This article commences in Genesis chapter 2 and includes references to the creation story in chapter 1. Stating it very simplistically, symbols such as light = Day = love and darkness = Night = hate. Starting with Gen. 2:8 the speci man, called Adam (referring to both male and female - Gen. 1:27 and Gen. 5:1,2) having evolved to the height of conceptual thought is a conscious being, a living soul, in a garden eastward in Eden. As well as trees for food, there is also the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. We must investigate what “eastward in Eden” signifies. What does “eastward” infer? This is a core example, of how to use the lexical sources to trace the original writers’ thoughts.
If we look closely at the Genesis stories we find each scene is subsequently followed with backup stories giving more details of a former narrative. The ancient engravings are like circles within circles, spiraling larger and larger in circumference and circumstance. Proceeding to travel through Genesis, little family groups multiply and diversify into larger families with a common ancestry, then intermixed as each lineage develops – e.g. Japheth’s son Tubal marries a Cain progeny and produces Tubal-cain.
In Gen. 1 man rises above his instinctive animal kingdom that was mentally without form and void of any moral consciousness. He arose being capable of applying virtuous conceptual thought, with complete, selective control over complacent, melancholic behavior. Here apposite characteristics were finally apparent - born physically alive was to laugh and to cry – to conquer death by life. Such diversified archetypal characteristics are distinguishing features – the rock of sublime quality. Coming from the soul they are perceived intangibles being abstract but just as real, eternal truths compared to that of objective forms. The ancient writers sought to convey this advancing distinctive aspiring stride as the great turning point of the human mind and heart. Such deft characteristics had become persuasive, and were innate within the individual and are very real. They are best called-up, remembered or brought to realization by using familiar objects. That is something seen, something known or something felt. Some of these symbols were the everyday - Day and Night, Heaven and Earth and earth divided into Earth and Sea. All these familiar objects are used as symbols throughout the graphic writing of the Scriptures. So with symbols, the working of the mind and the heart could be expressed and eventually recorded.
It was an honourable period before I or me began to dominate. It could be said to be the I of grace. Leading up to the emergent picture of man in the garden we read, “But the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth” - Gen. 2:5. Rain, waters, sea and flood are more images within the narrative scripture – see Jer. 46:7-8, Isa. 8:6-8, Isa. 28:1-2, Isa. 17:12-14 and Rev. 17-15. All these texts in some way pertain to human life. Bible symbols must be self-interpretive. Institutions of incrusting folly have had a vested interest in self-proliferation so avoiding any hard, detailed scholarship or revelation of liberty, or voice of conscience for the flock. My contention is that original word meanings must be strenuously sought to understand simple, straightforward messages of human behaviour that the writers left for all who care to know. My approach is not to give a personal interpretation but to use lexical sources only for tracing word interpretation. By doing this ego I, is taken out of the discipline.
Returning to the phrase, “not caused it to rain”. “Rain” here is taken from the word MATAR. Dealing with the word “rain”, Joel 2:23 speaks of the early or former rain. Former rain is from the word MOWREH meaning, teacher of righteousness. This phrase “not caused it to rain” tells us there was no teacher of righteousness, eastward in Eden. So immediately the original interpretation begins to be clarified. “But there went up a mist from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground, Gen. 2:16. The word “mist”, from the original ED means an enveloping fog or vapor, representing a mental fog, mental darkness or a dimness of cognitive understanding. Here is pictured man with no learning, no teacher, no invention, no organization, no government and no ownership - just a dimness of base-level perception – supine or frozen intellect. It was noted that, “there was not a man to till the ground.” Such a necessity had not arisen. Every plant of the field was in the earth and every herb of the field grew. This indicated that pre-conceptual man was an agrarian hunter and gatherer with his hands.
Let’s investigate Eden. This portrait, we are told, was “eastward in Eden”. “Eastward” from QEDEM means, the forefront of time, antiquity, anciently, before east, before the sunrise on Eden. Have you ever heard an institution describe it that way? The original writer is saying primitive man was pre-Edenic – eastward of Eden. Eden means delightful and pleasant. Unfortunately the delight was in enchantment and the knowledge of how to live, shall I say, voluptuously – where vocation, the pivotal spot was unknown and insecurity abounded. The cause of the excitement of living luxuriously will unfold a little latter in this paper. But remember spiritually, this picture is a conditional state of mind and heart.
It is here that the early picture of mankind broadens a little. Woman or ISHA enters the scene. She is ISHA because she is taken out of man who is ISA. This is the first mention of division in human society, showing the woman of the populace, as life-givers and man, as law-givers. These are very important concepts in the ancient writers’ catalogue and have been taken more literally than symbolically by those obsessed by an ecclesiastical grip on subjugation, dullness and darkness.
In contrast woman’s communal bonds and constitution is not from dust but from the essence of the speci man. In other words the perennial life-giver is a reaction to the constituent lawgiver (continued in today’s duality or plurality). Woman’s personification and temperance is resultant from the essence of man. Woman’s embodiment is that of the complete psychosomatic separation from man. In marriage they co-exist despite the ongoing tension. It’s never been a truly subservient relationship, but two equally independent forces within the individual and society. The symbolic woman’s soul or mind is described as apparently outside the physical law, but prolifically signified. Man’s body (structure, law, form) was set as the foundation of the creative fountain of woman (mother of all living). Thus woman was distinctively drawn from the masculine.
What was the next etching of this duality to be considered by the writers? Pristine humanity was a free spirit, and was owned by nobody. The word “free” of course means liberty and not license as we see in I so often in freewill. But Adam, man, the law-giver and Eve, (CHAVAH - mother of all living - the life giver), took what was not theirs to take. “And when the woman saw that the tree (of knowledge of good and evil) 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 husband and he did eat.” - Gen. 3:6.
We have now covered the story of early, primitive society in a nutshell. Its ramifications are revealed and explained in more detail chapter-by-chapter in the Book of Genesis. By now in Genesis chapter 4, tribes were growing as narrated in the lineage of Cain. The meaning of “taking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil” is about to be magnified, as it gradually becomes multi-layered “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bare Cain, and said I have gotten a man from the Lord.” Cain means acquisition. Eve said, “I have gotten”. Yes acquisition had entered the heart and mind of early mankind. This temperament, to possess, came from the symbolic woman. Cain (acquisition) killed his brother Abel. Abel means keeper of the sheep - the shepherd. Acquisition is a deadly vice and it killed the spirit of loving care, typified as a shepherd’s tender care for his sheep. These were days of fight to the death. Historians called this epoch Savagery. The philosophical artists illustrated this time as pre-Edenic.
Cain was jealous of Abel’s major life contribution. Cain, being a tiller of the ground, made an offering of the fruit of the ground, but this was unacceptable. Abel brought an offering of his flock. This was acceptable. Abel’s offering illustrated, by bringing the firstlings of his flock and the fat thereof that he was offering the richest or choicest part of his life’s work. Fat from CHELEB means richest or choicest part. The idea sought to be conveyed is simply the difference between those with a sacrificial, communal attitude compared to those without. To sacrifice the richest prime time of one’s life-activity, so as to endeavor to raise living conditions for others in the face of avaricious acquisition, it was believed, would bring betterment to mankind.
Overwhelmingly man’s fear of enslavement caused him to choose to fight for supremacy. This is the male influence within each individual – whether physically male or female. Likewise the female’s constitutional elements exist within social bonds, but as creativity requires resolute, reflective effort, it is easier to decide might is right, and even portrayed as the masculine way. How true the verse “Not by might, (from CHAYIL – army) nor by power, (KOWACH – force, strength, wealth) but by my spirit saith…” “a still small voice”.
Cain, too, had lost peace and tranquility and had to till the ground for his livelihood. Gen. 4:16 records, “Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.” This picturesque narrative is saying, acquisition took a backward step – going east of Eden to a place called Nod. Nod means wandering. This gives a sense of chaos and disorder. When studied carefully this story is clear. It is not the empty story of fundamentalism (a what will I get if I am good). As one travels carefully through the Scriptures it can be seen to be a very rich and fertile message of the honourableness of allocating time for self-sacrifice – or devoted to grace – an acceptance of the inherent voice of conscience. It is wasted on the inattentive thoughtless reader, who is easily influenced and lead to the darker side of life and who sees only desolation in his/her journey. Such a vocation fails to grasp anything beyond the needs of I.
The idea of the victorious conquering tribes possessing the captured and putting them to work, instead of being assimulated (life-giving), as once was the way, came from the members, of the tribes, not the leaders. Symbolically written this was woman – Eve taking of the forbidden fruit. Dominance and ruler-ship was enhanced by possession and gave the tribal leader or patriarch the idea to take complete charge of the defeated and appropriate them. Remember, it is said, Adam took the fruit “and did eat”. Thus arose a new commander stealing the voice of conscience.
Firstly, the members of the tribe had “gotten”. The “right” to possess had completely changed the serene nature of life. Secondly, the militarist commander or mighty hunter replaced the tribal god or patriarch. The inordinate revenge, the desire of taking possession without due regard to the rights of others began in the nomadic life of ancient tribes and then spread to the leaders. The nucleus of possession or ownership, “a gotten for me mentality” a distorted psyche, had reared its ugly head in many different fields. This was a very important development in societal relationships and is well documented graphically in Genesis. We do not know how many eons passed before it dawned on Homo sapiens that they could possess anything, but pre-Edenic conditions were no doubt lengthy.
The story of pristine man being a free spirit (without the ego of I) prior to bondage needed to be hidden. Such native freedom was too democratic and this would leave the peers of society, who taught I guaranteed freedom, without an obedient and meekly accepting flock. Hence came the centuries old deception in translations by turning metaphor into literal application. But even in the days of Nimrod, leaders, in a very blatant autocratic way, knew how to condition and deceive the genuine seeker. Some verses in Scripture have escaped mutilation by “the powers of darkness in heavenly places”. So in Genesis 11:3-4 we read “And they (HUW, HIY HEMMAH = a man) said one to another, Go to, let us make brick…And they (a man) said, Go to let us build a city…and let us make us a name”- very democratic indeed!
Now remember, early pristine humanity was a reconciled spirit and governed by nobody except the innate. Once genuine liberty is redeemed, then a government by the united spirit of the vocative consciousness, that is a government of the ever-present still small voice, would rightly be called theocracy. The rule of the liberated, creative Spirit is where the active God abides. So you see, the true God is a verb, benign thought plus action.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Leavenedand Unleavened in Old and New Testaments
Take the words leavened and unleavened. This article proposes to express how these words are used in the Old and New Testaments.
The word leavened in Hebrew from CHAMETZ means dough containing yeast to make bread. Yeast causes the dough to be fermented, risen, swollen. When the word “leavened” is applied to human characteristics one might say, “He or she is aroused or spiritually aroused, excited, awakened, perturbed or drawing public attention.” Leavened bread takes effort and must be kneaded, with a little kept to be added to the next baking.
On the other hand the word unleavened being MATSTAH, means unfermented, unrisen, flat, not sourced with yeast. In human parlance regarding our nature this word “unleavened” could indicate apathy, undisturbed, inactive, indolent, or one suffering mental bondage or paralysis. Unleavened bread is easily made, without effort or thought.
The words leavened and unleavened are used in the Old Testament to describe kinds of bread. In very ancient time, the eating of unleavened bread followed Passover (offering of pascal lamb), the first feast of the Jewish sacred year. It was inaugurated into the tabernacle/temple ceremonials. Unleavened bread following Passover was to be a memorial to commemorate the saving, sacrificial power of a God of love and the liberation of downtrodden, unrisen life of bondage and despair narrated in the Exodus story.
Unleavened Bread
Legend has it that, the congregation of Israel, about to leave Egytpian captivity was instructed to eat unleavened bread along with slaying a lamb and eating its flesh. “And unleavened bread…they shall eat.” “Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread.” “And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread, for in the selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt; therefore ye shall observe this day in your generations (= DOWR, DOR – a revolution of time) by the ordinance forever (= OLAM – a vanishing of point or time out of mind, and ALAM – to veil from sight) Exd. 12:17. “Seven days shall there be no leaven in your houses.” Exd. 12:19. “Moses said unto the people, Remember this day in which ye came out of Egypt, out of the land of bondage, for by strength of hand the Lord (Jehovah, Eternal, Beacon, Hayah – to exist) brought you out of this place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten. This day came ye out in the month of Abib.” Exd. 13:3,4.
“This month (Abib) shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you; Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel saying, In the tenth day of this month, they shall take to them every man a lamb.” Exd.12,2,3. And ye shall keep it up until the fourteeth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.” Exd. 12.6. “In the evening” indicating the beginning of the fifteenth day Abib – see Exd. 12:7-11 for more details.
“Observe the month of Abib, and keep the Passover unto the Lord thy God: for in the month of Abib, the Lord thy God brought thee forth out of Egypt by night. Thou shalt therefore sacrifice the Passover unto the Lord thy God, of the flesh of the herd, in the place which the Lord shall choose to place his name there. Though shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, even the bread of affliction; for thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste…” Deut. 16:1-3.
So we see here the unleavened bread, the inactive or repressed man’s bread, void of exertion or cogitation is also the symbol of affliction. Hence we have it, from the 15th to 21st Abib is the Passover, the sacrifice of the lamb, and the feast of unleavened bread to remember the unrisen life of absolutism in bondage, and a compassionate indwelling sacrificial God that can liberate the human soul from the evil fruits of acquisition and power. All this is presented in a mental picture.
It is interesting to ponder another illustration concerning unleavened bread. In the early Hebraic picturesque drama, Lot (LOWT = a veil or concealed, dark coloured) when living in Sodom, invited visitors into his home, “And made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.”
