Tag Archives: Lent 3 Year C

Exodus, Language, Teaching

Exodus 3:1-15 – The test of listening to a burning bush

Leave a comment

Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian; he led his flock beyond the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain ha-elohim. There the angel of Yahweh appeared to him in a flame of fire out of a bush; he looked, and the bush was blazing, yet it was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I must turn aside and look at this great sight, and see why the bush is not burned up.” When Yahweh saw that he had turned aside to see, elohim called to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then he said, “Come no closer! Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” He said further, “I am elohe of your father, elohe of Abraham, elohe of Isaac, welohe of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at ha-elohim.

Then Yahweh said, “I have observed the misery of my people who are in Egypt; I have heard their cry on account of their taskmasters. Indeed, I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them from the Egyptians Egypt, and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the country of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. The cry of the Israelites has now come to me; I have also seen how the Egyptians oppress them. So come, I will send you to Pharaoh to bring my people, the Israelites, out of Egypt.” But Moses said ha-elohim, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and bring the Israelites sons of Israel out of Egypt?” He said, “I will be with you; and this shall be the sign for you that it is I who sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall worship ha-elohim on this mountain.”

But Moses said ha-elohim, “If I come to the Israelites and say to them, ‘elohe of your ancestors has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” elohim said to Moses, “I am who I am.” He said further, “Thus you shall say to the Israelites sons of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’” elohim also said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the Israelites sons of Israel, ‘Yahweh elohe of your ancestors, elohe of Abraham, elohe of Isaac, welohe of Jacob, has sent me to you’:

This is my name forever, and this my title for all generations.”

——————–

This is the Old Testament selection to be read aloud on the third Sunday in Lent, Year C, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will precede a singing of verses from Psalm 63, where David wrote: “Therefore I have gazed upon you in your holy place, that I might behold your power and your glory.” That pair will be followed by a reading from Paul’s letter to the true Christians of Corinth, where he wrote: “Our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink.” All will accompany a reading from Luke’s Gospel, where he wrote of how Jesus “asked them, ‘Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were worse sinners than all other Galileans? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish as they did.’”

You will notice the changes I have made in the above text. Four times the NRSV had translated “Yahweh” as “the Lord.” Because that is not what was written, I have restored the proper name of Yahweh [in bold type] that Moses had be memorized and then written. You will also take note of the seventeen restorations I have made in italics. All relate to variations of the word “elohim,” which is plural in number, implying “gods” [in the lower-case]. In all places the NRSV has taken the liberty to make this a singular number, capitalized “God,” which is wrong. It is vital that one see there is a difference between “the Lord” and “God,” simply because that is two different words being focused upon. Likewise, there is a significant difference in Yahweh and elohim, which must be grasped to see the truth of this lesson rising to the surface.

According to the BibleHub Interlinear that shows the Hebrew words, their transliterations into an alphabet recognized, and an English translation of the transliteration, that source also provides a link to the root word [in Strong’s], where multiple translation variations can be found. Also, underneath each English translation is a coded statement about the word written in Hebrew. Relative to that reference, the transliterations that I have restored in italics above shows this [my translations in quotation marks]:

elohim – noun masculine plural = “gods”

elohe – noun masculine plural construct = “the gods”

welohe – conjunction + noun masculine plural construct = “and gods”

ha-elohim – article + noun masculine plural = “this gods”

In this text from Exodus 3 are three uses of “elohim,” with no modifications. There are five places that “ha-elohim” is written. There are seven places where “elohe” is written as that construct; and, there are two times that “welohe” is found. As shown in this list above, all are plural number masculine nouns. However, none of those uses should be thought of as “gods.”

The “elohim” are introduced in Genesis 1, where thirty-two times Moses orated [memorized and then later transcribed] the word “elohim,” which is to be understood as “the gods” that Yahweh created … first thing: “In the beginning created elohim.” There is absolutely no references to Yahweh in Genesis 1, which means Genesis 1:1a must be assumed that it was Yahweh who “in the beginning created gods.” Those “gods” [the “elohim“] would then carry out Yahweh’s plans for The Creation.

The ”elohim” that were many [plural] and who carried out Yahweh’s Creation are then named singularly – as “elohim” stated with Yahweh absent – when Yahweh then put the singular “elohim” to rest, after six phases of The Creation. The seventh phase was deemed holy by “Yahweh,” whose name appears eleven times in Genesis 2. In each of the times Yahweh is written in Genesis 2 it is followed by the word “elohim.” This word has the same implication as “gods,” but when that word follows “Yahweh,” as “Yahweh elohim,” the implication is those “gods” that are then married to Yahweh, as His elohim. All elohim are the creations of Yahweh, but not all elohim are married to Yahweh within human flesh. Yahweh controls them all; but some elohim willingly and lovingly serve Yahweh as His elohim, His angels who are the guardians of His priests.

Genesis 2 tells of the creation of Adam, who is the true Son of Yahweh, the only Son, made by His hand. The “elohim,” which is a plural number word, says the soul of Adam was angelic, where Adam was made in flesh made from the earth, with a multiplicity that could be many “gods” in one body. To understand this, think of Adam as being Adam in the flesh, while being presented different animals to name; and, in that naming one of the elohim of Adam entered the soul of the animal, instantly knowing everything about that animal. Thus, Adam’s extended elohim asked the animal, “What would you like to be named, and the animal soul responded to that elohim of Adam and Adam knew, because of his still present elohim. This is a spiritual multiplicity that ordinary souls do not have, which means Adam would be sent to earth as the Son of Yahweh to spread the lineage of Yahweh elohim among mankind.

By seeing this as the intent and purpose of all forms of “elohim,” one should then look at the series of Hebrew words that are given proper name status. All capitalization of Hebrew into English comes with applied capital letters, as those translating the Hebraic text see a word as a name; and, it is a name. Still, the lower-case states the meaning behind the name every time that word-name is used in divine text. Even the name Yahweh is not capitalized in Hebrew, because Hebrew has no way of designating capital letters, versus lower-case letters. Thus, the letters “yod – he – waw – he” [“י ה ו ה” where Hebrew writes from right to left] are transliterated (with vowels inserted) to sound out as “yah-weh” [or auf Deutsch “je-ho-vah” – where j = y and a w = v] but that ‘word-name’ means, “He Who Causes That-Which-Is To Be & He Who Causes That-Which-Can’t-Be To Fall.”

In such a long reading selection, as is fifteen verses, this story unfolds with many Hebrew words read as proper names, without any contemplation given to the meaning behind the names. Everything in Biblical Scripture is divine, so nothing is without deeper meaning. All of these ‘names’ written need to be understood; and, when one is looking closely at these ‘names,’ one then finds the word “elohe” directly connected to the names Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, while also directly linking to non-names: “your father” [implying Amram, but not stated] and “their fathers.” That then says “elohe” are “sons of Yahweh,” which is supported in the correction made above [following strikethroughs] where is written “sons of Israel.”

All of this means it is important to have a list of the names and the meaning behind the names. They are as follows [most referenced from Abarim Publications]:

Moses = “Child – Rescued From Drowning In Water; Extracted; Loan; Hidden; Covered”

Jethro = “Excellent; His Excellence; His Remnant”

Midian = “Strife; Place Of Judgement”

Horeb = “Arid; Dryness”

Abraham = “Their Protection; Their Shield”

Isaac = “Laughter; He Will Laugh”

Jacob = “He Who Closely Follows; Supplanter”

Egypt = “Temple of Ptah; Married To Tragedy”

Canaanite = “Land Of Purple People”

Hittite = “Terrors; Terrible”

Ammonite = “Great People”

Perizzite = “Non-urbanite; Wildling; Rural”

Hivite = “Tent Villagers”

Jebusite = “Of The Trodden Underfoot; The Down Tramplers”

Israel = “He Retains God; God Is Upright”

With all of this at one’s disposal, this reading can speedily be seen to show the following:

In verse one, we find Moses (Extracted, Hidden) has found safety in a land outside of Egypt. He is working for his father-in-law Jethro (His Remnant), who is a priest of Midian (a son of Abraham that is known for Strife), as a shepherd. This element of being one who tends to a flock cannot be overlooked. It is a projection of Moses being the shepherd over the flock of Israelites for the next forty years. In the translation that says “wilderness,” the Hebrew word “midbar” is used and refers to “uninhabited land,” which is in the land of Midian, where modern Saudi Arabia touched the northern edge of the Red Sea.

