The truncated ל is also used and is highlighted ‘to’.

And Yahweh said unto Mosheh, Speak unto ‘Aharon thy brother, that he come not (אל) at all times into the holy place within the vail before (unto the faces of) the kaporeth, which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear (be manifested) in the cloud upon the kaporeth. (Leviticus 16.2)

Note here the dual use of the word ‘upon’ (as in the word related to the ‘burnt offering’) – the kaporeth is upon the ark, the cloud is upon the kaporeth. Again, in this verse ‘unto’ is linked to speech and ordered manifestation. Yahweh speaks unto Mosheh so that Mosheh can speak unto ‘Aharon. The homographic אל is used to show that the way ‘into’ the holiest of all is not available at all times. The presence of ‘not’, and by implication its inverse, shows how that can be accomplished and, therefore, that every other way is excluded and would lead to the outcome that befell ‘Aharon’s two sons. This permitted way into the holy of holies is reminiscent of the words in Hebrews 9 which demonstrate that this figure showed that it is a one-off event, for all time.

Thus shall ‘Aharon come into the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram (איל) for a burnt offering. (Leviticus 16.3)

So, the route ‘into’ the holiest of all begins with the offering of the sin offering and lifting up offering for the sins of the high priest and his house. Figuratively Iesous must offer for himself and for those of his house first in order to come before the faces of ‘elohym.

Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within (into the within) the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the kaporeth, and before the kaporeth: (Leviticus 16.15)

As we saw in the previous post the word ‘within’ derives from the word for house. In this verse we can see that the second of the offerings, that of the goat (also alongside a ram) which was for the sins of the children of Yisra’el, provides an entrance into that which is within the vail, that is the kaporeth set, as it is, in its house which is the holy of holies. We can see this pattern of the holy of holies being a dwelling place for the kaporeth when Dawid was given the pattern for the building of the temple and he gave it to his son:

Then Dawid gave to Shelomah his son the pattern of the porch, and of the houses thereof, and of the treasuries thereof, and of the upper chambers thereof, and of the inner parlours thereof, and of the place (בית house) of the kaporeth (1 Chronicles 28.11)

So we see two offerings functioning to the same end, that is to bring the high priest into the dwelling place within which was the kaporeth.

And he shall go out unto the altar that is before Yahweh, and make an atonement for it; and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat, and put it upon the horns of the altar round about. (Leviticus 16.18)

So, ‘Aharon leaves the holy of holies and does to the altar that is before Yahweh, the altar of incense within the holy place, as he has done with the kaporeth. The altar of incense speaking of the reciprocal element of manifestation. The cloud of incense is that which is created by man at the instruction of ‘elohym to rise up before him. Following which, and the completion of the reconciling (or atoning) of the holy, the tabernacle and the altar, we come to the scapegoat, the goat which was not killed but sent away.

And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness. (Leviticus 16.22)

The goat has been presented before ‘Aharon who lays his hands on its head, in the same manner as preparing to kill it, but instead the sins of the children of Yisra’el are confessed over it and it is sent into the wilderness. The direction up to this point has been seen very much as a direction towards Yahweh. A reconciling with him of those who are counted as part of the holy [place] and are therefore the saints (or sanctified ones). It seems as if the outcome of the drawing near of those sanctified ones, embodied in the approaching of the sanctified high priest and his entering in to the dwelling of Yahweh, is for the movement in the opposite direction of the living bearing, as it does, the sins of the children of Yisra’el. We could see this in two ways. The first might be to look at the two goat sacrifice as an indication of life and death in the one sacrifice, much as the sacrifice of the two birds in the matter of cleansing from leprosy (Leviticus 14) can be seen in which one of the birds is killed over living waters and the other, dipped in its blood, is released. This would be indicative of death and resurrection in the one sacrifice. Another way in which it can be seen, and not necessarily exclusive of the first one, is the casting out of Yisra’el, bearing their sins, following the atoning sacrifice of Iesous. There appears to be some evidence of the latter in the use of the phrase ‘a land not inhabited’. The Hebrew translated ‘not inhabited’ is gizrah (גזרה). This unique word is related to the Hebrew gazar (גזר) which occurs alongside the word ‘land’ thus:

He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. (Yesha’yahu 53.8)

Here we see a passage closely associated with the work of Iesous, quoted several times in the New Testament as we saw in earlier posts when looking at the healing work that he did. However, this work is set in the context of the rejection of his manifestation of Theos in their midst by the people he came to. As reconciliation can only be accomplished by drawing near to Yahweh in his dwelling place then how can this atoning work be extended to those of his nominal people who have rejected that manifestational offering? This word translated as ‘cut off’ also occurs to describe Yisra’el’s own perception of their condition in the last days:

Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Yisra’el: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts. (Yehezq’el 37.11)

This passage is set in the context of the Lord’s return and describes Yisra’el as a valley full of dry and scattered bones. They are then brought together and stand as an army firstly skeletal then clothed upon with flesh and then enlivened by the spirit of Yahweh. The beginning of this process, however, is Yisra’el as a scattered valley of bones, acknowledging their separation from Yahweh on account of their sins. Acknowledgement is the first stage of repentance and this repentance is about to be occasioned by the return of Iesous and the house of Yisra’el’s instruction by him and his saints who were redeemed, in that they are of his house, in that beginning of his reconciliatory work. The beginning of this reconciliatory work draws near those that believe and alienates those of the natural seed that will not believe. They wander in this cut off place until they are in a position to acknowledge those sins that have accompanied them. That teaching can only occur through the work of Iesous and his disciples.

And ‘Aharon shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them there…And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp…and he that burns them shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp (Lev.16.23,26,28)

There is some movement back and forth here involving the conclusion of the reconciling of the holy, the tabernacle and the altar when ‘Aharon re-enters the tabernacle and removes his clothes in which he has accomplished this reconciliatory work and bathed himself before undergoing atonement for the people. We can see this as figurative for Iesous, following his initial reconciliatory work finally drawing the people back to ‘elohym. The man who separated the goat from the camp returns into the camp and so does the man that takes the residue of the sacrifice outside of the camp to burn it. This act seemingly prefiguring the fact that even with these precepts performed under the auspices of the law the solution to forgiveness of sins lies outside of those constraints:

We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into (εις) the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Iesous also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto (προς) him without the camp, bearing his reproach. For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come. (Hebrews 13.10-14)

The blood was brought into the holy, just as Iesous approached Theos ultimately in the shedding of his blood. We need to follow Iesous toward that destruction of the flesh. However, along with him it is done outside of the precepts of the mosaic law and it ends up in that aionian city.

Similarly, as we conclude in Leviticus 16 we see the principles of anticipatory manifestation being employed. The day of the atonements was an ‘olam statute (one anticipating the age to come). It is held in the seventh month (anticipating the seventh day). It is a sabbath (anticipating the sabbath) on which no work is done. This anticipatory day looks forward to the ultimate reconciliation of Yahweh with his people by Iesous. Firstly by his son and, in him, his house and, latterly, through Iesous and his house, the children of Yisra’el in the age to come.

In conclusion, direction is that of Yahweh to his anointed, who speaks to those who are santified by his voice, and the return journey of this voice back to ‘elohym. Only by this reciprocal unto/unto relationship, between ‘elohym and man, and the ensuing struggle to overcome the flesh by the spirit, and stedfastly maintain this reciprocity of mind, unto the shedding of blood is it possible to approach unto Yahweh and become one with him. This is the only way to approach, any other way is ‘not’ acceptable and, indeed, the antipathy of Yisra’el to Yahweh and his manifestation in his son prevents them from being saved and they must wander away from the dwelling of Yahweh with man until they are turned toward him and then they can enter into the gate and approach his dwelling by the work of the son, who they first rejected, and his disciples. By their obedient reception and reciprocation of that teaching they will receive they can become one faced and one mouthed with ‘elohym. This is the basis for reconciliation or making of atonement.

Yom hakipurym, or day of the coverings (poorly translated day of atonement) is an event, termed a holy convocation, which comes on the 10th day of the seventh month set, as it is, between the blowing of trumpets on the first day of the seventh month and the beginning of the feast of tabernacles on the 15th day of the seventh month.

The importance of this day is seen in relation to the word which describes it – coverings – kipurym (כפרים). It is from the verb ‘to cover’ (kapar כפר) but it is expressed as a plural noun because there were a number of such coverings but also, as we shall come to see that, like as ‘elohym are plural manifestations of the one ‘el, so kipurym are multiple offerings, events and animals that look to the one offering, the one reconciliation and its place of fulfillment – the kaporeth. The verb translated ‘make an atonement’ occurs 15 times in Leviticus 16, which is the chapter which describes the day of the atonements. On one occasion it is translated ‘reconciling’. It is from a family of words which include this verb plus the plural noun alluded to above and a singular noun sometimes translated ‘ransom’ and often equated with a parity of value required to satisfy someone that a release from a debt can be accomplished.

To recap from previous posts then, we have seen the importance and positioning of the kaporeth. It was placed as a cover (kapar כפר) on the ark of the covenant, which was the first item of furniture revealed in Exodus 25 to be placed within the dwelling of ‘elohym with man and specifically in that place termed ‘holy the holies’, a cubic space situated beyond the vail (paroketh) where the glory of Yahweh was revealed and into which ‘Aharon alone was permitted to enter once a year.

That the kaporeth is set atop the ark of the covenant which contained the two tables of the ten commandments, whereby Yahweh made covenant with Yisra’el and in connection with which he revealed his covenantal name, reinforces the bi-directional covenant made with his people through Mosheh, which is accomplished by face to face revelation from ‘elohym to Mosheh and then from Mosheh to the people. This revelation is that which draws together, making one, the two kerubym. Thus embodying the idea of reconciliation.

This one day in the year when ‘Aharon entered into the holy of holies before the kaporeth was yom ha-kipurym and its focal point is the kaporeth. The ‘making atonement’, which we repeatedly see in Leviticus 16, is clearly related to the place where the blood of these offerings, that make atonement, is placed. This is seen by the relation of the Hebrew ‘make atonement’ (כפר) to the Hebrew kaporeth (כפרת).

The importance and figurative nature of this event is made clear by the writer to the Hebrews:

But into (εις) the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and the errors of the people: The holy spirit this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing…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 (εις) 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 (εις) serve a living Theos? (Hebrews 9.7,8;11-14)

So we see that the offering of anointed is predicated on the building of a better dwelling place of Theos in him. Manifestation of Theos and sacrifice are inextricably linked and are seen as a journey which, for Iesous, comes to a fruition in the holiest of all and in the presence of the father and for us is a journey towards serving Theos.