The narrative is a delineation. The literary composition is telling us that there was only unrisen conscience in Sodom, a place of volcanic burning rocks. In this graphic form the men of the city were physically indifferent towards having a part in bringing forth new life. Plainly this is a vivid description of those unwilling to produce the fruits of the Spirit for the advancement and benefit of struggling humanity. Later in this written production of behavioral guidance a purposeful cry, in the inscribed Hebraic imaginative intellect wrote to the house of Judah, “Arise shine for thy light is come and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.” Sadly, such admonition was not understood or even heard in Sodom.
The Books of Exodus and Leviticus give details of the feast of Passover and unleavened bread. This was woven into the commands to build the tabernacle and its ceremonial. Some attention should be given here to clarify the reason for the earthly tabernacle, and also the separate use of leavened and unleavened bread. The Passover demonstrated the sacrificial life to redeem the human conscience, stolen when acquisition, called Cain in the Genesis saga, reared its ugly head and stole mankind’s self-determination.
The Israelite teachers, purported as one called Moses, were able to prepare a pattern or model, “a figure for the time then present” by borrowing from an earlier culture which happened to be Egyptian, Exd. 25:1-9. They kept a little of their inheritance (or comprehension) for future construction. Transforming their borrowings, of using objects in the night sky as tutorial symbols, they built their own discipline of corrective behavior. Henceforth the designers of this teaching-method looked forward and not backward lest they should become a pillar of salt, “a monument of an unbelieving soul.”
The ancient people devised a method of type and antitype. Built around the earthly tabernacle as a “pattern”, the feasts, ritual, sacrifices and graphic Old Testament Bible-history implied something much greater and more excellent. The basic form was type. The New Testament gave substance to the Old Testament-form, showing we are the true and original temple, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.” 1 Cor. 3:16. A cleansed earthly temple, for example, was intended to point to a cleansed heart and mind (the true holy of holies) where the law of love and liberty would abide – see Heb. 10:16 and Jer. 31:33. The temple built, the temple desecrated, pillaged, cleansed, plundered, re-built, re-dedicated are all vivid graphic records of our lives.
Leavened Bread
The earthly tabernacle, we are told, had two compartments – the holy place and the holy of holies or most holy. In the holy place, along with the seven lamps of the candlestick was a table “And thou shalt set upon the table showbread before me alway.” (note, not unleavened bread) – Exd. 25:30.
The word “shewbread” in Hebrew is from LECHEM meaning food for man or beast, bread, grain, loaf. “Shewbread” is also from LACHAM – to feed on, or figuratively to consume, enabling one to triumph and prevail over adversity. The shewbread on the tabernacle table, though veiled in philosophical meaning, being a pattern was a tutorial directive.
The lesson to eat spiritual food empowering one to arise, shake-off apathy with compassion, sincerity and integrity and fight the battle for freedom of conscience and self-resolution over restriction, hopefully to live creatively and in peace and goodwill towards others, is the story of redemption. This is brought to light in the New Testament Gospels with the protagonist, Jesus of Nazareth.
The shewbread was leavened bread, risen bread. It was/is critically important that shewbread be on display until messianic Light actually sweeps aside human nature’s dictates, making both Jew and Gentile one spiritual Jew with a circumcised heart.
The bread of the new meat offering was also leavened or shewbread. “After seven weeks of harvest number fifty days; and ye shall offer new meat offering unto the Lord.” See Lev. 23:15-17.
Leaven in the New Testament
Having briefly considered the eating of unleavened bread noted in the Old Testament’s implicit teaching-beacon, that is to say, the story of the earthly tabernacle and its service, we move on.
Leavened
The word “leavened” in the New Testament does not apply to bread. However, it still signifies something that has caused fermentation, arousal, excitement, or perhaps social uprising. Once yeast is added to dough it rises and rises. The Gospel writers saw a wonderful illustration here and wove it into a parable told by the character called Jesus. “Another parable spake he (Jesus) unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened (risen)” Matt.13:13 & Luke 13:20. If the yeast of insincerity is added to the dough of faithful contributions to humanity, on our behalf, then the dough, the matters of substance, will rise and rise.
Now if leaven can be added to love and liberty, it may also be added to error and destruction. Did the Gospels warn of this?
The Pharisees and Sadducees also had their leaven. “Jesus said unto them (his disciples), Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said…How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” Matt. 16:6-12. A very similar picture is presented in Mark 8:14-21. Luke 12:1 records, Jesus warning his disciples “Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy.”
Jesus said of the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem, “Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth,and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matt. 15:7-9. “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men.” See Matt. 23 for more details of the Pharisees malevolent leaven. The Sadducees fermentation, or a whipped-up excitement and confusion of the people, is clearly seen “when the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, (Jesus) they cried out saying, Crucify him, crucify him.” John19:6, Luke 23:21.
The leaven of hypocrisy and unleavened bread fall from grace.
When the messianic body was rejected and the Spirit of this excellence and honorableness quelled, the power of the leaven of hypocrisy crumbled and came to a close. The civil unrest that followed brought about the demise of Jerusalem’s temple and service. The long-held status quo of literalism was about to meet an eternal blow. Instead of a fundamentalist approach to indoctrination, a comprehending of the substance in ritual and ceremonial arose.
This prepared the way for us to understand the true meaning, the significance, and result of eating unleavened bread, the bread of affliction, torment and sorrow. At the time of Herod (Agrippa 1, grandson of Herod the Great) early in this era, “the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. And because he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread).” Acts 12:1-3. Ah! In a stroke of the pen the misleading literalism of unleavened bread, so firmly embedded in the human psyche, was suddenly swept away, and reality glaringly revealed. Unleavened bread was confirmed to be the symbol of the unrisen conscience for tyranny, despotism and murder.
Contrasts of Understanding
Soon to be considered is the scene of Christ’s last supper. But it is important to observe the contrasting mental persuasion of the Jewish approach to the passover compared to that of the messianic body. “And the Jew’s Passover was at hand and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep, and doves, and changers of money sitting, And…he drove then out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them…make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise…Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jews answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and thou wilt rear it up in three days? But Jesus spake of the temple of his body.” John 2:13-21.
There were those incensed with materialism and gain, akin to fundamentalism and the products of the stale leaven of hypocrisy. Ah! But there is power in the changers’ money. Might and power absorbs the minds of conditioned literalists.
On the other hand, the character, Jesus, preoccupied with the spiritual or heavenly soul-temple, could not be understood. There was such a wide gulf of conception between the two dispositions that there could be no dialogue. Interesting isn’t it?
Another rather disturbing display from Matt. 26:1-4 is worth recalling. “And it came to pass when Jesus had finished all these sayings (see Matt. 25) he said unto his disciples. Ye know that after two days is the Passover, and the son of man is betrayed to be crucified. Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the place of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees,” a very decadent, malignant fermentation, indeed. The story reminds me of the tale of Pharaoh when Moses was born. “And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying , Every (Hebrew) son that is born ye shall cast into the river.” The Pharisees and Sadducees seem to have made no progress since the days of life in Egypt.
The Jews Passover in New Testament versus Christ’s last supper
With Acts 12:1-3 relating the positive meaning of unleavened bread it is alarming to note the difference between the Jew’s Passover of the New Testament and Christ’s last supper.
Matt. 26:18, “Jesus said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at the house of my disciples.” Now to Matt. 26:26 “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and break it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take eat; this is my body.” This “bread” is not unleavened bread. The word “bread” from ARTOS means, bread as raised or a loaf = shewbread. Here “bread” is also from AIRO, a verb meaning, to lift, to take-up; figuratively, to raise. So the text can read, “Take, eat, this risen bread is my body.”
Here is a little about the word “bread”. Remember, “I am the resurrection “ANASTASIS = raised to life again, rising again. “I am that bread of life” – risen bread, shewbread. See John 6:32-58 for more “bread”. For we being many are one bread, ARTOS, and one body – for we are all partakers of that one bread. 1 Cor. 10:17. And now ye are the body of Christ and members in particular. 1 Cor. 12:27.
Just to complete the picture of Christ’s last supper, Matt. 26:27,28 reads: “And he (Jesus) took the cup (POTERION = figuratively meaning, your lot in life) and gave thanks and gave it to them (the disciples) saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood (blood = HAIMA fig. the juice of grapes also meaning, my kindred) of the New Testament. The fruit of the vine being, “I am the true vine.” (“The vine of the earth in Revelation 14:19 is the counterfeit).
Leaven and Unleaven in the Epistles
The messages to the Corinthians and Galatians shall be written with the original meanings inserted.
“Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven (ZUME = ferment, agitations) leaveneth (ZUMOO = fermenteth) the whole lump.”
Purge out therefore the old leaven (the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees, Matt 16:12) that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened (AZUMOS = uncorrupted). For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Sacrificed (THUO = sacrificed by fire = lived the life of a burnt offering) – To those who deny me, “I came not to send peace but a sword.” Matt. 10:34 shows the spirit of self-sacrifice and ferment in the messianic body.
Therefore let us keep the feast (holy day) not with old leaven (the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy) neither with the leaven (ferment or arousal) of malice and wickedness; but with the unleaven (uncorrupted) bread of sincerity and truth.” 1 Cor. 5:6-8.
And to the Galatians the same message, “A little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump.” Gal. 5:9.
Conclusion
Matt. 26:27 tells us we are the kindred of the New Testament, “If ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” The upright kindred of the New Testament offer as a gift or sacrifice their time, their life’s work, to the benefit, enlightenment and advancement of humanity.
Those who offer their life as a burnt offering do so for the remission of sins. Remission from APHESIS meaning - freedom, pardon, deliverance bringing salvation of the conscience. Sin from HAMARTA meaning offense, a negative particle or to miss the mark and not share the prize.
So, today, partake of the leavened bread, the showbread, freely offered to all. You will find it on the table in the Temple. You see, the showbread is innate. May your God bless you.
The word leavened in Hebrew from CHAMETZ means dough containing yeast to make bread. Yeast causes the dough to be fermented, risen, swollen. When the word “leavened” is applied to human characteristics one might say, “He or she is aroused or spiritually aroused, excited, awakened, perturbed or drawing public attention.” Leavened bread takes effort and must be kneaded, with a little kept to be added to the next baking.
On the other hand the word unleavened being MATSTAH, means unfermented, unrisen, flat, not sourced with yeast. In human parlance regarding our nature this word “unleavened” could indicate apathy, undisturbed, inactive, indolent, or one suffering mental bondage or paralysis. Unleavened bread is easily made, without effort or thought.
The words leavened and unleavened are used in the Old Testament to describe kinds of bread. In very ancient time, the eating of unleavened bread followed Passover (offering of pascal lamb), the first feast of the Jewish sacred year. It was inaugurated into the tabernacle/temple ceremonials. Unleavened bread following Passover was to be a memorial to commemorate the saving, sacrificial power of a God of love and the liberation of downtrodden, unrisen life of bondage and despair narrated in the Exodus story.
Unleavened Bread
Legend has it that, the congregation of Israel, about to leave Egytpian captivity was instructed to eat unleavened bread along with slaying a lamb and eating its flesh. “And unleavened bread…they shall eat.” “Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread.” “And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread, for in the selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt; therefore ye shall observe this day in your generations (= DOWR, DOR – a revolution of time) by the ordinance forever (= OLAM – a vanishing of point or time out of mind, and ALAM – to veil from sight) Exd. 12:17. “Seven days shall there be no leaven in your houses.” Exd. 12:19. “Moses said unto the people, Remember this day in which ye came out of Egypt, out of the land of bondage, for by strength of hand the Lord (Jehovah, Eternal, Beacon, Hayah – to exist) brought you out of this place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten. This day came ye out in the month of Abib.” Exd. 13:3,4.
“This month (Abib) shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you; Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel saying, In the tenth day of this month, they shall take to them every man a lamb.” Exd.12,2,3. And ye shall keep it up until the fourteeth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.” Exd. 12.6. “In the evening” indicating the beginning of the fifteenth day Abib – see Exd. 12:7-11 for more details.
“Observe the month of Abib, and keep the Passover unto the Lord thy God: for in the month of Abib, the Lord thy God brought thee forth out of Egypt by night. Thou shalt therefore sacrifice the Passover unto the Lord thy God, of the flesh of the herd, in the place which the Lord shall choose to place his name there. Though shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, even the bread of affliction; for thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste…” Deut. 16:1-3.
So we see here the unleavened bread, the inactive or repressed man’s bread, void of exertion or cogitation is also the symbol of affliction. Hence we have it, from the 15th to 21st Abib is the Passover, the sacrifice of the lamb, and the feast of unleavened bread to remember the unrisen life of absolutism in bondage, and a compassionate indwelling sacrificial God that can liberate the human soul from the evil fruits of acquisition and power. All this is presented in a mental picture.
It is interesting to ponder another illustration concerning unleavened bread. In the early Hebraic picturesque drama, Lot (LOWT = a veil or concealed, dark coloured) when living in Sodom, invited visitors into his home, “And made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.”
The narrative is a delineation. The literary composition is telling us that there was only unrisen conscience in Sodom, a place of volcanic burning rocks. In this graphic form the men of the city were physically indifferent towards having a part in bringing forth new life. Plainly this is a vivid description of those unwilling to produce the fruits of the Spirit for the advancement and benefit of struggling humanity. Later in this written production of behavioral guidance a purposeful cry, in the inscribed Hebraic imaginative intellect wrote to the house of Judah, “Arise shine for thy light is come and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.” Sadly, such admonition was not understood or even heard in Sodom.
