Towards, unto, into and in Theos

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 you 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 belief (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. The parallel is clear. The spirit leads to a creative outcome in man. The man’s belief leads to a creative outcome in works. This is the journey of becoming Yahweh. Because becoming Yahweh is a journey that ultimately leads to the eighth day but progresses, incrementally, through the ages in specific contexts of important manifestations of his name, then a significant part of belief is to look at the future, that is the destination of the journey. We can see this, for example, in the primary theme of the covenant between Yahweh and ‘Abraham – the cutting off of the flesh (Genesis 17). Cutting off the flesh is a struggle to subvert the natural mind of man with the spirit of Theos that occupies all the faithful in their journey to become him and finds an acme, in a man, at the glorification of Iesous but finds its final summit in the eighth day. This pursuit was signified in a work by circumcision.

I have called this behaviour anticipatory manifestation which, although not a scriptural phrase, describes how works (acts of manifestation) can be anticipatory in meaning. Because, although acts practised along the way, they are looking forward to future outcomes.

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 purpose of the creation of a 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 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 belief (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. Whereas circumcision focuses on that which needs removing, baptism offers us the means by which to accomplish it.

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 Zebedaios 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 and circumcision, 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, in the heavens and earth and in a created person and people.

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, uttered by the unseen spirit, 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. That is, the phenomenon of an entity being a representation and embodiment of the unseen spirit precedes the utterance of the unseen spirit’s words that will create another representation of himself in Mosheh and in a people. 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. Manifestation/revelation/appearance is that which lies behind the meaning of the name. The name of Yahweh was revealed in the context of the representation of him in a messenger, in Mosheh and in a people. The name of Iesous is about the revelation of the spirit in a son and in a people, declared by a messenger. The name is a journey of manifestation unto the forgiveness of 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 becoming 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 reciprocal, 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 you 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, especially him. When that person is demonstrating, in this case, Yahweh, they become him to others who, seeing him, will respond. Fundamerntally, it is seen by Theos and judged by him as being, in the case of a believing response, good. 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.

Following on from the ten commandments the next three chapters of Exodus deal with a series of specific commands which are largely to be fulfilled when the children of Yisra’el come into their land inheritance which is how chapter 23 ends commanding the people not to make covenants with the inhabitants of the land, and especially with their ‘elohym, whose territory they are taking over and the extents of that territory are delineated. The covenant that they are making with Yahweh is at variance with any covenant they might make with ‘other’ ‘elohym and/or the people that served them.

In chapter 24 these words are written down in a book and Mosheh takes the book of the covenant and sprinkles it with the blood of offerings made with oxen. He reads the words of this covenant to them and their response is:

All that Yahweh has said will we do, and be obedient. (Ex.24.7)

Mosheh responds:

Behold the blood of the covenant, which Yahweh has made (literally ‘cut’) with you concerning all these words. (Ex.24.8)

So, the covenant made with the people is a conversation from Yahweh mediated through Mosheh and reciprocated in his presence with a declaration of obedience to the precepts set out in these words. Even though that declaration was, in effect, vain. The words are sprinkled by blood because as the writer to the Hebrews says:

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. (Heb.9.22)

and:

It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. (Heb.9.23)

These events in Exodus are figurative of the greater sacrifice made by Theos in Iesous and, although it was accompanied by the shedding of blood it was the pouring out of Iesous’ soul that was to effect remission. It was the conversation between ‘elohym and him and his subsequent obedience taken to the extremity of his giving up of his life/soul which accomplished that promise of the new covenant.

Subsequently, Mosheh with Nadab and Abihu and seventy elders approach ‘elohym and eat and drink in his presence. Yahweh then calls Mosheh up into the mountain, he and his minister Yehoshua’, to receive the tables of stone, a law and commandments which he has written. They ascend and remain there for forty days and nights. In this period he receives, critically for us in this discourse, the pattern of the tabernacle as well as the tables of stone. Exodus 25 is the beginning of the revelation of the pattern of the dwelling of ‘elohym with man.

Speak unto the children of Yisra’el, that they bring me an offering: of every man that gives it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering. (Ex.25.2)

The conversation of Yahweh unto Mosheh is that he shall speak unto the children of Yisra’el that they willingly offer the materials they have to construct the dwelling of ‘elohym with man. That is, the willing reciprocal giving of themselves to him is a prerequisite for him being able to dwell in them. This is the essence of the name and the covenant.

The pattern of the tabernacle is interesting in that it starts with furniture to be placed within it before going on to the structure itself. So that which is within would appear to have preeminence over that within which it is set. The first item is presumably that of greatest importance. It is the vessel into which the symbols of the covenant, the tables of stone with the ten commandments on them written by ‘elohym, are to be placed and over which as a lid, or more correctly a covering, the kaporeth is to be placed. This combination of ark and kaporeth, with rings and staves so that they can be borne by the priests when the camp is to move, is to be placed in the holy of holies, a place into which the high priest was to enter once a year on the day of the atonements/coverings (yom hakipurym).

Critically, when the camp was about to move the glory of Yahweh, as evidenced in the pillar of fire by night and of cloud by day, moved away from the tabernacle and the tabernacle was dismantled. In the movement the ark, with the kaporeth on top, covered by the vail proceeded first to find a resting place for the camp. In a sense this is the fundamental journey, the direction of the ark and kaporeth. The journey to the place where Yahweh chooses to set his name in the midst of the covenanted possession is directed by the ark moving forward and the kaporeth upon it with the kerubym face to face. The journey to the destination of Yahweh’s ultimate revelation is occasioned by forward direction and advancement which in turn is caused by the face to face reciprocal relationship of ‘elohym to man.