The pre-amble to the events of the day of the atonements is the death of ‘Aharon’s sons, Nadab and Abyhu, because they offered unacceptably before Yahweh. Yahweh lays down the conditions by which ‘Aharon can come before him.

And Yahweh said unto (אל) Mosheh, Speak unto (אל) ‘Aharon thy brother, that he come not (אל) at all times into (אל) the holy place within the vail before (unto – אל – the faces of) the kaporeth, which is upon the ark; that he die not: for I will appear (manifest) in the cloud upon the kaporeth. (Leviticus 16.2)

As we can see, the Hebrew is fascinating. The littering of the verse with the homographic ‘el (אל) both as ‘unto’ and ‘not’; the use of the verb ‘to appear’ which has this sense of manifestation and by use of which we see that Yahweh will manifest himself upon the kaporeth. This manifestation is seen in the kerubic speech ‘unto’ Mosheh and from Mosheh ‘unto’ ‘Aharon with the destination of this speech being the entry ‘into’ the holy of holies and ‘unto’ the kaporeth (the ultimate destination of manifestation). This journey can only be accomplished by prohibition and injunction (yea and nay or not and not/not). Furthermore, we have the Hebrew for ‘within the vail’ which (as we saw in a previous post about inversions) is using the inverted letters of kaporeth to make paroketh for ‘vail’ but is also combined with the truncated ל (signifying ‘to’) and placed after the word ‘within’ which is from the word for house. This word for ‘within’ is used in Genesis 6 to describe the preparation of the ark by Noah:

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

Here we can see that the word for ‘pitch’ is a homograph of kaporeth and the second time is a homograph of kapar (atone). Furthermore, the word ‘within’ is used as it is in Leviticus 16. The word ‘ark’ here is not the same Hebrew word used to describe the ark of the covenant although the two ‘arks’ are brought together in the New Testament where the Greek word used to describe them both is the same word, so we can see they are thematically linked. Furthermore this word ‘within’, deriving, as it does, from the word ‘house’ is used later on in the narrative of No’ah:

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

So, we see No’ah, like Iesous, entering with his house into a dwelling place he built at the direction of Yahweh made secure against the destruction of the wicked by a covering (atonement) within (of the house) and without (outside the house). This salvation accomplished because Yahweh sees (appears/manifests) in him righteousness. No’ah, like Iesous (and in the context of Leviticus 16 ‘Aharon), has provided a dwelling place for those of him as Yahweh has begun to dwell in him. This dwelling place, constructed, like the tabernacle, after the pattern given from heaven is a haven from the judgmental destruction against that which is outside. The dwelling of ‘elohym in man is that which protects from the ingress of iniquity.

Returning to the day of the atonements, we see that the day breaks down into two offerings. The offerings involve a number of animals. These are all couched in terms of ‘making an atonement’.

The first offering is of a bullock and a ram but, after the first mention of the ram, the focus of the offering is the bullock.

And ‘Aharon shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house. (Leviticus 16.6)

The second offering is of two goat kids and a ram. Rather like with the offering of the bullock, any mention of the ram is restricted to the first description of the offerings and then the focus is on the two goats.

And he shall take the two goats, and present them before Yahweh at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And ‘Aharon shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for Yahweh, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And ‘Aharon shall bring the goat upon which Yahweh’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before Yahweh, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness. (Leviticus 16.7-10)

So, both offerings are seen as ‘making an atonement’ firstly for ‘Aharon and his house, representative, as is clear from Hebrews 9, of Iesous and his house. The second offering that makes atonement is for the house of Yisra’el and is accomplished, in a figure, by a dual sacrifice. That is, the sacrifice, and that which it represents is one but it consists of the death of one and the life of another.

And ‘Aharon shall bring the bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which is for himself: And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before Yahweh, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the vail: And he shall put the incense upon the fire before Yahweh, that the cloud of the incense may cover the kaporeth that is upon the testimony, that he die not: And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the kaporeth eastward; and before the kaporeth shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times. (Leviticus 16.11-14)

Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the kaporeth, and before the kaporeth: And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Yisra’el, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness. And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goes in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Yisra’el. And he shall go out unto (אל) the altar that is before Yahweh, and make an atonement for it; and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat, and put it upon the horns of the altar round about. (Leviticus 16.15-18)

So the figurative sacrifice involves reconciliation concerning the altar, representing the death of the sacrifice, and the kaporeth, representing reciprocal manifestation by spirit.

The making of atonement (or reconciling in v.20) is an outcome of the death of the bullock for the high priest and his house and the death of the goat and the life of the scapegoat for the reconciling of the people and the removal of their sins far away. These outcomes are premised upon the involvement of the kaporeth, where ‘elohym meets with man. The kaporeth is intimately bound up in the underpinnings of the euangelion – reciprocal manifestation – which is understood in the meaning of the name, which is the basis for the covenant, which speaks of a union (a reconciliation) between two who were previously at enmity.

This manifestation was particularly seen in Iesous, who manifested the name of the father in himself and gifted that opportunity of seeing/hearing and reciprocating to the father through him. This is the basis for his name: the name of the father revealed in him unto salvation.

As with ‘Abraham, receiving the covenant of circumcision, so with Iesous. He had to confront the flesh with the mind of Theos to overcome it, in himself and in his adversaries (within and without as it were) unto the shedding of his blood. The victory of his resurrection being the verdict of the father on his approbation of the son’s accomplishing of that task. Sacrifice unto the death of the flesh in the face of kerubic manifestation is the means both of the son’s (high priest’s) salvation and that of his house and, finally, that of the children of Yisra’el. This reconciliation is accomplished by faithful instruction and obedient reception of the word, unto the time and place of union, that time and place of becoming Theos.

Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest enters into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the kosmos: but now once in the end of the age has he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So anointed was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (Hebrews 9.25-28)

It is an odd etymology in English that the two words seem to be related but when you consider the ideas in the Greek New Testament particularly it seems less so. We have already, in the previous post, considered the relation of the kaporeth figure to the idea of giving and receiving and the gift of Iesous’ soul as a release for many. So, we can see that giving can be associated with forgiveness of sins.

And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it shall be opened…If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give holy spirit to them that ask him? (Loukas 11.9,10,13)

Following on from looking at giving and receiving, we can see that this passage tells us exactly what it is that we will be given, i.e. holy spirit, and therefore what we should be asking for. The gift of Theos to us is himself, the revelation of his mind and that is what we should be asking for. This is the foundation for understanding the giving of forgiveness of sins.

But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold…He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever has, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever has not, from him shall be taken away even that he has. (Math.13.8,11,12)

In the parable of the sower the seed is the word of Theos which is sown in a variety of different soils which represent the recipients who receive it and their ability to receive it with a view to being saved. The good soil are those who receive it with a good and honest heart and create a considerable increase on that original sowing. They ‘bring forth’ (give) fruit. So it is with the giving of the mind of Theos. It gives fruit in those in whom it is placed. They understand the revelation of the mystery of the kingdom and bear fruit. Iesous was the archetype of this pattern.

And he charged them straitly that no man should know it; and commanded that something should be given her to eat. (Markos 5.43)

Iesous has just raised a little girl from the dead and his immediate injunction is to give food that causes that renewed life to persist. Life is premised on the giving of food by the representative of Theos.

He answered and said unto them, Give them to eat. And they say unto him, Shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat?… And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before them; and the two fishes divided he among them all. (Markos 6.37,41)

Again Iesous is giving food to those who require it for the persistence of their lives. He causes the food to be given by the disciples. Iesous shares the food out to them and they divide it out to the multitude and the outcome of that sharing is the evidence of its multiplication – twelve baskets of leftovers. Here we see authority in action, just as the centurion had confessed to Iesous. Giving is done through agents, whether it be bread or the true bread from heaven, the word of Theos. This authority bestowed upon his disciples is seen in other manifestations:

And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them authority against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease…And as you go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons: freely you have received, freely give. (Math.10.1,7,8)

Iesous sends out the twelve to engage in activity which we saw earlier on in Maththaios (and we referred to in an earlier post) was indicative of forgiveness of sins, that is the healing of the sick and the raising of the dead. It was a gift which was bestowed upon them, that is Iesous gave them the authority to do it just as his father had given him the authority to bestow such blessings. He, and then his disciples, had freely received and must now freely give. Understanding then that forgiveness of sins is a gift from Theos it is evident that it can be, and indeed must be, administered by his representatives whom he has sent. Thus:

For Theos so loved the kosmos, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes into him should not perish, but have aionian life… Iohannes answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven… For he whom Theos has sent speaks the words of Theos: for Theos gives not the spirit by measure unto him. (Ioh.3.16,27,34)

The gift is from Theos. Theos gives his son so that aionian life will be the outcome to those who believe into him. The gift of the spirit is from heaven. Theos gifts his spirit to the son without restraint and offers aionian salvation on account of that gift. The son must subject himself to the father and manifest that word himself to create that opportunity of salvation for himself and his people.

For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his soul a release for many. (Markos 10.45)

We have already looked at this verse in a previous blog when considering what is a soul. It is clear that the disciples, like Iesous, were required to take (receive) the stake and follow him. This process of exchanging their own natural identity for the identity of Theos, by the process of supplanting the natural mind by the utterances of his spirit, is what leads to the release of many from the sentence of death. It is Theos that gifts this possibility. It is Iesous, and then his disciples, who must obey. The gift of Iesous’ identity, that is his manifestation of the soul of the father by ceding his own soul, is that which can release many others.

And this is the record, that Theos has given to us aionian life, and this life is in his son…These things have I written unto you that believe into (εις) the name of the son of Theos; that you may know that you have aionian life, and that you may believe into (εις) the name of the son of Theos…We know that whosoever is born of Theos sins not; but he that is begotten of Theos keeps himself, and that wicked one touches him not…And we know that the son of Theos is come, and has given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in (εν) him that is true, even in (εν) his son Iesous anointed. This is the true Theos, and aionian life. (1 Ioh.5.11,13,18,20)

Here we return to the theme of the blog – ‘into’ and ‘in’. Theos has given us aionian life by the revelation of himself in his son. These things are accessible to those that believe into the name of Iesous. Theos has given us this understanding so that we may become in his son and may become Theos having life for the ages. If we are born of Theos, as Iesous was, we do not sin. Iesous did not sin on account of the revelation of the father to him. We will not sin if we see that revelation of the father in him, receive it and reflect it. Ultimately, when we are finally in him, through the process of believing into him, we will become Theos we will possess aionian life. The life and Theos are indistinguishable.

