March 2, 2012— updated 15.9.2016
An Essay of Definition in Seven Parts
Addendum 2 to PART FIVE
The Language of Redemption
Out of the North Country
Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. (Heb 9:22)
The people of Israel, descended from the children of Israel that Balaam wasn’t allowed to curse, delivered Jesus to Pilate, and when Pilate tried to release Jesus, the people began to riot. Pilate washed his hands of the persecution, and the people said, “‘His blood be on us and on our children’” (Matt 27:25), and so it has been for nearly two millennia … I need to pause here and remind readers that Matthew’s Gospel isn’t about the physical man Jesus the Nazarene, but about the indwelling Christ Jesus that gives life to the chosen ones, born of God. Thus, the factual nature of utterances in Matthew’s Gospel is often lacking. What is factual is that the natural descendants of Israel would not accept Jesus’ testimony, nor would they accept Paul’s testimony, nor will they today accept any testimony that has Jesus being the Son of God. Therefore, because of their rejection of Jesus’ prior deity, and rejection of His returned deity, they have effectively taken His blood onto themselves, but it is doubtful that assembled Jews ever spoke the words attributed them by the author of Matthew’s Gospel. It is doubtful that the leaders of the temple incited a crowd on the Preparation Day for the great Sabbath of the Sabbath enough for the crowd to say, His blood be on us.
For an example of the author of Matthew “improving” of the historical narrative, compare the post-baptism account of the temptation of Jesus found in Mark’s Gospel with the same account found in Matthew’s Gospel.
And immediately the spirit [to pneuma —neuter gender, nominative case] drives Him into [eis] the wilderness. And He was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. And He was among wild beasts, and the angels were ministering to Him. (Mark 1:12–13 literal translation)
Now, Matthew’s Gospel, but on only one of three temptations:
Then the Jesus [’o ’Iesous] was led into [eis] the wilderness by the spirit [tou pneumatos — neuter possessive] to be tempted by the devil. And having fasted days forty and nights forty, afterwards He hungered, and having approached the one tempting said to Him, If son you are of God, speak that these stones, bread may become …
Again takes Him the devil to a very high mountain and shows to Him all the kingdom of the world and the glory of them and he said to Him, These things to you all I will give if falling down you may worship me. (Matt 4:1–3, 8–9 literal translation)
I’ve asked the question before: from what very high mountain can a person see all of the kingdoms of this world—and their glory. From what mountain can a person see over the curve of the horizon; see kingdoms on the opposite side of the world?
When facing a sphere, who can see the backside of the sphere? Perhaps Superman with X-Ray vision, but the author of Matthew’s Gospel gave to his “Jesus” better than X-Ray vision, for not only could Jesus see the kingdoms that Satan was offering Him, but could see their glory.
None of the disciples were with Jesus when Satan confronted Him; none of the disciples knew more of what happened than Jesus told them—and the person who just bested the Adversary, the prince of the world, in a man-on-man struggle of wills simply won’t say much about the struggle except that He won. Rather, He would give credit to God, and to faithful angels for His win. So while Jesus’ responses to Satan were, for each of the situations, the right reply, the situations didn’t occur as recorded in Matthew’s Gospel.
While John Mark has Jesus being tempted by Satan throughout the forty days, he also has angels ministering to Jesus during these forty days. His account is more believable; his account is what the Apostle Peter preached. But Matthew’s account, based on Mark’s, isn’t believable; didn’t occur; however, Matthew’s account tells disciples how to address temptations when they occur—and they are sure to occur. And Luke’s account, apparently based on the oral Gospel as well as on Matthew’s Gospel, has the same problems: if the Adversary sat the man Jesus on the pinnacle of the temple, someone would have noticed; someone would have said, You can’t do that, get down! And the incident would have appeared in the writings of temple scribes.