In the last two segments of verse one is written “and came to mountain ha-elohim , Horeb (Dryness).” Certainly, this literally indicates Moses coming upon a mountain, where Jethro’s “flock” had gone to graze. The region of Median is indeed arid, so that would be an indication that the mountain (which could also be a hill) was one the locals called it “Horeb,” because it was dry. Still, there actually is no separation between “ha-elohim” and “hore-bah,” with that ‘name’ shown to be in the third person feminine singular. So the “mountain of elohim” can be seen as a statement of a wife of Yahweh. In this, one must see that Yahweh is the spiritual Father of His elohim Son, with the Mother of Adam being the Earth, from whom Yahweh took dust to form His Son. So, the “mountain herself” is one of the elohim created by Yahweh in The Creation.

In verse two we are immediately told, “and appeared a messenger Yahweh.” In that, the Hebrew word “malak” means “a messenger,” but Yahweh’s “messengers” are “angels;” so, that is a viable translation that must be seen. This becomes a transition from a “mountain of elohim” to an “angel of elohim.” The aspect of “Dryness” (Horeb) can now be seen as the presence of Moses bringing the moisture that made “her mountain” produce an “elohim.” This is then explained as “an angel appearing a flame of fire in the midst of a bush.” In that, “the bush” must be seen as the fruit of “her mountain,” where some conject the Hebrew word “seneh” could be a blackberry shrub,” or some other “bramble bush” that produces fruit. The fruit of this “bush” is “an angel” that is so bright it “appears” to be “a flame.” However, because it is “an angel” it is not physical fire, but Spiritual presence.


This depiction is wrong, as shepherds do not tend their flocks at night; so, the background should be depicting daylight.

Because we now have read “ha-elohim” twice, the “appearance,” which says Moses was able “to see and angelic elohim,” this becomes a statement that Moses has transfigured, in the same way as did Peter, James and John, when they went on “a mountain” with Jesus. They too had an ability “to see” the “angels” that were Moses and Elijah. This must now be realized when the remainder of this reading unfolds, as it is not ordinary Moses talking with Yahweh elohim. He has become a Yahweh elohim. When we then are told that Moses looked and saw what he thought was physical fire not destroying the bush, this says he was beginning to realize this was a spiritual manifestation.

In verse three, it begins by stating, “and said Moses.” Unless Moses was talking to the flock, he was speaking to the “angel of elohim,” which had appeared to him. To then say, “I will turn aside now to see great here ; for what reason not does burn this bush .” This must be recognized as two statements being made, with the second statement not being a question about why the bush is not burning. It says Moses understands that the reason the bush is not burning is it is a spiritual presence, not material … not physical fire. That is then what makes Moses say it is ”great.” That then says that the Hebrew words translating as “I will turn aside now” [“’ā·su·rāh- nā”] is not a statement of Moses changing direction, as if walking towards the bush. Instead, the word means Moses told the angel that he willingly would enter into the spiritual realm; and, he would do that because he knew the “angel of elohim” was most holy.

In verse four begins by saying, “when he saw Yahweh,” which is the first time that Moses became face-to-face with Yahweh and spoke with Him. For this to happen – to “see Yahweh” – one has to die, because “no one can look upon Yahweh and live.” Thus, the soul of Moses had left his body of flesh, in order to have this direct spiritual meeting. The way this has described a flame of fire in a bush says this bright glowing light is what would transfer onto Moses’ soul; so, when his soul returned to his body of flesh the holiness of Yahweh’s penetrating light would shine through his flesh, as a halo. This leaving of his physical body is now confirmed by repeating “he turned aside to look.” That says Yahweh made it possible for the soul of Moses to leave his body; and, Moses voluntarily went towards Yahweh.

From this naming of Yahweh, we then read that Moses was called by “elohim” in the “midst of the bush,” saying (twice), “Moses!” (“Extracted”) “Moses!” (“Child Rescued”). When Moses heard the voice of Yahweh speaking his name, two things should be seen. First, Moses ceased being part of the physical surrounding. Instead of a “flame of fire in a bush,” Moses has become an “elohim amid that which gives birth to angels of elohim.” Having become one of Yahweh’s “elohim,” Moses could hear Yahweh speaking to him. Rather than hear Yahweh speak his name – as a name is unimportant in the spiritual realm – hearing Yahweh declare a new soul has been “Extracted!” and a “Child Rescued,” that led Moses to respond. This is then the second point of importance to realize. For Moses to say (in Hebrew) “hin·nê·nî,” this better translates as “behold!” where Moses saw that truth spoken from Yahweh. While that Hebrew word is similar to the one written by Isaiah, in his spiritual dream where the question was asked, “Who do we send?” there is no focus place on the first person “I” in the spiritual realm of Yahweh. Thus, Moses said “See!” the truth of what Yahweh spoke [the truth of a name] and replied, “Behold!” because the truth was amazing to Moses.

In verse five, Yahweh did not say Moses was walking about and needed to stop. Yahweh said Moses did “not draw near to this place,” as “this place” or “here” [“hă·lōm”] is not physical, but spiritual. Yahweh next said “clear away your sandals,” where the implication to “take off” or “remove” footwear is symbolic, as Moses’ soul had no need for any clothing at all. The words are intended to say that Moses was no longer in a realm that required “sandals” to move about. The spiritual realm had taken Moses’ soul “clear away,” in the same sense he willingly “turned aside.” The focus placed on “your sandals” is then a statement about the spiritual “footwear” of Moses being “above” [from “mê·‘al”] the terrestrial. The necessity of “your feet” [“raḡ·le·ḵā”] has been “cleared away,” as ordinary human souls stand at the “feet” of Yahweh; but Moses has been divinely elevated “above” that state of being; adding, “for this place” only.

When verse five then has Moses hearing (as an “elohim”) Yahweh say, “where you stand over , land-holy is .” This becomes relative to Genesis 2, as “land-holy” is Eden. Eden is where divine souls (elohim) can exist in bodies of flesh. Moses was elevated out of his body of flesh, but his body of flesh was still present and living, in the sense that Moses felt his body of flesh still within his soul. Yahweh was telling Moses that his “elohim” addition to his soul had taken him above and beyond ordinary “land,” taking his being to a “land-holy” (or Holy Land), which is Eden. While Adam and Eve lived in Eden (as Yahweh elohim) they could hear the footsteps of Yahweh and hear His voice. They could see Yahweh in the same way Moses was now able to see Him, hear Him and talk to Him.

In verse six we see that Yahweh begins to teach Moses about all who are His “elohim.” When He first says, “I elohe your father,” this is not Yahweh saying that Amram (the father of Moses and Aaron) was one of Yahweh’s “elohim,” even if Amram was such a divinely elevated soul. This first segment of words is stating that Yahweh (“I”) am “your father,” who made Moses’ soul one of His “elohim.” This first segment is the truth about all souls that can call Yahweh “my Father.” Thus, with that understood, the same relationship existed between Yahweh and “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Yahweh was the Father of each of those souls, when they became His “elohim.”

When verse six then tells us, “for hid Moses his face for fear , to look into of elohim .” that says Moses immediately knew he could not wear the face of a mere mortal upon his face and look upon Yahweh. Moses was still some time away from receiving the Law he would take down to the children of Israel to agree with, as their vows of divine marriage to Yahweh; but the first Law says, “Thou shall wear no other face before the face of Yahweh.” The “fear” Moses felt was that of being ejected from this divine experience; so, he feared standing for his own self-ego in such a great presence. This means Moses lowered his face in submission to the power of Yahweh; and, he could then “look into” Yahweh’s face, as one “of His elohim.” That says being one of Yahweh’s elohim means subjection of self-will, in service to Yahweh.

Verses seven, eight and nine are then Yahweh telling Moses the background story of the Israelite people in Egypt. In verse nine, and again in verse ten, Yahweh does not call those children “Israelites,” but instead “sons of Israel.” The key terms used by Yahweh – “to deliver them” [from “lə·haṣ·ṣî·lōw”] “and bring them up” [from “ū·lə·ha·‘ă·lō·ṯōw”] “to earth flowing with milk and honey” [from “el-’e·reṣ zā·ḇaṯ ḥā·lāḇ ū·ḏə·ḇāš”] – together say that Yahweh is choosing Moses to be the ‘midwife’ who would “deliver” the baby ready to be born from the womb of Egypt (Married To Tragedy]. Those “sons of Who Retained God,” who developed in the womb from one Yahweh elohim that taught all of his children to worship One God as above all others, had reached a point in fetal development that birth pangs were signaling it was time for their birth. And, in that regard, the infant would need another Yahweh elohim to lead them to the teat that would fatten them, where other peoples would still be allowed to remain and dwell. Canaan would be the nursemaid of baby Israel.

