This article will show that New Testament writers sourced information from the Old Testament. The abomination of desolation is certainly an unresolved mystery with several self-opinionated interpretations presented. The original form must be retrieved to clearly illustrate what the abomination of desolation heralds.
Run-of-the-mill explanations merely point back to Antiochus Epiphanes being the abomination, as he plundered the Jewish temple.
Announcing the clue to solving this puzzle is found in Dan. 12:11 and reads as follows. “And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination that maketh desolate set up there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.”
Understanding how the daily sacrifice was taken away in original O.T. type is essential, as a base. Those who only literalise falsely claim that Antiochus Epiphanes is biblically documented as the primary transgressor. But is this true?
The perennial question as to what expositors have written reams about is, “What is the daily sacrifice, and how/when was it “taken away?” O. T. prophetic writers borrowed recollections of the Bible temple-history including ceremonies as foundational models, as that is exactly what they were. The “tabernacle/temple” in Jerusalem was only a pattern of the Heavenly. Later prophetic writers projected these visions as spiritually ever-present circumstances in application, hence the compounding down the eras.
The O.T. daily sacrifice was the daily burnt offering. See Numbers 28:3,4. It was an evening and morning oblation, a continual burnt offering, Exd. 29:42. Yes, it was continual, it was a verb, part of action in Israel’s ceremonial token. This was demonstrating, each person had every right to determine individual sacrifice. They were given a choice. The burnt offering was a total sacrifice. It taught all that a complete individual sacrifice was of necessity if innate conscience were to be redeemed after a period of prohibition. The daily sacrifice offering, was part of the entirety of service to be calculated over a seven-year period. Seven Sabbaths of years, see Leviticus 25:8.
The Jewish sacred year consisted of twelve months of 30 days = 360 days a year. Every few years an intercalary month was added to align with the seasons. This month was not considered in reckoning times of feasts and sanctuary ceremonial over a seven-year period.
The sacred feasts commenced on 15/1 Abib with Passover and eating unleavened bread. Pentecost (new meat offering) was 50 days after Passover in third month Sivan. Day of Atonement 10/7 Tishri was followed by the great celebration of atonement, Feast of Tabernacles, commencing 15/7 and lasting 7 days. The ceremonial time of the year lasted 6 months from 15/1 to 15/7. Seven half-years is 180 x 7 = 1260 days. Atonement meant the children of Israel were cleansed of wrongdoing (missing the mark). To add to this service or take away would be the most highest sacrilege.
Remember the O.T. writers were writing to the children of Israel. They condemned their habitual regression into idolatry – turning away from the spiritual, time and time again. How can this idolatry be detected? Could such idolatry be the abomination of desolation? Did God’s people, the peculiar people, go wrong? Tut, tut, it is always the enemy who is in error, by following the Devil, not God’s elect, no. Is idolatry a desolation or stultifying of the mind? Now to see in detail the O.T. example of idolatry that describes the abomination of desolation.
Following Solomon’s reign the twelve tribe - kingdom was split into two. Israel of 10 tribes became the kingdom of Israel in the north whilst 2 tribes Judah and Benjamin became kingdom of Judah in the south. Jeroboam did not want the people of the north returning to the house of David and Rehoboam king of Judah. He thought they might kill him. So Jeroboam, “the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them (his people), It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of Egypt. He set one calf in Bethel, and the other put he in Dan…And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eight month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah…” See 1 Kings 12:25-33.
By making two objects of golden calves as gods of worship Jeroboam “took away” the daily sacrifice, the continual, ever-present burnt offering. He took away an individual’s innate right. Furthermore adding to this apostasy he ordained a feast 30 days after the Feast of Tabernacles, that great celebration of atonement or pardon. By Jeroboam ordaining a feast on 15/8 thirty days after the Feast of Tabernacles add 30 days to 1260 = 1290 days. “From the time the daily (1260 days) shall be taken away (by Jeroboam) and the abomination (idolatry) that maketh desolate (the mind) set up, there shall be 1290 days.” This was Israel’s literal idol-worship condemned unceasingly by their God of creation - Jehovah in the O.T. The children of Israel had literised and de-spiritualised a redeeming concept.