And thou shall make a kaporeth of pure gold: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof. And thou shall make two kerubym of gold, of beaten work shall thou make them, in the two ends of the kaporeth. And make one kerub on the one end, and the other kerub on the other end: even of the kaporeth shall ye make the kerubym on the two ends thereof. And the kerubym shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the kaporeth with their wings, and their faces shall look one to another (man unto his brother); toward the kaporeth shall the faces of the kerubym be. And thou shall put the kaporeth above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shall put the testimony that I shall give thee. And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the kaporeth, from between the two kerubym which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Yisra’el. (Ex.25.17-22)

The fundamental relationship of one kerub to another was that of a man unto his brother. That is, a man speaking to his brother and therefore in a face to face, reciprocal, relationship. Through this reciprocal interaction Yahweh was meeting with Mosheh ‘there’. The interactive reciprocal relationship between Yahweh and Mosheh is the basis for meeting and communing and is at the heart of the vessel which represents the covenant.

This is at the heart of the holy of holies in the dwelling place of Yahweh with man, the tabernacle, a figure for the dwelling of Yahweh in Iesous in the ekklesia. It is also a significant part of the events of the day of the atonements or coverings (yom hakipurym) symbolising as they do, in figure, the sacrificial work of Iesous. This is a subject we will look at in another blog.

In the previous post we were considering how that, in Exodus 19, there appears to be a fulfillment of the promise in Exodus 3 that Mosheh and his people would worship ‘elohym at Horeb as a sign that Yahweh would be with Mosheh. At the conclusion of the chapter we see that the people being prohibited from ascending the mountain, it is Mosheh and his brother ‘Aharon who ascend and commune with ‘elohym and this forms the revelation in Exodus 20 which is referred to as the ten commandments and which are then inscribed on the two tables of stone and placed inside of the ark of the covenant and covered with the kaporeth.

This revelation, these giving of commandments are referred to by the number ten. In Exodus 34 for example:

And he was there with Yahweh forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments. (Ex.34.28)

There is a lot going on here. Firstly I have highlighted the word ‘there’ from the verb ‘to place’ or ‘to set’ and a homograph of the word ‘name’ which is intriguing set, as it is, in the same chapter as Yahweh calling his name before Mosheh. ‘With’, a homograph of ‘people’ set, as it is, in the context of the covenant to create a people unto Yahweh, pertaining to which the meaning of the name is intricately bound up with. ‘Neither’/’nor’ both the word לא (an inversion of אל). Fundamental of course is the linkage between the tables of stone, to be placed within the ark of the covenant, and the covenant made firstly with Mosheh but, through him, with his people.

A few words here should be said about a covenant, which we will deal with more fully in later posts. A covenant is an agreement made between two parties. It is made here between Yahweh and Mosheh with that agreement being extended through Mosheh to Yahweh’s created people. Like the unto/unto relationship of the kaporeth it is brought into existence by the face to face juxtaposition of ‘elohym and man. ‘elohym speaks, man receives and reciprocates. As we saw with the ‘I’ into ‘he’ in a previous post, Yahweh gives us the means, the enlightenment, that is the commandments, which allow us to offer that reciprocation, through obedience, which he requires us to do in order to keep that agreement, or covenant. In this context the number ‘ten’ is highly significant as it is a number representative of such a giving back as is required under the ten commandments. The notion of a tenth or a tithe catches this sense. For example the tithing that was required by the law in which a son of Yisra’el was required to give a tenth of all that came to him to the priests. The tithing which Ya’aqob promises to ‘elohym when he was at Beth’el (the house of אל) and asked if Yahweh would bring him back (a return journey) then he would give him the tenth. Similarly when Iesous heals ten lepers only one returns back to give Theos the glory, that is a tenth. We can see clearly now how that the reciprocal obedience to the ten commandments is that which makes it a return journey. A return to אל and a return, ultimately to ‘Eden. These ideas are fundamentally enshrined in who אל is and will be and the meaning of his name. So, in returning back words which we have been given, we are transforming into him and returning to become he out of whom, as a species, we were made.

In language highly reminiscent of the calling of Yahweh’s name which will happen in chapter 34 Yahweh reveals who he is (and will be) and what he expects in reciprocation of that revelation, expressed both in the not and the not/not (yea), that is in positives and negatives, again wholly consistent with the title אל and its homographic meaning of ‘not’, although repeatedly using the inverted לא thus:

I, Yahweh thy ‘elohym, which have brought thee out of the land of Mitsraym, out of the house of bondage. There shall not be to thee other ‘elohym before me. (Ex.20.2,3 – commandment 1)

Here we start with a positive statement. Yahweh revealed his name to Mosheh with the express intention of bringing the people out of Mitsraym unto this place, unto him. As he did this he can be their only ‘elohym. There can be no other(s). We will see the importance of ‘the other’ in a later post but it is clear that there is only Yahweh and anything else (or ‘other’) is antithetical to him. It is an affirmative assertion of his identity with a complimentary, albeit negative, counterpoint to clarify what is not him. ‘elohym is a relationship of ‘to thee’ in which ‘elohym and man must be in a reciprocal position. Only Yahweh can ‘be’ when he, as true ‘elohym, is face to face with man. Any other ‘to thee’ is a reciprocal relationship with that which is not, that is ‘the other’.