In verses ten through twelve, the scenario of “pharaoh” comes up. This needs to be read metaphorically as the soul of Egypt, where Egypt has been like a surrogate mother of Yahweh’s child. As has been the case in reported surrogate mother situations, once they carry a fetus in their womb the birth makes the baby be an extension of the mother; so, the mother does not want to part with the child. This is why Moses asked what legal grounds did he have in his favor, when the children of Israel had become an extension of the surrogate mother. If she were tp be unwilling to give up her newborn without a legal battle, how would Moses handle that resistance?

This is where the name “Egypt” takes on the meaning of “Temple of Ptah,” where “Ptah” was a deity with similarities to Yahweh (a creator god, patron to the development of crafts). The “sons of Israel” were placed in a surrogate mother’s womb, in order to develop into priests who serve only one God, not the polytheism natural to Egyptians. Thus, the ‘DNA’ of the “sons of Israel” was the legal grounds for the mother (Egypt) to release the baby to the rightful parent (Yahweh). Egypt had no gods that could make that claim of parentage. Moses would then be the “elohim” of Yahweh that would develop their ‘craft’ of priesthood further.

When verse thirteen begins by stating, “and said Moses into of elohim,” that needs to be seen as Moses now speaking as an extension of Yahweh, having received the soul of His Son, where Moses is also one “Who Retains Yahweh as one of His elohim” (Israel’s deeper meaning). This speech then led Moses to say, “behold!,” followed by the identification of “I” [from “’ā·nō·ḵî”]. Because Moses had hidden his ”face in fear,” the use of “I” cannot be read as if Moses suddenly raised his “face” and spoke of self (“I”). This is Yahweh speaking through the Son, so Moses spoke as one of the “elohim,” realizing he had also “come to the sons of Israel to tell them” he was an “elohim” who was divinely raised in soul, just like “the fathers” of the children of Israel in Egypt, with Moses “sent to them” as the same spirituality that made their fathers be “sons of Israel.”

In what appears to be two questions posed to Yahweh by Moses, this is actually two statements made by Yahweh to Moses. The first says, “and they will say to you what his name,” with the second statement being, “anything I shall say to them.” Again, the first-person construct in “I shall say” [from “’ō·mar”] says Yahweh will do all the talking. This is the model that will be found in Jesus, where he repeatedly said he spoke for the Father, because the Father was in him. This is Yahweh telling Moses not to worry about any questions posed to him, especially those posed by pharaoh, as to what God an “elohim” speaks for.

When verse fourteen begins, “and said elohim into Moses,” this is again Yahweh speaking through the divine soul that has possessed Moses, letting Moses’ soul know who is now his Father, the Father of all “elohim.” Here is where Yahweh says “I am” [from “’eh·yeh”]. The root Hebrew word here – “hayah” – means, “to fall out, come to pass, become, be,” which becomes an “I” statement about “Being.” That is “who” [from “asher”] is the possessor of Moses’ soul. Thus, Yahweh repeated “I am” again, which says there really is no name that can possibly be applied to Yahweh, because names are meaning applied to souls in shapes of angels or bodies of flesh [which resemble the elohim].

In this regard, the name “Yahweh” – or “YHWH” – is said to be “it incomprehensible” [from Judges 13:18, using “wə·hū-p̄e·li,” which can say “it wonderful” also]. By telling Moses Yahweh is simply a way to denote Him specifically, that ‘name’ is a statement of a presence that “IS.” It is a sensation that exceeds physical limitations, such that there are no words that truly can express what the divine “Being” is like, in human terms [even “God” or “Lord” fails to properly name Yahweh]. It is only a presence that can be felt by a soul [well beyond the sensations of a body of flesh], such that it is the truth of Spiritual “Love,” which cannot possibly be found equating to human “love.”

By Moses’ soul being told this, one needs to realize that there were no descendants of Jacob in Egypt, who had been taught by their forefather certain rites and rituals that were passed down from Yahweh to all His “elohim,” who Moses would go to and say, “I come to free you guys” and they would ask him, “Who sent you?” Moses would show up as God incarnate – like Jesus was seen – and he would let Yahweh do all the talking for him, which spoke loudest in miracles done. The children of Jacob – the “sons of Israel” – were in no way divinely elevated to ask any questions, or even know what answers should be given. Their approval – like a baby who is about to be born – had no bearing on the matter of their exit from the womb. Moses would appear as a divine ‘midwife’ to deliver that child, which meant taking it from the birthing table and then leading it to the big teat in Canaan, where it would suckle for several hundred years.

Moses would then be the “elohim” that would prepare the “sons of Israel” to become that themselves. They had been conceived by “Israel,” who was a “Son” of Yahweh, as a Yahweh elohim. The people were then normal “sons,” or “children,” who came from a divine lineage that was not genetically inherited (being a lineage of souls married to Yahweh – elohim). This is why Moses would become their teacher to sacrifice their souls to Yahweh, in the same way the human lineage went from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob. Those three had sons that were not inheritors of a divine elevation of soul [Ishmael, Esau, and the sons who sold Joseph into slavery and did other grave sins). Thus, Yahweh would be their Spiritual teacher, with Moses their “elohim” babysitter-teacher.

As a very deep reading selected to be read on the third Sunday in Lent, the theme of sacrifice in the wilderness must be seen as the test of service. Moses was filled with the Spirit of Yahweh that made him become a most divine elohim, one who saw Yahweh while in a transfigured state of being. Moses is quite parallel to Jesus in many ways, as the same Spirit-soul was in possession of Moses’ soul. The test of Moses would take him the rest of his life taking that test, which was the last forty years (a little more) of his life. Therefore, to see Lent as some temporary commitment to Yahweh is wrong. One needs to be in the presence of Yahweh forever, if one’s soul truly seeks salvation. The test is always about eternity; and, that means accepting all tasks that come from the Father. One must always reply, “Behold!” so Yahweh knows your soul welcomes the test.

Language, Psalms, Teaching

Psalm 63:1-8 – The test of singing praises

Leave a comment

1 elohim, you are eli, eagerly I seek you; *

my soul thirsts for you, my flesh faints for you,

as in a barren and dry land where there is no water.

2 Therefore I have gazed upon you in your holy place, *

that I might behold your power and your glory.

3 For your loving-kindness is better than life itself; *

my lips shall give you praise.

4 So will I bless you as long as I live *

and lift up my hands in your Name.

5 My soul is content, as with marrow and fatness, *

and my mouth praises you with joyful lips,

6 When I remember you upon my bed, *

and meditate on you in the night watches.

7 For you have been my helper, *

and under the shadow of your wings I will rejoice.

8 My soul clings to you; *

your right hand holds me fast.

——————–

This is the Psalm selection to be read aloud in unison or sung by a cantor on the third Sunday in Lent, Year C, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will follow a reading from Exodus, which tells of Moses coming upon a burning bush. There we read, “Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian; he led his flock beyond the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of elohim. There the angel of Yahweh appeared to him in a flame of fire out of a bush.” That pair will precede a selection from Paul’s first letter to the Christians of Corinth, where he wrote: “I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink.” Adding, “Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.” All readings will accompany that from Luke’s Gospel, where Jesus told the parable that begins: “A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and found none. So he said to the gardener, ‘See here! For three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree, and still I find none. Cut it down! Why should it be wasting the soil?”

The introduction to this psalm, written into verse one (but not translated above) is this: “a psalm of David , when he was in the wilderness of Judah .” That speaks volumes why this psalm is selected to be sung during Lent. In that, the Hebrew roots – “midbar yehudah” – are read mundanely as “the wilderness of Judah,” but on a deeper level – the level that examines those roots more thoroughly – finds the same words can equally say “in mouth let him be praised.” As an accompaniment to the Exodus reading where Moses was tending his father-in-law’s flock in “the wilderness,” which can also mean “uninhabited land,” by seeing the true root of “midbar” we can see that Moses was “following of the mouth , and came to the mountain.” That says Moses was led by the bleating of sheep or goats in the distance, which led him to find “the mountain of elohim.” Therefore, from this realization, the test of Moses was to become the “mouth” of Yahweh; and, that demands one’s own voice become “desolate.”