The Theos of our fathers raised up Iesous, whom you slew and hanged on a tree. Him has Theos exalted with his right hand to be a prince and a saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the holy spirit, which Theos has given to them that obey him. (Acts 5.30-32)

Petros is speaking to the council of the Ioudaioi that he cannot obey them and not speak in and about the name of Iesous as he must obey Theos. He then clearly shows the purpose of Theos in anointed in raising him up and exalting him in order to give the opportunity to Israel for repentance and subsequent forgiveness of their sins. The outcome of which is the giving of the spirit to those who are obedient. Repentance and subsequent forgiveness are conditional on the willing receiving of the revelation of Theos in Iesous.

A common theme, as seen above, is the giving of the spirit. This, in some places, is also juxtaposed with the idea of giving ‘grace’. Grace is a term intimately bound up with the meaning of the name of Yahweh:

And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will call the name Yahweh before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. (Ex.33.19)

It is also linked with the kindness that a man may have to his wife when she finds grace in his sight. It is linked with Noah who found grace in Yahweh’s eyes. This idea of favour is linked to revelation. Yahweh told Noah his plans for judgment on an iniquitous earth and a plan for the salvation of Noah and his house. In the New Testament we see grace being given as a regular theme:

For this cause I Paulos, the prisoner of Iesous anointed for you nations, If you have heard of the stewardship of the grace of Theos which is given me to you-ward: How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote before in few words, Whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of anointed) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets in spirit; That the nations should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in anointed by the euangelion: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of Theos given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the nations the unsearchable riches of anointed; (Ephesians 3.1-8)

Paulos, like the centurion, is under authority by the word and has authority to minister the word. This position is referred to as a gift of grace because it is the favourable bestowing by the father of his revelation upon Paulos for his own salvation and that he might graciously bestow it upon others. This lies at the heart of the gift of forgiveness of sins. It is the favourable bestowing of his revelation, by the utterance of the spirit unto salvation.

This is seen quite beautifully in the construction of one of the words for ‘forgive’ – karizomai (χαριζομαι). It is far from the commonest word in the New Testament for forgive and is often translated ‘give’ but nevertheless it illuminates the relation of the two:

And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight…There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou has rightly judged. (Loukas 7.21,41-3)

In this passage Iesous is showing to Iohannes the baptist’s followers that he is fulfilling scripture that shows he is the anointed. We recall from looking at Maththaios 8.16-17 that the various acts of healing were to demonstrate his power to forgive and take away sins by his word. Here we have the same phenomenon: the sick are healed, the dead raised and the euangelion is preached. Things are taken away and things are added or given. Sight is given, blindness is taken away. In the same chapter but later on we read about his encounter with a Pharisaios called Simon and a woman who enters Simon’s house to anoint Iesous’ feet and wipe them with her tears and her hair. Simon considers the woman a sinner. Iesous tells him the parable of the two creditors to show him the difference between him and the woman. She has kissed Iesous, anointed his feet and wiped them. Simon did none of these hospitable actions. He loves little, she loves much. He is forgiven little, she is forgiven much. She is repentant and Simon is not. Therefore forgiveness is granted, or given, to her while it is not for Simon. At the conclusion of all this Iesous tells her, Your sins are forgiven you. He uses here the more common word to forgive, which is aphiemi (αφιημι) meaning ‘to take away’. She manifested love to her lord because he is the revelation of Theos, he gave her forgiveness of sins and her sins were taken away. It is a giving because it is based on gifting of the word of Theos which results in the taking away of sin.

And grieve not the holy spirit of Theos, in which you are sealed unto the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as Theos in anointed has forgiven you. Be therefore followers of Theos, as dear children; And walk in love, as anointed also has loved us, and has given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to Theos for a sweetsmelling savour. (Ephesians 4.30-32; 5.1-2)

The word for ‘grieve’ is mostly translated as ‘sorrow’ and depicts a state of contention. Thus we must not be at odds with the spirit as it is the spirit of Theos which will make sure that we will be redeemed and we can only be redeemed within the framework of a kerubic relationship. Redemption being from the word ‘to loose’ which forms the basis for the word for ‘release’ which was what Iesous gave his soul for. The behaviour of the believer is what is critical here and is premised upon the willing receipt of the spirit of Theos. By virtue of this we are able to forgive as we are forgiven. The receipt of the spirit and the ensuing imitation of Theos is what we must strive to accomplish as anointed accomplished and by this gift of spirit that leads to redemption we may be forgiven en route to that redemption and aionian life.

The Kerubic pattern seen in the kaporeth, the face to face nature of the two creatures, can be seen in a number of oppositional ideas. One that we are going to consider firstly are words which describe this relationship from one side or the other and give expression to that relationship.

The first of these is giving and receiving. Two verbs which describe opposing sides of the same transaction:

But as many as received him, to them gave he authority to become the sons of Theos, even to them that believe into his name: Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of Theos. (Ioh.1.12,13)

A number of things are going on here. The word unto/into (eis) is used to describe the journey of transformation envisioned by the teaching of the name. The end product of which is the becoming of sons of Theos, the image of the father. The use of the plural ‘who’ to describe those participating in this pilgrimage is pertinent too hinting, as it does, at the revelation of the name in Exodus 3 – I will be who I will be – where the ‘who’ is/are the medium for manifestation of that name and become, at the end of that journey, the destination, having become him. In this context the criterion for participating in such a wonderful journey is that of ‘receiving’ of him, that is Theos, who is the word, who is to be made flesh in the person of Iesous Anointed.

We can see here that the ‘receiving’ would seem to be a willing acceptance of the word which is being offered to them and we see this in uses of the greek word lambano (λαμβανω).

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it shall be opened. (Math.7.7,8)

We can see here that the words ‘give’ and ‘receive’ are interchanged. If you ask it will be given (by someone); those who ask receive (themselves). This statement Iesous is making is about asking for good things, asking for the spirit, asking for understanding which the father will give to those who do ask. In the first statement it is the giver (Theos) who delivers; in the second, it is the receiver receiving. We can see the two sides of the kaporeth here: the one kerub giving while the other kerub receives. They also find when they seek, so a few verses later we read:

Enter in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leads unto life, and few there be that find it. (Math.7.13,14)

In the parallel passage in Loukas 13.24 we are told to ‘strive to enter’ where the word ‘to strive’ is ‘to agonise’ or ‘to fight’. It is an active struggle and battle to even get through the gate at the beginning of the path. The first steps on the journey are not accomplished without a struggle. In the light of this the idea of receiving becomes less than a passive receipt of a gift but an active struggle to take what is on offer to us from the giver. The kerubic relationship is, we can now see, more positively interactive and reciprocal.

He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that takes not his stake, and follows after me, is not worthy of me. He that finds his soul shall lose it: and he that loses his soul for my sake shall find it. (Math.10.37-39)

As we saw in a previous post (what is a soul?), a soul is an identity that exists because a person is alive due to breathing in and out. It is, in the true sense, an identity formed by the taking in and giving back of the spirit of Theos. The man worthy of Iesous is one ceding his natural identity and taking in Iesous’ identity. The word ‘take’ is translating the word we saw previously translated ‘receive’ (λαμβανω) and clearly shows a greater intent of action than a passive receiving. The stake (translated ‘cross’ and alluding to the manner of Iesous’ death) is something that is given and it is something which must be actively taken hold of by the aspiring believer in order to follow his Lord and be worthy of him. It is given inasmuch as conflict and tension between spirit and flesh is given upon receipt of the message. Once we are introduced to the spirit and the need to cast off the flesh by supplanting it with Theos’ spirit (as ‘Abraham was showing in a figure through the covenant of circumcision), we are acquainted with the conflict in ourselves, in our attachment to the flesh, and in others who do not want us to uphold that spirit. We therefore are introduced to the battle of the stake, of the death of the flesh and the victory of the spirit and of following Iesous in that endeavour. It comes as a ‘gift’ along with the gift of the euangelion. It is not, however, a passive gift but a gift we must actively take, lay hold of, and accept because fighting the flesh with the weapons of the euangelion is not a passive process and, if we are not willing to actively engage in the battle, we are not worthy of him.

Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. (Math.21.33-39)

The parable is clearly spoken against the chief priests and elders and to the unfaithful of Israel throughout their generations who had repeatedly rejected the message of Yahweh. The Lord is Theos and the inheritance is the message and covenants he gave to his people. He requires reciprocation from them and sends prophets with his word to elicit such willing reciprocation. The response by the husbandmen who inhabit his inheritance is to take (receive) the gift of the servants (prophets) and abuse and kill them. The final and greatest gift of all is the son who is sent to them and they receive him too and kill him thinking, curiously, that such action will mean they get to seize the inheritance whereas, in truth, it leads to their expulsion. We can see here that the active taking of the gifts offered to them does not amount to a faithful manifestation of the receiving kerub but, contrariwise, to a relationship of being at enmity with the giving kerub. Here we have a failed kaporeth relationship. Rather than spirit revealed leading to spirit reciprocated, we have spirit revealed confronting the ugliness of the flesh fighting against it. We saw the same in the previous post when we considered Paulos persuading the Ephesians of the truth of the euangelion only to be confronted with cursing of the way and rejection of the message. If giving leads to receiving, and that actively, we can see that receiving is not always reciprocal manifestation.

Of course, as we saw in Maththaios 7, if there is one who is receiving, that is taking what is on offer, then there must be a giver. In these we see the kaporeth relationship of the kerubym, a giver and a receiver, with the receiver demonstrating what he has taken.

The giving in Math.7 and Ioh.1 (see above) are both translating the Greek word didomi (διδωμι). Although there are other verbs translated ‘to give’, this is a common one.

Giving occurs when someone has something and is prepared to make it available to someone who asks, usually because they don’t have it or perceive that they don’t have enough of it. As such it is the preserve of the kerub who is mediating understanding rather than the one in the receiving position. Firstly, it is the preserve of Theos, who has all things, to give gifts (his spirit) to whomsoever he will. Certainly, if they ask but, knowing that they do not know what to ask for initially, he can give in order for them to ask to be given. Giving can also be a gift by those who have first received and then give to others and then, finally, giving can be the reciprocation to the giver by those who first received from him.

In the last category we can see how the elders of the Ioudaioi tempted Iesous with regard to paying taxes to Kaisar:

Tell us therefore, What think thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Kaisar, or not?…[after showing him the penny and its image and writing] They say unto him, Kaisar’s. Then says he unto them, Render (apodidomi αποδιδωμι) therefore unto Kaisar the things which are Kaisar’s; and unto Theos the things that are Theos’. (Math.22.17,21)

The issue here being that we can only give after receiving but we must give the things that came from Theos back to Theos. This is the essence of the euangelion and of the kaporeth. There is an inter-relation of ideas which seem to be antitheses and are, in fact, two sides of the same coin.