Thou shall not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shall not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I Yahweh thy ‘elohym am a jealous ‘el (אל), visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. (Ex.20.4-6 – commandment 2)

This commandment goes further in qualifying the not element of serving Yahweh. These ‘other’ ‘elohym can be expressed in the form of idols/graven images etc. These cannot be created or worshipped. Yahweh creates us in his likeness, that is that we are, ultimately, to become like/as him. The direction of creation is from him to us to create his likeness in us that we might reciprocate him. Worship of false ‘elohym is the anitithesis (the ‘not’) of this process inasmuch as a man creates ‘elohym in his likeness. If we do this then we are the not to Yahweh’s yea. In contrast to these negative assertions we have the contrast of the affirmative description of Yahweh in the same language that will be used in Exodus 34.6,7 to call his name by.

Thou shall not take the name of Yahweh thy ‘elohym in vain; for Yahweh will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain. (Ex.20.7 – commandment 3)

Here, perhaps, is the focal point of these commandments. That it is about the name is clear. We have already seen the importance of the name in calling the people by Mosheh out of Mitsraym and it is set in the context of that return journey to Horeb (like the return journey to Eden) which is a journey towards Yahweh – to the place where he is – and is accomplished by receiving and reciprocating his words/commands. This being the essence of his name, it is critical that it is performed sincerely and not with dissembling or disingenuity. The word ‘taking’ is the verb נשא with alternate meanings such as ‘bear’, ‘lift up’ and ‘forgive’ and indeed is used in the declaration of Yahweh’s name in Ex.34. The word translating ‘in vain’ is שוא and is related to the word translated ‘take’ and has the sense of falsehood and vanity. If we shift the axis of the kaporeth to a vertical one instead of a horizontal one we can see that reciprocal revelation can be seen not only as a friend speaking to another but as an ordered relationship of dominion. That is, the one above reveals to the one below. The one below lifts up back to the originator. If this is done falsely then any reflection of that name is false/vain. The obvious trajectory of the argument is that failure to keep these commandments will result in the vanity of attempting to show Yahweh in ourselves without subjection to his word.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shall thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of Yahweh thy ‘elohym: in it thou shall not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore Yahweh blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Ex.20.8-11 – commandment 4)

One of the issues with lifting up Yahweh’s name vainly/falsely is that there is a significant stress in the name on the future and in these two commandments (4 and 5) we begin to see the reality of this revelation. The idea of the sabbath day is to look back to the seventh day of creation but it is also clear that this seventh day of creation is anticipatory of a rest to come. (We will look at the idea of anticipatory manifestation in more detail in the future.) The writer to the Hebrews is clear that when the children of Yisra’el entered into the land they had not achieved that rest. This is because they had not ceased from their labours. A cessation of labour and an entering into rest rely upon ceasing to strive, in this age, against the flesh, to cease to struggle to manifest the name of Yahweh in ourselves and for it to be no longer a battle. As such to observe the sabbath is not only to look back but also to look forward to a time of true rest when the reconciliation of man and ‘elohym has been fulfilled.

Indeed, if we see these statements as factual observances of the future rather than commands then we can see a certainty of prophecy fulfilled. In this case we might consider who the ‘thou’ (singular) is that these statements are addressed to. Is it a personal unto/unto interaction with any given member of the children of Yisra’el or to Mosheh (to whom these words were given and in whom were the people) or to the future mediator of the new covenant, Iesous.

Again, although most of the statements concerning the sabbath are in the positive, one negative stands out – thou shall not work.

Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which Yahweh thy ‘elohym gives thee. (Ex.20.12 – commandment 5)

In Ephesians 6.2 it says that this is the first commandment with promise because it comes with the promise of long life, figuratively agelasting life, as an outcome of obedience to that command. It is also a command that comes with no negative. If Yahweh is a father to his children then this commandment hints at honouring natural parents as though they were your parent in heaven. In this sense it is a work befitting faith, it is a manifestational work, showing the belief in obedience to a natural parent as a figurative obedience to a heavenly parent. It is a kind of microcosm of the whole of the commandments. The true unto/unto relationship leads to life.

Thou shall not kill. (Ex.20.13 – commandment 6)

A completely negative statement. Life is the preserve of Yahweh. Man has no authority to take another man’s life.

Thou shall not commit adultery. (Ex.20.14 – commandment 7)

Another commandment in the negative. Again, manifestational in essence. According to the proverb ‘whoso commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding: he that does it destroys his own soul.’ (Prov.6.32). We will look at the definition of a soul in a later blog but suffice it to say that true marriage speaks of the true union between Yahweh and his people at that time and place when they become him. Adultery is akin to serving other ‘elohym as it involves union with another other than the spouse. A true manifestational marriage between a believing man and a believing woman fulfills the template from Genesis 2, that is the woman is brought unto the man to be a help as before him. If a man manifests ‘elohym to the woman then they are living out the meaning of that true reciprocal relationship. If he/she steps outside of that pattern then the manifestation is usurped, overthrown.

Thou shall not steal. (Ex.20.15 – commandment 8)

Again a negative command. Seemingly self-explanatory. Although becoming more interesting if you contemplate these statements and prophecies directed at the greater Mosheh, the mediator of the new covenant. What was it that he did not steal? In Philippians 2 it is evident that being equal (things) with Theos was not something he esteemed as to be taken but instead to be gifted. Thus becoming equal with Theos is something none of us can attempt to achieve except by his giving us the means to become him. As we will see in an upcoming post, receiving is taking what is being offered as a gift; stealing is to take what is not being offered.

Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbour. (Ex.20.16 – commandment 9)

Again a statement in the negative and apparently self-explanatory. However, this is not a command to desist from lying. It has a specific application and a specific potential victim. Bearing false witness is a criminal offence in which a person stands up in a judicial context and falsely denounces the accused. This was done to Iesous by the elders of Israel. It was done to Naboth by children of Belial when Ahab wanted his vineyard and conspired to kill him. Needless to say, the one who fulfilled the name of Yahweh completely only bore true witness to his Lord and shepherd (a Hebrew homograph of ‘neighbour’).

Thou shall not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shall not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. (Ex.20.17 – commandment 10)

Again a series of negative propositions which, again, concern the neighbour. Coveting is linked to idolatry in Colossians 3.5 and so we see a return to the themes expressed earlier in the ten commandments.

In these ten commandments we see the expression of the theme of return. The reciprocating of Yahweh’s word back to him to become one with him, to become him, is the ultimate point of the return journey. We can be joined with him in a fulfillment of his covenant by keeping his word and by looking on the singular ‘thou’ who did so.

At the conclusion of the previous post we discussed the way to the tree of lives being kept by the Kerubym. It was therefore implied that there was a way to get back to the tree of lives and to eat of it and live for ‘olam. Iesous, in Revelation says that this is the case for some who make that journey.

To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of the Theos. (Revelation 2.7)

This post considers the concept of such a circular journey. The return to Eden. The idea that it is possible to apparently return to a time and place but greatly enriched by the journey away and back. The undertaking of such a journey, however, transforms the pilgrim themselves as well as the final destination, the destination being what the pilgrim has become.

Most journeys appear to be linear. A simple leaving one place and reaching another. Emerging out of Mitsraym, entering into the land flowing with milk and honey. In fact a number of these apparent linear journeys can be construed to be circular. For example, the journey to the land of Kana’an is in fact a return to a land through which the patriarchs wandered four hundred years previously. Although the attaining of that land is a greatly enriched version of the one where ‘Abraham and his heirs wandered as strangers to one where their successors walked as apparent possessors. Albeit for the journey to be circular for the patriarchs requires the resurrection from the dead.

One such journey is set in the close context of a number of issues we have already considered including the revelation of the name, the calling of the name and the construction of the tabernacle and the kaporeth within it.

And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token to thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Mitsraym, ye shall serve ‘elohym upon this mountain. (Exodus 3.12)

I have highlighted the truncated ‘to’ (ל) and the words ‘I will be with thee’ and left the quotation in the KJV language where ‘thou’/’thee’ represents the singular and ‘ye’ represents the plural.

The importance of the ‘I will be’ is seen in previous posts where we discussed the meaning of the name and the switch from ‘I’ to ‘he’; and the ‘with thee’ we discussed in the section on homographs as it can also, homographically, be ‘thy people’.

The use of the singular and plural here is important because Yahweh is promising to be with Mosheh in order to bring out the people from Mitsraym. The outcome of their coming up out of Mitsraym is that they will serve ‘elohym on this mountain, referring to Mount Horeb where Mosheh has seen the burning bush and conversed with ‘elohym. This circular journey is seen as a sign to Mosheh that ‘elohym has sent him. Of course it is a return journey only for Mosheh. For the people it is a single direction. Yet in some sense the people are in him.

From this point Mosheh goes into Mitsraym to speak unto Phar’oh on behalf of Yahweh to ask him to release the children of Yisra’el. Clearly, he refuses and the ten plagues ensue culminating in the death of the firstborn and the passover night and flight from Mitsraym. Following the pursuit by Phar’oh and his army and the passage through the red sea the children of Yisra’el arrive beyond Mitsraym and immediately are tested, and fail, with regard to the bread from heaven, the flesh (quails) and water (supplied from the rock). A battle with ‘Amalek follows in which Yisra’el is victorious, led by Yehoshua’ before Mosheh’s father in law visits and advises Mosheh to use others below him to administer judgments rather than to be worn away by carrying sole responsibility. Then the children Of Yisra’el arrive at Mount Horeb as Yahweh promised they would as a sign that he would be with Mosheh. When the children of Yisra’el arrive at Horeb it is because Yahweh has been with Mosheh, directing him, giving him the words and the means to bring the people to the place where he will, again, reveal his name. In this there has been a fulfillment of his name because his name is about the transforming of man into ‘elohym because of a willingness to engage in a reciprocal, face to face, relationship. Mosheh can only achieve what he does by hearkening to ‘elohym and speaking and doing those instructions. He can only achieve these things by becoming Yahweh’s agent, by becoming Yahweh, as it is he who does all these things.

Once they arrive at Horeb the giving of the covenant begins in earnest alongside the revealing of the pattern of the dwelling of ‘elohym among men, the tabernacle.

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure to me above all people: for all the earth is mine (to me): And ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Yisra’el. (Ex.19.5,6)

Again I have left the words in the KJV so as to differentiate between singular and plural. ‘To’ is highlighted as it is the truncated ל and ‘unto’ is אל as well as the word ‘these’ as the extended form אלה – interestingly ‘these be the words’ is also the start of the book we know as Deuteronomy. Yahweh is speaking unto Mosheh telling him what to say to the children of Yisra’el. The essence of which is that if they obey his voice (words) then they will be to him a people, as we have seen previously in the construction ‘I will be to you for ‘elohym and you shall be to me for a people’. This outcome is premised on Yahweh being ‘with thee’ (homographically ‘thy people’) in respect of Mosheh. Yahweh must work through Mosheh in order to work with the people. He must first engage in an unto/unto relationship with him in order for him to be in a similarly reciprocal relation with those who will become his people. They can only be his people if they are face to face with him through being face to face with Mosheh. If they are disobedient then they are not his people as we saw in Hoshea’ 1.