In this song of praise by David, it is somewhat unique in that it not once names Yahweh. Instead, David wrote a form of “elohim” twice (one not sung today, in verse eleven), which is the plural number word that means “gods.” In addition, David wrote “eli,” which is a construct of the singular number of “el” [adding “my” to that], which proves there is a difference between the many “elohim” and the individual “el.” Verse one in this song (following the introductory verbiage) says, “elohim ׀ eli attah,” which says “elohim ׀ my el you”. In this, a vertical bar separates the word “elohim” from the word “eli”. Keeping in mind that the introduction has announced that David wrote this while “in the wilderness of Judah” (or as “in mouth let him be praised”), this should be seen as a test of David’s commitment to Yahweh, as David was one of His “elohim.” Following the vertical bar’s pause of separation, one then sees the many of “gods” is narrowed, specifically to the one that was in David, as “my el,” which made David an extension of Yahweh – “you.” This has to be seen as the truth presented, as David was in a solitary place, where his lone link to Yahweh was within his soul – the divine Son of Yahweh that was his “el.”

The rest of verse one then literally translates into English saying: “I will seek diligently for you it thirsts for you my soul , it faints for you my flesh ; in earth dryness and weary without waters .” This says that David had entered a place that isolated him from outward signs of Yahweh’s presence. While he could draw on personal experience from being in the wilderness of Judah where there were no sources of water, with little shade under a hot sun, this is a secondary view to take. Because David first said he “diligently sought Yahweh” and “his soul thirsted” for Yahweh, David was singing as all lost souls that have found their bodies of “flesh” (their “land” or “earth”) “faint” from a lack of spiritual nourishment. The spiritual “thirst” finds only “dryness” in return; and, that “dryness” makes one’s soul “weary without [spiritual] waters.” As such, David sang that the “test in the wilderness” is to find Yahweh offering the living “waters” that are within the “earth” of one’s “flesh,” within one’s “soul,” where Yahweh resides when one is an “el” of His.

This needs to be fully grasped and strongly held, especially when one recognizes the word “eli” is that said by Jesus as he was about to die on a Roman crucifix. The translation as “my God,” where “el” is given equal status as Yahweh [when Hebrew or Aramaic is spoken] is wrong. Jesus was not reciting Psalm 22:1 because he blamed Yahweh for his death on a cross. He sang the psalm verse because Jesus understood his “el” as “my el” was referencing how lost David felt, when his soul’s marriage to Yahweh was not able to satiate his hunger for inner spiritual food or quench his spiritual thirst. Neither David nor Jesus saw “eli” as their possessing Yahweh [“my” is the possessive case], because they both understood that Yahweh possessed their souls, through divine union that made them “elohim,” each an “el.”

The literal English translation of verse two says this: “thus in the sacredness I have sought you ; to behold your strength , and your abundance .” This then continues the search for the living “water” that David knew was deep within his soul. That is where “sacredness” lies [from “baq·qō·ḏeš” a transliteration of “qodesh”]. This says David could have gone to a private place in prayer (like sitting quietly in a lotus position), looking within his being, not using his eyes to search for Yahweh outside his being. The “strength” of one’s “el” is within one’s soul; and, to “behold” [from “ḥă·zî·ṯî·ḵā” transliterated from “chazah”] that presence of “abundant strength” is what one needs during states of “dryness.”

Verse three then literally states, “when agreeable your goodness that renews , my speech shall praise you .” Here, the use of the Hebrew “twob” should be read as “agreeable” (it usually says “good”), with this being a statement of the agreement to Yahweh’s Covenant (marriage vows). This is what unites Yahweh’s Spirit with a soul-flesh entity, making it become one of His “elohim.” With that known presence affirmed, David knew the inner “goodness” of Yahweh’s Spirit [from “ḥas·də·ḵā” transliterated from “checed”] will bring forth the living waters for “renewal” of “life,” making one’s soul come “alive” with Spirit. When the Hebrew transliteration “śə·p̄ā·ṯay” is read as “my lips” or “my speech,” this returns focus to verse one’s introduction, where “midbar yehudah” says “in mouth let him be praised.”

This then leads to verse four saying literally in English: “thus I will kneel to you as I have life ; in your name I will raise my hands .” Here, the combination of “I will kneel” and “in your name” state submission before in marriage, where David’s soul is committed in service to Yahweh. Through that divine union, David takes on “the name” of Yahweh. This is the same “name” given to the soul of Jacob, which is “Israel.” This holy matrimony has granted David’s soul eternal “life;” and, his service commitment is to “lift up” or “raise” all of those under the influence of David (as the King of Israel), so all the Israelites live up to that “name,” becoming David’s “hands” serving Yahweh.

Verse five then literally says, “like fat portions and abundance they are satisfied my appetite ; and with speech joyful , shall praise you my mouth .” In this, the ability within David to not only be uplifted himself, here he sings of the ability to raise up others as “hands” led to Yahweh by David as the “abundance of fat” that is sacrificed on the altar in the Tabernacle, with the cooked fat shared with the people afterwards. This then sings of the “souls” that have been fed spiritual food will also have had their spiritual “appetites” met. That satisfaction or satiation will bring forth songs of “praise” that are “joyful.” Here, again, the “mouth” is singing “praise.”

Verse six then literally translates into English as singing, “if I remember you above my bed ; in the watches I meditate on you .” This sings of David’s inspiration to write psalms in the middle of the night, when his soul would join with Yahweh while David’s body slept. The conditional Hebrew word “im” says this is what always happens during sleep, with a soul allowing a body to rest and allow physical maintenance to take place in the body. However, because David’s soul was married to Yahweh, his soul would be taught spiritual lessons, which would come to David in song and music. When he would be awakened by these melodies and the spiritual food coming to him in the lyrics of psalms, he would rise and play his harp, while writing down his words and notes. The “watches” are those four segments of the night, when sleep comes after the sun is down. His “meditation” was his dreams in song that would awaken him, bringing him spiritual vitality.

Verse seven then sings literally in English: “for you have been help mine ; therefore in the shadow of your wings I will rejoice .” This is David singing that Yahweh’s Spirit is his “assistance” in his writing psalms. It is David who gets the credit for writing the songs that come to him from Yahweh; but this verse begins by stating David is Yahweh’s “assistant” and “helper.” This is because Yahweh’s Spirit is unseen, therefore “a shadow” that is cast outwardly by the light of day, while being a statement of that hidden within. The body blocks the light of the sun from shining, so the shadow projects the true value of the flesh – it has no light of life. The “wings” are then metaphor for the angel that lies within David’s soul – that which is his “el” of Yahweh. It is that presence within that leads David to “rejoice” in his songs of praise.

The final verse of this selection for the third Sunday in Lent then literally translates to sing in English: “it keeps close my soul following you ; my soul attains your right hand .” Following a verse about the “shadow of your wings,” this is now stated as how a “shadow” follows closely the movements of the body, in the casting of light that creates a “shadow.” This sings of Yahweh being the light and David’s “soul following you” as His “shadow.” It is then from this willingness to do as commanded that David becomes an extension of Yahweh on the worldly plane, as His “right hand” doing as the light shines him to do.

As a Psalm chosen to be sung on the third Sunday in Lent, it clearly sings a theme of self-sacrifice and the testing that comes from a divine commitment to serve Yahweh. David had the Spirit of Yahweh poured out upon his soul when just a shepherd boy. He immediately was sent into the “mouth” that “lets him sing praise,” when David was sent by Jesse to meet his brothers, as they prepared to do battle with the Philistines, led by Goliath. The test of the period called Lent is finding out if one’s soul is a “wilderness” or a “mouth” of Yahweh. In the story from Luke 4, when Jesus was tested in the wilderness, the period of forty days passed by the time the second verse told that timeframe. It was the subsequent verses that had Jesus sing the praises of Yahweh within, as he countered the wiles of the devil. This song sings praises to that inner strength that comes abundantly, as the fat of self-sacrifice.

1 Corinthians, Language, Teaching

1 Corinthians 10:1-13 – The test not to get drunk, naked and revel in waywardness

Leave a comment

I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.

Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not become idolaters as some of them did; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and they rose up to play.” We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come. So if you think you are standing, watch out that you do not fall. No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it.

——————–

This is the Epistle selection that will be read aloud on the third Sunday in Lent, Year C, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will follow an Old Testament reading from Exodus, where Moses “looked, and the bush was blazing, yet it was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I must turn aside and look at this great sight, and see why the bush is not burned up.”’ That will precede a singing of Psalm 63, where David wrote: “For you have been my helper, and under the shadow of your wings I will rejoice.” All will accompany the Gospel selection from Luke, where Jesus said, “Those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam fell on them–do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others living in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish just as they did.”

Please note that I have stricken through the modern pandering to women that has translation services act as hired hands for profit, who are told by the purchasers of the Bibles they produce, “Add ‘and sisters’ wherever Scripture says only ‘brothers,’ because we make more money off our widows than we do off the men that still attend our churches.” Paul wrote “adelphoi” for a purpose; and, the motivation for that purpose was he was divinely led to write precisely what he wrote. The purpose was to make the panderers see the truth behind the meaning of only addressing “brothers,” which means that is a word that states a relationship to one another, through a common Father. It has nothing to do with sexuality, because souls are asexual. To be misled by these modern hired hands and false shepherds means to never venture to the realm of truth, where understanding the meaning of “brothers” comes. I have stricken it out, but the words are still visible; so, read as you want. My interpretation of the meaning of this reading will not dwell on this point of address.

In the first five verses there are only three capitalized words. A capitalized word is divinely elevated in meaning, which makes it be relative to Yahweh. The second and third capitalized words as “Christos” and “Theos,” which translate as “Christ” and “God.” Those two words are easily recognized as divinely elevated in meaning, being relative to Yahweh. The first capitalized word begins these five verses; and, it is “Ou,” translating as “Not,” which makes it difficult to see how that is divinely elevated and relative to Yahweh. For that reason, the NRSV has changed that word to a simple third word, in the lower case, transforming verse one to begin, “I do not.” That (like adding “and sisters”) is not what is written. A capitalized “Not” beginning these verses becomes divinely elevated and relative to Yahweh as Him speaking through Paul, telling true Christians what “Not” mistakes to make … if one wants to be a “Christ” and please “God.”

The first thing Paul was led to lead true Christians to “Not” be was “ignorant.” In his use of the Greek word “agnoein,” which translates as “to be ignorant” or “to not know,” To multiply a “Not” times a “not” means two negatives yield a positive; so, Paul is making true Christians “know” what should be “known.” This makes the word “ignorant” be less about being unknowledgeable (because of stupidity, illiteracy, brain disease, etc. biological excuse) and more about pointing out a basic fact that people choose to “ignore.”

Now, the use of “brothers” (like I said prior) has little to do with picking out all the male folk in a social gathering, ignoring all their wives. Like I said, it is a divine statement of relationship where all true Christians are Spiritually married to Yahweh and thereby reborn as His Son. Because all souls become Jesus reborn (guys and gals alike), all are “brothers” … as all are souls made Sons by the soul of Jesus being resurrected within. That is then why Paul used “brothers,” before speaking about “the fathers of us all” [literal translation into English] or “our ancestors” [as the NRSV translates]. All of the following verbiage about a “cloud,” going through “the sea,” and being “baptized” by Moses makes those who are ignorant of what “brothers” means think Paul was writing a letter to only male Jews in Corinth. He was not; and, that demands one understand why.

Paul’s legacy was his evangelism to both Gentiles and Jews. Thus, for the truth to be written in a letter, the ancestors that were “the children of Israel” has to be seen as the truth of the meaning behind the name “Israel.” Paul was making it known (to not be ignorant to this history) that the “cloud, sea, and baptism” references were not simply a large group of blood relatives walking where all that was. Instead, their souls had all be led to marry Yahweh (the Covenant agreement) and become Spiritually elevated like Moses. The ‘lineage’ that connects all true Christians to that history written down is that which lets one know those references were spiritual, not physical. That means “brothers” is a word of spiritual relationship, not physical.

When Paul wrote that this spiritual connection to the past was the same as the true Christians in Corinth had experienced, he was saying that was because they “all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.” [NRSV] The “same spiritual food” is the insight of Yahweh’s teachings [transcribed later onto scrolls as orated by Moses]. The “same spiritual drink” is the encompassing presence of Yahweh’s Spirit – His everlasting waters. To “drink from the spiritual rock,” which “was Christ,” says all the ancient true Israelites were filled in the same way, each with the soul of Yahweh’s Son [Adam] within, due to their “Anointment” by Yahweh [becoming a “Christ”]. Here, it is vital that one ceases reading “Christ” as if it is the last name of Jesus; because that will only make the “ignorant” scratch their heads and wonder, “How did Jesus get back that far in history?”

When Paul then reminded those who were recently transfigured into true Christians the stories of the Israelites following Moses in the “wilderness,” the reminder focused on telling them, “God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down.” [NRSV] In that, Paul wrote the word “katestrōthēsan,” which better translates as “they were overthrown,” implying “they had laid low.” This is not a statement that Yahweh went about killing wayward Israelites willy-nilly, as much as it is a statement that says (unlike physical bloodlines) spiritual brothers are not born from sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. This says it was the ministry of the first true Israelites to teach their children to eat the same spiritual food, drink the same spiritual water, and welcome into their souls the same spiritual drink that is the rock of the Christ. Feeding them physical food, giving them physical water, and showing them where water springs from a rock in the ground is not a guarantee of a Spiritual transformation. Thus, true Israelites gave birth to human beings that were not true Israelites, but those who “had laid low.”

Verse six then begins with the capitalized word “Tauta,” which is the plural word stating “These.” That is divinely elevated as a continuation of those who had not pleased Yahweh in the wilderness, because “they were laid low.” That means Paul’s word “These” is a reflection of “Those” who claim ancestry to Yahweh, as ‘children of Israel,’ through bloodline, not Spirituality. Paul then followed that word with “now,” to point to the fact that the failures of the past have not been corrected. Following a comma mark, Paul wrote: “models of us have been born,” saying the bloodline of sin leads to brothers and sister of sinful ancestors being a legacy of sinners always being born and reborn.

In verse seven, Paul wrote: “Do not become idolaters as some of them did”. [NRSV] In that, the Greek word “eidōlolatrai” means “image worshipers,” implying “those who serve idols.” This is most important lesson to learn, as modern Christians read “idol worshipers” and think of the Hindu praying before large statues of multi-armed creatures. This is then seen in Paul referring to Exodus 32, where the fearful Israelites cast a golden calf as an idol and worshiped it. All of that certainly fits the terminology of “idol worshiper,” but when one ponders the truth of “image worshipers,” it does not take much to see how most people claiming to be Christians ‘worship’ sports stars, actors, musicians and singers, politicians and social culture leaders (to name just a few of the “images” commonly mass-“worshiped.”)

A greater problem (after denial is easily an excuse to reduce the terminology from “worshiper” to fan or enthusiast or partisan) is self-worship, where many industries make huge profits by pandering to the lusts of brothers and sisters to look forever younger (than actual), through cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, clothing, medical procedures … on and on and on. This is the same root cause of the fallen Israelites in the wilderness behind Moses, as well as the root cause all those fallen, when Paul lived, who called themselves Jews. AND, let us not forget to project into their future, to all people today (and forever) who call themselves “Christian,” when being a “Christ”ian means eating spiritual food, drinking spiritual drink and being filled with the rock of a “Christ” (Jesus reborn).

When Paul quoted Exodus 32:6, which he began with a capitalized “Ekathisen,” meaning “[They] Sat down,” the divinely elevated meaning of that word says the Israelites “had been Appointed” to be true Israelites, with the teachings providing the plan for eating and drinking spiritually, so their souls could rise up and rejoice servitude to Yahweh [like all angels do]. However, that “Appointment” or “Seating” was from a position of having “laid low,” so they ate physical food, drank physical drink, and then went about their normal sinful business, “playing.” There, the word “paizein” means “to play,” inferring “as a child.” Being childish is then a negative usage, saying the serious nature of faith should not be taken as a game or sport. That is being “ignorant” of the truth.