The Books of Exodus and Leviticus give details of the feast of Passover and unleavened bread. This was woven into the commands to build the tabernacle and its ceremonial. Some attention should be given here to clarify the reason for the earthly tabernacle, and also the separate use of leavened and unleavened bread. The Passover demonstrated the sacrificial life to redeem the human conscience, stolen when acquisition, called Cain in the Genesis saga, reared its ugly head and stole mankind’s self-determination.
The Israelite teachers, purported as one called Moses, were able to prepare a pattern or model, “a figure for the time then present” by borrowing from an earlier culture which happened to be Egyptian, Exd. 25:1-9. They kept a little of their inheritance (or comprehension) for future construction. Transforming their borrowings, of using objects in the night sky as tutorial symbols, they built their own discipline of corrective behavior. Henceforth the designers of this teaching-method looked forward and not backward lest they should become a pillar of salt, “a monument of an unbelieving soul.”
The ancient people devised a method of type and antitype. Built around the earthly tabernacle as a “pattern”, the feasts, ritual, sacrifices and graphic Old Testament Bible-history implied something much greater and more excellent. The basic form was type. The New Testament gave substance to the Old Testament-form, showing we are the true and original temple, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.” 1 Cor. 3:16. A cleansed earthly temple, for example, was intended to point to a cleansed heart and mind (the true holy of holies) where the law of love and liberty would abide – see Heb. 10:16 and Jer. 31:33. The temple built, the temple desecrated, pillaged, cleansed, plundered, re-built, re-dedicated are all vivid graphic records of our lives.
Leavened Bread
The earthly tabernacle, we are told, had two compartments – the holy place and the holy of holies or most holy. In the holy place, along with the seven lamps of the candlestick was a table “And thou shalt set upon the table showbread before me alway.” (note, not unleavened bread) – Exd. 25:30.
The word “shewbread” in Hebrew is from LECHEM meaning food for man or beast, bread, grain, loaf. “Shewbread” is also from LACHAM – to feed on, or figuratively to consume, enabling one to triumph and prevail over adversity. The shewbread on the tabernacle table, though veiled in philosophical meaning, being a pattern was a tutorial directive.
The lesson to eat spiritual food empowering one to arise, shake-off apathy with compassion, sincerity and integrity and fight the battle for freedom of conscience and self-resolution over restriction, hopefully to live creatively and in peace and goodwill towards others, is the story of redemption. This is brought to light in the New Testament Gospels with the protagonist, Jesus of Nazareth.
The shewbread was leavened bread, risen bread. It was/is critically important that shewbread be on display until messianic Light actually sweeps aside human nature’s dictates, making both Jew and Gentile one spiritual Jew with a circumcised heart.
The bread of the new meat offering was also leavened or shewbread. “After seven weeks of harvest number fifty days; and ye shall offer new meat offering unto the Lord.” See Lev. 23:15-17.
Leaven in the New Testament
Having briefly considered the eating of unleavened bread noted in the Old Testament’s implicit teaching-beacon, that is to say, the story of the earthly tabernacle and its service, we move on.
Leavened
The word “leavened” in the New Testament does not apply to bread. However, it still signifies something that has caused fermentation, arousal, excitement, or perhaps social uprising. Once yeast is added to dough it rises and rises. The Gospel writers saw a wonderful illustration here and wove it into a parable told by the character called Jesus. “Another parable spake he (Jesus) unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened (risen)” Matt.13:13 & Luke 13:20. If the yeast of insincerity is added to the dough of faithful contributions to humanity, on our behalf, then the dough, the matters of substance, will rise and rise.
Now if leaven can be added to love and liberty, it may also be added to error and destruction. Did the Gospels warn of this?
The Pharisees and Sadducees also had their leaven. “Jesus said unto them (his disciples), Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said…How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” Matt. 16:6-12. A very similar picture is presented in Mark 8:14-21. Luke 12:1 records, Jesus warning his disciples “Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy.”
Jesus said of the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem, “Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth,and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matt. 15:7-9. “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men.” See Matt. 23 for more details of the Pharisees malevolent leaven. The Sadducees fermentation, or a whipped-up excitement and confusion of the people, is clearly seen “when the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, (Jesus) they cried out saying, Crucify him, crucify him.” John19:6, Luke 23:21.
The leaven of hypocrisy and unleavened bread fall from grace.
When the messianic body was rejected and the Spirit of this excellence and honorableness quelled, the power of the leaven of hypocrisy crumbled and came to a close. The civil unrest that followed brought about the demise of Jerusalem’s temple and service. The long-held status quo of literalism was about to meet an eternal blow. Instead of a fundamentalist approach to indoctrination, a comprehending of the substance in ritual and ceremonial arose.
This prepared the way for us to understand the true meaning, the significance, and result of eating unleavened bread, the bread of affliction, torment and sorrow. At the time of Herod (Agrippa 1, grandson of Herod the Great) early in this era, “the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. And because he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread).” Acts 12:1-3. Ah! In a stroke of the pen the misleading literalism of unleavened bread, so firmly embedded in the human psyche, was suddenly swept away, and reality glaringly revealed. Unleavened bread was confirmed to be the symbol of the unrisen conscience for tyranny, despotism and murder.
Contrasts of Understanding
Soon to be considered is the scene of Christ’s last supper. But it is important to observe the contrasting mental persuasion of the Jewish approach to the passover compared to that of the messianic body. “And the Jew’s Passover was at hand and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep, and doves, and changers of money sitting, And…he drove then out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them…make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise…Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jews answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and thou wilt rear it up in three days? But Jesus spake of the temple of his body.” John 2:13-21.
There were those incensed with materialism and gain, akin to fundamentalism and the products of the stale leaven of hypocrisy. Ah! But there is power in the changers’ money. Might and power absorbs the minds of conditioned literalists.
On the other hand, the character, Jesus, preoccupied with the spiritual or heavenly soul-temple, could not be understood. There was such a wide gulf of conception between the two dispositions that there could be no dialogue. Interesting isn’t it?
Another rather disturbing display from Matt. 26:1-4 is worth recalling. “And it came to pass when Jesus had finished all these sayings (see Matt. 25) he said unto his disciples. Ye know that after two days is the Passover, and the son of man is betrayed to be crucified. Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the place of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees,” a very decadent, malignant fermentation, indeed. The story reminds me of the tale of Pharaoh when Moses was born. “And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying , Every (Hebrew) son that is born ye shall cast into the river.” The Pharisees and Sadducees seem to have made no progress since the days of life in Egypt.
The Jews Passover in New Testament versus Christ’s last supper
With Acts 12:1-3 relating the positive meaning of unleavened bread it is alarming to note the difference between the Jew’s Passover of the New Testament and Christ’s last supper.
Matt. 26:18, “Jesus said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at the house of my disciples.” Now to Matt. 26:26 “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and break it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take eat; this is my body.” This “bread” is not unleavened bread. The word “bread” from ARTOS means, bread as raised or a loaf = shewbread. Here “bread” is also from AIRO, a verb meaning, to lift, to take-up; figuratively, to raise. So the text can read, “Take, eat, this risen bread is my body.”
Here is a little about the word “bread”. Remember, “I am the resurrection “ANASTASIS = raised to life again, rising again. “I am that bread of life” – risen bread, shewbread. See John 6:32-58 for more “bread”. For we being many are one bread, ARTOS, and one body – for we are all partakers of that one bread. 1 Cor. 10:17. And now ye are the body of Christ and members in particular. 1 Cor. 12:27.
Just to complete the picture of Christ’s last supper, Matt. 26:27,28 reads: “And he (Jesus) took the cup (POTERION = figuratively meaning, your lot in life) and gave thanks and gave it to them (the disciples) saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood (blood = HAIMA fig. the juice of grapes also meaning, my kindred) of the New Testament. The fruit of the vine being, “I am the true vine.” (“The vine of the earth in Revelation 14:19 is the counterfeit).
Leaven and Unleaven in the Epistles
The messages to the Corinthians and Galatians shall be written with the original meanings inserted.
“Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven (ZUME = ferment, agitations) leaveneth (ZUMOO = fermenteth) the whole lump.”
Purge out therefore the old leaven (the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees, Matt 16:12) that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened (AZUMOS = uncorrupted). For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Sacrificed (THUO = sacrificed by fire = lived the life of a burnt offering) – To those who deny me, “I came not to send peace but a sword.” Matt. 10:34 shows the spirit of self-sacrifice and ferment in the messianic body.
Therefore let us keep the feast (holy day) not with old leaven (the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy) neither with the leaven (ferment or arousal) of malice and wickedness; but with the unleaven (uncorrupted) bread of sincerity and truth.” 1 Cor. 5:6-8.
And to the Galatians the same message, “A little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump.” Gal. 5:9.
Conclusion
Matt. 26:27 tells us we are the kindred of the New Testament, “If ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” The upright kindred of the New Testament offer as a gift or sacrifice their time, their life’s work, to the benefit, enlightenment and advancement of humanity.
Those who offer their life as a burnt offering do so for the remission of sins. Remission from APHESIS meaning - freedom, pardon, deliverance bringing salvation of the conscience. Sin from HAMARTA meaning offense, a negative particle or to miss the mark and not share the prize.
So, today, partake of the leavened bread, the showbread, freely offered to all. You will find it on the table in the Temple. You see, the showbread is innate. May your God bless you.
John 12 - 3rd Century Manipulation
We all know Palm Sunday (the Sunday before Easter) – when palms being the sacrament, commemorates Christ’s alleged entry into Jerusalem. This is an ingrained symbol of our psychology pointing to Christ’s glory and divinity. But, is this interpretation of John12:12-13 correct? Is there something more significant behind the story? The existing perception may be grossly inadequate. It is a perfect example for review of how institutionalized forces manipulated ancient texts. These texts used strictly allegorical methods of type and antitype to paint a lasting impression. This methodology is far removed from the staid. After exposing ecclesiastical blunders one may begin anew, and show that allegory in the Scriptures added much more than merely a carry-over from ancient mythologies of Egypt and its surrounds, though many of the Hebraic symbols originated there.
Palms in the Old Testament
In the Old Testament the waving of palms occurred during the Feast of Tabernacles. This sacred statute was at the very heart of the Hebrews’ religion. In the northern autumn, at the end of the harvest, the Day of Atonement was celebrated on the 10th day of the seventh month Trishri. The Feast of Tabernacles followed on 15th – 22nd of the same month:
“And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of the goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days.” Lev. 23:40.
The taking of palms is again emphasized in 2 Maccabees 10:6-8:
“And they kept eight days with gladness, as in the feast of tabernacles, remembering that not long afore they had held the feast of the tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts. Therefore they bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, they sang psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his place. They ordained also by a common statute and decree, That every year those days should be kept of the whole nation of the Jews.”
The waving of palms was only associated with the sacred autumnal ceremonial and was never a part of the Old Testament northern hemisphere’s spring events of Passover. For ideological supremacy the waving of palms was deliberately dispatched to what is called Easter in the New Testament. Institutional powers of the 3rd century had their own agenda. Forces of absolute darkness decreed, at all costs, to alter the original of the early spiritual Scriptures. This can now be conclusively documented. If of course there has been a gross violation of the texts for ulterior purposes then this can have wide implications.
This paper will contend that the Scriptures relied on essentially, what is called, high level allegory, using layered type and antitype principles to build up a recollection of illustrations. The principle of type/antitype should be explained a little. Type is an object and is implicit. Sometimes it is a pattern, a figure or pre-figuration. It can be an illustration, a shadowy impression even a number. Antitype is subjective and explicit where the true meaning of a type is revealed. Antitype gives a mental illumination to a message veiled in type. This thesis proposes the Old and New Testaments are intertwined to a very great degree. By the use of tracing methodology and original word meanings, from lexical sources, the script’s thread and intent is crystal clear. It is therefore not possible for the waving of palms to have such flagrant seasonal inconsistency. This article will (hopefully) demonstrate that those bent on literalizing, deliberately, have tried to adjust texts for naked ideological dominance.
John 12:12 “On the next day” in English translations is one example. Note the following translations. These all followed a remarkable change from the original in about 3rd to 4th century A.D.
John Wycliffe Bible
12:12 But on the morew a myche puple, that cam togidere to the feeste dai, whanne thei hadden herd, that Jhesus cam to Jerusalem, 12:13 token braunchis of palmes
Also King James, Douay Rheims, Noah Webster, Weymouth, Old English, American Standard, Darby’s…Young’s Literal Translation have similar some stating “On the morrow”.
All versions then go on to talk about the taking of branches of palms and refer this to the Passover feast of the northern hemisphere’s spring celebration, citing John 12:1, which reads from KJV “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany”. For New Testament scholars John 12 appears to set the scene alluding to Passover. By the time one reads verses 12-13 the words “On the next day”, or equivalent as above, are used to confirm that on the Sunday after the Saturday of John12.1 much people came waving palm branches; thus erroneously verifying Palm Sunday in our psyche. This paper will proceed to show you the result of the devious change of words in John 12:12-13 and later John12:14-15.
Overview of “The Gospel according to St John”
John 12:1-16. Atonement and Feast of Tabernacles given briefly here will soon be followed by more detail.
As established the Old Testament is completely contradictory to the carrying of palms in the northern spring equinox. Indeed it was the function of the Hebrew statute associated with the sacred year’s seventh month Trishri. Succeeding Atonement the waving of palms took place during the Feast of Tabernacles. John 12:1-16 follows this pattern with the addition of calling up another type. Later this extra illustration shall be dealt with.