The gift that is given, as we have seen above, is a gift given in the face of conflict with the flesh. With the euangelion comes the stake, because the flesh is resistant to the spirit. So, the one who is worthy of Iesous is the one who follows in the steps of his teacher and is willing to face that conflict and willingly receive the spirit and give to Theos and to others. Within this framework lies the basis for the forgiveness of sins.

Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his soul a release for many. (Math.20.28)

We shall consider the matter of forgiveness of sins in the light of the kaporeth in the upcoming posts but suffice it to say, from what we have gleaned about the soul and giving/receiving, it is clear that Iesous gave up his natural identity by the receiving of his father’s spirit and gifted that example to his followers to copy.

The word ‘faith’ is predominantly a New Testament word and concept. This English word translates the Greek ‘pistis’ (πιστις). This noun is closely related to the verb ‘to believe’ which in Greek is ‘pisteuo’ (πιστευω). Therefore, at a straightforward level, we can translate the word ‘pistis’ as ‘belief’. There is nothing extra or magical about the word ‘faith’ above and beyond the fact that it is the noun which is associated with the verb ‘to believe’.

So, we may now ask, what is belief? Or, what is it to believe? These questions will have greater significance in future posts when we will consider the idea of ‘believing into’.

The verb ‘to believe’ and the word translated ‘faith’ do occur, albeit sparsely, in the Old Testament. Here, the Hebrew is ‘amen (אמן):

And he believed in Yahweh; and he counted it to him for righteousness. (Genesis 15.6)

In this passage. Yahweh has told him that he is ‘Abram’s shield and reward. Following the word of Yahweh coming unto ‘Abram and reassuring him of a seed proceeding from his own loins, ‘Abram believes. So, belief is an outcome of receiving the instruction of the word. It is the willing acceptance of such instruction and will lead to reciprocal acknowledgement in word and deed.

Belief or concern over a lack of it is in Mosheh’s mind in Exodus 4 after Yahweh has revealed his name to him and sent him to go and speak to the children of Yisra’el to use that revelation of the name to bring the people out of Mitsraym:

And Mosheh answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, Yahweh has not appeared unto thee (Ex.4.1)

Following the performing of three signs in the presence of the people by ‘Aharon, Mosheh’s brother (acting as Mosheh’s representative – see v.16), the people do accept his speech:

And the people believed: and when they heard that Yahweh had visited the children of Yisra’el, and that he had looked upon their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped. (Ex.4.31)

So, here, in the context of the revelation of Yahweh’s name and of ‘Aharon being the manifestation of Mosheh’s revelation, the acceptance of the word of Yahweh, authorised by sign is described as ‘belief’.

The homographic ‘amen (אמן) is used, untranslated, as a form of acceptance and agreement repeatedly in the Old Testament. On a number of occasions this response is done by a congregation:

Blessed be Yahweh ‘elohym of Yisra’el from the ‘olam and unto (or during) the ‘olam. And all the people said, Amen, and praised Yahweh. (1 Chronicles 16.36)

This is the conclusion of a psalm Dawid uttered upon the occasion of the bringing of the ark up to Yerushalym and being placed in a tent he had pitched for it. Figuratively anticipating the arrival of the temporary dwelling of Yahweh in man into a more permanent dwelling place in that place where he has chosen to set his name, this event is coupled with the enunciation of belief by those there, witnessing and participating in this event.

Of course, belief in the New Testament also accompanies the witnessing of the dwelling of Theos in man in the Lord Iesous:

When Iesous heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you, I have not found so great belief no, not in Israel. (Loukas 7.9)

This is Iesous’ approbation of the roman centurion who had asked, via intermediaries, for Iesous to come and heal his servant. Also, by intermediaries, when he knows he is coming he sends word that Iesous should not come under his roof but speak the word only and his servant will be healed. He acknowledges that he is like Iesous in that he is able also to send word and command his subordinates being also a man subject to higher authority. In this, he is confessing that he knows that Iesous is subject to the father and heals by his word. This confession is a statement of belief by this man greater than anything Iesous has witnessed among Israel.

As well as being related to the verb ‘to believe’ (πιστευω) the noun ‘belief’ (πιστις) seems to be related to a verb translated predominantly ‘persuade’ – peitho (πειθω):

And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of Theos. (Acts 19.8)

In language reminiscent of the work of Philippos in Acts 8, we see Paulos, in Ephesus, teaching people about the way. The response to this persuasion is entirely down to the recipients of that teaching. It can be belief but in this case it is not:

But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. (Acts 19.9)

So, persuasion leads to choice. The choice being to accept, obey, reciprocate, that is to believe, or its antitheses – refusal to accept and thus not to believe.

Iesous says unto him, Thomas, because thou has seen me, thou has believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. (Ioh.20.29)

There are many occurrences of the word ‘to believe’ (pisteuo) but here is an example that shows the basis for belief. It is not sight but rather to hear the word. Thomas, initially doubting that Iesous was risen, sees him face to face and confesses that he is his Lord and Theos, that is that he has appeared as the manifestation of Yahweh and of ‘el, glorified in resurrection. Of course, as Iesous is pointing out, blessing is upon those that have believed without seeing, that is they have heard the word and ‘seen’ the representation of Theos in him and the hope of following him.

So, belief is a response to teaching, teaching that leads to an understanding of manifestation and a participation in it. It is the kerubic response to mediation of the word.

Then they that gladly received his word were baptised: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers…And all that believed were together (upon the same), and had all things common; (Acts 2.41,42,44)

I have picked Acts 2 to show that those who received the word and were baptised, joining themselves to Theos, then continued in listening to the apostles teaching and shared all things. They were in a state of receptive obedience that was continual and led to sharing of possessions, a work depicting their shared beliefs. The commonality of their possessions is from the same word as ‘fellowship’. They had common possessions because they had a common mind (communion). That common mind was theirs because they all assented to the teaching of the apostles. Belief can only be the one belief (Ephesians 4) if we are united in following the same teaching. In such a case the beliefs of believers will be in common with the beliefs of other believers because they all are from the same source.

And Yahweh ‘elohym formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis 2.7)

The word ‘breathe’ is used only 12 times in the Old Testament and is translated in different ways but is also translated ‘breathe’ in Yehezq’el 37:

Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say unto the wind, Thus says ‘adonay Yahweh; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. (Yehez.37.9)

Rather like in Genesis 2 we have lifeless bodies requiring to come to life. In this case the lifeless bodies are representative of a lifeless Yisra’el requiring the spirit of Yahweh to enter into them to live. The words ‘wind’ and ‘breath’ in this verse translate the Hebrew ‘ruah’ (רוח) which is often translated ‘spirit’ when referring to the spirit of Yahweh. So in this verse it is the spirit of Yahweh that is figuratively blown upon these slain.

We can infer then that it is the breath or spirit of Yahweh ‘elohym that is blown into the nostrils of the man in Genesis 2 to make him live, or have the breath of lives, and become a living soul. Thus the existence of a living soul is premised upon firstly Yahweh breathing life into a man. As we saw this taking place figuratively in Yehezq’el so in Genesis 2 it can be interpreted on a figurative level. If Yahweh’s breath is his spirit then we see a figuratively lifeless man enlivened by Yahweh’s spirit. The outcome of such a breathing is that the man can exhale that breath and begin the process of inhalation and exhalation which will cause his life to persist. If spirit is the mind of Yahweh directed towards man in his utterances we can see a beginning of a kerubic relationship. Yahweh directs his mind to the man, the man receives the first breath and reciprocates by exhalation and then can continue to do so by dint of his willingness to continue after this pattern. The resultant state will be life, the resultant identity is soul. Over time, and the persistence of breathing, an identity is formed. This is what a soul is, it is the person, the identity, that is created by persistent breathing. Seen on a natural level, this is obvious for, without respiration, existence, and therefore identity formation, is impossible. Figuratively the same applies, that is, without inhalation and exhalation of Theos’ spirit we cannot form his identity within us. Of course the spirit we inhale and exhale may not be Yahweh’s but may be man’s and in such a case the identity or soul formed is not of him. In this case we may require to follow Iesous’ injunction to give up our soul for him.

Then said Iesous unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his stake, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life (soul – psyche – ψυχη) shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life (soul) for my sake shall find it. (Math.16.24,25)

A disciple is one who is prepared to follow Iesous, to crucify the flesh, to give up his life (his natural identity derived from his existence) and will thus be able to gain the life/identity which is of Theos. Indeed Theos says that he has a soul:

Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, unto who my soul is well pleased (eudokeo): I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles. (Math.12.18)

The above verse, a quotation from Esaias, uses a whole host of fascinating words. My beloved, like ‘Abraham being a friend (loved one) unto Yahweh; unto (eis) who (like the who in Yahweh’s name revealed in Exodus 3); ‘soul’ (here it is Yahweh’s soul); well pleased, which we saw in the previous post and is a declaration that Theos was ‘well thought’ in Iesous; ‘I will put’ is from the verb tithemi, being where the title Theos comes from; and, ‘show’ (apangelo) from the word ‘message’ which forms the basis of the word euangelion.

So, we see that Iesous is the one who, having been breathed into by the spirit of Theos, is showing that life (soul/identity) of Theos in his words and works.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knows the Son, but the Father; neither knows any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. Come unto me, all that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. (Math.11.27-29)

We must follow Iesous and receive his revelation; as he knew the father so we must know him and by that we will know the father. If we do this we will find rest unto our souls in the end. So a soul is a result of a reciprocal relationship, and a soul that is well thought in Theos’ sight can only be a result of a true kerubic relationship.

Euangelion (ευαγγελιον) is the Greek word which is translated ‘gospel’ in the New Testament. Some people translate it as ‘good news’ or ‘glad tidings’. I prefer to leave it in its transliterated form as these other translations do not convey the meaning of the word.

ευαγγελιον is a composite of the Greek ευ which is translated ‘well’ or ‘good’ (but is not the common word for good) and αγγελιον, which is closely related to the word αγγελος meaning ‘angel’ or ‘messenger’, and the word αγγελια meaning ‘message’.

For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. (1 Ioh.3.11)

The prefix ευ occurs on its own 6 times in the New Testament of which 5 are associated overtly with doing well and the 6th is the positive outcome of honouring father and mother.

And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou has been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities. (Loukas 19.17)

This is the parable of the pounds that are given to the servants and their responses and outcomes to their instruction from their Lord to trade with them. The servants who traded and increased their sum receive the approbation of ‘well’ (ευ), whereas the servant who doesn’t trade with his sum is called wicked. This term of ‘well’ indicates a faithful reciprocation of the command given by the Lord and hints at what happens when ευ is appended to the beginning of a word such as happens in ευαγγελιον (euangelion).