So before a Christian tells his Observant neighbor that Jews took Jesus’ blood onto themselves and onto their children, the Christian should take off his (or her) blinders and unlock that portion of his (or again, her) brain where reason buttresses logic, and consider the very real possibility that the Adversary, the present prince of this world, would like to murder every Sabbath-keeper in the world, beginning with the Jews. He actually has a pretty good record when it comes to murdering Jews. His present difficulty is that the modern nation-state of Israel has promised to take the world down with them if they are faced with another Holocaust. And I believe they have the ability to do so, which sort of keeps Satan in perpetual check, mate in two moves if the Adversary doesn’t keep running.
However, are the chosen ones to allow the natural descendants of the patriarchs to continue in spiritual ignorance? No! But Jews are not quick to love neighbor and brother; are not a people who are quick to forget three and a half millennia of attempted extermination. They tend to cling to their traditions, which have kept them alive against the efforts of the Adversary to wipe them from even the annuals of history as a parent wipes the runny nose of a child. Nevertheless, the chosen ones of God must go after them if for no other reason than to make them jealous; the chosen ones are to show them that the Decalogue can be kept by a people that is outwardly uncircumcised but that is inwardly circumcised of heart; can be kept by a people that are not a biological nation, that are not a people at all.
In sending Paul to Gentiles, the Lord made—as referenced in the preceding section—a species adaptation based upon human sons of God dwelling in perpetual darkness. This adaptation has firstborn sons of the Father receiving a second breath of life (indwelling eternal life) prior to demonstrated obedience; prior to the time for fruit to ripen, with Paul serving as the scale model for Christians being filled with spirit prior to liberation from indwelling sin and death at the Second Passover.
In his treatise to the saints at Rome, Paul by the hand of Tertius makes a profound statement that addresses every argument made against Christians keeping the Commandments:
What then shall we say? That the Law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the Law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing an opportunity through the Commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the Law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the Law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very Commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the Commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. (Rom 7:7–11 emphasis added)
In the textual redaction of Moses undertaken by scribes after the Book of the Covenant was found in the dilapidated temple (2 Kings chap 22), we find the Lord telling Isaac, “‘Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws’” (Gen 26:5); yet when the author of Hebrews speaks of Abraham, we find,
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him in the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. Therefore, from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore. … By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. (Heb 11:8–12, 17–19)
Again, in translating from Greek to English, <pisteos> is usually rendered “faith,” but the concept embedded in the icon is “belief unto obedience”; belief that causes the person to act upon his or her belief. Hence, Abraham’s faith was his belief of God that was counted to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6). So in the redaction of Moses’ writings that followed Josiah’s campaign to Bethel—whether in Jerusalem or in Babylon—Abraham’s belief of God (again, counted to him as righteousness) was counted to him by scribes as having kept the commandments, statutes, and laws of the Lord. For Paul says unequivocally,
The promises were made to Abraham and to his [seed]. It does not say, “And to [seeds],” referring to many, but referring to one. “And to your [seed],” who is Christ. This is what I mean: the Law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance comes by the Law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. (Gal 3:16–18)
Picking up a thread left from the previous writing: has God protected the integrity of Scripture when Paul says that Abraham didn’t have the Law—the Commandments—to keep, but a scribe has the Lord tell Isaac that Abraham did indeed keep the Commandments? Or did Abraham keep different commandments from those the Lord delivered to Israel at Mount Sinai? And should Christians try to recover commandments Abraham kept? At what point should a chosen one simply say belief of the sort that can be counted to a person as righteousness will have the person manifesting love for neighbor and brother, and therefore doing in this world the work of the Law, hence keeping the Law. By this criterion, Abraham kept the Law 430 years before it was given. And by this measure of a person, every chosen one, born of God, needs to surpass what Abraham, the father of believers, did.
With Paul serving as a scale model for Christians being filled with spirit, a troubling question postulates itself: how can a person crucify or kill a dead inner self, an inner self consigned to disobedience and condemnation?