And Mosheh came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which Yahweh commanded him. And all the people answered together, and said, All that Yahweh has spoken we will do. And Mosheh returned the words of the people unto Yahweh. And Yahweh said unto Mosheh, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and believe thee for ‘olam. And Mosheh told the words of the people unto Yahweh. (Ex.19.7-9)

Again I have left the KJV language there to differentiate between singular and plural. ‘Laid’ is the word to set or place and is related to the word for name (see section on homographs). ‘Before’ is the truncated ל whereas ‘unto’ is the full אל. ‘These’ is the word אלה as above. Again we see this order of representation even adding another layer of the correct order in respect of the elders. The intent on reciprocation is enunciated. The mediation of Yahweh’s words and the resultant belief are through Mosheh to the extent that the people will believe (in) him.

And Mosheh brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with ‘elohym; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because Yahweh descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. (Ex.19.17,18)

Interestingly, the word ‘to meet’ is a homograph of the word ‘to call’ as it is used, for example, in Exodus 34 when Yahweh calls his name. The ideas of meeting and calling are intertwined inasmuch as it is a prerequisite of meeting someone that you call out to them. One calls, the other reciprocates, and a meeting of speech, if not presence, occurs. The people, in response to Mosheh’s words, have enunciated their intended obedience. Now they call, ‘elohym responds and Yahweh descends on the mountain, the same mountain he brought them to as a sign that he would be with Mosheh. Indeed, it is Mosheh who is ascending and then descending from the mount to mediate Yahweh’s words to the people. Here we seem to see the fulfillment of that promise made in Exodus 3 that Mosheh returning to this mountain and worshipping ‘elohym with the people in attendance was a sign that Yahweh would be with him. Indeed, it is a fulfillment of a fleeting moment when Yahweh being with Mosheh is also Yahweh being (speaking to Mosheh) ‘thy people’.

We may consider here that this is the completion of the circular or return journey which was begun in Exodus 3 and yet there is so much more to consider in this journey which we will consider in the next posts.

When we say unto/unto it is an allusion to the reciprocal nature of interaction that is seen between the Kerubym of the Kaporeth and in the interactions of Mosheh and Yahweh and ‘Abraham and Yahweh who were both known as friends of ‘elohym and knowing him face to face.

Unto, on its own, is a journey to a destination.

The purpose of this post is to look at some occurrences of אל particularly where it is translated ‘to’/’unto’.

We have already considered Genesis 1.9 as it is the first occurrence of אל in any of its homographs.

And ‘elohym said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so (Gen.1.9)

Here the idea of אל is clearly a directional one with a destination, the one place that the waters should be gathered unto.

The next occurrences of אל in Genesis are highly instructive:

And out of the ground Yahweh ‘elohym formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. (Gen.2.19)

and again 3 verses later:

And the rib, which Yahweh ‘elohym had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. (Gen.2.22)

These are the first interactions characterised by אל in which, firstly, animals are brought unto ‘Adam and then a woman, who is created out of him, is brought unto him. The first, which includes the verb ‘call’ and the word ‘name’, fulfills the initial idea of calling Yahweh’s name, that is a single direction of ‘unto’, but does not fulfill the second which is the reciprocal nature of calling. That is, that having been called by the name it is imperative for those faithful respondents to reciprocate in calling back to him. The need for the second occurrence of ‘unto’ hints at this secondary reciprocal element. ‘Adam requires ‘a help as before him’ (verses 18,20) and the animals are not able to satisfy this requirement. Clearly this is because for someone to be ‘before him’ they must be in a face to face relationship and thus be able to interact in reciprocal speech and understanding. This is the foundational basis for the relationship between the man and the woman seen here but ultimately to be fulfilled in Anointed and the ekklesia in the age to come. The man is teacher, the woman receiver and reciprocator. When this reciprocal pattern is in evidence then the name is being fulfilled.

This makes what happens in the next chapter particularly problematic. Indeed, another major theme of אל comes into the dialogue in Genesis 3, although the presence of the homographic אל as ‘not’ is not present here but rather its inversion לא. Nevertheless, the chapter is littered with negatives and positives and the tension that arises when face to face relationships fail. The setting is of a series of conversations between a number of correspondents.

The precursor to this chapter is the second use of not לא – in Genesis 2:

And Yahweh ‘elohym commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it: for in the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die. (Gen.2.17,18)

After the commandment in Genesis 1.28 to go forth, multiply, fill the earth and have dominion over the creatures of the earth, this is the next commandment that is given to the man by ‘elohym. It is clear that this is both a positive and negative commandment with a significant censure on failure to keep it.

The presence of the serpent as a means to introduce the temptation in the woman’s mind begins the process of opposing (or negating) the assertion of ‘elohym to not eat. Not eating is life, eating is death. The woman is tempted and succumbs to the serpent narrative. The serpent represents that which is not of Yahweh. He is the embodiment of the not. Yahweh ‘elohym is the embodiment of the yea. When the seed of the woman appears on the earth (who is also the son of Theos) he will undo the not of the serpent and affirm the yea of the promises of Theos.