In the Book of Daniel, Antiochus Epiphanes, the little horn which came forth out of one of the four horns when the Grecian Empire divided, (see Dan. 8:1-12), “and an host given” him against the daily,” (The host was apostate Jews, see 1 Maccabees 1: 10-15 was a later fulfillment of this prophecy, as they plundered the temple. Certainly this was a type but it was not the foundational stone of plundering. The abomination is beginning to compound now.
Contemporary expositors point to Antiochus Epiphanes but they omit the apostate Jews. Their aim is to show it is “others” and not “us” that bring about notional ideas. But regression takes place within. When literalism abounds, spirituality is lost. Yes, Spirituality is a verb, not a noun. Action, create. This ability is the possession of the liberated.
Now Apply the New Testament
The abomination of desolation is mentioned in Matt. 24:15 and Mark 13:14. It is time to examine the declaration in Matthew.
Jesus, having been shown the buildings of the temple said to his disciples, “There shall not be left one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down.” Remember the disciples world was Judaism. The stones of the temple represent the tenets of Judaism. The temple was a “pattern” of the original soul-Temple. The disciples, gripped by legalism wanted to know, “when shall these things be?”
Jesus speaks of many events such as false prophets rising, wars, famines, earthquakes etc. Then he announces, “This gospel of the kingdom (the gospel of peace - Rom. 10:15) shall be preached in all the world (OIKOUMENE = a place, cohabited, Roman Empire) then shall the end come.” The harvest is the end of the world. Matt. 13:39. This word “world” is from AION meaning (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future) eternal. Here in Matthew it was the end of the world the disciples knew. Being a foretelling, the prediction would compound in substance as it compacts with the passage of time.
However, the preaching of the gospel of peace was/is the trigger to incite a momentous apocalyse. It is the end of the world of superstition.
Jesus says, “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whosoever readeth let him understand). Then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains.” Matt. 24:15,16.
The abomination of desolation would stand in the holy place in the Roman-day setting. Matt. 24:15. Mark 13:14 writes, stand “where it ought not.” Where is the holy place, the HAGIOS? This is where the abomination (idol-worship) should not stand. The holy place is a consecrated place, a sacred place, the most holy place. The law of love, the law of liberty, is represented as placed in the ark in the tabernacle. Firstly it was written and placed in the original Temple, the soul-Temple. When the body is reunited with an innate soul the Creator’s law of consciousness, James 1:25, will be written in our hearts and in our minds. See Heb. 10:16. This is the holy place where no one must trespass.
The abomination did stand in the holy place in the Roman-day report as it demanded the quelling of the Messianic Spirit. The Pharisees and Sadducees were responsible for deceiving the populace. The Sadducean high priest had whipped the citizens of Jerusalem into mass hysteria, as the story goes. The life of benevolence, compassion, healing and teaching of the protagonist, Jesus, was silenced. This was a spiritual application – the great archetype. As the messianic message was rejected the teachings of Judaism crumbled, having no lasting meaning. Disregarding the true Temple-life destroyed in the temple in Jerusalem and its service. It had lost its value. It was time for harvest. A new age would emerge.
Don’t express your opinion if it is contrary to institutionalism’s status quo, for then you must be condemned. Today, applying to the Jew of the heart and mind, idolatry is the worship of the idols of doctrine and the dogma of literalism. Should this ever be challenged, what then?
To reiterate, this paper shows our spirituality has been taken away and replaced by the literal teachings of symbolic writings.
Articles also available at:
http://www.myspace.com/jc13579
http://debunkingchristianitysydney.blogspot.com/
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Can a Camel go Through the Eye of a Needle?
This article will show that New Testament writers sourced information from the Old Testament. This empowered them to present instructive anecdotes. It is important to detail O.T. base types juxtaposed with N.T. antitypes. This enables a mirror image of the Old in the New. The eye-of-a-needle riddle is an example of an unsolved enigma. The form, a shadow, pointing to substance, must always be resolved.
In Matt. 19.24 we read, “…I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” If I asked, “Why is this so?,” many off-the-cuff answers would be given. We can learn from Romans 8:1, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Another tip from John 3:19 may help us understand, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” Maybe a camel does not love darkness and has no evil deeds?