Back on the last Sunday after the Epiphany, the reading for the Old Testament came from Exodus 34, which was telling of Moses coming down from the mountain a second time, bringing replacement tablets for the one he broke in disgust because he saw the ways of the Israelites. At that time, I wrote my feeling that this “second “Law” was not a reality to Moses and Aaron, but a prophecy of coming times, when Jesus would come down with the New Testament. By then all Laws had been broken, with all ‘Promised Land’ given up in that divorce. When that concept is seen, then Paul writing “These now” is his saying the fulfillment of that prophecy commanded to be written by Moses is seen forever, when people pretend to worship Yahweh, but really worship self-pleasures.

People tend to love Halloween and Mardi Gras, more than the boring stuff that leads to eternal salvation. Carpe diem! I think that is called.

In verse seven, Paul is shown to have written: “We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.” A literal translation better presents the truth of this verse. The verse literally states: “but not should we commit sexual immorality [fornicate] , according to the manner in which certain ones of the same committed sexual immorality [fornicated] , kai fell down to one day twenty three thousand .” In this, the number “twenty-three thousand” becomes an erroneous figure, as there is nothing in the times of Moses when that specific number of fallen Israelites died. Because that segment of words is led by the word “kai,” giving importance to the truth contained to follow, the figures “twenty” and “three” become the truth of two episodes, both telling when a failure to follow the Laws of Moses led to deaths. That historical text needs to be reviewed.

In Exodus 32, after the quote stated by Paul, verse 28 then tells: “and fell from the people day that , about three thousand men .” That accommodates the “three” to which Paul referred. However, In Numbers 25, after telling of the immorality of the people with the women of Moab, verse nine tells of the punishment that came by plague: “and were those who died in the plague four and twenty thousand .” This can justify the use of “twenty” by Paul, as the number relative to both “twenty” and “three” is “thousands” dying “in one day.”

This mixture of Israelite history says “idolatry” is more than worshiping some external image. The external image becomes the lure of the flesh, tempting it to break free of self-will that restrains physical lusts, leading the soul to give-in to external influences and sin. That becomes a statement of “[They] Sat down” as proposed worshipers of Yahweh, but “rose to play” like wayward children. The word translating as “to play” can mean to make “revelry.” Both “revelries” that come from eating fat and drinking wine [drunkenness] and being enticed to fornicate when foreign women flaunt their physicality in one’s face, says “nakedness” is to be avoided; and, nakedness is how Noah became after getting drunk once.

When a passed out drunk Noah was in his tent naked, two of his three sons refused to look upon his “nakedness,” while son Ham looked. Ham was cursed simply for looking upon his father’s “nakedness,” thereby Ham’s lineage “fell down” and was insignificant as far as the Biblical history is developed after that. In Exodus 32:25, when Moses came down the mountain to see the wickedness of the people, it is written: “and saw Moses the people , that unrestrained were ; for had not restrained them Aaron , to derision arisen their enemies .” The words translated as “unrestrained” and “not restrained” means “make naked.” Thus, Exodus 32 says when the people “arose” or “made revelry,” they were so drunk on wine that they began dancing naked … and nakedness has a natural way of leading to sexual immorality.

In verse nine, Paul wrote, “but not should we test this Christ , according to the manner in which certain ones the same tested , kai under this of serpents were destroyed .” This is another example of “testing the Christ” that makes one’s soul be related to others of the same “Christ” “Appointment” made by Yahweh. In the Exodus 32 story of the Israelites falling and going to a fallen Aaron (none of that really happened then), we read of Yahweh somehow finding out about all that was going on at the base of the mountain. Of course, that story is written for childish minds, as Yahweh knows all, at all times; but the point of that notification should be realized as it came as a voice that said, “Hey Dad, there is some sexual immorality going on down below that you should know of.” The one taking that message to Yahweh was the “Christ,” which is Yahweh’s extension into a soul in human flesh [i.e.: Adam-Jesus].

While the “test” of Moses and Yahweh led certain Israelites to rebel, so they got bitten by poisonous serpents and died, the metaphor of the “serpents” are the “Christ” being fallen in those who were only pretending to be Yahweh’s wives. The “serpents” are then metaphor for the demon spirits that love to invade a soul and turn it away from Yahweh. These are then the bridesmaids who could not keep oil in their lamps. They are like the goats that thought they were doing good by claiming to believe in God and Jesus, but never came to know Yahweh in marriage, nor give birth to His Son within their own souls. The “test” of the “Christ” is what Lent is about, because Yahweh knows the hearts of all who say, “I love you God.” Many are still in love with themselves and are only pretending to give up self-worship. They love the nakedness of human flesh and how it tingles when drunk on wine.

In verse ten, Paul then wrote, “and not are you to grumble , even as certain ones the same grumbled , kai perished by the destroyer .” In Numbers 16 is told the story of Korah and two hundred fifty supporters of his, who felt their duties in the Tabernacle denied Korah an equal status with Aaron, as High Priest. They mounted a rebellion burning incense in censers, which led to Yahweh opening the earth and swallowing them all (burning them to death). This led to mass revolution, where the people “grumbled” mightily. That contempt led to 14,700 dying by plague [Numbers 16:49 says: “and were those who died in the plague four ten thousand and seven hundred”]. When Paul wrote about this, the high priest and his Sanhedrin had rebelled and were no longer of the Levitical lineage [Herodians]; so, Numbers 16 reflects a future rebellion that can then be seen as a prophecy of the earth opening up and swallowing the Second Temple.

Verse eleven then repeats the use of a capitalized “Tauta,” again meaning a divinely elevated “These” – of Israelite history. Paul also repeated the following, “These now models having come to pass to others , [those stories] were written now advantageous for a warning of ourselves , into which these ends of those spans ages of time are these arrived .” This says, “If it has happened before, it can happen again.” The punishments for past mistakes become the promise of punishments for all subsequent similar mistakes. It says Scripture is not to read to figure out how to pretend to act, because pretenders will always be tested by Satan and proved to be failures in their souls’ commitment to Yahweh. There can be zero souls allowed eternal life, when they bow down before the altar of self-worship. The span of “ages” says one’s commitment to Yahweh includes “now,” and one is uncommitted if “now” is like it was for “Those.”

In verse twelve, Paul then began with a capitalized “Hōste,” which translates as “Therefore,” which is a divinely elevated statement about the cause and effect relative to a soul. This word continues Paul’s saying the times of the past had then “arrived” and the future of one’s soul is based on one’s past actions, relative to the present. If one’s past includes revelry in nakedness, fornication against the Law, and grumbling about being restricted in any way (as if Yahweh is forcing one’s soul to seek eternal life, not damnation), then it is foolish to expect anything other than a plague to befall one. That will be the mortality of death promised. Death without salvation means reincarnation (to start from scratch again) or worse (self-sold into eternal slavery to Satan … not fun).

The rest of verse twelve then says, “Therefore this appearing to stand upright , let him [or her] take heed , lest it [a soul] falls .” In that, the use of “dokōn,” which I have translated as “appearing,” can also mean “thinking” or “having an opinion.” That usage boils this down to using a ‘Big Brain’ to pretend how to act Christian, when there is no “Christ” poured out upon one’s soul. One “thinks” what would Jesus say that will grant me a conditional favor to do as I please; and, as a return favor to Jesus, I will then give some money to the Church that condones my indulgences. That is what Paul is writing this letter for – to warn the pretenders that like to ‘hang out’ with true Christians, following them around, pretending they will be able to get through the gate to heaven when their time comes, as tag-alongs. They fall into the category that says, “The best laid plans of mice and men go astray.” Brains are the gateway to demonic possession.

Verse thirteen then has Paul writing, “testing yourself not has taken hold of ¸ if not human ; faithful now this God , who not will permit yourself to be tested beyond what ability you possess , except will make , together with this trial , kai this outcome , this to be able to endure .” This says that a soul (“yourself” = your soul) is tested to see if it is “not” one that “has taken hold” of Yahweh’s Spirit [His “Christ”] in divine union. If the result of a test is “not taken hold of,” then one is “human,” and humans only possess a soul for animating their flesh. When one passes the test of “faithfulness” (commitment in divine marriage), then “this God” will prove to be one’s strength in a test. It is the presence of “God,” through His Son (the “Christ”) that will prevent any test from exceeding the power of the Spirit one’s soul “has taken hold of.” Anything beyond that “ability” [such as casting out Satanic spirits in others] will be a special talent allowed by the Father to the Son, so any damage collateral done by Satan will be “endured.” Thus, Stephen was able to forgive his murderers, because the Spirit made his suffering temporary.