Eusebeia (ευσεβεια), which we came across in 1 Timotheos 3.16 in the previous post, is translated ‘godliness’ and is made from the word ευ and the word σεβω (sebo) meaning ‘to worship’. As eusebeia is the manifestation of Theos in word and work the presence of ευ is again offering a reciprocal element to the word.

Eudokeo (ευδοκεω) is another New Testament Greek word that has ευ as its prefix with it being appended to the word dokeo (δοκεω) meaning ‘to think’. It is used in, for example, Maththaios 3:

And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Math.3.17)

Again we could see this as a commendation of reciprocal behaviour. Iesous is the one in whom Theos is ‘well thought’ because Iesous has willingly received the word from the father and manifested it.

Another example of the use of ευ as a prefix is in the Greek word eukaristeo (ευχαριστεω), where the word ευ is appended to a verb meaning ‘to forgive’ or ‘to give’ and its related noun meaning ‘grace’. Again we can see a reciprocal element here. The grace (favour) of Theos is seen in the manifestation of his son which leads to forgiveness of sins, the response to which is a giving of thanks and a reciprocal manifestation of these qualities, especially as evidenced in behaviour towards others.

A final composite word we can consider that uses ευ as a prefix is the word eulogeo (ευλογεω) which means ‘to bless’. It derives from ευ and the verb lego (λεγω) meaning ‘to say/speak’. Again the reciprocal impact of ευ is seen in this word. The etymology of putting the two words together would suggest a translation akin to ‘speak well’. This is exactly what we mean by blessing, it is to speak well, of someone or something. In the context of revelation and manifestation ‘to bless’ or ‘to speak well’ is bi-directional speech. Theos reveals the word and in so doing blesses the recipient, the believer receives it and reciprocates in speech, he blesses Yahweh after having been blessed by him.

Bringing the above back to the meaning of euangelion helps us to see a reciprocal element to the meaning of that which was preached to the nations. The message, the outcome of a messenger, or angel, is a manifestational revelation of Theos. This message is a message of receiving and reciprocation. At the heart of its meaning is the image of the kaporeth, the reciprocal kerubic relationship.

Furthermore, the use of ‘angel’ in the word euangelion shows the element of manifestation in the delivery of the message. The message is mediated to man by the messenger whether that be, ultimately, Iesous or the apostles. It is given to the listener by a representative of Theos, acting as him, that is, in his name. The reciprocation of this message is therefore multi-layered, multi-faceted. Firstly, by the initial receiver, the word is reciprocated and then that receiver turns mediator and the subsequent receivers follow the same pattern of manifestation. Again, in this we see the repeated pattern of the kaporeth.

This euangelion was preached to Abraham:

And the scripture, foreseeing that Theos would justify the nations through faith, preached before the euangelion unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. (Galatians 3.8)

We know that ‘Abraham was engaged in a covenantal/reciprocal relationship with Yahweh and that both preaching and blessing are used here where, initially, we might think these words speak to the mediation of words from Theos toward ‘Abraham and through him the nations. This is true, however, this mediation of the message and the blessing also speak to the offering of the opportunity to return the message and the words offered to us. Theos is giving us the means to reciprocate as we are unable to find that path ourselves. We require his revelation to praise him, to draw near to him in speech. We saw this in the post that dealt with the movement of the ‘I’ to the ‘he’ where we showed that the nature of revelation is to give us the means by which we might call on him. The name is called first (Exodus 34) and then we are able, as ‘Abraham did, to call ‘in name Yahweh’.

Thus, the mystery which was hidden for generations is now revealed in the euangelion. This is because it is revealed in Iesous, the seed of ‘Abraham, who was necessary to fulfill this true pattern of the kaporeth. The seed of ‘Abraham was something that he foresaw and who he, in figure, offered up on Mount Moryah calling the place Yahweh Yir’eh, meaning in the mount of Yahweh it shall be seen, or appear. The appearance of ‘Abraham’s seed is Yahweh revealed in the flesh and is seen by the faithful in order that the ‘olam inheritance can be fulfilled. That is, the true reward.

This euangelion is first mentioned in Maththaios 4:

And Iesous went about all Galilaias, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the euangelion of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. (Math.4.23)

A number of themes arise from this passage set, as it is, at the beginning of Iesous’ ministry. Firstly, Iesous is travelling. He is the passer through, as was Abraham, without anywhere to lay his head. His residence is temporary but his words are aionian (agelasting). In these journeys he is consistently teaching, preaching, the euangelion of the kingdom and healing the sick.

Healing the sick is seen as a figure for forgiveness of sins. We can see this later in Maththaios:

When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with demons: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses. (Math.8.16,17)

The relevant passage that this is quoting from is Yesha’yahu 53 where the suffering of Iesous is described. Furthermore, we can also link this chapter to the euangelion.

But they have not all obeyed the euangelion, For Esaias saith, Lord, who has believed our report? (Romans 10.16)

So Yesha’yahu’s ‘report’ of the sufferings of anointed is considered to be the euangelion.

We can see, therefore, that the preaching of the euangelion by Iesous being surrounded by acts of healing is an indication that his taking away of sin is part of that message. Furthermore, the kingdom of Theos was also the substance of this euangelion. We can see the same in the work of Philippos the evangelist (from the same family of words as euangelion) in his preaching in Acts 8:

But when they believed Philippos preaching (euangelizo) the things concerning the kingdom of Theos, and the name of Iesous Anointed, they were baptised, both men and women. (Acts 8.12)

We have seen how the name of Iesous, which people were to believe into and be baptised upon is that journey of manifestation. The appearance of Theos in him begiining primarily from his baptism until his death and resurrection, leading ultimately to his appearance at the dawning of the seventh day and taking us through to the eighth. The kingdom of Theos can be seen very much to take the same trajectory. The kingdom is when and where Theos rules in man. To an extent this can occur when man individually submits to Theos’ rule and therefore he reigns in him. It can be seen if a group of people do the same but it can only truly be seen when Theos is all things and in all.

Then is the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to Theos, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. (1 Corinthians 15.24)

And in Iesous’ prayer:

Our father who is in the heavens, hallowed be thy name, Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, as in heaven, also upon the earth. (Math.6.9,10)

So, the euangelion comprises the elements of the journey, name and kingdom, that ends up at the final destination, which is Yahweh, and describes the progress of that journey.

It is worth considering the phenomenon of faith and works. Works are a demonstration or manifestation of belief. As we saw in the previous post, the energetic impulse of the spirit leads to the substantive creative outcome of such a mind. It is the same with faith (or belief) and works. Belief is the outcome of receiving of the mind of Theos, expressed in his utterances, and agreeing with said speech. This is the energetic impulse that leads to words and actions that are compatible with the belief possessed by the mind. A significant part of belief is to look at the future, that is the destination of the journey. The reason being that the manifestation of Theos in Anointed is yet to come (in the sabbath of rest), never mind the fulfilment of the name at the dawning of the new week. As such it is often the case that these works depict the substance of that future. They can depict the journey to that future also, as often the narrative of the path is often the narrative of the journey’s end, such as in the primary theme of the covenant between Yahweh and ‘Abraham – the cutting off of the flesh. (Genesis 17)

I have called this behaviour anticipatory manifestation which, although not a scriptural phrase, describes how works (acts of manifestation) can be anticipatory in meaning.

Having already mentioned the covenant of circumcision between ‘elohym and ‘Abraham it is probably wise to consider this and its New Testament equivalent sign, baptism in water.

As we have already discussed, a covenant is an agreement between two parties. In this case between Yahweh and ‘Abram (and from Genesis 17.5, following his name change, ‘Abraham). The agreement which he makes with ‘Abraham in Genesis 17 is:

And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an ‘olam covenant, to be for ‘elohym to thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou are a stranger, all the land of Kana’an, for an ‘olam possession; and I will be to them for ‘elohym. (Genesis 17.7,8)

Apart from the large number of occurrences of the truncated ‘to’ (ל) in evidence here, there are a number of strong connections with Mosheh and the revelation of the name. In Exodus 33.11 it implies Mosheh is a friend of ‘elohym as he speaks to him face to face as a man speaks unto his friend, rather like in the kaporeth where the kerubym were positioned opposite one another as a man unto his brother. This reciprocal manifestational relationship is key to the covenant given to Mosheh for the sake of the people. Similarly in 2 Chronicles 20.7, which is then referred to in Iakobos 2.23, ‘Abraham is called the friend of ‘elohym. Admittedly, the terms are different – In Exodus 33 it is a word meaning someone close like a neighbour and in 2 Chronicles 20 it is a beloved but the two terms come together in the New Testament in Loukas 15.9 where the woman who finds her coin and gathers together her friends and neighbours. Perhaps, though, the strongest link is in the commandment which Iesous says comes second only to the first, great commandment (you shall love the Lord your Theos…) – You shall love your neighbour as yourself (Leviticus 19.18). Perhaps this helps us to understand exactly what it is to love your neighbour as yourself. If Yahweh loves ‘Abraham and is a neighbour to Mosheh and is engaged in a face to face relationship with both then he is showing us what it is to love your neighbour. That is, to manifest Yahweh to him.

Furthermore, we may also consider the similarity of making covenant with Mosheh and with ‘Abraham. In both cases the covenant is first made with, and kept by, Mosheh/’Abraham but the making of the covenant is, by them, extended to a people. This, of course, anticipates the making of a covenant with, and the keeping of said covenant by, Iesous being, as it is, a forerunner of the extension of that covenant to the people created by his work.

So, what is the covenant made with ‘Abraham? If a covenant is an agreement between two parties and we can see that, in the pattern of the kaporeth, which sat atop the ark of the covenant, then those two parties are reflective of one another, we should think that the two parties would be joined together around the same principles. That is, if I am making an agreement concerning one subject I might expect the reciprocation to be of a similar nature. In this case the covenant centres around the keeping of it by circumcision. If ‘Abraham is expected to keep the covenant by the act of circumcision upon himself and the males of his household we might expect that what is being delivered to him is also concerning the cutting off of the flesh. And so it is, for what Yahweh is offering him is a journey by which he will occasion the removal of the flesh. It is a journey unto him, who is the antithesis of flesh, that is spirit.

The promises to ‘Abraham revolve around a series of promises set in the context of a journey.

Now Yahweh said unto ‘Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will show thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shall be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curses thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. (Genesis 12.1-3)

He is asked to take a journey away from his natural family unto a land that Yahweh will reveal/manifest to him. The outcome of this journey will be a nation created out of him, his name becoming a blessing and all nations of the earth being blessed on account of him. As with Mosheh there is a journey of geography and a journey of reciprocal speech. The former is caused by the latter.

After having left the land of his birth, Ur, and his father’s house, in Haran, he comes into the land.