In the same vein we have numerous statements along the following lines “And behold, one came and said unto him (Jesus) Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” Matt. 19:16. “Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give it to the poor…and come and follow me.” Matt. 19:21.
We have not yet made much progress towards understanding, can a camel go through the eye of a needle. But we have been told, eternal life is not about good works of ritual and ceremony that I may have, but it is to give (to the poor). This advice has a multiple function. To give spiritually is paramount. This is achieved by the creative psyche. This psyche lives the compassionate Spirit, spiraling to sincerity, optimism and beneficence. Contributing to an innate resurrection, it associates both giver and recipient. This is peace. This is life - heaven. Contrastingly the rich man in principle is a “haver”. Note, the camel is still missing. However, the above parable does have a duality with a man seeking eternal life through good works and a camel with no pretence, no ambitions.
“The kingdom of God cometh not with observation,” or PARATERESIS = ocular evidence, not with outward show, ritual ceremony, piety. “The kingdom of God is within you.” Luke 1:20, 21. And we are told clearly that “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” 1 Cor. 15:50.
The word “eye” from Greek TRUPEMA means an aperture, opening, hole. We are not considering the pathway of a thread. An aperture, opening or hole gives one clue as to why a camel may have no trouble of entry.
So far, an explanation to the subject in question has not sourced the original base. Only then will a converse duality appear.
Taken from Ezekiel chapter eight, Ezekiel writes, “…the hand of the Lord God fell there upon me (“there” refers to Ezeliel’s vision of Jerusalem while in Babylonian captivity), and the spirit lifted me up…and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem…He said, Son of man seest thou what they do? Even the great abomination that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go from my sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations. And he brought me to the door of the court; and when I looked, behold a hole in the wall.” This word “hole” from Hebrew is CHOR or CHUR and means a cavity, a hole, hollowed out place. It is equivalent to the Greek word TRUPEMA. Then said he unto me, Son of man, dig now in the wall: and when I had digged in the wall, behold a door. And he said unto me, Go in, and behold the wicked abominations that they do here. See Ezekiel 8:1-18 for a fuller picture of the base type.
Now if the rich man in Jesus’ day could look through this hole in the wall of Jerusalem, that became a door, and seeing such abominations, would he enter? He was seeking the kingdom of heaven by some outward show. So, no, he would not go through the door. He would not want to tarnish himself. He was carnally minded, he was dead. “The canal mind is enmity against God.” He could not be a “giver”. His idea of righteousness and his riches, he did not see as idols, gods or abominations. Having eyes to see he had no perception.
In an opposing manner, the camel, not bound by precepts and statutes, (“would not give a stuff”) would willing go through the “eye” without compunction. The camel represents the person who is non-judgmental. He would enter Jerusalem amongst those oblivious to the “holy.”
Without O.T. texts, as a base, there is no way whatsoever of understanding the meaning of a camel going through the eye of a needle.
The O.T. and N.T. are put together as the perfect body and soul. O.T. is written in form, in pattern, and is a shadow, ever pointing to substance found in the N.T. “You can’t have one without the other.” Ezekiel plainly shows this.
Articles also available at:
http://www.myspace.com/jc13579
In Matt. 19.24 we read, “…I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” If I asked, “Why is this so?,” many off-the-cuff answers would be given. We can learn from Romans 8:1, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Another tip from John 3:19 may help us understand, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” Maybe a camel does not love darkness and has no evil deeds?
In the same vein we have numerous statements along the following lines “And behold, one came and said unto him (Jesus) Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” Matt. 19:16. “Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give it to the poor…and come and follow me.” Matt. 19:21.
We have not yet made much progress towards understanding, can a camel go through the eye of a needle. But we have been told, eternal life is not about good works of ritual and ceremony that I may have, but it is to give (to the poor). This advice has a multiple function. To give spiritually is paramount. This is achieved by the creative psyche. This psyche lives the compassionate Spirit, spiraling to sincerity, optimism and beneficence. Contributing to an innate resurrection, it associates both giver and recipient. This is peace. This is life - heaven. Contrastingly the rich man in principle is a “haver”. Note, the camel is still missing. However, the above parable does have a duality with a man seeking eternal life through good works and a camel with no pretence, no ambitions.