As a reading selection for the third Sunday in Lent, it obviously focuses on the purpose of testing. When it should be clear that all liturgical seasons are making Scripture be oneself looking within oneself for spiritual strength; so, one should see Lent is not about Jesus spending forty days in the wilderness. Lent is about oneself being tested for faithfulness to Yahweh. It is not a test of one’s brain. It is a test of whether or not one has been blessed by Yahweh’s Anointment, so one truly is a Christian. This reading makes it clear that being “human” means doing everything that one can to satisfy self-concerns, rather than fully submit one’s soul into service to Yahweh.

Paul’s reminder of the sins of the Israelites says, “If they did it, it can happen to your soul as well.” There can be no pretenders pass the test of faith. That is a very loud message that holds its value today, when the sexual immorality of homosexuality, adultery, grumbling, and anything else human is condoned in pulpits throughout the Episcopal Church. This lesson points out with clarity that one does not sit down in the Episcopal section of Heaven (en masse). Proving one can wait out forty days as a group supporting sins together, each watching the back of another, is one of those games children play. Groups are not given entrance into eternal salvation … which is the lesson Paul reminded the “brothers” not to be “ignorant” of.

Language, Luke, Teaching

Luke 13:1-9 – The test of producing good fruit or being destroyed

Leave a comment

At that very time there were some present who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. He asked them, “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were worse sinners than all other Galileans? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish as they did. Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam fell on them–do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others living in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish just as they did.”

Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and found none. So he said to the gardener, ‘See here! For three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree, and still I find none. Cut it down! Why should it be wasting the soil?’ He replied, ‘Sir, let it alone for one more year, until I dig around it and put manure on it. If it bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.'”

——————–

This is the Gospel selection to be read aloud by a priest on the third Sunday in Lent, Year C, according to the lectionary for the Episcopal Church. It will be preceded by an Old Testament reading from Exodus, where is written: “Then Yahweh said, “I have observed the misery of my people who are in Egypt; I have heard their cry on account of their taskmasters. Indeed, I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them from the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the country of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.” That will be followed by Psalm 63, which sings, “For your loving-kindness is better than life itself; my lips shall give you praise.” That will then lead to a selection for Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, where he warned: “We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer.”

The point of this reading is fairly clear to me. The only confusion comes from the listing of specific events that historians are unclear on, as to when they happened. The historian Josephus did not record anything that says when (or if) these events happened. All that needs to be grasped from verses one through five is some Jews died, some by punishment thought to be unjust or inappropriate and some died by pure accident. All were Jews that died. Thus, the causes of their deaths were irrelevant to Jesus, because death comes to everyone; repentance prior to death is then the point Jesus would address in his parable.

There is some commentary about the focus put on “Galileans,” where this is believed to have been associated with an historical character named Judas of Galilee. He is said by Josephus to have been one of the founders of a “fourth sect” (other than the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) that led to the revolt that caused the Temple of Jerusalem to be destroyed. In 6 A.D. (or “CE”), he led a protest against the taxes in Judea proposed by Quirinius. Judas and his followers threatened Jews who paid a Roman tax, because God was the only ruler over Israel. That would certainly have led to some rebels being rounded up (Galilean followers of Judas) and executed, near or during the Passover festival, just to make a Roman point that God was not a very strong ruler that cared about tax money, like Rome and Caesar were.

If this was the event referred to in these verses in Luke’s Gospel, then this says the Jews harbored grudges long after the fact (roughly twenty years after). It is possible that Jesus was not in Galilee when that execution took place, having left for his travels east before that rebellion took place. This would mean he was told that it was this zealous sect that brought shame on the other Jews, because their “blood mingled with their sacrifices.” The embarrassment of some Galileans being killed during the time remembering the Passover being when Israelites were not killed by Yahweh would reflect on how God would have been less pleased with their festival’s outcome then. To bring up that old event as reason to confront Jesus would say that these Jews bringing up ‘ancient history’ were doing so because Jesus was seen in a similar light to them. It was a reminder to Jesus about what happens to those who threaten punishment to Jews who obey Rome. That suggestion says Jesus was bringing back old memories of zealots who had likewise said God is the only ruler of Israel.

If that is the case, then Jesus’ question about those long dead makes more sense, as it projects the wrongs of the past onto the wrongs of the present. Because Jesus was known as being from Nazareth, in Galilee, he was thought to be ‘messianic,’ therefore a rebellious leader. His being told of an old event, one relative to what the Romans do to rebels from Galilee, means they saw Jesus as being anti-Roman, more than pro-God. When he then asked in response, “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were worse sinners than all other Galileans?” he was pointing out how many sins always go unpunished. The use of “worse sinners” implies all in Galilee were sinners, just not executed by Rome for their sins. Jesus, therefore, was not promoting rebellion against Rome, but compliance to the Laws that actually made Jews be true Israelites.

It is important to see that Jesus was much closer to the philosophy of the Essenes, than he was to the other sects. He was constantly being challenged by the Pharisees and Sadducees, because his views did not agree with the errors of logic they defended. It would be in the Essene Quarter of Jerusalem that the Passover Seder meal (Jesus’ last supper) would take place, with an empty room in pilgrim-packed Jerusalem being due to the Essenes not observing the Passover festival in Jerusalem. They held their festival around their temple built on Mount Carmel, only ten miles from Nazareth. It is quite possible that Judas of Galilee was an Essene priest who was against the Temple in Jerusalem supporting all Roman taxes. For that reason, Jesus would have been thought to secretly be an Essene (or a zealot), which was why this suggestion of Jewish blood “mingling with their sacrifices” is a threat posed to Jesus (as it certainly is somewhat prophetic).

After Jesus made his point by asking (in essence) a rhetorical question, his saying, “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish as they did.” From this statement it can be gathered that Jesus was speaking to other Galilean Jews, most likely around Capernaum, where Jesus lived when not on the road. After having made his name be known in Jerusalem, the ‘spies’ of the Temple were regularly dispatched to Galilean synagogues to gain reports of any possible threats to their firm control over the Jews in that region. To tell those who had just suggested to Jesus that he could end up dead if he kept rocking the boat of complacency; that they were sinners – no better no worse – like those they called out as sinners, Jesus next said without repentance “you all will perish as they did.”

In that, Luke wrote the Greek word “apoleisthe,” which is the second-person future form of the word “apollumi,” which has been translated as “you will perish.” The actual translation of “apollumi” is “to destroy, destroy utterly,” implying in usage, “I kill, destroy” or “I am perishing (the resultant death being viewed as certain).” (Strong’s) This must be seen as Jesus predicting Jews who are unrepentant will be destroyed, put to death, executed, killed, in the same manner the rebels were executed by Roman means; and, this means “perish” is not some ‘die in your sleep at peace with God’ natural prediction of mortality. The implication (which becomes clearer in the parable) is a higher authority than Pilate – a Roman governor in a conquered land – or Caesar in far away Rome. Without repentance to Yahweh, Yahweh will administer much more severe punishment than killing a few rebel before or during Passover for ‘shock value.’

To make that point stronger, Jesus then spoke about a reported incident where eighteen Jews died in an obvious accident, where “this tower this Siloam” seems to have collapsed or fallen in some way.

A model in a museum.

Again, historically speaking, there is nothing recorded about a tower accident near Siloam, where eighteen Jews were killed. The pool of Siloam is where Jesus healed the man born blind, as told in John’s Gospel (only). One can only assume that is the place being referenced, because Jesus did not mention a pool. Because David built walls around his city, it is possible that some earth tremor caused a tower along the western wall of the City of David, close to the pool of Siloam to become weakened. Perhaps the Romans were preparing some repairs to shore up the weakness, when it suddenly gave and collapsed, killing people who were close to that tower. Some might have actually been workers, but some could have been preparing to enter the pool. All that can be gathered from this statement by Jesus is it is a true event that was recognized. However, what could have been missed in the conversation is the meaning of the word “Siloam,” which is capitalized and thus has divinely elevated meaning.