1. Atonement
The first type in John 12 is illustrated with the raising of Lazarus. The raising of Lazarus was a New Testament presentation and enlightenment of the Old Testament Day of Atonement - the raising of Lazarus being the equivalent of the cleansing of the temple. John 12:1 “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany ( NOW WHAT IS IMPORTANT HERE?) where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he (Jesus) raised from the dead.” Passover is here superseded by atonement. With the coming of Messiah, persecution and subjugation, the true pascal lamb was here. The raising of Lazarus being resurrection pointed to the pinnacle of divine power. It was the sublime redemption of human Creativity. It was paramount.
2. Feast of Tabernacles
Now to the second type of John 12. In the Old Testament the Feast of Tabernacles follows a few days after Day of Atonement, in the northern autumn. The carrying of palms was never associated with the vernal equinox. The Feast of Tabernacles was a joyous occasion as it followed reparation from wrong to reconciliation with God. It is the most solemn feast of the Jewish sacred year.
The New Testament illuminates the meanings of the Old Testament types. Here in John 12:12-13 the Feast of Tabernacles follows expiation with the God of love. This was the important message. With the fall of man to a captive of acquisition, called Cain in the Genesis story, the gradual evolution to redeem the human conscience to its positive condition began. The Feast of Tabernacles was a type of the joy that accompanies humanity’s salvation through the grace of a harmonious indwelling uniting God. The scene of Feast of Tabernacles is superimposed in John 12:12-13. An institutional power replaced this picture with a phase. More details shall soon be given regarding this claim.
Enumeration of Day of Atonement (More regarding the resurrection of Lazarus)
John 12.1 “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.”
As already stated, the picture of the raising of Lazarus is a New Testament fulfillment of an Old Testament type – atonement, resurrection. Today, Bethany is said to be a village at the Mount of Olives. The modern name is el-Azariajah or Lazarieh from the name Lazarus, and is very relevant to the New Testament narrative.
“Six days before Passover”, we are told by scripture reckoning, would fall on Saturday. Bethany, in the gospel pictorial, is where Lazarus (meaning without help) was, having been raised from the dead. The words “without help” indicate that the name Lazarus is a personification. The expression “dead” is from the Greek word THNESKO or THANTOS, signifying literally or figuratively, to die, or from THANO, past tense, has been dead. As the narrative is a portrait of the raising of the helpless, depraved psyche, to a more excellent level of hope and understanding the word “dead” is figurative.
When the Greek-Jews wrote “dead” from NEKROS or “death” from THANATIS, this is what they were telling us - “To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” Rom. 8:6. “And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” Rom. 8:10. Therefore in these verses is the tiny glimpse of atonement - life. It should be noted the word “sin” from HAMATIA means, an offense, or from HAMARTANO meaning, negative - not a cleansed temple and so cannot share in the prize of a reconciliation with the Divine, meaning, with the Creative.
Lazarus “which had been dead” personified the apathetic, impotent defenseless soul and intellect without self-determination. The personification of saving-power, “he shall save his people” is named Jesus in Matt. 1:21. This title is borrowed from Isa. 7:14 which gave the name Immanual to Hezekiah as he saved his people, with the help of the indwelling God, from the Assyrians. Here in Matt. 1:23 Jesus of verse 21 is called Emmanuel meaning, God or love (charity or benevolence) with us. So one could say, a philanthropic spirit helped the helpless.
Now the Old Testament Jerusalem temple-service was purely a pattern to restore the human to his pristine perfection. Then he/she has the ability to reach divinity (creativity), that inventive genius innate to mankind, male and female. The soul-temple is the true and original temple. It is the heavenly temple where God’s spirit dwells. The earthly temple cleansed, was only a pattern, a type to which each of us can aspire by listening to “the still small voice”. The earthly temple was a figure for the time then present. A redeeming of the true temple’s self-resolution is a removing of the impurity of idol worship and blind submission to ideological dominance.
Having moved on from teaching by signs and symbols such as are in the night sky (a very ancient practice that has been well and truly superseded) the Hebrews devised a more sophisticated way to teach by using models and dramatic graphic stories. This method was well endowed with advancing societal images, figures, symbols, and glyphs. The service of the earthly temple on the Day of Atonement exemplified the taking way of the tarnish of idolatry (literalism) and indolence in mankind’s conditioned heart, giving birth to new literacy and a moral awareness to think rationally with virtue. It had nothing to do with a vicarious handover of initiative.
The significance of the literal temple-ceremonies including the Day of Atonement was not understood by the members of ancient Israel. Strict observance of the feasts, offerings and rituals became compulsory for acceptance, “salvation”. This is where Judaism fell into an annihilative mode – the manifestation of idolatrous literalism. But the typical Day of Atonement was foremost a figure of emancipation teaching us that liberty of conscience and expression must triumph.
Feast of Tabernacles – more information regarding John 12:12,13
Subsequent to atonement the taking of branches of palm trees is recorded in John12:13. Commencing this scene in verse 12, “On the next day much people were come to the feast”… verse 13 … “Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him (Jesus)…”
As the early verses of John 12 recall atonement, then, “On the next day” of John 12:12 would seem out of place. It would appear to be the day after atonement. To show that this is not the case an examination of the phrase, “On the next day” from its original wording is necessary. By using lexical sources it is possible to find the correct translation.
Firstly, it should be stated, the meaning of the word “day” depends on the preceding word, eg next day – EPAURION. If it were “today” or “this day” the derivation would be SEMEROY.
Now to investigate what appears to be an anomaly.
To begin, the words “next day” from the Greek is EPAURION and literally implies tomorrow. By applying EPAURION literally “the next day” becomes a deception. The next day, EPAURION, is from EPI meaning superimposition (of time, place, order etc). It is dative case, having the function of an indirect object, (parallels an original type as an example). EPAURION is also made up of AURION being an adverb with ellipses or HERMERA = a period. Ellipses meaning, an omission of something understood. The omission of something understood refers back to the Old Testament type. HEMERA also means a time between dawn and darkness or 24 hours (but several days were usually reckoned, by the Jews, as an inclusion of the parts of both extremes = a period). See Strong’s concordance.
The omission of something understood now becomes clearer. The word superimposition referred to the Feast of Tabernacles, having resulted in the writers looking back to the original temple-type. The Feast of Tabernacles ceremony was laid on top (superimposed) on what was seen as the Passover story commencing in John 12:1. The Passover story, however, does not follow the pattern of the Old Testament Day of Atonement. Lazarus, raised from the dead (atonement) then the Feast of Tabernacles scene of John 12:13 does.
Was there an ulterior purpose in this change of context? It was easy to replace “The next scenes are a superimposition” to “On the next day”. Was there some exemption to the rules of the Hebraic philosophy of history, in the minds of the Greek-Jews, without any explanation? Was it something plucked out of the blue? This transmutation sent haywire the entire structure of the vital message of retrieving freedom of conscience and expression for all. It was completely out-of-focus, berserk and alien to the Old Testament model that was a figure for the time then present; and now to be applied virtuously and incorporeally. Such vandalism was something purely by design and very devious indeed. More shall be documented about this destructive change in translation at the end of this article.
The Feast of Tabernacles is the first superimposition of John 12. There are two superimpositions and the second begins in verse 14. The reason for two dominant unassimilated features is that it is written into the Hebrew’s sacred law, quote - “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.” Deut. 17:6.
John 12:14-15 “And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereupon; as it is written, Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt” And where was it written?
It is well known that this quotation was borrowed as type from Zechariah 9:9. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee; he is just and having salvation: lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”
Foremost to the documentation of this type/antitype inscription, John 12:16 should be given much consideration as this verse confirms that the methodology of superimposition would not be understood – “These things understood not his disciples.” The disciples were steeped in the literalism of Judaism where the sanctuary services and rituals must literally by punctiliously observed. With a new teaching of superimposing Old Testament narrative-types, this threw the disciples (learners or pupils from the word MATHETES). They did not understand at first. Once the character, Jesus of the Gospels, was “lifted up” in glory, - or come, to be known as the harbinger of faithfulness and justice, then they saw that literal “things were written of him”, in type. Types were indicators and not to be taken literally.
In substance, “These things understood not the disciples” refers directly to the literalist who does not comprehend the dative case type/antitype systematization. It is challenging to the modern mind as it arose as a descriptive methodology far in advance of hieroglyphs and cuneiform. Unfortunately this wonderful teaching-method has been distorted. The human mind constantly directed towards the material world has resulted in a regression from spiritual lessons to literalism.
So, you see, there was no literal taking of branches of palm trees and no Jesus sitting on an ass’s colt.
Now returning to Zech. 9:9.
“Rejoice greatly O daughter of Zion”. Why such great rejoicing? Because Jerusalem could celebrate a great victory over a despotic enemy, the Selucid king Antiochus Epiphanes. The Selucids were a Syrian division of Greece following the downfall of Alexander the Great. Antiochus Epiphanes tyrannically enforced his laws upon the Jewish people. They were persecuted if attempting to live by their national culture. No liberty of self-determination was allowed. This victory was a practical atonement succeeded by great rejoicing. Later writers looked back to those old illustrations in types to offer compassion, courage and trust, etching them for subsequent generations.
The detail of the war, between the House of Judah and the Selucids, is more historically recorded in the Books of Maccabees, with a slant towards victory coming with the help of their God.
The Books of Maccabees do not give the characters involved, a personification of psyche. The telling of this time, in their contribution to erudition, is not colored with myth and symbols to create a philosophy of history. This might be why the Jews did not accept these Books as part of the Hebrew Old Testament canon.
However, dealing with the Kingdom of the Jews the latter part of the large Old Testament “prophetic” books contribute to consciousness raising in post-exilic Israel in their established method of colorful graphics, myth, figures and symbols. Zechariah is one example. Some smaller “prophetic” books (Joel for instance) deal solely with the post- exilic period in the same philosophically incorporated pictorial – never intended to be taken literally.
It should be explained, the usage of the word “prophetic” does not mean, “to be taken literally as though yet to happen”. Prophetic writers were coloring past events, but making them conceptual shadows of spiritual matters – ever-present.
The subject of the Scripture writers is spirituality – continually, not a chronology. Understanding this concept is created by listening to “the still small voice.” The writers’ effort was to transfer accounts from mere mundane history to more excellent and elevated levels of consciousness. This involved conveying to the soul a moral, virtuous abstract but very real quality by way of the literal. Using the tangible or visible as a vehicle produced a philosophy of history. The spiritual concept is ever-present, is ever expanding, until it is completely exhausted - universal.
Regarding the Jews victory over Antiochus Epiphanes, it would be too lengthy a process here to deal with Old Testament books, to prove the point. Suffice to say, quotes from Maccabees will be aligned with extracts from the Book of Zechariah to give a developed reason why the writers of John12:14,15 decided to juxtapose a Roman day narrative with a Maccabean victory presented in shadowy form in Zech. 9:9.
Prior to the great event of Zech. 9:9 the writers having told of the Jewish goal achieved, now proceed to describe foregoing events - “I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the house from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea and from river even to the ends of the earth.” Zech. 9:10.
Judas Maccabeus was an Ephraimite from Modin in the territory of Ephraim. 1 Macc. 2:1-4.
The Selucid chariots were cut off and the horses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow cut off prior to the Jews great victory - 1 Macc. 4:28-34 (the entire chapter should be read).
And he shall speak peace unto the heathen: Zech. 9:10. “Judas…left Joseph and the Azarias captains of the people…in Judea…Unto whom he gave commandment, saying, take ye charge of the people and see that ye make not war against the heathen…” - see 1 Macc. 5:17-19.
As the writers of the Maccabees Books wrote semi-historically it could be said, literally his (Maccabeus’) dominion eventually was from sea to sea, from east of the Salt Sea (Dead Sea) to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the river (possibly Litam River) even to the ends of the earth. But, the Book of Zechariah is symbolical and seas or waters represent peoples (see Jer. 46:7-8 and Rev. 17:15 just to mention two instances). The word “river” from NAHAR figuratively is prosperity. Zechariah’s statement is describing a dominion of prosperous people.
Continuing to the victory scene, “When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons O Greece, and made thee as the sword of a mighty man, the Lord (Jehovah, Jewish national name of God) shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning.” The scene - the Jews reconciled with justice. Zech. 9:13-14.
The following chapters of Zechariah show the belief that idolatry and false prophecies, bring disaster. Faithfulness and righteousness bring victory. The writers anticipated a great future in emancipation as it extends in time throughout the globe, believing then all will celebrate the true feast of tabernacles - Zech 14.
Atonement is well worth celebrating, as it is that great harmonizing with the indwelling God, “the still small voice”. “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” So rejoice we can be assured of victory over death.
Manipulation Around the 3rd Century
By about the third century of this dispensation a literalist and false translation of original Eastern writings by Hellenized Jews now in the hands of westerners was carefully devised to accommodate Constantine’s idolatrous sun-worship. Constantine decreed the sun-god must be venerated, “The earliest law by which the observance of the first day of the week was ordained, is the edict of Constantine 321.” - “Haydn’s Dictionary of Dates”. “Centuries of the Christian era passed away before Sunday was observed by the Christian Church as a Sabbath. History does not furnish us with a single proof or indication that it was any time so observed previous to the Sabbatical edict of Constantine in A.D. 321.” “The Sabbath: or an Examination of the Six Texts” by a layman (Sir William Domville), p. 291. London Chapman and Hall.
The entire plan in changing John 12:12 was to introduce Sunday. Sunday was nothing to do with the Hebrew message. The ancient Jewish law had set aside the seventh-day of the week (Saturday) to commemorate Creation. They called their God of creation Jehovah or Yahweh.