“The kingdom of God cometh not with observation,” or PARATERESIS = ocular evidence, not with outward show, ritual ceremony, piety. “The kingdom of God is within you.” Luke 1:20, 21. And we are told clearly that “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” 1 Cor. 15:50.
The word “eye” from Greek TRUPEMA means an aperture, opening, hole. We are not considering the pathway of a thread. An aperture, opening or hole gives one clue as to why a camel may have no trouble of entry.
So far, an explanation to the subject in question has not sourced the original base. Only then will a converse duality appear.
Taken from Ezekiel chapter eight, Ezekiel writes, “…the hand of the Lord God fell there upon me (“there” refers to Ezeliel’s vision of Jerusalem while in Babylonian captivity), and the spirit lifted me up…and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem…He said, Son of man seest thou what they do? Even the great abomination that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go from my sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations. And he brought me to the door of the court; and when I looked, behold a hole in the wall.” This word “hole” from Hebrew is CHOR or CHUR and means a cavity, a hole, hollowed out place. It is equivalent to the Greek word TRUPEMA. Then said he unto me, Son of man, dig now in the wall: and when I had digged in the wall, behold a door. And he said unto me, Go in, and behold the wicked abominations that they do here. See Ezekiel 8:1-18 for a fuller picture of the base type.
Now if the rich man in Jesus’ day could look through this hole in the wall of Jerusalem, that became a door, and seeing such abominations, would he enter? He was seeking the kingdom of heaven by some outward show. So, no, he would not go through the door. He would not want to tarnish himself. He was carnally minded, he was dead. “The canal mind is enmity against God.” He could not be a “giver”. His idea of righteousness and his riches, he did not see as idols, gods or abominations. Having eyes to see he had no perception.
In an opposing manner, the camel, not bound by precepts and statutes, (“would not give a stuff”) would willing go through the “eye” without compunction. The camel represents the person who is non-judgmental. He would enter Jerusalem amongst those oblivious to the “holy.”
Without O.T. texts, as a base, there is no way whatsoever of understanding the meaning of a camel going through the eye of a needle.
The O.T. and N.T. are put together as the perfect body and soul. O.T. is written in form, in pattern, and is a shadow, ever pointing to substance found in the N.T. “You can’t have one without the other.” Ezekiel plainly shows this.
Articles also available at:
http://www.myspace.com/jc13579
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
The Naked Man
In this wonderful Scriptural, symbolic production we see Jesus coming to the Gadarenes. When leaving the ship immediately there met him out of the tombs (place of the dead) a man with an unclean spirit. No man could bind him not even with chains.
He had been bound in fetters and chains, just as people are today. They had been plucked asunder by him. Day and night he was in the mountains, and with the dead, crying and cutting himself with stones – quite out of his mind.
When this wild-man with an unclean spirit saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, saying, “What have I to do with thee Jesus, thou son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.”
Jesus said unto the unclean spirit, “Come out of him.” Then he asked the man, “What is your name?” He answered, “My name is Legion for we are many,” Mark 5:1-9. “We are many”. Legion was a personification of those with an unclean spirit. Jesus was also a personification of one Spirit – the Spirit of the God of love. Here the two spirits met face to face.
“There was a great herd of swine feeding near by. All the devils or unclean spirits besought Jesus saying, Send us unto the swine, that we may enter into them…And the unclean spirit went out and entered into the swine: the swine then ran violently down a steep place into the sea and were chocked.” See Mark 5:10-13.
When people came to Jesus to see what was done, and the “one” possessed with the devil, “They saw Legion sitting clothed in his right mind.” Matt. 5:15.
Now Legion (being many) prayed that he might be with Jesus. Jesus said go home and tell your friends. Legion departed and published in Decapolis, how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men did marvel.” Legion had been converted. See Mark 5: 14-20.
Consider now the scene of Christ’s betrayal and arrest. Jesus said, “I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not…and all forsook him and fled.” “And there followed him a certain young man, (certain from TIS representing divers or different kinds of men/women) having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; could we say “clothed in his right mind?” “Young men laid hold of him: and he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.” Mark 14: 51,52.