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin [unbelief of God that leads to transgressing the Law] that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? We were buried therefore with Him by baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with Him in a death like His, we shall certainly be united with Him in a resurrection like His. We know that our old self was crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free from sin. (Rom 6:1–7)
If the chosen ones [the Elect] have died to sin, will they continue to intentionally sin, intentionally transgress the Law? No, they will not! This means that for fifty of fifty-two Sunday mornings every year, the parking lots and pews of Christian Churches should be empty … there are many-more empty ones than there used to be, but mostly because mega-churches offer better entertainment than local choirs can.
If baptism represents real “death” albeit without the person losing his or her physical breath of life, then what dies is the evil conscience of the person. The Apostle Peter, by the hand of Silvanus, said that baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience (1 Pet 3:21); this appeal analogous to the Flood of Noah’s day when the Lord baptized the world in water and unto death.
In the days of Noah, those human persons who were not in the Ark did not live physically; therefore, for what Paul said about baptism to make symbolic sense, those persons who are baptized must be “inside” the Ark of the Covenant, not clinging to the figurative rigging Noah used to tether the Ark until the waters came. Those persons who are baptized into Christ’s death should not continue in willful transgression of the Law.
Speaking the language of the oppressor and deceived by the words used, Christians do not realize assembling together on the day after the Sabbath to worship the Lord, regardless of the justifications deployed to conceal their unbelief from God, makes them intentional transgressors for which no sin offering atones, even Jesus’ death at Calvary. So in the rhetoric of redemption, the Christian who is baptized as an infant; the Christian who is baptized as an adult (the Believers’ baptism), has NOT been baptized into the death of Christ, but simply was dampened, as clothes used to be dampened before being ironed. These Christians will be ironed with a rod of iron in the Affliction. And in this, the days of Noah again pertain; for Noah crossed from one world into the next world, boarding the Ark on the day when, centuries later, the paschal lamb was chosen for the second Passover (the 10th day of the second month). At the end of this age, Christians will cross from one world—this present world of transactions—into the next world [heaven or the Millennium], but not without witnessing death on a previously unimaginable scale.
Lucky will be the Christian who dies in faith early into the Affliction; for this Christian will be sealed in death and saved by the Christian’s belief of God.
When the Second Passover liberation of a second Israel occurs, on a second Passover day that happens in a year when the 15th day of the second month is a Thursday, all who profess that Jesus is Lord will be filled with spirit [pneuma Theou] and therefore able to commit blasphemy against the spirit—and blasphemy against the spirit will be nothing more that returning to being a transgressor of the Law, thereby rejecting liberation from indwelling Sin & Death. Obedience to God as in keeping the Commandments by faith kills disobedience, kills an evil conscience. The inverse is also true: disobedience kills faith, kills belief of God; will kill the Christian filled with spirit in the Affliction. For baptism will do the unbeliever no good. To make a public appeal for a good conscience, then to do any of those things that pertain to spiritual darkness negates the good conscience and returns the Christian to being a son of disobedience.
To figuratively kill darkness is to strike a match, for light overcomes darkness. But the vast majority of Christians as well as the natural descendants of Israel continued to dwell in darkness, not able to see where they were going or where they had been; not knowing the Lord; not willing to accept Christ Jesus as the Light and Life of men. Although Pharisees claimed to be able to see (John 9:39–41), they were blind, perhaps more blind (if such a state can exist) than the lawless, the open sinners, the ones who knew that they came short of the standard represented by the Law.
An analogous situation exists in endtime Sabbatarian Christendom. With few exceptions, Sabbatarian Christians live according to the flesh, focusing on what hands do and what bodies do and even on how words are pronounced, claiming that to not use a bastardized Hebrew pronunciation for “the Name” is blasphemy (cf. Lev 24:10–16; Deut 5:11) …
Jesus would not use a Hebrew pronunciation for the Name (cf. Matt 22:44; Ps 110:1 in their original languages); so was Jesus guilty of blasphemy? Of course not! It is the person who assigns a pronunciation, any pronunciation, to the Tetragrammaton YHWH that commits blasphemy against the Father and the Son.