In 323 A.D. Constantine openly professed the Christian religion bringing with him not only Sunday-worship but also the celebration of the re-birth of the sun god to the northern hemisphere.
The following extract from Roman Catholic Catechisms is interesting:-
Sabbath, Change of,
Question - Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer - Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question - Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer - We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodica (A.D.), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday - “The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine,” Rev. Peter Yeir-mann.
Note: This work received the apostolic blessing of Pope Pius X, Jan. 25, 1910 - EDS.
The precise year of the holding of the Council of Laodica is a matter of considerable doubt. Some writer’s place it before the Council of Nicaea (325), whilst the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests that it was probably subsequent to the Council of Constantinople (381). Many old writers use A.D. 364.
So by the time of John Wycliffe the insertion of the phrase, “On the next day” was status quo. Going unchallenged it justified Psalm Sunday. It also justified Sunday and the rebirth of the sun as well.
Dispensing with the subtly inserted and manipulated phrase, “On the next day” extinguishes Palm Sunday, the very deception it was designed to inaugurate. Conveniently incorporated into ancient spring festivals, when the sun was seen to be above the equator shinning equal light to both hemispheres, was the appropriate time to deceive the unwary with idolatrous literal ritual.
The message of the spirited re-birth or atonement in the northern autumn celebrated with the joyful waving of palm trees was destroyed. Literalism adopted by ecclesiasticism (Christianism) has committed an aggressive assault upon a plan to re-instate the uprightness of pristine integrity, which the messianic body, personified by Jesus, proclaimed.
Early writers understanding human nature wrote regarding vandals, who early in this dispensation defiled the benign Hebraic writings - “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day (when Faithful and True doth judge and make war) shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin (HAMARTIA, offensive, negative, cannot share in the prize of atonement) be revealed, the son of perdition.” “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.” “Study to, show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
Palms in the Old Testament
In the Old Testament the waving of palms occurred during the Feast of Tabernacles. This sacred statute was at the very heart of the Hebrews’ religion. In the northern autumn, at the end of the harvest, the Day of Atonement was celebrated on the 10th day of the seventh month Trishri. The Feast of Tabernacles followed on 15th – 22nd of the same month:
“And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of the goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days.” Lev. 23:40.
The taking of palms is again emphasized in 2 Maccabees 10:6-8:
“And they kept eight days with gladness, as in the feast of tabernacles, remembering that not long afore they had held the feast of the tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts. Therefore they bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, they sang psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his place. They ordained also by a common statute and decree, That every year those days should be kept of the whole nation of the Jews.”
The waving of palms was only associated with the sacred autumnal ceremonial and was never a part of the Old Testament northern hemisphere’s spring events of Passover. For ideological supremacy the waving of palms was deliberately dispatched to what is called Easter in the New Testament. Institutional powers of the 3rd century had their own agenda. Forces of absolute darkness decreed, at all costs, to alter the original of the early spiritual Scriptures. This can now be conclusively documented. If of course there has been a gross violation of the texts for ulterior purposes then this can have wide implications.
This paper will contend that the Scriptures relied on essentially, what is called, high level allegory, using layered type and antitype principles to build up a recollection of illustrations. The principle of type/antitype should be explained a little. Type is an object and is implicit. Sometimes it is a pattern, a figure or pre-figuration. It can be an illustration, a shadowy impression even a number. Antitype is subjective and explicit where the true meaning of a type is revealed. Antitype gives a mental illumination to a message veiled in type. This thesis proposes the Old and New Testaments are intertwined to a very great degree. By the use of tracing methodology and original word meanings, from lexical sources, the script’s thread and intent is crystal clear. It is therefore not possible for the waving of palms to have such flagrant seasonal inconsistency. This article will (hopefully) demonstrate that those bent on literalizing, deliberately, have tried to adjust texts for naked ideological dominance.
John 12:12 “On the next day” in English translations is one example. Note the following translations. These all followed a remarkable change from the original in about 3rd to 4th century A.D.
John Wycliffe Bible
12:12 But on the morew a myche puple, that cam togidere to the feeste dai, whanne thei hadden herd, that Jhesus cam to Jerusalem, 12:13 token braunchis of palmes
Also King James, Douay Rheims, Noah Webster, Weymouth, Old English, American Standard, Darby’s…Young’s Literal Translation have similar some stating “On the morrow”.
All versions then go on to talk about the taking of branches of palms and refer this to the Passover feast of the northern hemisphere’s spring celebration, citing John 12:1, which reads from KJV “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany”. For New Testament scholars John 12 appears to set the scene alluding to Passover. By the time one reads verses 12-13 the words “On the next day”, or equivalent as above, are used to confirm that on the Sunday after the Saturday of John12.1 much people came waving palm branches; thus erroneously verifying Palm Sunday in our psyche. This paper will proceed to show you the result of the devious change of words in John 12:12-13 and later John12:14-15.
Overview of “The Gospel according to St John”
John 12:1-16. Atonement and Feast of Tabernacles given briefly here will soon be followed by more detail.
As established the Old Testament is completely contradictory to the carrying of palms in the northern spring equinox. Indeed it was the function of the Hebrew statute associated with the sacred year’s seventh month Trishri. Succeeding Atonement the waving of palms took place during the Feast of Tabernacles. John 12:1-16 follows this pattern with the addition of calling up another type. Later this extra illustration shall be dealt with.
1. Atonement
The first type in John 12 is illustrated with the raising of Lazarus. The raising of Lazarus was a New Testament presentation and enlightenment of the Old Testament Day of Atonement - the raising of Lazarus being the equivalent of the cleansing of the temple. John 12:1 “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany ( NOW WHAT IS IMPORTANT HERE?) where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he (Jesus) raised from the dead.” Passover is here superseded by atonement. With the coming of Messiah, persecution and subjugation, the true pascal lamb was here. The raising of Lazarus being resurrection pointed to the pinnacle of divine power. It was the sublime redemption of human Creativity. It was paramount.
2. Feast of Tabernacles
Now to the second type of John 12. In the Old Testament the Feast of Tabernacles follows a few days after Day of Atonement, in the northern autumn. The carrying of palms was never associated with the vernal equinox. The Feast of Tabernacles was a joyous occasion as it followed reparation from wrong to reconciliation with God. It is the most solemn feast of the Jewish sacred year.
The New Testament illuminates the meanings of the Old Testament types. Here in John 12:12-13 the Feast of Tabernacles follows expiation with the God of love. This was the important message. With the fall of man to a captive of acquisition, called Cain in the Genesis story, the gradual evolution to redeem the human conscience to its positive condition began. The Feast of Tabernacles was a type of the joy that accompanies humanity’s salvation through the grace of a harmonious indwelling uniting God. The scene of Feast of Tabernacles is superimposed in John 12:12-13. An institutional power replaced this picture with a phase. More details shall soon be given regarding this claim.
Enumeration of Day of Atonement (More regarding the resurrection of Lazarus)
John 12.1 “Jesus six days before Passover came to Bethany where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.”
As already stated, the picture of the raising of Lazarus is a New Testament fulfillment of an Old Testament type – atonement, resurrection. Today, Bethany is said to be a village at the Mount of Olives. The modern name is el-Azariajah or Lazarieh from the name Lazarus, and is very relevant to the New Testament narrative.
“Six days before Passover”, we are told by scripture reckoning, would fall on Saturday. Bethany, in the gospel pictorial, is where Lazarus (meaning without help) was, having been raised from the dead. The words “without help” indicate that the name Lazarus is a personification. The expression “dead” is from the Greek word THNESKO or THANTOS, signifying literally or figuratively, to die, or from THANO, past tense, has been dead. As the narrative is a portrait of the raising of the helpless, depraved psyche, to a more excellent level of hope and understanding the word “dead” is figurative.
When the Greek-Jews wrote “dead” from NEKROS or “death” from THANATIS, this is what they were telling us - “To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” Rom. 8:6. “And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” Rom. 8:10. Therefore in these verses is the tiny glimpse of atonement - life. It should be noted the word “sin” from HAMATIA means, an offense, or from HAMARTANO meaning, negative - not a cleansed temple and so cannot share in the prize of a reconciliation with the Divine, meaning, with the Creative.
Lazarus “which had been dead” personified the apathetic, impotent defenseless soul and intellect without self-determination. The personification of saving-power, “he shall save his people” is named Jesus in Matt. 1:21. This title is borrowed from Isa. 7:14 which gave the name Immanual to Hezekiah as he saved his people, with the help of the indwelling God, from the Assyrians. Here in Matt. 1:23 Jesus of verse 21 is called Emmanuel meaning, God or love (charity or benevolence) with us. So one could say, a philanthropic spirit helped the helpless.
Now the Old Testament Jerusalem temple-service was purely a pattern to restore the human to his pristine perfection. Then he/she has the ability to reach divinity (creativity), that inventive genius innate to mankind, male and female. The soul-temple is the true and original temple. It is the heavenly temple where God’s spirit dwells. The earthly temple cleansed, was only a pattern, a type to which each of us can aspire by listening to “the still small voice”. The earthly temple was a figure for the time then present. A redeeming of the true temple’s self-resolution is a removing of the impurity of idol worship and blind submission to ideological dominance.
Having moved on from teaching by signs and symbols such as are in the night sky (a very ancient practice that has been well and truly superseded) the Hebrews devised a more sophisticated way to teach by using models and dramatic graphic stories. This method was well endowed with advancing societal images, figures, symbols, and glyphs. The service of the earthly temple on the Day of Atonement exemplified the taking way of the tarnish of idolatry (literalism) and indolence in mankind’s conditioned heart, giving birth to new literacy and a moral awareness to think rationally with virtue. It had nothing to do with a vicarious handover of initiative.
The significance of the literal temple-ceremonies including the Day of Atonement was not understood by the members of ancient Israel. Strict observance of the feasts, offerings and rituals became compulsory for acceptance, “salvation”. This is where Judaism fell into an annihilative mode – the manifestation of idolatrous literalism. But the typical Day of Atonement was foremost a figure of emancipation teaching us that liberty of conscience and expression must triumph.
Feast of Tabernacles – more information regarding John 12:12,13
Subsequent to atonement the taking of branches of palm trees is recorded in John12:13. Commencing this scene in verse 12, “On the next day much people were come to the feast”… verse 13 … “Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him (Jesus)…”
As the early verses of John 12 recall atonement, then, “On the next day” of John 12:12 would seem out of place. It would appear to be the day after atonement. To show that this is not the case an examination of the phrase, “On the next day” from its original wording is necessary. By using lexical sources it is possible to find the correct translation.
Firstly, it should be stated, the meaning of the word “day” depends on the preceding word, eg next day – EPAURION. If it were “today” or “this day” the derivation would be SEMEROY.
Now to investigate what appears to be an anomaly.
To begin, the words “next day” from the Greek is EPAURION and literally implies tomorrow. By applying EPAURION literally “the next day” becomes a deception. The next day, EPAURION, is from EPI meaning superimposition (of time, place, order etc). It is dative case, having the function of an indirect object, (parallels an original type as an example). EPAURION is also made up of AURION being an adverb with ellipses or HERMERA = a period. Ellipses meaning, an omission of something understood. The omission of something understood refers back to the Old Testament type. HEMERA also means a time between dawn and darkness or 24 hours (but several days were usually reckoned, by the Jews, as an inclusion of the parts of both extremes = a period). See Strong’s concordance.
The omission of something understood now becomes clearer. The word superimposition referred to the Feast of Tabernacles, having resulted in the writers looking back to the original temple-type. The Feast of Tabernacles ceremony was laid on top (superimposed) on what was seen as the Passover story commencing in John 12:1. The Passover story, however, does not follow the pattern of the Old Testament Day of Atonement. Lazarus, raised from the dead (atonement) then the Feast of Tabernacles scene of John 12:13 does.
Was there an ulterior purpose in this change of context? It was easy to replace “The next scenes are a superimposition” to “On the next day”. Was there some exemption to the rules of the Hebraic philosophy of history, in the minds of the Greek-Jews, without any explanation? Was it something plucked out of the blue? This transmutation sent haywire the entire structure of the vital message of retrieving freedom of conscience and expression for all. It was completely out-of-focus, berserk and alien to the Old Testament model that was a figure for the time then present; and now to be applied virtuously and incorporeally. Such vandalism was something purely by design and very devious indeed. More shall be documented about this destructive change in translation at the end of this article.
The Feast of Tabernacles is the first superimposition of John 12. There are two superimpositions and the second begins in verse 14. The reason for two dominant unassimilated features is that it is written into the Hebrew’s sacred law, quote - “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.” Deut. 17:6.
John 12:14-15 “And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereupon; as it is written, Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt” And where was it written?
It is well known that this quotation was borrowed as type from Zechariah 9:9. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee; he is just and having salvation: lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”
Foremost to the documentation of this type/antitype inscription, John 12:16 should be given much consideration as this verse confirms that the methodology of superimposition would not be understood – “These things understood not his disciples.” The disciples were steeped in the literalism of Judaism where the sanctuary services and rituals must literally by punctiliously observed. With a new teaching of superimposing Old Testament narrative-types, this threw the disciples (learners or pupils from the word MATHETES). They did not understand at first. Once the character, Jesus of the Gospels, was “lifted up” in glory, - or come, to be known as the harbinger of faithfulness and justice, then they saw that literal “things were written of him”, in type. Types were indicators and not to be taken literally.