This certain young man having a linen cloth cast about him has great significance. Linen in Greek is from SIDON or BYSSOS from Hebrew BUWTS meaning to bleach, be white, fine white linen.
At Christ’s burial Joseph of Arimathaea wrapped Jesus body in a linen cloth (cloth same word as above).
Those who came to see Jesus’ body saw a young man sitting on the right side of the sepulcher, clothed in a long white garment…” See Mark 16:5. White from LEUKOS or LUKE and means light. “I am the light of the world.” This man was the “I am”. The word garment from STOLE was a long fitting gown, a mark of dignity.
Just as Legion, clothed in his right mind, wore a linen cloth, likewise all who experienced and witness resurrection or conversion have redeemed liberty and dignity, through the grace of the indwelling God.
The great apocalyptic book of the New Testament, Revelation, sees “seven angels coming out of the temple…clothed in pure and white linen…” They have work to do during the harvest. Linen in this text comes from the Greek word LINON meaning flax-linen, as linen is a product of flax = fine white linen.
Noted, in Rev. 19:8 & 21:2, is the marriage supper of the “Lamb” and his bride, the holy city, “new Jerusalem”. “To her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.”
You see, Legion, when converted and in his right mind, wanted to be with Jesus, Mark 5:18.
Seeing Jesus taken by authority to be silenced, Legion still wanted to be with him and followed him. Mark 14:51. Now Legion had a linen cloth cast about him, a symbol of the righteousness of saints. When the young men laid hold of him Legion left the linen cloth and fled from them. He left them righteousness. He left them all he had. It was a complete sacrifice, a burnt offering. Better than leaving them fetters and chains, don’t you think?
Articles also available at: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=216951117
http://debunkingchristianitysydney.blogspot.com/
He had been bound in fetters and chains, just as people are today. They had been plucked asunder by him. Day and night he was in the mountains, and with the dead, crying and cutting himself with stones – quite out of his mind.
When this wild-man with an unclean spirit saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, saying, “What have I to do with thee Jesus, thou son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.”
Jesus said unto the unclean spirit, “Come out of him.” Then he asked the man, “What is your name?” He answered, “My name is Legion for we are many,” Mark 5:1-9. “We are many”. Legion was a personification of those with an unclean spirit. Jesus was also a personification of one Spirit – the Spirit of the God of love. Here the two spirits met face to face.
“There was a great herd of swine feeding near by. All the devils or unclean spirits besought Jesus saying, Send us unto the swine, that we may enter into them…And the unclean spirit went out and entered into the swine: the swine then ran violently down a steep place into the sea and were chocked.” See Mark 5:10-13.
When people came to Jesus to see what was done, and the “one” possessed with the devil, “They saw Legion sitting clothed in his right mind.” Matt. 5:15.
Now Legion (being many) prayed that he might be with Jesus. Jesus said go home and tell your friends. Legion departed and published in Decapolis, how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men did marvel.” Legion had been converted. See Mark 5: 14-20.
Consider now the scene of Christ’s betrayal and arrest. Jesus said, “I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not…and all forsook him and fled.” “And there followed him a certain young man, (certain from TIS representing divers or different kinds of men/women) having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; could we say “clothed in his right mind?” “Young men laid hold of him: and he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.” Mark 14: 51,52.
This certain young man having a linen cloth cast about him has great significance. Linen in Greek is from SIDON or BYSSOS from Hebrew BUWTS meaning to bleach, be white, fine white linen.
At Christ’s burial Joseph of Arimathaea wrapped Jesus body in a linen cloth (cloth same word as above).
Those who came to see Jesus’ body saw a young man sitting on the right side of the sepulcher, clothed in a long white garment…” See Mark 16:5. White from LEUKOS or LUKE and means light. “I am the light of the world.” This man was the “I am”. The word garment from STOLE was a long fitting gown, a mark of dignity.
Just as Legion, clothed in his right mind, wore a linen cloth, likewise all who experienced and witness resurrection or conversion have redeemed liberty and dignity, through the grace of the indwelling God.
The great apocalyptic book of the New Testament, Revelation, sees “seven angels coming out of the temple…clothed in pure and white linen…” They have work to do during the harvest. Linen in this text comes from the Greek word LINON meaning flax-linen, as linen is a product of flax = fine white linen.