Until Imperial Hebrew scribes undertook to redact Moses, the early prophets, and the Writings post Josiah’s reforms, the Tetragrammaton YHWH was always read silently as an unpronounced linguistic determinative that identified Hebrew deity: it was not a naming noun, and it was not singular in number. It was singular in unity. And this lack of singularity can still be seen in the few places where the Tetragrammaton YHWH is used that Imperial Hebrew scribes missed in their redaction of the sacred text.
The God [Elohim] said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness …
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them. (Gen 1:26–27)
indented line is spiritual portion of thought-couplet
Then the Lord God [YHWH Elohim] said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. … (Gen 3:22)
And the Lord [YHWH] came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. And the Lord [YHWH] said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.” (Gen 11:5–7)
And I heard the voice of the Lord [YHWH] saying, “Who shall I send, and who will go for us?” (Isa 6:8)
King David in this later psalms employs rigid Hebraic “thought-couplet” structure in his versification; thus, we find in in Psalm 146:1,
Praise YHWH, O my soul!
David placed <Yah> in the natural or physical portion of the couplet, and <YHWH> which he most likely would have sung as <Adonai> in the spiritual portion of the couplet. And he does this again in Psalm 148:1,
Praise YHWH from the heavens;
Again, <Yah> in the natural portion of the couplet [“you” here on earth praise Yah]; <YHWH> in the spiritual portion [“you” in the heavens praise YHWH]. And David does this one more time in Psalm 149:1,
Sing to YHWH a new song,
Whether Israel was, in the time of David, uttering <Adonai> in lieu of attempting to pronounce the Tetragrammaton YHWH cannot be said with certainty; for the linguistic icon Adonai seems to “contain” the vowels for both consonant pairings, plus the Chaldean word <don>, usually used to represent “another such” where two things are similar. Hence, when <Adonai> is superimposed over the Tetragrammaton, we would get the conjoined union of YaHdonWaiH, with the <H> representing aspiration or breath—or two deities with their own breaths that function as one deity as Adam and Eve were one flesh. And this is what we see in John 1:1, where in primacy [arche] the Logos [’o Logos] was God [Theos], and was with or of [pros] the God [ton Theon]. These two deities were, respectively, the God [Theos] of living ones and the God [Theos] of dead ones.
Again, according to John’s Gospel, it was the Logos who created all things physical (John 1:3) and who entered His creation as His unique Son (John 3:16), thus no longer having any presence in heaven and as such “dying” in heaven; for He entered His creation as His son, not as Himself. And while He had “life” in Himself, He had only the life and light of men (John 1:4) in Him. Thus, He could not impart to His unique Son the “life” of a deity, but only the life of men. It was the God of dead ones who could impart to the spiritually dead indwelling heavenly life.
When Yah entered His creation as His Son, the God of Abraham ceased to exist in either heaven or on earth. He was no more and would never again be as He was before even when the glory He had with the Father before the world existed is/was returned to Him. This is correct. And the Sabbatarian Christian who utters some form of <Yahweh> has audacity rooted in ignorance that defies belief. This Sabbatarian commits blasphemy against the Father and the Son; for to pray to <Yahweh> is to deny Christ Jesus. To claim that <Yahweh> is the Creator of all that has been made is denial of the Logos.
Today, the God of dead ones is known as “the Father,” for every person was spiritually dead before being foreknown and predestined by the Father, with Christ Jesus forming the fractal of every son of God, born of spirit.