In substance, “These things understood not the disciples” refers directly to the literalist who does not comprehend the dative case type/antitype systematization. It is challenging to the modern mind as it arose as a descriptive methodology far in advance of hieroglyphs and cuneiform. Unfortunately this wonderful teaching-method has been distorted. The human mind constantly directed towards the material world has resulted in a regression from spiritual lessons to literalism.
So, you see, there was no literal taking of branches of palm trees and no Jesus sitting on an ass’s colt.
Now returning to Zech. 9:9.
“Rejoice greatly O daughter of Zion”. Why such great rejoicing? Because Jerusalem could celebrate a great victory over a despotic enemy, the Selucid king Antiochus Epiphanes. The Selucids were a Syrian division of Greece following the downfall of Alexander the Great. Antiochus Epiphanes tyrannically enforced his laws upon the Jewish people. They were persecuted if attempting to live by their national culture. No liberty of self-determination was allowed. This victory was a practical atonement succeeded by great rejoicing. Later writers looked back to those old illustrations in types to offer compassion, courage and trust, etching them for subsequent generations.
The detail of the war, between the House of Judah and the Selucids, is more historically recorded in the Books of Maccabees, with a slant towards victory coming with the help of their God.
The Books of Maccabees do not give the characters involved, a personification of psyche. The telling of this time, in their contribution to erudition, is not colored with myth and symbols to create a philosophy of history. This might be why the Jews did not accept these Books as part of the Hebrew Old Testament canon.
However, dealing with the Kingdom of the Jews the latter part of the large Old Testament “prophetic” books contribute to consciousness raising in post-exilic Israel in their established method of colorful graphics, myth, figures and symbols. Zechariah is one example. Some smaller “prophetic” books (Joel for instance) deal solely with the post- exilic period in the same philosophically incorporated pictorial – never intended to be taken literally.
It should be explained, the usage of the word “prophetic” does not mean, “to be taken literally as though yet to happen”. Prophetic writers were coloring past events, but making them conceptual shadows of spiritual matters – ever-present.
The subject of the Scripture writers is spirituality – continually, not a chronology. Understanding this concept is created by listening to “the still small voice.” The writers’ effort was to transfer accounts from mere mundane history to more excellent and elevated levels of consciousness. This involved conveying to the soul a moral, virtuous abstract but very real quality by way of the literal. Using the tangible or visible as a vehicle produced a philosophy of history. The spiritual concept is ever-present, is ever expanding, until it is completely exhausted - universal.
Regarding the Jews victory over Antiochus Epiphanes, it would be too lengthy a process here to deal with Old Testament books, to prove the point. Suffice to say, quotes from Maccabees will be aligned with extracts from the Book of Zechariah to give a developed reason why the writers of John12:14,15 decided to juxtapose a Roman day narrative with a Maccabean victory presented in shadowy form in Zech. 9:9.
Prior to the great event of Zech. 9:9 the writers having told of the Jewish goal achieved, now proceed to describe foregoing events - “I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the house from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea and from river even to the ends of the earth.” Zech. 9:10.
Judas Maccabeus was an Ephraimite from Modin in the territory of Ephraim. 1 Macc. 2:1-4.
The Selucid chariots were cut off and the horses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow cut off prior to the Jews great victory - 1 Macc. 4:28-34 (the entire chapter should be read).
And he shall speak peace unto the heathen: Zech. 9:10. “Judas…left Joseph and the Azarias captains of the people…in Judea…Unto whom he gave commandment, saying, take ye charge of the people and see that ye make not war against the heathen…” - see 1 Macc. 5:17-19.
As the writers of the Maccabees Books wrote semi-historically it could be said, literally his (Maccabeus’) dominion eventually was from sea to sea, from east of the Salt Sea (Dead Sea) to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the river (possibly Litam River) even to the ends of the earth. But, the Book of Zechariah is symbolical and seas or waters represent peoples (see Jer. 46:7-8 and Rev. 17:15 just to mention two instances). The word “river” from NAHAR figuratively is prosperity. Zechariah’s statement is describing a dominion of prosperous people.
Continuing to the victory scene, “When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons O Greece, and made thee as the sword of a mighty man, the Lord (Jehovah, Jewish national name of God) shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning.” The scene - the Jews reconciled with justice. Zech. 9:13-14.
The following chapters of Zechariah show the belief that idolatry and false prophecies, bring disaster. Faithfulness and righteousness bring victory. The writers anticipated a great future in emancipation as it extends in time throughout the globe, believing then all will celebrate the true feast of tabernacles - Zech 14.
Atonement is well worth celebrating, as it is that great harmonizing with the indwelling God, “the still small voice”. “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” So rejoice we can be assured of victory over death.
Manipulation Around the 3rd Century
By about the third century of this dispensation a literalist and false translation of original Eastern writings by Hellenized Jews now in the hands of westerners was carefully devised to accommodate Constantine’s idolatrous sun-worship. Constantine decreed the sun-god must be venerated, “The earliest law by which the observance of the first day of the week was ordained, is the edict of Constantine 321.” - “Haydn’s Dictionary of Dates”. “Centuries of the Christian era passed away before Sunday was observed by the Christian Church as a Sabbath. History does not furnish us with a single proof or indication that it was any time so observed previous to the Sabbatical edict of Constantine in A.D. 321.” “The Sabbath: or an Examination of the Six Texts” by a layman (Sir William Domville), p. 291. London Chapman and Hall.
The entire plan in changing John 12:12 was to introduce Sunday. Sunday was nothing to do with the Hebrew message. The ancient Jewish law had set aside the seventh-day of the week (Saturday) to commemorate Creation. They called their God of creation Jehovah or Yahweh.
In 323 A.D. Constantine openly professed the Christian religion bringing with him not only Sunday-worship but also the celebration of the re-birth of the sun god to the northern hemisphere.
The following extract from Roman Catholic Catechisms is interesting:-
Sabbath, Change of,
Question - Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer - Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question - Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer - We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodica (A.D.), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday - “The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine,” Rev. Peter Yeir-mann.
Note: This work received the apostolic blessing of Pope Pius X, Jan. 25, 1910 - EDS.
The precise year of the holding of the Council of Laodica is a matter of considerable doubt. Some writer’s place it before the Council of Nicaea (325), whilst the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests that it was probably subsequent to the Council of Constantinople (381). Many old writers use A.D. 364.
So by the time of John Wycliffe the insertion of the phrase, “On the next day” was status quo. Going unchallenged it justified Psalm Sunday. It also justified Sunday and the rebirth of the sun as well.
Dispensing with the subtly inserted and manipulated phrase, “On the next day” extinguishes Palm Sunday, the very deception it was designed to inaugurate. Conveniently incorporated into ancient spring festivals, when the sun was seen to be above the equator shinning equal light to both hemispheres, was the appropriate time to deceive the unwary with idolatrous literal ritual.
The message of the spirited re-birth or atonement in the northern autumn celebrated with the joyful waving of palm trees was destroyed. Literalism adopted by ecclesiasticism (Christianism) has committed an aggressive assault upon a plan to re-instate the uprightness of pristine integrity, which the messianic body, personified by Jesus, proclaimed.
Early writers understanding human nature wrote regarding vandals, who early in this dispensation defiled the benign Hebraic writings - “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day (when Faithful and True doth judge and make war) shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin (HAMARTIA, offensive, negative, cannot share in the prize of atonement) be revealed, the son of perdition.” “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.” “Study to, show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
Why One Man - Immanuel and Emmanuel
Before commencing this essay it should be pointed out that my approach to interpreting Scripture is substantially different to modern expositors. The method displayed is simple and only K.J.V. texts are used. The difference being that I commence with Old Testament stories to find the base-types, show these in greater detail, and then search for subsequent types developed. This gives more initial prominence to Old types and their implication in recurring themes. Many images are duplicated. Images are formed in reflection and repeated in ever-present spiritual scenes. They are certainly not to be taken at their literal face value either in the Old or New testaments. Written symbolically there is an incorporeal pattern, a genre that can only be approached from a thorough investigation of the original structure. This makes discovery in later metaphysical re-enactments plainer.
An example chosen here will present coverage of a virgin giving birth to a son. Old and New Testament narratives with dynamics enlarged, illuminate One Man in each setting. My contention is that failure to understand type in the initial formation results in the antitypical picture being less understood, less appreciated, even warped by cursory ill-read coverage. This paper will look in detail at the original type of virgin and son mentioned in Isaiah, then cover its components enabling Mathew’s antitype to be further comprehended. Isaiah’s record was not a foretelling of Christ, alone. Hezekiah was a typical messiah. The form in Hezekiah’s life meets its zenith in substance in the Roman-day Messiah, Jesus the Christ.
The schema within the Old is for modern discernment. The Old contains the kernel from which arises the interpretive New. Sow a seed in the ground. When the plant, after germination, bursts forth and finally yields fruit after its kind, you will know why.
The Old Testament structure and the New Testament reality may be likened to body and soul. Or, if the radar is turned off and blindness results, mere opinion comes into play – anyone’s opinion. Then armaments devised by the ancient writers are underrated. But the New enacts itself – it is exactly that – a new active soul, a new creation. However the divine is within. The divine is the “I am” individually and en mass. Here dwells the still small voice. Listen carefully as it whispers, “ liberty of conscience.” God-given self-determination is our salvation.
Virgin and Immanuel in Old Testament
Commencing, in the days of the kingdom of Judah, prior to Babylonian captivity, Immanuel is mentioned in Isa. 7.14. Ahaz, king of Judah, had plunged his country into total idolatry, making molten images for Baalim, burning incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, burning his children with fire, and much more kindred idol worship that was not right in the sight of the Lord. 2 Chron. 28:2-4. As this descriptive tale goes, Judah was to be punished for her backslidden, debased condition, but Ahaz, the cause of much despair, was promised a deliverer. “Behold a virgin (ALMAH) shall conceive and bare a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Isa. 7:14. One wonders what Ahaz would have thought of this statement.
In this context the word “virgin” is from ALMAH and means “young woman” but also very importantly means “concealment” or “unmarried female” (taken from Young’s lexicon). It is indeed correct to ask why a “young woman” in this case, would conceive and bare a son, who would be called Immanuel. Older women, late in life have been said to give birth in ancient times. To concentrate on the “young woman” aspect, to the detriment of “concealed” or “unmarried condition” is not doing justice to the text. “Young woman” can infer other characteristics apart from a virgin. Virgin is much more powerful when correctly linked to the meaning behind “concealed” or “unmarried female.” This connection is key to unlocking the cube.
My contention is that under Ahaz, Jerusalem, the daughter of Zion, had apostasised, so was not married to her God, Jehovah. Jerusalem was concealed from her God. Jehovah the great Beacon or Light Bearer condemned Jerusalem’s repressive conditions. Nevertheless, out of this unmarried environment, we are told, a virgin shall conceive and bare a son, and shall call his name Immanuel – God with us. But who was Immanuel?
Who was Immanuel?
After Ahaz’s backslidden reign Hezekiah his son, became king before the impending Assyrian invasion. The son of an evil father, Hezekiah, the strength of Jehovah, was said to do right in the sight of the Lord. Hezekiah, a noble person, sought to assist both his own people of Judah, and those of the northern kingdom, Israel. When Sennacherib of Assyria planned to take Jerusalem, in his bid for power, Jerusalem found she had been sent a deliverer. This is when Hezekiah became Immanuel.
Jerusalem certainly needed a deliverer – God with us. Leading up to this perilous time take a moment to consider carefully Isa. 7:14. When the virgin conceives and bears a “son” Jerusalem was in a state of deep depravity, and the virgin is ALMAH separated from God. It is later, when Hezekiah is a victorious king, that Jerusalem’s “son”, a grown man, is addressed as “O Immanuel” Isa. 8,7,10. Never could this have been said when it was asked, “How is the faithful city become a harlot! It was full of judgment; righteousness lodge in it: but now murderers…thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves…” Isa. 1:21-23.
When Assyria, lead by Sennacherib passed through Judah, his next advance was to Jerusalem. Prior to this we are told that Jerusalem had been cleansed of its idol-worship. Hezekiah cleansed the temple (see 2 Chron. 29:18,19). After preparing Jerusalem for an assault, Hezekiah said, “Be strong and courageous, be not afraid nor dismayed for the king of Assyria, nor for the multitude that is with him, for there be more with us than with him: With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our God, (that great indwelling excellence of uprightness, integrity, fortitude) to help us, and to fight our battles.” Read 2 Chron. 32:1-23 for a picture of such outstanding courage…more than words can say…
Hezekiah said, “with us is the Lord our God.” This was promised to Ahaz when Jerusalem, city of peace, would confront deep trouble – “a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel (God with us).” Why do we remain in a cocoon not recognizing the great Old Testament achievements presented to us in a structured representation of a messianic shadow? This is a record of complete reversal, the swinging to and fro of society from appalling contemptuous waste and fragmentation to the glory of the divine, in many. Taken from Old Testament temple “history”, written prophetically in Isaiah (indicating recurrence in essence) is an account of the ebb of evil in society and the flow of innate divine determination. A faithful witness confirms in a psalm the great protective presence of creativity: “The eternal God is thy refuge and underneath are the everlasting arms; and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.”
From this story, the Immanuel who came to deliver Jerusalem was Hezekiah – God is strength. “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful from PELE – a marvelous thing and, PALA singularly, unique. Hezekiah was also Counselor – “he took counsel with his princes” 2 Chron. 32:3. Another title, “The mighty God”, (is an indwelling God). The God of love dwelt within Hezekiah. “Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.” John throws much light on this statement, “…the Spirit of truth: … he dwelleth with you and shall be in you.” John 14:17. More appellations follow; The everlasting Father = the chief without end. Prince of Peace, Hezekiah said to Isaiah, “there shall be peace and truth in my days.” Isa. 29:8. Hezekiah was this Immanuel, a typical messiah. His mother’s name was ABIJAN from AB = father from YAHH, JAH, Jehovah the self-existent, from HAYAP = the beacon. Male and female are symbols in scripture-writing. Male represents law-giver (good or bad) and female represents life-giver (good or bad).