And Yahweh appeared unto ‘Abram, and said, To thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar to Yahweh, who appeared unto him. And he removed from there unto a mountain on the east of Beth‘el, and pitched his tent, having Beth‘el on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar to Yahweh, and called in name Yahweh. (Genesis 12.7,8)

The language of manifestation/appearance is in evidence here as well as the name and its homograph ‘there’. ‘Abram is engaged in a journey to Yahweh and to the fulfilment of his name. The geographical movements and location are figurative for this directional progress.

We have seen the fundamental need to leave behind the natural man and pursue the aim which Yahweh has set him. It is a journey accomplished by instruction and obedience, as in all covenants. It is a journey set in the context of a destination (there) and of Yahweh’s and ‘Abram’s names. Finally it is set in the context of a seed. We see, further along, that it is this singular seed that is required for these promises to be accomplished.

After this, ‘Abram goes down into Mitsraym to avoid a famine in the land and accomplishes a return/circular journey, much as Mosheh did with ‘Abram’s successors, and emerges from Mitsraym back to the place of the altar having been enriched by Phara’oh and with Phara’oh’s house having been plagued. It is at this point that ‘Abram separates from the final part of his natural relations, his kindred, Lot.

And Yahweh said unto ‘Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art (there) northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: For all the land which thou see, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ‘olam. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it to thee. Then ‘Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar to Yahweh. (Genesis 13.14-18)

Now that he has finally separated from his natural relations Yahweh reiterates the promise of the land inheritance to him and his seed and that it, like the covenant, will be for ‘olam (the age). He is commanded to arise (as in resurrection – קום) and walk through a land that he is yet to inherit and which he did not inherit during his natural lifetime. His response is to build an altar to Yahweh’s name there.

After these things (or ‘words’) the word of Yahweh came unto ‘Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not (אל), ‘Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward. (Genesis 15.1)

Here we get to the heart of the matter. It is Yahweh who is to be ‘Abram’s (and indeed every faithful person’s) reward. The land inheritance is a place, a destination, but it is Yahweh who is the true destination. The people are to be created out of the covenant made with him, as it was with Mosheh. The seed is the mechanism by which these things can come to pass, because the seed, ultimately, is Iesous.

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He says not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Anointed. (Galatians 3.16)

We also know that ‘Abraham foresaw this. He knew that the seed had a number of fulfilments. 1) that which would proceed from his loins – Yitshaq; 2) that which would proceed from his descendants – the children of Yisra’el; and 3) Anointed.

Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad…Iesous said unto them, Amen amen, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (Iohannes 8.56,58)

Iesous, the fulfilment/manifestation of Yahweh’s name – the ‘I am’ – was foreseen by Abraham as his seed and the way by which he could be the heir of Yahweh himself.

So we come to Genesis 17 – see above – and the promise of the covenant to Abraham and to his seed after him for an ‘olam covenant, that he will be for ‘elohym to him and his seed, to give them the land for an ‘olam possession and to be to them for ‘elohym.

We have seen this language used in Yeremyahu in previous posts where the ‘I will be’ form was used to describe the coming together of ‘elohym and the people into one.

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 I will be to them for ‘elohym, and they shall be to me for a people. (Yeremyahu 31.33)

This is seen as the fulfilment of the new covenant and the fulfilment of Yahweh’s name. In ‘Abraham we see the archetype of the faithful who can inherit these promises, we see a nation created out of him unfit to inherit those promises by their unbelief, being reconciled to him by the work of ‘Abraham’s seed (Anointed) who creates a faithful people from all the families of the earth who are instrumental in the reconciling of that first natural people – the house of Yisra’el – in the ‘olam.

Now that Yahweh has given this covenant he requires a sign, a token of manifestation, to be enacted by ‘Abraham to show his agreement to the promises. This sign is the cutting off of the flesh of every male in his household and once this is accomplished, the cutting off of the flesh of every male child at the age of 8 days old.

Knowing that ‘Abraham is faithful and understands, in some depth, the revelation he has received, he is being asked to enact a sign which anticipates the accomplishment of what he is about to do, the cutting off of the flesh. ‘Abraham has already accomplished such in his separation from his natural relations and his joining himself wholly unto Yahweh. In order to accomplish the rest he will need to continue to cut off the flesh but, more importantly, his seed to come will need to cut off the flesh to make the creation of a faithful people and the reconciliation of the natural people a possibility. As he foresees Iesous, it is Iesous who will cut off the flesh in his life, death and resurrection. In order for the faithful people, walking in the steps of ‘Abraham, to be saved they must follow his seed’s example. Through this process and the reconciliation of his natural seed we will come to a time, figuratively the eighth day (as it comes after the seventh, the sabbath of rest), when all flesh is cut off, when there is only spirit, when there is only Yahweh.

In performing this anticipatory sign, ‘Abraham is manifesting his understanding and belief. It is a work befitting faith. It is done by all the males because the word ‘male’ in Hebrew – zakar (זכר) – is a homograph of the word ‘memorial’ which is used in Exodus 3 to describe Yahweh’s name. It is also used in the commandment to remember the sabbath day and by extension it is the concept behind remembering the Lord in eating of his supper in the New Testament. Remembering, bringing to mind, is what faithful people (of both genders) do in being overwhelmed by his mind, expressed through the word, in order to cut off the flesh. This is the journey of the name. ‘Abraham was fully involved in that journey and showed it by the anticipatory sign of circumcision. In all of the above circumstances ‘remembering’ is a part of a journey of understanding and belief. That is, the journeying ‘Abraham kept the sign of circumcision as a sign of his present behaviour but anticipatory of the cutting off of the flesh in his seed and the cutting off of all flesh in the eighth day, evidenced by the act of circumcision being performed on the eighth day of the male child’s life. Remembering the sabbath day for the children of Yisra’el was a looking back at the rest of ‘elohym after the six days of creation, a reminder of their need to rest from man’s labour to do the work of Yahweh and an anticipation of the sabbath of rest to come (the ‘olam). The name of Yahweh being, as it is, a memorial (Ex.3.15) follows the same pattern of journeying being a progression of becoming him from the revelation of that name to Mosheh to its manifestation in his son in his appearance in the first century and then the sabbath of rest before offering all things up to the father at the conclusion of that age so that his name might be fulfilled. It is a journey that we must make if we are to reach the final destination.

In the New Testament circumcision is replaced by the anticipatory work of baptism in water, which is similarly a journeying figure associated with the name and encompasses the progression of manifestation from the offering of Iesous to the 8th day with ourselves participating in such a figure in order to share in its glorious outcome.

In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Anointed: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of Theos, who has raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2.11,12)

Here we see that the figure of cutting off of the flesh is now being supplanted by the figure of immersion in water, signifying the immersion in spirit which the Lord Iesous achieved in his manifestation in the days of his suffering unto death and resurrection. If we seek to be co-heirs with him of his glory we must also join with him in the figure and its meaning.

But Iesous answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with? They say unto him, We are able. (Math.20.22)

But I have a baptism to be baptised with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished! (Loukas 12.50)

The sons of Zebadaiaos are asking if they can sit on his right hand and left hand in the kingdom. Iesous’ response is to ask them can they share with him in accepting and doing the father’s will. In the garden he asks that the cup pass from him but nevertheless ‘thy will be done’ (Math.26.42). Drinking of the cup is doing the will of Theos. Similarly with baptism.

Iesous baptism is his complete immersion in spirit to overcome the flesh and do the will of Theos. The question is, can his disciples follow him in taking on that opportunity?

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Anointed was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6.4)

Baptism is clearly an endeavour to supplant the flesh by the spirit (mind) of Theos. If we accomplish such an immersion we will be following Anointed unto the death of the flesh and a new life in him in the age. The sign of this truth is with full immersion, by believing adults, in water. As there was a tangible outward sign of cutting off of the flesh with ‘Abraham so with Iesous and his followers.

And Iesous, when he was baptised, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the spirit of Theos descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: (Math.3.16)

So, Iesous was immersed in water under the auspices of Iohannes the baptist and, arising from the water, the spirit of Theos proclaimed Iesous to be his son. It was a work carried out at the beginning of his ministry much as baptism is carried out with the believer when they first hear and believe. It is an act signifying the beginning of the journey of immersion.

There is one (εν) body, and one (εν) spirit, even as ye are called in one (εν) hope of your calling; One (εις) Lord, one faith, one (εν) baptism, One Theos (εις) and father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in (εν) you all. (Ephesians 4.4-6)

The use of one alludes to the oneness of Yahweh’s name (Zech.14.9) and its fulfilment in the eighth day. In this context the one baptism is the final overwhelming of flesh by spirit at that time. It is interesting to note that the words employed for the word ‘one’ are homographs for the word unto/into (εις) and the word ‘in’ (εν). Of course the journey of Yahweh ‘el (אל) is the journey unto, into and then in him.

Baptism in water, a figure for this final overcoming of flesh, is seen in the likeness of the figure of immersion in water with that of the flood.

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of Theos waited in the days of Noe, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism does also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward (εις) Theos) by the resurrection of Iesous Anointed: (1 Petros 3.20,21)

Noah was a figure for Iesous, saving his household in an ark which ‘moved upon the face of the waters’ as the spirit of ‘elohym did in Genesis 1. The evil that surrounded him was overcome by the will of Yahweh until he, with only the seven other souls (making eight in total) and the animals emerged into a world of a new heavens and earth. This salvation is linked with the believers’ belief, the resurrection of Iesous and the eighth day, all couched in the terms of a journey toward Theos.

Baptism is linked with the name on numerous occasions:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them into (εις) the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy spirit: (Math.28.19)

Then Petros said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you upon the name of Iesous Anointed unto (εις) the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the holy spirit. (Acts 2.38)

Iesous, after his resurrection, commissions the disciples to preach the euangelion and to baptise those who willingly receive (that is, believe) that message. Petros, in Acts 2, acting on that commission instructs those people who are listening to him that the journey unto forgiveness of sins is dependant on baptism. Clearly, as Acts progresses we see that the baptism being referred to is, at the very least, sealed by the act of immersion in water, even though it is clear that immersion in the spirit of Theos (his mind revealed in his utterances) is the way in which forgiveness of sins operates. Nevertheless, as with ‘Abraham, the act of full immersion in water is a sign of obedience that the willing recipient of the word engages in to show the outworking of their belief. It is a substantive creation occasioned by the invisible belief they have by submitting to his word. It is a necessary walking in the path which Iesous trod before us.

So, baptism, like circumcision, observing the sabbath day and the eating of the Lord’s supper (not to mention marriage), is an anticipatory act of belief, looking forward to the glorification of all things in the eighth day. It also signifies the journey taken by the believer from the moment of hearing the word to their participation in the revelation of Yahweh’s glory. It signifies the journey of the Lord Iesous from birth through to his ministry, suffering, death, resurrection and glorification and his leading of his flock to the fulfilment of Yahweh’s name. It is a journey of following in the steps of Iesous’ baptism; it is a journey of immersion in spirit.