Noted, in Rev. 19:8 & 21:2, is the marriage supper of the “Lamb” and his bride, the holy city, “new Jerusalem”. “To her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.”
You see, Legion, when converted and in his right mind, wanted to be with Jesus, Mark 5:18.
Seeing Jesus taken by authority to be silenced, Legion still wanted to be with him and followed him. Mark 14:51. Now Legion had a linen cloth cast about him, a symbol of the righteousness of saints. When the young men laid hold of him Legion left the linen cloth and fled from them. He left them righteousness. He left them all he had. It was a complete sacrifice, a burnt offering. Better than leaving them fetters and chains, don’t you think?
Articles also available at: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=216951117
http://debunkingchristianitysydney.blogspot.com/
Friday, September 7, 2007
Was Peter the Rock?
Was Peter the Rock?
“He (Jesus) asked his disciples saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? Some say John the Baptist…or one of the prophets…But whom say ye that I am? Simon Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus said, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonna: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (PETROS) and upon this rock (PETRA) will I build my church…” Matt. 16:13-18.
Peter from PETROS means, a piece of rock. John’s account in 1:40-42 is as follows: “…Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother saith unto him, We have found Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought Peter to Jesus. He (Jesus) said, Thou art Simon (hearing) the son of Jona (a dove): thou shalt be called Cephas, which by interpretation, is a stone (PETROS – piece of rock). Cephas, the surname of Peter is from KEPHAS in Greek derived from KEPH in Hebrew meaning a hollow rock. So Peter Cephas means a stone, piece of rock or a hollow rock (see Strongs/Young concordance).
What then of the words, “upon this rock (PETRA) will I build my church”? Matt. 16:18. PETRA is the feminine of PETROS - feminine meaning life-giving, in figurative scripture. PETRA is a mass of rock - mass, a body, as in the messianic body. Would Christ build a church on a hollow-rock?
Peter was a small hollow rock or stone. “A sower went out to sow his seed…And some fell upon a rock (or stony places from PETRODES rocky, stone). As stated “Rock” derived from PETRA, being feminine, indicates a potential to bring forth new life. As soon as it, the seed that fell upon stony ground, was sprung up, it withered away because it lacked moisture (substance). Now here is Peter, when the heat was put on him: - “A damsel came unto him saying, Thou also was with Jesus of Galilee. But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.” Matt. 26:69,70. Peter was not the “Rock” for he withered and denied Christ.
The word “Rock” (PETRA) must be investigated.
The writers of 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 have something to say about the “Rock” but keep in mind the Scriptures are symbolical writings, using objects to convey spiritual experience. In the story of the Exodus was a cloud that followed them and all passed through the sea. Seas, waters, flood, all refer to peoples. All in the Exodus passed through countries of people near Egypt without attack. This is how the description goes: “The Lord caused the sea to go back, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.” Exd. 14:21. “And did all eat the same spiritual meat.” Exd. 16: 5,35. “And did all drink the same spiritual drink.” Exd. 17:6 for they drank of that spiritual Rock (PETRA) that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
Christ, the faithful witness…to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever Amen.” - (so be it).
Christ is also called “a living stone”, “a chief corner stone in Sion,” “the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner”. These texts are taken from 1 Pet. 2:4-7. The word “stone” is from LITHOS (NOT PETROS) and means a stone (lit. or fig.):- (mill, stumbling-) stone.
Ephesians chapter 2 telling of spiritual Jew and Gentile becoming one, writes, “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood (kindred) of Christ…no more strangers…but fellow citizens with the saints…And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner (stone).” Eph. 2:20. The word “stone” is added here by translators. Stone in 1 Pet. 2 is LITHOS. Both 1 Pet. 2 and also Eph. 2:20 (added by translator) is borrowed from Ps. 118:22. “The stone (which) the builders refused is become the head (stone) of the corner.” “Stone here is Hebrew is EBEY meaning to build, or the builder.
It seems quiet clear that the statement, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” is the “ROCK” (PETRA) upon which “I (Christ) will build my church.”
“Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular” 1 Cor. 12:27. “…Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Eph. 5:23. Christ is our one body, our one Spirit, our one hope, and our one Lord. Eph. 4.
Bear in mind the word “Christ” is a title, Christ the anointed, messiah, and king. Christ is our Melchisedic king and high priest - King of righteousness, King of peace. What wonderful attributes. Christ is our first begotten of love, the Father of all, bringing forth beneficial substance and a new spiritual way. Redeeming happiness and prosperity is available for all.
“He (Jesus) asked his disciples saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? Some say John the Baptist…or one of the prophets…But whom say ye that I am? Simon Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus said, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonna: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (PETROS) and upon this rock (PETRA) will I build my church…” Matt. 16:13-18.
Peter from PETROS means, a piece of rock. John’s account in 1:40-42 is as follows: “…Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother saith unto him, We have found Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought Peter to Jesus. He (Jesus) said, Thou art Simon (hearing) the son of Jona (a dove): thou shalt be called Cephas, which by interpretation, is a stone (PETROS – piece of rock). Cephas, the surname of Peter is from KEPHAS in Greek derived from KEPH in Hebrew meaning a hollow rock. So Peter Cephas means a stone, piece of rock or a hollow rock (see Strongs/Young concordance).
What then of the words, “upon this rock (PETRA) will I build my church”? Matt. 16:18. PETRA is the feminine of PETROS - feminine meaning life-giving, in figurative scripture. PETRA is a mass of rock - mass, a body, as in the messianic body. Would Christ build a church on a hollow-rock?
Peter was a small hollow rock or stone. “A sower went out to sow his seed…And some fell upon a rock (or stony places from PETRODES rocky, stone). As stated “Rock” derived from PETRA, being feminine, indicates a potential to bring forth new life. As soon as it, the seed that fell upon stony ground, was sprung up, it withered away because it lacked moisture (substance). Now here is Peter, when the heat was put on him: - “A damsel came unto him saying, Thou also was with Jesus of Galilee. But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.” Matt. 26:69,70. Peter was not the “Rock” for he withered and denied Christ.
The word “Rock” (PETRA) must be investigated.
The writers of 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 have something to say about the “Rock” but keep in mind the Scriptures are symbolical writings, using objects to convey spiritual experience. In the story of the Exodus was a cloud that followed them and all passed through the sea. Seas, waters, flood, all refer to peoples. All in the Exodus passed through countries of people near Egypt without attack. This is how the description goes: “The Lord caused the sea to go back, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.” Exd. 14:21. “And did all eat the same spiritual meat.” Exd. 16: 5,35. “And did all drink the same spiritual drink.” Exd. 17:6 for they drank of that spiritual Rock (PETRA) that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
Christ, the faithful witness…to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever Amen.” - (so be it).
Christ is also called “a living stone”, “a chief corner stone in Sion,” “the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner”. These texts are taken from 1 Pet. 2:4-7. The word “stone” is from LITHOS (NOT PETROS) and means a stone (lit. or fig.):- (mill, stumbling-) stone.
Ephesians chapter 2 telling of spiritual Jew and Gentile becoming one, writes, “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood (kindred) of Christ…no more strangers…but fellow citizens with the saints…And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner (stone).” Eph. 2:20. The word “stone” is added here by translators. Stone in 1 Pet. 2 is LITHOS. Both 1 Pet. 2 and also Eph. 2:20 (added by translator) is borrowed from Ps. 118:22. “The stone (which) the builders refused is become the head (stone) of the corner.” “Stone here is Hebrew is EBEY meaning to build, or the builder.
It seems quiet clear that the statement, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” is the “ROCK” (PETRA) upon which “I (Christ) will build my church.”
“Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular” 1 Cor. 12:27. “…Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Eph. 5:23. Christ is our one body, our one Spirit, our one hope, and our one Lord. Eph. 4.
Bear in mind the word “Christ” is a title, Christ the anointed, messiah, and king. Christ is our Melchisedic king and high priest - King of righteousness, King of peace. What wonderful attributes. Christ is our first begotten of love, the Father of all, bringing forth beneficial substance and a new spiritual way. Redeeming happiness and prosperity is available for all.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
A Glimpse into “The Beginning of Human Concept”
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.
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.
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.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)