Hezekiah became king and brought about a great reform. He said when going to battle against Assyria, “with us is the Lord our God to help us fight our battles.” At this time the word “virgin” takes on a different meaning. The “virgin” is now reformed, cleansed from idol-worship. It is this change in the meaning of the word “virgin”, in the original Hebrew, that must be appreciated. The meaning of the reformed “virgin” is about to be revealed. Noting Hezekiah’s victory it is written: “This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning him (Hezekiah). The “virgin” (BETHUWLAH) the daughter of Zion hath despised thee (Sennacherib) and laughed thee to scorn; the daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee.” 2 Kings 19:21. Now the reformed, triumphant “virgin” is called BETHUWLAH and not ALMAH. BETHUWLAH means separated from idolatry and made Holy One. The word holy is from QADESH and means separation or set apart. The word BETHUWLAH is feminine meaning, productive, life-giving. It is interesting to see the change in the heart of Jerusalem’s people because of Hezekiah’s righteous reform. Hezekiah, in prophetic writing, was portrayed as the messiah to Jerusalem in this typical illustration. The first virgin in Isa. 7:14 was ALMAH meaning concealment or unmarried female. ALMAH reflected Jerusalem’s debased condition of fragmentation and anarchy. The second “virgin” BETHUWLAH the victorious Jerusalem, rising from superstition was made Holy.
The truth from whence came the Gospel’s Messiah is becoming clear. It is imperative that we keep in mind the meaning of BETHUWLAH as Immanuel (God with us). In Roman days the Greek/Jewish writers showed the wonderous essence of the structured story in the days of one called, Hezekiah.
Virgin and Emmanuel in New Testament
The citizens of Judea in Roman days, as in the days under Ahaz, were crushed, but this time by the rule of the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The pious bell-ringers weighed the people down with their god and legalistic formalisms. The Pharisees obsessed with keeping the exactions of the sanctuary service and ceremonials, whilst the Sadducees, the civic leaders, with no concept whatsoever of a spiritual resurrection or spiritual life, cared nought for the poor, blind, widowed, fatherless, lame. They were much akin, in attitude, to the rebellious princes of Isa. 1:23.
Judea was certainly in need of a deliverer. Would there be a virgin this time to bear a son? In Mathew the word “virgin” comes from the Greek word PATHENOS interpreted as, “one put aside” or “separated”, “holy”. Holy means separated from the Greek HAGIOS and has the same intent as Hebrew BETHUWLAH, the triumphant virgin. The virgin BETHUWLAH was righteous, signifying cleansed from idol-worship – sanctified. Matthew writes, “Behold a virgin shall be with child.” This virgin is PATHENOS and called Mary. The shadowy Old Testament narrative of Hezekiah’s victory is retraced, in principle, in the New Testament depiction.
As it was important in the Old section to study the details of the characters, likewise it is important in the New. The qualities and discipline that make a person in the New are sourced from the Old, and it is possible for them to be traced throughout the Gospels.
Having sufficiently covered “virgin” ponder for a moment the meaning of the name, Mary to seek its spiritual importance, rather than merely accepting the insipid, prosaic idol, virgin Mary. Mary means bitter or bitterness and is taken from the Hebrew word MARAH = bitter in Exd. 15:23. The people were bitter because they had no water to drink – no sustenance – no meaning to life. Ruth 1:20 declares, MARA means bitter. Returning to Bethlehem, Naomi, who lost her husband and two sons in Moab said, “Call me not Naomi, call me MARA (bitter), I went out full and the Lord hath brought me home empty. “So emptiness brings bitterness. MARAH in Hebrew, MARY in Greek. This is the midrashic source of Mary.
In both instances where messiah appears, Hebrew Immanuel, Greek Emmanuel there are similarities in the figurative writings. In Roman days there was a replication of the oppression in the earlier ages – whether it be Egyptian bondage, Babylonian captivity, Greek/Syrian persecution or plain home-grown idol-worship.
At first, the rumble against piety and dictates was small. An imperceivable body at concept, but this one-body was intrinsically endowed with the unction of the everlasting Spirit, One Spirit. It was a call for justice and equity in the little town of Bethlehem (place of food). “The still small voice” of the indwelling Spirit was enlivened, as a babe leaps into the womb. This small awakening body, the messianic body, was personified as one man, Jesus (saviour) who became the Christ (messiah). Allegorically they, the upright seekers, were one body, as they stood together as one man in Spirit. One goal, one objective, one cry - Liberty. Yes, something happened, with profound consequences.
As the story goes, over time earnest individuals began to exert influence and increase in numbers and this is why the conjunction of bitterness and now increase are entwined by association. They go hand in hand. From ancient Hebrew, Joseph means increaser. When a populace becomes offside with authority or status quo, there arises, a chorus for change. This movement, this carillon in Judea in Roman days was all too evident. My assertion is that there was no singular person fulfilling this role. It was a group of interpretive apostles or disciples who were a personification of representative types, Jesus saviour, Emmanuel, God with us.
This enlivened God-given creative Spirit within upright Judeans (described as Mary) was called the virgin (pathenos, holy, sanctified) and was in unison with a swelling in numerical supporters (expressed as Joseph). This begat a delivering redeeming strength, with its proclamation in one word, Rectitude! Yes, this movement was the messianic body and arose from a disadvantaged and segregated society. When a community’s ethics degenerate the conception of a reformation ensues. A new birth, a new creation is inevitable.
Ask yourself why was the name Joseph chosen to be the husband of Mary (bitterness) and furthermore, why was Joseph the son of Jacob – Math. 1:16? What are we being told? Must we return to the inauguration of the children of Israel? Well; Yes, but the word Israel is metaphorical – reigning with God. The Old form had given way to reality. The spiritual age had arrived and a Jew became a spiritual Jew. One with a circumcised heart. And Joseph still represents increase.
Ending this segment, take a brief look at the life of Joseph of old. Olden-day great character-names teach a wonderful lesson. Jacob, Joseph’s father was supplanter, who became overcomer – a prince with God.
Such a noble reputation embodied supreme foresight, outstanding creativity. Jacob gave Joseph (increase) a coat of many colours, or pieces. Coat from KETHONETH = a garment or robe, the shoulder, the spot where the garment hangs, figuratively, side piece or lateral projection. The coat represented the spot where the weight of the garment rests – upon the shoulder.
Joseph was taken to Egypt by merchantmen. Here, the character-name, Joseph, did increase. According to historians Egypt was then ruled by shepherd kings. Joseph became governor of Egypt. This was when the concerns of the people weighed upon the shoulder of Joseph.
One Man
In the New Testament, Jesus a personification, Emmanuel, meaning God with us, was a new birth, a new creation, void of dogma, void of stereotype assumption and superstition. Hearts of concerned people, symbolized now as Emmanuel, were filled with the indwelling God’s love for life and accomplishment. Had this God-experience, this great transcendence, been conveyed to us in Hebraic parlance, Emmanuel or Jesus would have been inscribed Joshua. Then today we would not be talking about Jesus. A mere name of an individual, a literal person, nullifies and constricts meaning. As a movement is forming names are too narrow and confined when you consider the parlous state of ancient Jerusalem. A descriptive name is appropriate in this instance to signify unity. To turn a principle into an historical person in antitype, is an anathema to the very construction of this ancient Hebraic philosophy. It is not about one person. One person alone does not change everything. It is the principle that makes a creative psyche.
The saving-power defined in graphic New Testament scenes brought great light. Far beyond all distant Old Testament forms. This includes the ancient judges and all who were cast as deliverers, saving their people from an enemy. Oneness starts right at the beginning of the Genesis story. “This is the book of the generations of Adam…Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam…” Gen. 5:1,2. This follows through the character-names of the patriarchs and judges. The first judge considered here is Gideon meaning, feller, warrior, one who cuts asunder. Gideon delivered the tribes of Israel from the Midians. It is written that Gideon said, “My family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least of my father’s house, and the Lord said unto him, Surely I will be with thee and thou shalt smite the Midians as one man,” Jud. 6:16. Judges 20:1,8,11 records “the children of Israel gathered together as one man…knit together as one man against Gibeah. Generally judges represented this oneness. The particular character recognized in each judge is by the meaning of the name…e.g. Jephthah = he will open, he will loosen. Samson = sunlight, to be brilliant, a ray, sun rising, house of sun.
Returning to Jerusalem after Babylonian captivity it is stated, “And when the seventh month was come and the children of Israel were in the cities, the people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem.” Ezra 3:1. They stood together as one man for they were one in objective, heart, mind, purpose, Spirit. How better to describe a people so united, having one goal – victory over an enemy. As we proceed it shall be seen that the principle of describing unison of purpose, and Spirit, as one man is carried throughout the Scriptures. Hezekiah is just one example.
The Old established base, “historicity” is by fabrication, construction. It is not a chronological story. It shows character-nature in action – Temple solidarity. The New cannot be a literal replication of Old structure. The Old was only an overview. The New is a great transformation and transcendancy of the psyche – a new temple – the Soul Temple.
Greater illumination it was than ever before. John 3:19 writes, “light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” However, Emmanuel is the new sanctified Temple. The Old Testament temple with its feasts etc. ceased to have binding value when the Spirit of the faithful was quelled. Thankfully the Spirit rose again to teach another generation. Religious dogma must die. Described as Babylonian – confusion, the cry today is, “Come out of her, my people…” The nucleus of good judgment concerning, “standing together as one man” is gaining recognition as many fervent enquirers are studying Holy Writ to interpret “virgin” and Emmanuel. The retrieval or redemption of true integrity, dignity and conscience, ah! that is the sanctified Soul. That is the original Temple, the existential “I am”. The product of a life of self-sacrificing, sacrificing ego. It is a life of self-giving of the fruit’s of one’s intrinsic alpha and omega.
In ending this paper let me re-iterate. Jesus the Christ is not a myth. Jesus the Christ is a personification of a people with like-mind. A people with oneness of heart, objective and Spirit to restore liberty of conscience, human dignity. In Roman days self-determination was crushed by the dictates of the Pharisees and Sadducees in Judea. This brought poverty and despair to a great majority. Their bitterness (Mary) increased (Joseph) producing a Body of people demanding justice (God with us). Yes, this was the something that happened. Can you think of a better way to say a virgin (PATHENOS = put aside, holy one) shall be with child and shall bring forth a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel, God with us?
An example chosen here will present coverage of a virgin giving birth to a son. Old and New Testament narratives with dynamics enlarged, illuminate One Man in each setting. My contention is that failure to understand type in the initial formation results in the antitypical picture being less understood, less appreciated, even warped by cursory ill-read coverage. This paper will look in detail at the original type of virgin and son mentioned in Isaiah, then cover its components enabling Mathew’s antitype to be further comprehended. Isaiah’s record was not a foretelling of Christ, alone. Hezekiah was a typical messiah. The form in Hezekiah’s life meets its zenith in substance in the Roman-day Messiah, Jesus the Christ.
The schema within the Old is for modern discernment. The Old contains the kernel from which arises the interpretive New. Sow a seed in the ground. When the plant, after germination, bursts forth and finally yields fruit after its kind, you will know why.
The Old Testament structure and the New Testament reality may be likened to body and soul. Or, if the radar is turned off and blindness results, mere opinion comes into play – anyone’s opinion. Then armaments devised by the ancient writers are underrated. But the New enacts itself – it is exactly that – a new active soul, a new creation. However the divine is within. The divine is the “I am” individually and en mass. Here dwells the still small voice. Listen carefully as it whispers, “ liberty of conscience.” God-given self-determination is our salvation.
Virgin and Immanuel in Old Testament
Commencing, in the days of the kingdom of Judah, prior to Babylonian captivity, Immanuel is mentioned in Isa. 7.14. Ahaz, king of Judah, had plunged his country into total idolatry, making molten images for Baalim, burning incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, burning his children with fire, and much more kindred idol worship that was not right in the sight of the Lord. 2 Chron. 28:2-4. As this descriptive tale goes, Judah was to be punished for her backslidden, debased condition, but Ahaz, the cause of much despair, was promised a deliverer. “Behold a virgin (ALMAH) shall conceive and bare a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Isa. 7:14. One wonders what Ahaz would have thought of this statement.
In this context the word “virgin” is from ALMAH and means “young woman” but also very importantly means “concealment” or “unmarried female” (taken from Young’s lexicon). It is indeed correct to ask why a “young woman” in this case, would conceive and bare a son, who would be called Immanuel. Older women, late in life have been said to give birth in ancient times. To concentrate on the “young woman” aspect, to the detriment of “concealed” or “unmarried condition” is not doing justice to the text. “Young woman” can infer other characteristics apart from a virgin. Virgin is much more powerful when correctly linked to the meaning behind “concealed” or “unmarried female.” This connection is key to unlocking the cube.
My contention is that under Ahaz, Jerusalem, the daughter of Zion, had apostasised, so was not married to her God, Jehovah. Jerusalem was concealed from her God. Jehovah the great Beacon or Light Bearer condemned Jerusalem’s repressive conditions. Nevertheless, out of this unmarried environment, we are told, a virgin shall conceive and bare a son, and shall call his name Immanuel – God with us. But who was Immanuel?