And he said unto the woman, Yea, has ‘elohym said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (Gen.3.1)

The deep irony here that the serpent utters the word ‘yea’ (or indeed or also) should not be lost on us. He poses as the one making an emphatic statement of affirmation but in doing so he is questioning the not commandment of ‘elohym by counterpointing his certainty. The real certainty is that disobedience to the command will certainly lead to death.

This is the beginning of a conversation of reasoning that will lead to the overthrow of the negative command. It is not the pattern of conversation anticipated in the ‘help as before him’ that was being provided for ‘Adam. Rather than being a reciprocator to ‘Adam the woman is overthrowing the Kerubic pattern of man unto woman followed by woman unto man. She will replace it with its antithesis – woman unto man and man unto woman.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also to her man with her; and he did eat. (Gen.3.6)

I have highlighted here the truncated form of אל. The outcome of this overthrow of the true reciprocal relationship of man unto woman leads to expulsion from the garden and to death.

And Yahweh ‘elohym called unto ‘Adam, and said unto him, Where are you? (Gen.3.9)

When Yahweh finds the two and that they now know they are naked a period of interaction occurs in which blame and counter blame are thrown around until Yahweh addresses himself to the woman and to the serpent:

And Yahweh ‘elohym said unto the woman, What is this that you have done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. (Gen.3.13)

And Yahweh ‘elohym said unto the serpent, Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon your belly shall you go, and dust shall you eat all the days of your life:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. (Gen.3.14,15)

The outcome of the overthrow of the true order of obedience of ‘elohym’s commandment, of the overthrow of the true pattern of man unto woman is a period of mutual antagonism between that which is of Yahweh (the yea), that is the seed of the woman (and the son of Theos) and between that which is not of Yahweh, that is the serpent and his seed, that is those who similarly are not of Yahweh. The inevitable conclusion of that antagonism is a permanent end to the not while a temporary injurious state occurs by the not towards the ‘yea’.

Of course the immediate outcome of the overthrow of that true order is the expulsion from Eden.

So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Kerubym, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of lives. (Gen.3.24)

The irony is that the very things which stand as a metaphor for the unification of ‘elohym with man through the expression of the word one unto another are now used as a sign of antagonism between ‘elohym and man preventing an opportunity to eat of the tree of lives and live for ‘olam. They keep the way of the tree of lives. The way remains but access to it is presently barred. However, by their presence and by their indication of the phenomenon of salvation via reciprocal speech and understanding, they stand as a reminder that the way to life is still possible.

We have covered a number of prerequisites that get us to the point where we can focus on the path forward and the main thrust of the argument.

As has already been intimated, particularly in the ‘homographs’ section, the contention of this blog is that one of the titles which the creator of the heavens and earth has chosen to call himself by is ‘el (אל) and that the meaning(s) of that title can be inferred by reference to the homographs of that term. If we follow, therefore, the meanings of these homographs we should be able to gain a greater understanding of that one who calls himself, among other things, ‘el (אל). We saw that the meaning of the name that he has chosen to call himself by (Yahweh יהוה) has at its core the idea of being/becoming him. Knowing the meaning of ‘el (אל) will help us to fulfill that promise.

Besides the use of אל as a title to describe him, there appear to be at least 5 further homographic uses of אל.

1. as we have seen in previous blogs the use of אל as the preposition ‘to’/’unto’.
2. again, as noted in previous blogs, the use of אל as the less common negative ‘no’/’not’/’nor’/’neither’
3. the use of אל as a word for ‘power’ particularly in the sense of ‘control’
4. the use of אל as a less common variant for the word ‘this’.
5. the use of אל as a less common word for ‘oath’

The use of אל as a title for him is nicely illustrated in Exodus 34 where it is combined with the name Yahweh (יהוה) after Mosheh has asked him to reveal himself.

And Mosheh said unto Yahweh, see, you say unto me, Bring up this people, and you have not let me know whom you will send with me. Yet you have said, I know you by name, and you have also found grace in my eyes. (Ex.33.12)

I have highlighted the terms ‘unto’ (אל) and ‘people’/’with’ (עם) as we referred to these homographs in the homograph prerequisite post and, specifically, in relation to Exodus 3 and the revelation about Yahweh’s name. Mosheh is clearly referring back to that time when he says that Yahweh has commanded him to bring up this people from Mitsraym which was the context of the revelation of his name in Exodus 3. Mosheh goes on to say:

Now therefore I pray you, if I have found grace in your eyes, make me to know now your way, that I may know you, that I may find grace in your eyes: and consider that this nation is your people. (Ex.33.13)

At the heart of what Mosheh is trying to understand are the ideas of his name and his way, as if the two were somewhat synonymous. This appears to be the case when Yahweh says that he will place Mosheh in a gap in the rock where he will be covered over while Yahweh passes by and calls his name.

Mosheh goes up into the mountain with two tables of stone to replace the first broken set and Yahweh descends and stands with him there and passes by calling his name:

And Yahweh passed by before him and called, Yahweh, Yahweh ‘el (אל), 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, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and upon the children’s children unto the third and unto the fourth [generation]. (Ex.34.6,7)

‘el (אל) is here fundamentally associated with the calling of the name of Yahweh before Mosheh in a context of direction. Direction of speech between Mosheh and Yahweh; direction of the passage of the one calling his name and the juxtaposition of the term ‘way’ with the name.

The first in our list of homographic occurrences of אל is the translated ‘to’/’unto’ which we have already seen used above in Exodus 33. It is used in geographical terms, that is, unto a place and it is used in interactive speech, unto one another.