The word “Siloam” is Greek, which pulls from the Hebrew “Shiloah” (from “shalah”), which means “to send out or let go.” According to the Wikipedia article on the Pool of Siloam, the following is stated: “The Pool of Siloam was the starting point for pilgrims who made the annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and where they ascended by foot to the inner court of the Temple Mount to bring their sacrificial offerings. The Pool of Siloam was used by pilgrims for ritual purification before visiting the Temple enclosure.” This would mean the pool was given a name that became a starting point, from which ritual sacrifices would be “sent out” or “let go” to Yahweh. Still, the divine elevation in the context of what Jesus said says the true sacrifice is a soul that has been “sent out” or “let go” back to Yahweh at death. This also ties in with the parable told next; and, the number of people killed becomes symbolism to consider.

In the Greek text written by Luke, there is a mark that connects the words “ten” and “eight.” The mark looks like this: “‿”. Without that mark connecting the two, ten would have to be considered meaningful, separate from the meaning of eight. The connecting mark still draws from two numbers, such that the number “ten” becomes symbolic of a level higher than normal life, which becomes a divine elevation of a soul. A “ten” becomes reflective of the difference between a common Gentile [a 1] and a Jew devoted to Mosaic Law [a 10]. To then connect “eight” to that elevated level, as “eighteen,” this becomes numerologically a “nine,” as “one plus eight,” where the “one” is a “ten” reduced by adding “1 + 0” to yield “one.” The number “nine” reflects “finalization,” which death normally represents. However, as “ten connected to eight,” the “eight” reflects death (going to a higher realm – 10) when one is still fit and able (8). That says they were not Jews who were at the pool seeking to be healed from some malady or deformity; but, instead, they were able-bodied Jews who were unlucky and at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Because they were most probably devout believers, they were still sinners [another story from metaphysics]; so, they died as sinners, not saints. Premature deaths are then lessons to teach the kiddies: You want to serve Yahweh now, because you never know what bad things can happen in the future, where plans on serving Yahweh not realized make one the same as a Gentile who does not serve any gods either.

When Jesus finished reminding those who had confronted him of the specifics of an accident that killed eighteen Jews, he then asked (rhetorically), “Do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others living in Jerusalem?” That question says all eighteen Jews who died were “offenders,” where the Greek word written is “opheiletai,” meaning “debtors,” implying “sinners.” Jesus said everyone “dwelling in Jerusalem” were “sinners” or “debtors” to Yahweh; so, Jesus asked those before him to “think” if death was how Yahweh punishes sinful people.

Just as he asked them to “think” about the “sinner” Galileans from past history were plucked from a larger group of “sinners,” that selectivity means their deaths were manmade, not punishment from Yahweh. To then suggest they “think” the same manmade cause applies to accidents again supports the reasoning [something philosophies are known for] that everyone dies soon enough for Yahweh. He has no reason [that word again] to kill anyone because they sin. The whole point of being His chosen people [not Gentiles] was to be models of righteousness. So, Jesus wanted religious philosophers to “think” about the only reason Jews could “think” they were better than anyone else in the world.

Again, as a rhetorical question, Jesus answered his own question before anyone else could. He said, “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish just as they did.” Here, Jesus has linked sinners in Galilee with the sinners of Jerusalem, which in effect says all Jews living in Galilee and Judea were sinners (for the most part), because none of them were zealous about their religion, to the extent that they admitted they were sinners and sought to live righteous lives, according to Mosaic Law. Certainly, that was what Jesus was promoting; but his rebellious focus was less about following a single leader to ruin (a leader who like all the other leaders failed to understand the ‘how to’ of the Law). It was promoting all individual Jews admit their shortcomings to Yahweh and fully submit to Him, so they can see what they were all doing wrong. To accomplish a righteous state of living, one needs to do less thinking and more doing what Yahweh says.

This then leads to the parable of the man who had a fig tree planted in his vineyard. That says the man is a landowner of means, who has a “gardener” who cares for the vineyard and this one fig tree. Right off the bat, one needs to realize the landowner is Yahweh. The “gardener” is His Son Adam (whose resurrected soul is in Jesus). Here, it is important to recall how Mary Magdalene mistook the soul of Jesus as “the gardener,” which needs to be seen as her seeing Jesus as his soul’s projection of originality [from the Garden of Eden], rather than the Jesus she knew from her marriage to him. Thus, it becomes important to see the Father has made the ‘executive decision’ to plant one fig tree (Adam-Jesus) in a world of grapevines (those who live righteously), where the name of the “vineyard” is Israel Acres.

Now, the symbolism of the “vineyard” is all of Israel, which was all of the twelve tribes being dispersed over all the regions. The one fig tree can then be symbolic for the kings and leaders of the Tabernacle, which began with David being planted in Jerusalem. In 1 Kings 4:25 is written: “During Solomon’s lifetime Judah and Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, lived in safety, everyone under their own vine and under their own fig tree.” In Zechariah 3:10 is written: “In that day each of you will invite your neighbor to sit under your vine and fig tree,’ declares Yahweh of hosts.” In Micah 4:4 is written: “Everyone will sit under their own vine and under their own fig tree, and no one will make them afraid, for Yahweh of hosts has spoken.” All of this speaks of the duality of heart and soul, as having become the fruit of a Yahweh elohim. A true Israel is that.

When the vine part of a vineyard is then the religion, where everyone has been given the Law as one’s stake in the ground, and its fruit is the children born that are expected to follow the Law, the fig tree becomes the one that takes the position of a Patriarch, a Prophet, or a King that reflects the resurrected soul of Adam-Jesus as its fruit. Everything in the vineyard is then dependent on the one fig tree to produce good fruit and not be barren.

In the reality of fig trees, they usually do not begin producing figs until they have lived five seasons. Not all fig tree will produce figs. Once a fig tree begins to produce fruit, it will only do that for about thirty-five years, at which point it will become barren (from old age). Thus, the willingness of the “gardener” to tell the “landowner” that the full time allowance for fruit production to begin is still a season away says the fig tree will not be cut down prematurely. [There will be no executions or accidents forthcoming unnecessarily.] However, once the time has come for it to produce good fruit or be “let go” [“shalah”], it will be cut down if it does not produce. [Natural death leading to Judgment by the Father.] This becomes a parable about Yahweh sending His Son as the gardener, who knows a good way to promote good fruit production is to throw some dung around the roots of the leaders of the Jews [the truth of the ‘decomposed’ Law], to see if this next phase means they will produce good fruit.

The “dung” or “manure” [from “kopria“] has to be seen as the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets, which has to become digested and processed so it becomes fertilizer for the soul. The producer of this “dung” is a Yahweh elohim, where the soul of Adam-Jesus has resurrected within the soul of a repentant sinner, so the truth of all Scripture is known [not reasoned]. This encounter where Jesus was spreading a load of truth upon a barren fig tree, that truth still had not been broken down (spiritually) and absorbed in the root system of inner knowledge [a Yahweh adonay]. The brains of human beings are like the leaves on the trees, which are useful half the year, but then absent the other half. The soul needs to know the truth of the Word, which is then seen in the metaphor of “dung.” The leaders of the Jews were not absorbing their manure very well at all.

The ’moral’ of this story is not that Jesus is the fig tree. He is the gardener. The fig tree that was the Temple of Jerusalem would be cut down when the second revolt of the Jews against Rome led to that destruction. The new fig tree planted in its place would be the Apostles and Saints, who would produce the good fruit of Christianity. The problem those to whom Jesus spoke (and we never know who they were specifically) was they did way too much “thinking” and still could not figure out why they were placed into Yahweh’s vineyard. They were too concerned with old news of failed attempts to displace Rome; so, their minds were set on serving Rome (not Yahweh). All that thinking led them nowhere. They could not see the value coming to their souls from serving only Yahweh [repenting], over the values they could find from serving other masters.

As the Gospel selection to be read aloud on the third Sunday in Lent, the lesson should be the test of fruit production. All souls animating human flesh are bound to die. Some deaths will be by natural causes, some from punishments for crimes committed, and some will be because of accidents. Death is inevitable. The test is to commit one’s soul to Yahweh well before one’s soul is released from its flesh (whenever that will be), so eternal life is assured. For that to happen, the test is to serve Yahweh (as His Son reborn) for some significant number of fruitful years (perhaps thirty-five?). The dung that fertilizes one’s ability to produce good fruit is Scripture; but Scripture needs to become digested nutrients that are processed through divine insight. It is easier to reject the dung and do nothing productive. The test is to receive the dung as your chance to live. Otherwise, you will be destroyed.