At the present time, especially in the social media world, the word manifestation is used to describe an almost mystical process whereby one imagines a highly desirable outcome and, by dint of intense self-conviction that such an outcome will come to pass, the said objective magically occurs.

However, the term manifestation is used in scripture and the concept is present in a number of synonyms such as reveal/revelation; appear(ance); show; see and perhaps by implication demonstration.

The greek word translated manifestation is phanerosis (φανερωσις) which occurs in only two places:

But the manifestation of the spirit is given to every man to profit withal. (1 Cor.12.7)

But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of Theos deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of Theos. (2 Cor.4.2)

Manifestation takes the form of works demonstrating a motivating power determining those outcomes. In the first passage it is the spirit and in the second it is the word. As we have already seen, Theos is both of these things, he is the mind that was there in the beginning and he is the utterance of that mind that followed. As such, the motivating power that leads to these works, as it did in Genesis 1, is Theos himself. Thus, the mind then the word then the substantive creation. As in Genesis 1 and 2 so it is with all things that are created by spirit and by word, they bear the image of that which has created them. Because the mind, and then the word, goes forth to create, the mind directing this process can be seen reflected in the creation. Thus at the conclusion of the creation it is looked upon by ‘elohym and seen to be very good because it is reflective of himself in much the same way as when Yahweh was going to pass by Mosheh and call his name he told him,

I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will call the name of Yahweh before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. (Ex.33.19)

Yahweh’s goodness, glory, way, name are synonymous with who he is and will be, so the creation bears the image of his goodness. It is like the kaporeth, there is a relationship between creator and created that forms an image of reflection in the other, by mind (spirit) and by speech.

The verb related to φανερωσις is phanero-o (φανεροω) and occurs in two fascinating passages:

I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gave me out of the kosmos: thine they were, and thou gave them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou have given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou gave me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou did send me. (Iohannes.17.6-8)

Manifestation and name are linked here. Iesous has manifested that name that we saw revealed in Exodus. He is able to be that manifestation of the name of Yahweh, to show Yahweh to his disciples, because he, first, received that spirit and that word and was obedient to it. It is manifested to them inasmuch as he has spoken to them, they have received his words and been obedient to them and by so doing have known that he came forth from Theos.

and:

But if I tarry long, that thou may know how thou ought to behave thyself in the house of Theos, which is the ekklesia of the living Theos, the pillar and ground of the truth. And confessedly great is the mystery of eusebeia (ευσεβεια – translated ‘godliness’): who was manifest in flesh, justified in spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the nations, believed on in the kosmos, received up into glory. (1 Tim.3.15,16)

Rather like in the revelation of the meaning of Yahweh’s name in Ex.3.14 the term ‘who’ is used to describe the medium through which Yahweh will come to be. Here he is seen as being in flesh but made righteous in spirit and, having been raised up and witnessed to by angels and apostles, believed on and ascended to heaven from whence he will appear again. This is a moral revelation of Theos in a man, by spirit, by word which caused the creation of the visible by the invisible. Similarly it is necessary that those who believe into that name, that process or journey of creative manifestation, must do the same, which is their behaviour in the house of Theos, the ekklesia. This phenomenon is, furthermore, to be confessed. The word for confess is taken from two greek words ‘same’ and ‘speech’ so to confess is to use the same speech. Again we have another allusion to the pattern of the kaporeth. Confession is to reflect the manifestation of the word and is manifestation in and of itself.

The first thing about manifestation is that it is the revelation of that which is hidden:

For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. if any man have ears to hear, let him hear. And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given. (Markos 4.22-24)

Theos is himself hidden as it says in Proverbs:

It is the glory of ‘elohym to conceal a word: but the honour of kings is to search out a word. (Proverbs 25.2)

and:

But is now made manifest by the appearance of our Saviour Iesous Anointed, who has abolished death, and has brought life and immortality to light through the euangelion (ευαγγελιον – translated poorly ‘gospel’): (2 Tim.1.10)

The euangelion was a message that previously was hidden but has now become evident through the preaching of that message in him and his disciples and the hearing and obedience of the faithful. That euangelion is the message of the manifestation of Theos in his son on the earth. It is a message that will only be heard by those who are diligent to hear that message and to seek it out.

Creation, both of the physical and substantive heavens and earth and the time periods that emerged from the beginning of his will with man, is also a critical pattern of manifestation. As we have seen above, the invisible spirit, who is Theos/’el, is the energetic impulse that is the prerequisite for the existence of the substance of creation.

Because that which may be known of Theos is manifest in them; for Theos has showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the kosmos are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his aionian (age-lasting) power and Theiotes (translated godhead); so that they are without excuse: (Romans 1.19,20)

This can be seen as creative language being used to describe the creation of Israel as a people unto Theos. His name, his commandments were revealed to them, they saw the substantive outcomes of that creative work and yet remained disobedient.

Through faith (belief) we understand that the ages were framed by a word of Theos, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. (Hebrews 11.3)

The things that are manifest, and seen, are made by that (i.e. the word) which is unseen. This unseen word is the creative force behind the obedient belief which is shown by the many faithful people named in the rest of Hebrews 11.

This creative spirit, manifested by angels (are they not all ministering spirits? – Hebrews 1.14) was in evidence at the appearance of the son of Theos in the run up to, and the unfolding of, his birth (or creation). Furthermore they were in evidence ministering to him throughout his life and the unfolding of the appearance of the likeness of Theos in flesh. They were especially in evidence at his resurrection and, particularly, at the witnessing of the empty tomb, as we saw in 1 Tim.3.16.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Ioseph, thou son of Dabid, fear not to take unto thee Mariam thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of holy spirit. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shall call his name Iesous: for he shall save his people from their sins. (Math.1.20,21)

Critically here, as with Mosheh at Horeb, the manifestation of the angel is the precursor to the revelation of the name. Here, the name that will overtake the name of Yahweh in preeminence in the New Testament, is Iesous’ name. This is the New Testament equivalent to the name Yehoshua’ (the son of Nun, Mosheh’s minister who led the people into the land). Meaning ‘he shall save’, the question that requires answering is, who is the ‘he’. In the name of Yehoshua’ in Hebrew (יהושע) we can see that the first three letters are the same as the first three letters in Yahweh’s name (יהוה) so the answer to the question, who is ‘he’? is Yahweh. It is the appearance/manifestation of Yahweh’s name in Iesous that shall save his people from their sins.

This appearance that will forgive sins is seen on more than one occasion. Iesous has already, in the prayer in Iohannes 17, stated that he has manifested the name of the father to the disciples, just before his final suffering and death. This first manifestation was accomplished by him becoming Theos in their midst, by him embodying the word, made flesh, offering them the teaching that is an outcome of such complete immersion in spirit, and performing demonstrative signs and wonders depicting that authority which came from above.

This beginning of signs did Iesous in Kana of Galilaias, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed into/unto (εις) him. (Ioh.2.11)

Note here the use of ‘into/unto’ (like ‘el in the Old Testament) to describe the believing response of the disciples. Also we have the creative ‘beginning’ which we can see as the commencement not just of a creative process but also of a journey. Of course this is the first appearance/manifestation of Theos in Anointed, it found its first completion at his death after which a second appearance/manifestation occurred in the resurrected Lord.

After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. (Markos 16.12-14)

Again we see journeying occurring here but they are not able to perceive his second manifestation, that is his post-resurrectional manifestation, until their ears and eyes are opened by his words.

Beloved, now are we the sons of Theos, and it does not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is…And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. (1 Ioh.3.2,5)

Iesous’ third manifestation is the appearance at the outset of the age, the sabbath of rest, when those who have believed into him will be with him and will be like him. Then their sins will be utterly forgiven (taken away) and there will be no sin in them as there is none in him.

His (that is Theos declared and depicted in him) first appearance was the overcoming of the flesh in him by the overwhelming influence of spirit. This new creation was revealed in his second (resurrectional) appearance. His third appearance is yet to come and will see the appearance of those believers with (and in) him, becoming part of the new creation. At the end of that age there is no need for manifestation to occur as Theos will be all and in all. There will be no need for representation in others as it will be a creation of one Yahweh and all in that name.

So, manifestation is revelation which is seen by others. When that person is demonstrating, in this case, Yahweh, they become him to others who, seeing him, will respond. It is seen in the figure of the kaporeth. Firstly, a reciprocal relationship creates a similarity between the two kerubym. The one creates the other in his image, the other, having reflected and reciprocated, is seen by onlookers as such and they are able to engage in such a relationship. This process of transformation of image to image to image creates the likeness of Yahweh in all who listen (metaphorically look on the appearance of his agent) until there is only Yahweh in all. At such a point when a man is born of Theos, becomes his image, and there is no fault in him, is it clear that his sin is taken away. This need for representation is over at the end of the sabbath of rest when Theos is all and in all, when the name of Yahweh is one, when it is described as Yahweh shamah (is there) and there is no other, other than he.

We have seen so far that it was to be a sign that Yahweh would be with Mosheh when he returned with the people to this mountain (Horeb). That is, that the circular, or return, journey which Mosheh would be performing would be only a return journey for him and for Yahweh and would therefore be intimately bound up with their kerubic relationship (unto/unto or face to face) and would have the enriching effect of creating a people unto Yahweh and would be intrinsically linked with the meaning of his name (I will be to them for ‘elohym and they shall be to me for a people). Mosheh and the kerubic relationship he enjoys with ‘elohym is the basis for the revelation of the covenantal name which allows for the creation of the people. He is the conduit through which that revelation of the words of the covenant will be transmitted to the people in order for them to draw near to, and become one with, ‘elohym. This is the basis for that covenant, that agreement between two parties, ‘elohym and Mosheh, through which the agreement can be established with the people. The agreement relies on keeping to the terms of the covenant, something which Mosheh largely accomplishes and the people do not, despite their protestations.

This forerunner of a pattern is replicated, but to a greater extent, when Theos makes a covenant with Iesous, sealed by his obedience, and by it extended to his people who are faithful in following their archetype.

So, when we arrive in Exodus 19 we see the beginning of this realisation.

And Mosheh went up unto the ‘elohym, and Yahweh called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shall thou say to the house of Ya’aqob, and tell to the children of Yisra’el; Ye have seen what I did unto the Mitsraym, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself. (Ex.19.3,4)

At the point at which these words are spoken and the people have arrived at Horeb it is as though they have arrived at Yahweh, reached the destination that is him. They have, as it were, come face to face with him but through the face (and voice) of Mosheh. From here we see the signs of his angelic revelation atop the mount and the people’s reaction. We then have the ten commandments as discussed above; various more particular commandments followed by the pattern of the tabernacle (and, critically, the kaporeth and ark of the covenant), all of which we have discussed in detail in the previous post.