An example of the first is its first occurrence in the word:

And ‘elohym said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so (Gen.1.9)

Whereas an occurrence that could be said to encapsulate both is when the pattern for the Kaporeth (‘mercy seat’) is revealed:

And the Kerubym shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the kaporeth with their wings, and their faces are man unto his brother; unto the mercy seat shall the faces of the kerubym be. (Exodus 25.20)

Here, the interaction between the brother kerubym is seen as an unto/unto relationship and their faces are directional toward the place of the kaporeth where both the glory of Yahweh falls and the blood of the bullock and goat are sprinkled on the day of the atonements.

The second homographic use of אל is as the less common word for the negative, being an inversion of לא (lo’). We saw both these terms in use earlier. Firstly, לא (lo’) in use in Hoshea 1 – not my people and not mercy. We saw the use of אל in Ruth 1 where Ruth says, Intreat me not to leave you…

Another occurrence of the word אל translated as the negative occurs in Genesis:

And ‘Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray you, between me and between you and between my shepherds and between your shepherds for we are brothers. (Gen.13.8)

I’ve emboldened ‘unto’ here as it is also the word אל but the other occurrence is also emboldened as ‘no’. ‘Abram and Lot are in a close familial relationship. Pursuant to this, so should their shepherds, part of their households, be; just as the flock or people should be as one with their shepherd or head, as we saw in the section on homographs when we dealt with ‘I will be with thee/thy people’. Their relationship is characterised by the word ‘between’ which is often used in covenant making language. The relationship is one of speech, just as in Exodus Mosheh was involved in a reciprocal speech arrangement with Yahweh. In order for them to remain as one (the use of ‘brothers’ hinting at family unity and also being descriptive of the unity of the brother kerubym – see above) he intreats Lot that there should be no strife. Of course, the way that they resolve this issue is to separate their flocks and households owing to the need to find grazing.

A further homographic use of אל is as ‘power’ but particularly in the context of control. The idea of force, might and strength seem to be conveyed by other Hebrew words. An example of its use is also in Genesis:

It is in the power of my hand to do you evil: but the ‘elohym of your father spoke unto me last night saying, Take heed that you speak not with Ya’aqob good or evil. (Gen.31.29)

Again, note the occurrence of ‘unto’ in this verse. Here is a conversation of conflict and confrontation, not of reciprocity leading to oneness of mind. Laban, Ya’aqob’s father-in-law, asserts that he has the ability to exert harm over Ya’aqob, presumably either by his authority over his daughters or, more likely, by the force of men he has with him. The truth is that it is ‘elohym who has control here and Laban, reluctantly, has to recognise that. Further occurrences of אל as control, that is ‘the power of my hand’, are largely concerned with Yahweh.

The next homographic use of אל is as a less common form of the more common אלה (these), where אל is translated as ‘this’:

Sojourn in this land, and I will be with you, and will bless you; for to you and to your seed I will give all these lands, and I will perform the oath which I sware to ‘Abraham your father (Gen.26.3)

I have emboldened quite a bit here which is pertinent in the light of several of the foregoing blogs. Firstly, I will be (‘ehyeh אהיה) as used in the formation of the name of Yahweh in Exodus 3. With you (עמך), homographically ‘thy people’ as discussed in the homographs blog. ‘To’ as the truncated form of ‘unto’ as referred to in the blog on truncations. Finally, and the reason for its inclusion here is the word for ‘these’, which interestingly is in the singular and would be best translated ‘all the lands, the this‘ intimating possibly that the many lands are to become one singular inheritance in the ‘el.

Yahweh is speaking to the son of ‘Abraham, Yitshaq, to reaffirm the promises which he swore to his father about the future possession of the lands in that region. These promises were made with a view to their being accomplished in a time to come when all three of the patriarchs would see them come to pass.

The last homographic usage of אל is as a word translated ‘oath’ but is not the more common word mentioned above and in our blog on homographs.

Then shall you be clear of my oath, when you come unto my kindred; and if they give not to you, you shall be clear of my oath. (Gen.24.41)

The word ‘clear’ in this verse is the same as the word acquit in Ex.34.7 (see above), interestingly. The words emboldened are the homographic ‘oath’ and the full and truncated ‘to’/’unto’. Here ‘Abraham’s servant is recalling the oath that his servant made him swear to him concerning the fetching of a bride for Yitshaq, his son.

As has been intimated earlier, a homograph of אל is as the translation ‘not’/’neither’. It was used in one of the quotations used in a previous post. When Ruth says, Intreat me not (אל) to leave you. This is a form less common than its more ubiquitous inversion לא (lo’). This form of the negative is more widely used. It becomes quite obvious, for example, in Hoshea’ chapter 1 where it is used as part of the name of two of his children.

‘And she conceived again and bare a daughter and he said unto him, Call her name Lo-ruhamah: for I will no more have mercy upon the house of Yisra’el; but I will utterly take them away.’ (Hoshea’ 1.6)

Her name is made up of two words ‘not’ and ‘mercy’ because Yahweh will not have mercy on Yisra’el. A further child is named similarly:

‘Then said he, Call his name Lo-ammi for you are not my people and I, I will be not yours.’ (Hoshea’ 1.9)

So we can see that the opposite of Yahweh’s name, that is merciful, (Exodus 34.6), is embedded in the name of Hoshea’s daughter – not mercy. Interestingly, Hoshea’ is taken from the word ‘to save’ and is the name first given to Yehoshua’ before his name is moved into the future tense (he shall save) – Numbers 13.16

Similarly the opposite of the creative work embedded in Yahweh’s name, that is the creation of a people, is in the name of Hoshea’s son – Not a people. It is the negation of the promise that Yahweh will be(come) his people and they will be(come) him. It uses the critical ‘I will be’ from Exodus 3 but negates it. Yet the promise is that he will undo this negative and return once again to the positive ‘I will be’.