Who was Immanuel?
After Ahaz’s backslidden reign Hezekiah his son, became king before the impending Assyrian invasion. The son of an evil father, Hezekiah, the strength of Jehovah, was said to do right in the sight of the Lord. Hezekiah, a noble person, sought to assist both his own people of Judah, and those of the northern kingdom, Israel. When Sennacherib of Assyria planned to take Jerusalem, in his bid for power, Jerusalem found she had been sent a deliverer. This is when Hezekiah became Immanuel.
Jerusalem certainly needed a deliverer – God with us. Leading up to this perilous time take a moment to consider carefully Isa. 7:14. When the virgin conceives and bears a “son” Jerusalem was in a state of deep depravity, and the virgin is ALMAH separated from God. It is later, when Hezekiah is a victorious king, that Jerusalem’s “son”, a grown man, is addressed as “O Immanuel” Isa. 8,7,10. Never could this have been said when it was asked, “How is the faithful city become a harlot! It was full of judgment; righteousness lodge in it: but now murderers…thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves…” Isa. 1:21-23.
When Assyria, lead by Sennacherib passed through Judah, his next advance was to Jerusalem. Prior to this we are told that Jerusalem had been cleansed of its idol-worship. Hezekiah cleansed the temple (see 2 Chron. 29:18,19). After preparing Jerusalem for an assault, Hezekiah said, “Be strong and courageous, be not afraid nor dismayed for the king of Assyria, nor for the multitude that is with him, for there be more with us than with him: With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our God, (that great indwelling excellence of uprightness, integrity, fortitude) to help us, and to fight our battles.” Read 2 Chron. 32:1-23 for a picture of such outstanding courage…more than words can say…
Hezekiah said, “with us is the Lord our God.” This was promised to Ahaz when Jerusalem, city of peace, would confront deep trouble – “a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel (God with us).” Why do we remain in a cocoon not recognizing the great Old Testament achievements presented to us in a structured representation of a messianic shadow? This is a record of complete reversal, the swinging to and fro of society from appalling contemptuous waste and fragmentation to the glory of the divine, in many. Taken from Old Testament temple “history”, written prophetically in Isaiah (indicating recurrence in essence) is an account of the ebb of evil in society and the flow of innate divine determination. A faithful witness confirms in a psalm the great protective presence of creativity: “The eternal God is thy refuge and underneath are the everlasting arms; and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.”
From this story, the Immanuel who came to deliver Jerusalem was Hezekiah – God is strength. “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful from PELE – a marvelous thing and, PALA singularly, unique. Hezekiah was also Counselor – “he took counsel with his princes” 2 Chron. 32:3. Another title, “The mighty God”, (is an indwelling God). The God of love dwelt within Hezekiah. “Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.” John throws much light on this statement, “…the Spirit of truth: … he dwelleth with you and shall be in you.” John 14:17. More appellations follow; The everlasting Father = the chief without end. Prince of Peace, Hezekiah said to Isaiah, “there shall be peace and truth in my days.” Isa. 29:8. Hezekiah was this Immanuel, a typical messiah. His mother’s name was ABIJAN from AB = father from YAHH, JAH, Jehovah the self-existent, from HAYAP = the beacon. Male and female are symbols in scripture-writing. Male represents law-giver (good or bad) and female represents life-giver (good or bad).
Hezekiah became king and brought about a great reform. He said when going to battle against Assyria, “with us is the Lord our God to help us fight our battles.” At this time the word “virgin” takes on a different meaning. The “virgin” is now reformed, cleansed from idol-worship. It is this change in the meaning of the word “virgin”, in the original Hebrew, that must be appreciated. The meaning of the reformed “virgin” is about to be revealed. Noting Hezekiah’s victory it is written: “This is the word that the Lord hath spoken concerning him (Hezekiah). The “virgin” (BETHUWLAH) the daughter of Zion hath despised thee (Sennacherib) and laughed thee to scorn; the daughter of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee.” 2 Kings 19:21. Now the reformed, triumphant “virgin” is called BETHUWLAH and not ALMAH. BETHUWLAH means separated from idolatry and made Holy One. The word holy is from QADESH and means separation or set apart. The word BETHUWLAH is feminine meaning, productive, life-giving. It is interesting to see the change in the heart of Jerusalem’s people because of Hezekiah’s righteous reform. Hezekiah, in prophetic writing, was portrayed as the messiah to Jerusalem in this typical illustration. The first virgin in Isa. 7:14 was ALMAH meaning concealment or unmarried female. ALMAH reflected Jerusalem’s debased condition of fragmentation and anarchy. The second “virgin” BETHUWLAH the victorious Jerusalem, rising from superstition was made Holy.
The truth from whence came the Gospel’s Messiah is becoming clear. It is imperative that we keep in mind the meaning of BETHUWLAH as Immanuel (God with us). In Roman days the Greek/Jewish writers showed the wonderous essence of the structured story in the days of one called, Hezekiah.
Virgin and Emmanuel in New Testament
The citizens of Judea in Roman days, as in the days under Ahaz, were crushed, but this time by the rule of the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The pious bell-ringers weighed the people down with their god and legalistic formalisms. The Pharisees obsessed with keeping the exactions of the sanctuary service and ceremonials, whilst the Sadducees, the civic leaders, with no concept whatsoever of a spiritual resurrection or spiritual life, cared nought for the poor, blind, widowed, fatherless, lame. They were much akin, in attitude, to the rebellious princes of Isa. 1:23.
Judea was certainly in need of a deliverer. Would there be a virgin this time to bear a son? In Mathew the word “virgin” comes from the Greek word PATHENOS interpreted as, “one put aside” or “separated”, “holy”. Holy means separated from the Greek HAGIOS and has the same intent as Hebrew BETHUWLAH, the triumphant virgin. The virgin BETHUWLAH was righteous, signifying cleansed from idol-worship – sanctified. Matthew writes, “Behold a virgin shall be with child.” This virgin is PATHENOS and called Mary. The shadowy Old Testament narrative of Hezekiah’s victory is retraced, in principle, in the New Testament depiction.
As it was important in the Old section to study the details of the characters, likewise it is important in the New. The qualities and discipline that make a person in the New are sourced from the Old, and it is possible for them to be traced throughout the Gospels.
Having sufficiently covered “virgin” ponder for a moment the meaning of the name, Mary to seek its spiritual importance, rather than merely accepting the insipid, prosaic idol, virgin Mary. Mary means bitter or bitterness and is taken from the Hebrew word MARAH = bitter in Exd. 15:23. The people were bitter because they had no water to drink – no sustenance – no meaning to life. Ruth 1:20 declares, MARA means bitter. Returning to Bethlehem, Naomi, who lost her husband and two sons in Moab said, “Call me not Naomi, call me MARA (bitter), I went out full and the Lord hath brought me home empty. “So emptiness brings bitterness. MARAH in Hebrew, MARY in Greek. This is the midrashic source of Mary.
In both instances where messiah appears, Hebrew Immanuel, Greek Emmanuel there are similarities in the figurative writings. In Roman days there was a replication of the oppression in the earlier ages – whether it be Egyptian bondage, Babylonian captivity, Greek/Syrian persecution or plain home-grown idol-worship.
At first, the rumble against piety and dictates was small. An imperceivable body at concept, but this one-body was intrinsically endowed with the unction of the everlasting Spirit, One Spirit. It was a call for justice and equity in the little town of Bethlehem (place of food). “The still small voice” of the indwelling Spirit was enlivened, as a babe leaps into the womb. This small awakening body, the messianic body, was personified as one man, Jesus (saviour) who became the Christ (messiah). Allegorically they, the upright seekers, were one body, as they stood together as one man in Spirit. One goal, one objective, one cry - Liberty. Yes, something happened, with profound consequences.
As the story goes, over time earnest individuals began to exert influence and increase in numbers and this is why the conjunction of bitterness and now increase are entwined by association. They go hand in hand. From ancient Hebrew, Joseph means increaser. When a populace becomes offside with authority or status quo, there arises, a chorus for change. This movement, this carillon in Judea in Roman days was all too evident. My assertion is that there was no singular person fulfilling this role. It was a group of interpretive apostles or disciples who were a personification of representative types, Jesus saviour, Emmanuel, God with us.
This enlivened God-given creative Spirit within upright Judeans (described as Mary) was called the virgin (pathenos, holy, sanctified) and was in unison with a swelling in numerical supporters (expressed as Joseph). This begat a delivering redeeming strength, with its proclamation in one word, Rectitude! Yes, this movement was the messianic body and arose from a disadvantaged and segregated society. When a community’s ethics degenerate the conception of a reformation ensues. A new birth, a new creation is inevitable.
Ask yourself why was the name Joseph chosen to be the husband of Mary (bitterness) and furthermore, why was Joseph the son of Jacob – Math. 1:16? What are we being told? Must we return to the inauguration of the children of Israel? Well; Yes, but the word Israel is metaphorical – reigning with God. The Old form had given way to reality. The spiritual age had arrived and a Jew became a spiritual Jew. One with a circumcised heart. And Joseph still represents increase.
Ending this segment, take a brief look at the life of Joseph of old. Olden-day great character-names teach a wonderful lesson. Jacob, Joseph’s father was supplanter, who became overcomer – a prince with God.
Such a noble reputation embodied supreme foresight, outstanding creativity. Jacob gave Joseph (increase) a coat of many colours, or pieces. Coat from KETHONETH = a garment or robe, the shoulder, the spot where the garment hangs, figuratively, side piece or lateral projection. The coat represented the spot where the weight of the garment rests – upon the shoulder.
Joseph was taken to Egypt by merchantmen. Here, the character-name, Joseph, did increase. According to historians Egypt was then ruled by shepherd kings. Joseph became governor of Egypt. This was when the concerns of the people weighed upon the shoulder of Joseph.
One Man
In the New Testament, Jesus a personification, Emmanuel, meaning God with us, was a new birth, a new creation, void of dogma, void of stereotype assumption and superstition. Hearts of concerned people, symbolized now as Emmanuel, were filled with the indwelling God’s love for life and accomplishment. Had this God-experience, this great transcendence, been conveyed to us in Hebraic parlance, Emmanuel or Jesus would have been inscribed Joshua. Then today we would not be talking about Jesus. A mere name of an individual, a literal person, nullifies and constricts meaning. As a movement is forming names are too narrow and confined when you consider the parlous state of ancient Jerusalem. A descriptive name is appropriate in this instance to signify unity. To turn a principle into an historical person in antitype, is an anathema to the very construction of this ancient Hebraic philosophy. It is not about one person. One person alone does not change everything. It is the principle that makes a creative psyche.
The saving-power defined in graphic New Testament scenes brought great light. Far beyond all distant Old Testament forms. This includes the ancient judges and all who were cast as deliverers, saving their people from an enemy. Oneness starts right at the beginning of the Genesis story. “This is the book of the generations of Adam…Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam…” Gen. 5:1,2. This follows through the character-names of the patriarchs and judges. The first judge considered here is Gideon meaning, feller, warrior, one who cuts asunder. Gideon delivered the tribes of Israel from the Midians. It is written that Gideon said, “My family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least of my father’s house, and the Lord said unto him, Surely I will be with thee and thou shalt smite the Midians as one man,” Jud. 6:16. Judges 20:1,8,11 records “the children of Israel gathered together as one man…knit together as one man against Gibeah. Generally judges represented this oneness. The particular character recognized in each judge is by the meaning of the name…e.g. Jephthah = he will open, he will loosen. Samson = sunlight, to be brilliant, a ray, sun rising, house of sun.
Returning to Jerusalem after Babylonian captivity it is stated, “And when the seventh month was come and the children of Israel were in the cities, the people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem.” Ezra 3:1. They stood together as one man for they were one in objective, heart, mind, purpose, Spirit. How better to describe a people so united, having one goal – victory over an enemy. As we proceed it shall be seen that the principle of describing unison of purpose, and Spirit, as one man is carried throughout the Scriptures. Hezekiah is just one example.
The Old established base, “historicity” is by fabrication, construction. It is not a chronological story. It shows character-nature in action – Temple solidarity. The New cannot be a literal replication of Old structure. The Old was only an overview. The New is a great transformation and transcendancy of the psyche – a new temple – the Soul Temple.
Greater illumination it was than ever before. John 3:19 writes, “light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” However, Emmanuel is the new sanctified Temple. The Old Testament temple with its feasts etc. ceased to have binding value when the Spirit of the faithful was quelled. Thankfully the Spirit rose again to teach another generation. Religious dogma must die. Described as Babylonian – confusion, the cry today is, “Come out of her, my people…” The nucleus of good judgment concerning, “standing together as one man” is gaining recognition as many fervent enquirers are studying Holy Writ to interpret “virgin” and Emmanuel. The retrieval or redemption of true integrity, dignity and conscience, ah! that is the sanctified Soul. That is the original Temple, the existential “I am”. The product of a life of self-sacrificing, sacrificing ego. It is a life of self-giving of the fruit’s of one’s intrinsic alpha and omega.
In ending this paper let me re-iterate. Jesus the Christ is not a myth. Jesus the Christ is a personification of a people with like-mind. A people with oneness of heart, objective and Spirit to restore liberty of conscience, human dignity. In Roman days self-determination was crushed by the dictates of the Pharisees and Sadducees in Judea. This brought poverty and despair to a great majority. Their bitterness (Mary) increased (Joseph) producing a Body of people demanding justice (God with us). Yes, this was the something that happened. Can you think of a better way to say a virgin (PATHENOS = put aside, holy one) shall be with child and shall bring forth a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel, God with us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)