Of course, this is the pattern, the design or blueprint, not the finished article. Following on from the various items of furniture and the construction of the infrastructure we move on to the ministry of the priests and, in particular, ‘Aharon and his sons, their clothing and the anointing oil for their consecration and the incense for offering in the holy and holy of holies.

Following on from this we encounter the two men chosen out to be the workmen who will enact the pattern and create the realisation of this dwelling of ‘elohym with man on the earth. We are then reacquainted with the sign of the sabbath and keeping it as a token of the ‘olam (age) covenant with Yisra’el:

Wherefore the children of Yisra’el shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for an ‘olam covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Yisra’el for ‘olam: for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. (Ex.31.16,17)

This is an act of anticipatory manifestation. That is, the seventh day is akin to the ‘olam (the age, derived from a word meaning ‘to hide’, so a hidden period) and the covenant is an ‘olam covenant. Observing the rest of the seventh day looks back at the rest of ‘elohym at the conclusion of the creation and looks forward to the rest from labour that the faithful (who will also be called ‘elohym) will enjoy at that time when they are joined in covenant with him.

Of course, all this revelation is happening to Mosheh with Yehoshua’ his minister with him while he is still in the mountain during his 40 day spell there. As he comes down from the mountain with the two tables of stone he comes across the sorry state of affairs the children of Yisra’el have gotten into and the presence of the golden calf ‘Aharon made for them and their singing, dancing and nakedness. He breaks the tables of stone, the commandments at the centre of the covenant he has made with Yisra’el and calls on the people to cull out the offenders and then Mosheh pleads for the forgiveness of the people.

At this point we come to the pivot of the narrative. Since arriving at Horeb it is as though the journey has stagnated. There has been a pause while the people have received the covenant: the commandments and the pattern of the tabernacle. However, in this pause they have atrophied and fallen away. Now is the time to renew the journey but, in order to renew this journey, there must be a renewal of the covenant and the revelation of the name as it is that teaching of the name – a journey to a destination – which is intimately bound up with their pilgrimage.

And Yahweh said unto Mosheh, Depart, and go up hence, thou and the people which thou has brought up out of the land of Mitsraym, unto the land which I sware to ‘Abraham, to Yitshaq, and to Ya’aqob, saying, To thy seed will I give it: And I will send an angel before thee (literally ‘to thy face’); and I will drive out the Kana’any, the ‘Amory, and the Hitty, and the Perizzy, the Hiwy, and theYebusy: Unto a land flowing with milk and honey: for I will not (לא) go up in the midst of thee; for thou are a stiffnecked people: lest I consume thee in the way. (Ex.33.1-3)

So we can see the resumption of the journey, signified in speech unto Mosheh and with the destination being unto the land of promise, that which was promised to the fathers, as we saw in Exodus 3 when the meaning of Yahweh’s name was first revealed. However, there is now a question mark over the creation of the people who have shown themselves to be stiffnecked, disobedient and among whom Yahweh will no longer walk. At this point it is evidenced to us that the pattern of the tabernacle has been constructed as Mosheh takes the tabernacle out of the midst of the camp and separates Yahweh’s dwelling from the people in whom he is supposed to dwell according to the figure and pattern of the tabernacle. Now Mosheh and Yehoshua’ must minister from afar.

As we progress it is becoming evident that there are two parts to the covenantal revelation and, as it were, two peoples created. As an outcome of what happened in Exodus 32 when Mosheh descended from the mountain:

And Yahweh said unto Mosheh, Whosoever has sinned to me, him will I blot out of my book. Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken to thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. (Ex.32.33,34)

So he has promised a visitation upon that people. Presumably which happened when they refused to enter the land when the ten spies returned with their evil report at Kadesh in Numbers 13 and they were prevented from entering the land because of their unbelief and had to wander in the wilderness until all that generation, over 20 years old, died there. In a sense we can see that the first people were not to inherit the promises associated with the fulfilment of the name. The land inheritance – the figurative, or anticipatory, arrival at the destination that is Yahweh – would have to wait for a second generation or people. There is a consistent refrain of a second covenant, a second revelation of the name, a second people and a second inheritance, brought about by the second minister, Yehoshua’.

With Mosheh’s ascent into the mountain again and his receipt of the second set of tables of stone upon which were to be written the commandments we see, as it were, the second covenant and the creation of a second people in prospect. This process is then associated with the calling of Yahweh’s name in the mountain, anticipating the revelation of his name in Iesous.

And Mosheh said unto Yahweh, See, thou say unto me, Bring up this people: and thou has not (לא) let me know whom thou will send with me. Yet thou has said, I know thee in name, and thou has also found grace in my sight. Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, show me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight: and consider that this nation is thy people. (Ex.33.12,13)

Mosheh is involved in Kerubic interaction with Yahweh. At the point of the separation of Yahweh from his people and the ensuing movement of the tabernacle away from them Mosheh is at the centre of Yahweh’s purpose and with it the possibility of reconciliation.

And Yahweh spoke unto Mosheh faces unto faces, as a man speaks unto his neighbour. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Yehoshua’, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle. (Ex.33.11)

Mosheh is clearly in a kaporeth like relationship – faces unto faces – and he is in a speech based relationship ‘man unto his neighbour’, very similar to the ‘man unto his brother’ of the kaporeth. It is this reciprocal relationship that will form the basis of the prospect of reconciliation with his people as Yahweh will instruct Mosheh how it will come to pass.

Mosheh seems to be reliving some of the discussion in Exodus 3. There he asks, Who am I that I should go? Here, in verse 12, he asks, Who will you send with me? The answer in the end is similar. It is Yahweh in him, Yahweh with him that will go, that has caused him to find grace in his eyes, that will lead this people unto the land. The fact that Mosheh is fulfilling the name, that he is in this kerubic relationship with him, this is the reason he is able to do these things because he is becoming Yahweh. If the people also do the same they are ‘with him’. Mosheh asks Yahweh to show him his way which becomes synonymous with the calling of his name. Mosheh is known in name and he wishes to know Yahweh in name. This reciprocal knowledge is what the name is about for Mosheh and for a faithful people. Yahweh, however, will make a distinction with a sinful people.

And Yahweh descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and called in name Yahweh. And Yahweh passed by before him, and called, Yahweh, Yahweh ‘el, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means acquit the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. (Ex.34.5-7)

The answer to Mosheh’s question is right here: the one who will stand with him in that place (there) is Yahweh (the one who is Yahweh i.e. an angel – see Ex.32.34; 33.2) and who calls the name and passes by. This is his way, his journey, which we witness, his passing by and calling his name: the qualities of who he is and will be and what he requires to be in those he seeks to make covenant with, so that they also take this journey and come to the place where he is and has set his name there. At this fundamental point in the exposition of the journey being at the heart of the meaning of his name he uses the title ‘el (אל) which of course is homographically ‘unto’. Yahweh appends his name to a word describing direction.

Following on from this incident Yahweh renews the covenant with Mosheh and with the people through him. He writes the ten commandments on the two new tables and gives various other commandments to Mosheh during another 40 day and night period before descending from the mountain, not knowing his face shone so brightly it was difficult for the people to tolerate.

Following on from this Mosheh speaks to the children of Yisra’el and gives them some commandments. He has turned from being the receiving kerub in the kaporeth, as it were, and now becomes the giving, or mediating, kerub. He then reiterates the pattern of the tabernacle but now it is in the language of performing the figure and creating the work in substantive form. At the end of the process Yahweh commands Mosheh to raise up the tabernacle.

On the first day of the first month shall thou set up the tabernacle of the tent of the congregation. And thou shall put therein the ark of the testimony, and cover the ark with the vail. (Ex.40.1,2)

The culmination of this return, or circular, journey is the raising up of the tabernacle. The Hebrew word translated as ‘set up’ (qum – קום) is often translated as ‘arise’ and is the word used by Iesous when he raises the little girl from the dead and says ‘Talitha cumi’ (Markos 5.41). Mosheh then proceeds, under instruction from Yahweh, to anoint the tabernacle with oil along with the high priest and his sons. Anointing also being linked with resurrection (Hebrews 1.9)

And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was reared up…And he took and put the testimony into the ark, and set the staves on the ark, and put the kaporeth above upon the ark: And he brought the ark into the tabernacle, and set up the vail of the covering, and covered the ark of the testimony; as Yahweh commanded Mosheh. (Ex.40.17,20,21)

Mosheh finishes all the work of the tabernacle and:

Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of Yahweh filled the tabernacle. And Mosheh was not (לא) able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of Yahweh filled the tabernacle. And when the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the children of Yisra’el went onward in all their journeys: (Ex.40.34-36)

So, at the beginning of this second year, this second era, the tabernacle, the dwelling of ‘elohym among man, is raised up, resurrected from its component parts that lie on the ground. Within this resurrected dwelling will now dwell the ark with the tables of stone within and the kaporeth on top. The outcome of its resurrection is the glory of Yahweh filling it so completely that Mosheh is unable to enter. In these figures we can see an anticipation of the resurrection of Iesous, a dwelling place of ‘elohym among man, and the dwelling of Yahweh in him being so full that it excludes the Mosaic era, the very era and ordinances that are anticipating, in figure, the true. This resurrection creates a new people and allows them to continue in a journey following in the steps of the journeying ark, kaporeth and tabernacle unto the land of promise. We can also see the tabernacle as the figure for the resurrected body of believing people in Iesous after their resurrection leading a second people unto the final destination of the setting of Yahweh in the place he has chosen. This process being understood in the idea of the name.

So, in conclusion, we have seen an overarching journey with micro journeys within it. Primarily, the return journey is one which Mosheh engages in, as does the Lord Iesous after him. This journey is one of revelation; it is one symbolised by the kaporeth, that is, that as the priests march forward to their destination, beneath the paroketh (the vail) the kaporeth is a kerub facing a kerub. The journey is enabled by the reciprocal kerubic relationship of ‘elohym to man where the man is firstly Mosheh and, latterly, Iesous. Because the people are created by him, firstly Mosheh latterly Iesous, then the onward journey that proceeds from the first intimate covenantal conversations is theirs and results in them, the faithful followers, the second generation, ending up at the true and final destination. Of course that destination, ultimately, must have ‘Abraham, Yitshaq and Ya’aqob there because Yahweh’s name is named upon them. His final identity is premised on those people who have engaged in kerubic relationship with him being with him where he shall be and thus completing their return journey, greatly enriched and enlarged than at the beginning of their pilgrimage.