So we can see here that both אל and לא are used in the same way. That is, although the letters are inverted the meaning remains the same. This is not uncommon in Hebrew where letters are inverted or mixed around, in the case of 3 word stems rather than the 2 used here. Often these words bear a relation of meaning to one another and sometimes their relation is one of dissimilarity, sometimes to the point of complete inversion, sometimes it is an identical or similar meaning. This idea of inverting letters and changing meaning as well as inverting letters while retaining the same or a related meaning is particularly relevant when considering the homographic אל as a ‘not’ and something which is not a not, that is an affirmative. We might deduce, therefore, that in the title of ‘el (אל) there is an implicit sense of the affirmative and the negative. The commandment to not (eg ‘thou shalt not’) and the commandment to do (Thou shalt love the Lord thy Theos…).

Of course, the above raises the issue of what is antithesis. The opposite of a people is not a people and the opposite of mercy is not mercy. At some level, anything that is ‘not’ is by definition an antithesis. We consider that black is the opposite of white but in many cases it is as though anything that is not white is its antithesis. This becomes more evident as we consider the attribute of the negative to ‘el (אל). That is, that anything that is not of him is by definition antithetical to him and that anything that is of him is antithetical to every other value. Inversions of meaning may, therefore, be what we might call opposites but may be, simply, a not of the word it inverts. Hopefully in upcoming blogs we will look at the idea of ‘the other’ which may crossover well with this section.

Let’s look at a further example of an inversion.  
כפרת (kaporeth) is a word which is translated as ‘mercy seat’ in the Old Testament. It is based on the 3 letter stem כפר (kapar) which is translated predominantly as ‘covering’ or ‘atonement’. An inversion of this word ‘covering’ or ‘to cover’ (כפר) is the word perek (פרך). This occurs only a handful of times and is predominantly translated ‘rigour’ and once as ‘cruelty’. It is used in the context of people ruling in a hard and unsympathetic way, that is to say without mercy.

As the word כפרת (kaporeth) is lengthened from its 3 letter stem כפר (kapar) by the addition of a final ת (th) to make up the word translated ‘mercy seat’ so the 3 letter stem פרך (perek) is also similarly lengthened by a final ת (th) to make the word פרכת (paroketh) which is translated as ‘vail’ and is used to describe the vail that separated the holy from the holy of holies in the tabernacle. That is, it separated the holy (place) with the table of shewbread, the lampstand and the altar of incense within it from the holy of holies wherein was the ark of the covenant with the kaporeth (mercy seat/covering) on top of it.

We will, undoubtedly, visit the subject of the kaporeth later in this blog as it features in a number of issues surrounding the ‘to’/’unto’/’toward’ sense of ‘el (אל). However, it would be as well to mention a number of characteristics of it and the meaning of its name.

The kaporeth is a ‘covering’ or a lid to the open topped box which was the ark of the covenant, inside which were the tables of stone (the ten commandments, made up of both not and affirmative commandments), a pot of the bread from heaven and ‘Aharon’s rod that budded. This ark of the covenant was then covered by the kaporeth, a single piece of solid gold which formed the lid to the ark but out of which were crafted two creatures called kerubym whose wings overshadowed the covering and met at their apex while the faces of the creatures faced one another. The Hebrew says they were man unto his brother and they were unto the kaporeth.

In the New Testament the kaporeth, with its meaning of covering/atonement is translated into the Greek with the word ilasterion (ιλαστηριον) whose only other occurrence is translated ‘propitiation’ and is used to describe the reconciliatory work of Iesous in Romans 3.25. It is related to a verb which is used when Iesous gives the parable of the publican and the Pharisaios and it is the publican who is justified before Theos because he would not lift up his eyes to heaven but smote his breast and said, Theos be merciful to me, a sinner. Its only other translation in Heb.2.17 is ‘reconciliation’. A related word is translated as ‘merciful’ in Heb.8.12 quoting Yer.31.34 where the apparently equivalent Hebrew word is ‘to forgive’ or ‘to pardon’. Any of the usual words for ‘mercy’ both in Hebrew and Greek are unrelated to the idea of kaporeth or ilasterion. The point here is evident that the covering of the ark carries with it senses of covering and forgiveness. We may argue that the mercy of Yahweh is to forgive iniquity and transgression and sin, which is perhaps why the KJV translators chose the epithet ‘mercyseat’ but the focus is on the forgiveness and the method of its deliverance.

We have a juxtaposition in the tabernacle of two terms which are inversions of one another. At some level we may see an opposition in meaning. That is, that one is the ‘not’ of the other. The vail, coming from the word ‘rigour’ hinting at a lack of kindness (and mercy), separating from the object whose name is taken from the idea of covering and forgiveness. While the vail is in place access to the kaporeth is restricted to the annual entry of the high priest on the day of coverings or atonements (yom ha-kipurym יום הכּפּרים – atonements here taken from the same 3 letter stem as the kaporeth כפר – see above) . At the death of Iesous the vail is rent and access is restricted only to the saints (holy ones). The relationship of the two items and the terms that describe them is a juxtaposition firstly of geography, that is that the one faces the other and prohibits viewing or entry of the other. Secondly, there is a juxtaposition of meaning where one, in its name, reveals its purpose, forgiveness. The other however is ‘not’ that meaning.