And about being foreknown and predestined, consider Jesus, the unique Son of the Logos [the Word] of [pros] the God [ton Theon]. For how long did the Father know Jesus before He spiritually raised Jesus from the dead? Thirty years? Yes, for about thirty years. And was Jesus predestined for all of these thirty years to be born of spirit [born again] by the Father? Indeed, He was. And did Jesus need to be called from this world? No. Jesus knew when it was time for Him to begin His ministry; for a priest could not serve in the temple until he was thirty years old. John’s ministry couldn’t begin until John was thirty years old. Likewise, Jesus’ ministry couldn’t begin until He was thirty years old—the age He was when he went to John to be baptized “‘to fulfill all righteousness’” (Matt 3:15). And did Jesus need to be justified? No, for He was without sin. Did He need to be glorified? Yes, twice glorified, the inner self at the beginning of three and a half years of ministry, and the outer self after it was dead for three and a half days. For God, both being a time, times, and half a time [one unit of “time” being “years”; one “days”]—as it has now been a time, times, and half a time since Moses led Israel out from Egypt [the unit being a millennium].
There is no way to prevent the carnally minded from thinking physically. Jews think carnally as evidenced by Moses preventing them from kindling a fire—fire representing life, the dark fire of cellular oxidation sustaining physical life; the bright fire that is the glory of God (from Ezek 1:26–28) sustaining spiritual life—on the Sabbath (Ex 35:3), with the Sabbath representing being in the presence of God. Hence, because of Israel’s rebellion at Mount Sinai, no Jew will be born of spirit as a son of God. For as long as even an Observant Jew remains a Jew and doesn’t profess that Jesus is the Christ, the person (male or female) can only think physical thoughts, which doesn’t mean that he or she won’t be saved, but means that the person won’t be one of the chosen ones; for the first shall be last. Just as no Moabite can enter the assembly of the Lord, even to the tenth generation (Deut 23:3), no Israelite can enter into the presence of the Lord until the glorified David returns to being King over Israel.
If Jesus was foreknown by the Father for thirty years before the Father raised Jesus’ inner self from death through sending to Him in the bodily form of a dove, His holy spirit [pneuma ’agion], that entered into Jesus (Mark 1:10) and thereby caused Jesus to be born of spirit as the firstborn Son of the Father, the First of many brothers, each a son of God, then no Christian should be overly upset at being in the faith for thirty years before the person is tasked with a work suited to his or her physical abilities and spiritual maturity. The person who is not equipped to read texts critically shouldn’t be surprised when the person isn’t given the opportunity to read critically: why would God task a person with a job the person doesn’t have the talents necessary to do? Does the person expect God to give to the person what he or she doesn’t have just so there is equality among disciples? If the person does, the person needs to review what Paul wrote about the gifts of the spirit.
I presently live in one of the most strikingly beautiful [in a wild way] places in the world, but I live here without the benefit of being able to order-out for pizza, or being able to go to a local hardware store when I need a bolt, or even being able to buy ammunition for my rifle. I had a few self-tapping sheet metal screws when I came—and I used them putting together the first few lengths of stovepipe so we could get heat in our house (we have an Amish-built wood range). I needed more, but I had to wait until we could again get on the Internet to order more. And when we could, I ordered 2,500 shipped freight free from Wisconsin for about what I would have paid for 500 shipped from a hardware store in Anchorage. Now, I don’t need 500. I need about 40. But by bringing to this island more than I need, a lot more than I need, I have a relatively inexpensive item to share with others. And that is what “community” is ultimately about, me having what someone else needs and someone else having what I need. It’s about sharing without an expectation of gain …
But, you ask, how will someone else know that I have more self-tapping sheet metal screws than I need. The someone else will have to come and visit, just as a fellow came to visit when I needed a 10-foot-long, copper coated ground rod when installing a new electrical meter base. The fellow said he thought he still had one from a previous job, and he returned with the rod at a time when I could neither order one, nor afford the airfreight to have one flown in if I had been able to order one.
If a person is numbered among the chosen ones, the Elect, the person isn’t necessarily tasked with what would be perceived as a spiritual work. The person could simply be tasked with supporting another person’s work, for none of us are entirety self-sufficient islands. And if the person has been tasked as support help, the person is—because he or she has been born of spirit—special to God and before God. As Sabbatarian Christians, we have only to look around us to see how few we truly are in number. And if it wasn’t for us, no flesh would still be alive when dominion over the single kingdom of this world is taken from the Adversary and given to the Son of Man.
It is easy to be critical of another son of God because the son doesn’t have the same natural abilities as you have … it is the Adversary who pushes for equality: equal outcomes for unequal abilities and opportunities. It is the Adversary who advocates for democratic ideals, democratic elections, democracy. It is also the Adversary who needs the American democratic experiment to succeed if he is to convince the other two parts of the angels that he has better ideas than God.
Before the Logos entered His creation as His unique Son, the relationship between the Logos (Yah) and the God of dead ones was, perhaps, best represented as a side-by-side relationship as seen in the tetragrammaton YHWH, a relationship suggesting marriage, but without gender being involved (which is one reason for the Adversary to push same-sex marriages, little realizing that there is jealousy even in deities). However, that relationship ended when the Logos entered His creation as His unique Son; that relationship has since been replaced by the vertical relationship of the Father and His Primogeniture, His eldest Son, with the Father being in the Son as Jesus is in His disciples (John 17:23).
Christ is a fractal of which Christ Jesus is the repeated image. And to teach any contrary doctrine is to teach error as a false teacher of Israel.
The Sabbatarian Christian who has swallowed the poison of the Sacred Names Heresy is spiritually dead and is as the Pharisees were who claimed to see, thereby causing their guilt to remain in them. The Christian who is a convert to the Sacred Names Heresy will never enter the kingdom of heaven for this Christian has denied Christ Jesus and as such has been denied by Christ before angels. … Jesus’ first language was Galilean Aramaic. He knew Hebrew and He knew Greek and apparently was fluent in both, but as a child, His mother Mary called Him to dinner in Aramaic; thus His last words were in Aramaic—and in His last breath, He cited the Aramaic version of Psalm 22:1, in which David addresses the Lord by the singular noun <El> (Strong’s #H410), as opposed to the plural <Elohim> (Strong’s #H430), or by the equally plural Tetragrammaton YHWH in which two deities function as one spirit as Adam and Eve were one flesh.
In His last breath here on earth, Jesus, knowing that He was the only Son of Yah, did not use the Tetragrammaton YHWH as the name of God; nor did He use the plural Elohim. He used the singular <El> that is properly translated from Hebrew into Greek as Theos and from Hebrew into English as God. The person who uses the plural linguistic icon Elohim for the Father is without understanding and has come under a strong delusion that prevents the person from ever being saved.
Jesus said to permit the dead to bury the dead of themselves, and so it shall be … in a community, the dead aren’t flown to Anchorage to be buried in a cemetery surrounded by iron bars, but are buried where elders can be respected … the Sabbatarian Christian who remains dead through being denied by Jesus will sincerely believe that he or she is as right with God as Paul believed he was right with the Lord when persecuting the saints. But unlike Paul, the Sabbatarian who has been denied by Jesus before angels will not hear the voice of Jesus before judgments are made in the great White Throne Judgment.
And the message of the great White Throne Judgment is the message that Paul delivered, that John delivered in the 1st-Century; whereas the message those called in the 21st-Century as Paul was called are to deliver is of the Endurance of Jesus, the message about the 1260 days after the kingdom of this world is given to the Son of Man and the Adversary is cast into time and comes claiming to be the returning Messiah, thereby usurping the authority of Christ Jesus who is with the 144,000 and not with the remainder of humanity for this time, times, and half a time.
The message of the Endurance of Jesus is a simple gospel: all who endure to the end shall be saved (Matt 24:13; 10:22) … why will the one who endures to the end be saved? He or she will be saved because the person will be filled with spirit when the spirit is poured out on all flesh (Joel 2:28), and as such will be filled with spirit throughout the Endurance of Jesus. The fleshly body of this person will be purified by the shedding of blood in the second woe (Rev 9:13–21) …
It is time to back up and fill in the missing pieces between Paul and when there is hail and fire mixed with blood thrown down upon the earth.
Shortcutting what was said in Part Three: Jesus built His assembly, His Church on the movement of breath from the nose that supplies the breath of life to the fleshly body of the person to the heart where the breath of God in the breath of Christ gives life to the person’s inner self, with the person’s lungs forming a shadow and copy of the core of the person’s inner self that receives the indwelling breath of Christ. Thus, in the language of redemption, Jesus built His church on the movement of breath that is seen in the names John versus Jonah, where aspiration goes from in front of the nasal consonant to behind the nasal consonant.
The Apostle Paul understood this movement of breath whereas other first disciples apparently did not; for Paul wrote,
For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, in spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. (Rom 2:25–29)
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (Col 2:11–12)
If an endtime Jew—the second nation of Israel—is not a person who is outwardly circumcised but is a person who is circumcised of heart, then endtime Israel is not a physical people, but the inner selves that have been consigned to disobedience as Israel in Egypt was consigned to slavery—
In the language of redemption, Christians replace Jews as endtime Israel, but find themselves as bondservants to the spiritual prince of Babylon, that old serpent Satan the devil, as Israel in Egypt were slaves of Pharaoh. And until the Second Passover, Christians within greater Christendom remain the bondservants of the Adversary, consigned to disobedience and unbelief, and subject to hard labor of making bricks for Pharaoh.
The Apostle Paul understood that it wasn’t the fleshly body of the person that mattered to God: it was the inner self of the person.
How many times does a point need to be repeated before Christians in greater Christianity get the point? I wish I knew for even among Sabbatarians, few comprehend that salvation isn’t of the flesh; that no physical temple in Jerusalem needs to be constructed before Christ Jesus returns as the Messiah; that a person CANNOT store up treasure in heaven while the person stores up treasure in this world; that wealth in this world is NOT an indication that what the person does is pleasing to God. Rather, wealth in this world discloses that the Adversary has blessed the person for whatever reason—and with the Adversary being more subtle than any other heavenly creation of God, it is reasonable to suspect that as the serpent went to Eve rather than to Adam to get Adam to eat forbidden fruit and not eat of the Tree of Life, the Adversary would go to a friend, to a parent, to a spouse of a foreknown and predestined son of God to get this son to believe what isn’t true or to pursue what isn’t of God.
Yes, the preceding is correct: the Adversary might well bless and prosper a Christian, the parent or spouse of predestined son of God, if the Adversary has concluded that in doing so he might prevent one of the Elect from understanding the ways of God and thereby prevent this son of God from declaring to others what is true and correct. How else can the Adversary bring truthful accusations against the son of God—and the Son certainly won’t listen to a lie told by the Adversary against His younger brother—so any accusation brought against a son of God by the Adversary will most likely be true; for foreknown and predestined sons of God are not chosen because of their righteousness prior to being called by Christ.
Again, Paul understood whereas Pharisee converts did not: Paul understood that endtime Israel is the nation of inner selves that have been circumcised by spirit through receiving a second breath of life, the breath of God in the breath of Christ. And the Christian who rejects so-called replacement theology is not now of God and has no business attempting to teach the things of God. Rather, this Christian needs to quietly learn from one called to preach the word of Jesus.
Again, the recovery of Israel following the Second Passover liberation of Israel, the nation to be circumcised of heart, will be of sufficient importance to cause Israel to forget the Exodus of Moses’ day; for this recovery of Israel will be from sin and death, with the awaiting Promised Land being heaven.
But a Second Passover liberation of Israel requires a second shedding of blood for the redemption of Israel: as the Lord took the lives of the firstborn of Egypt, Cush, and Seba as ransom for Israel in the days of Moses (again Isa 43:3), the Lord will again take the lives of men to redeem Israel (v. 4), with this second recovery of Israel being unforgettable.
This is enough for now.
[To be continued in Part Six]
"Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.”