Studies In Theology - 12/07/2006 (Virgin Girls As Plunder? & A Nagging Efficiency In Communication?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/07/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/07/2006

31:25 describes the plunder being taken in the destruction of the Midianites - in which was included human captives; virgin girls no less.

This all was divided according to the instructions presented, presumably.

Besides indicating the use of slavery at this point, it raises another question in my mind; What would priests do with virgin girls? ~ (I can imagine what I would do in that situation with virgin girls given the configuration of the tribes) ~

It is stated that Moses took 1 of every 50 prisoners and gave them to the Levites, 32 of the captives are said to have been given to the Lord via Eleazar the priest. ~

The human captives are counted just as the live stock are in this instance. ~

The generals then made additional offerings to the Tabernacle (the Lord) - through Moses and the priest. ~

It was said that this 'was done as a reminder to the 'Lord' that the people of Israel belong to him.' ~

This is a definite change in tone. it is almost as though such a statement infers that their actions were the Lords responsibility! ~

It further differs in that all previous sort of action(s), were to remind the people of that covenant. ~

It almost indicates a competition of reminding so to speak. The people of Israel doing things to remind the Lord - and conversely, the Lord instructing certain actions to remind the people of Israel. ~

This combined with the incessant guilt trip complaints about having been 'better off dead somewhere else' so to speak, then tends almost to liken itself in the imagination, to a nagging old couple - niether being one or the other, male or female in that respect. ~

Amusing thought, no less. ~

Chapter 32, Book Of Numbers describes another pronounced divergence within the Israelites. Reuben and Gad found land on the East side of the Jordan river which they wanted instead of that, with the others, on the West side.

Something else of note, is that those two tribes were previously assigned to the South of the Tabernacle. ~

This definitely indicates a social separation as well as progress away from nomadic tendencies - toward cultivation - in the reasoning being that concerning domestication of various sorts. Including fortification of towns for wives and children. ~

In 32:04, another noticeable difference occurs in the people of Israel, now being referred to as the community of Israel. ~

It continues to describe battles yet to be fought by the Israelites in the interest of procuring the land promised them, and it does so in sort of a third person reference pertaining to the Lord in statements such as the Lords battles, and the Lord has driven out his enemies - the Lord conquers the land so on, and the like. ~

Just as a note; it isn't until this haggling deal of sorts, that any reason is presented for battle and progress to be for the benefit of females particularly. That is to say, the reason(s) seem now divided pertaining to battle and progress, though still under the initial single point of focus in a larger social sense - being the Lord. ~

In 32:33, it describes entire kingdoms now being owned by the Israelites - the whole land and its cities as it states in one passage. ~

It then continues to state that towns were even built entirely, as well as some being re-built which were previously destroyed. Most definitely indicating a pronounced lack in nomadic aspects at this point. then further demonstrating perhaps the non-chronological/linear traits within this work at this point. ~

Chapter 33 is a written account of the places the Israelites camped after leaving Egypt. (41 separate moves if memory serves)~

In reviewing this written account of travel - it again piques my interest to compare the dates prescribed for noted ceremony and celebration of the Lunar calendar, with the modern calendar we use commonly within society. ~

Briefly it states that they set out from Ramsese in early spring - on the 15th day of the first month - after the first passover. ~

Immediately, as previously mentioned - this celebration could be likened to Mardi Gras (as previously mentioned) I believe. ~

Studies In Theology - 12/06/2006 (continued) (Vows, Divorce, Contradiction In Battle Leadership & Philosphy Of Religion?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/06/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/06/2006 (continued)

Chapter 30 is in concerning vows.

Most judgement concerning vows is placed upon the men concerned - especially regarding females having made vows. it is presented here that the men can nullify or allow such vows to stand - unless she is widowed or divorced - then she must fulfill her vows - which seems odd considering the sort of vows being violated within the social action of divorce (presumably) - which I might say is another rather progressive social trait, for not only the time period - but the area as well. ~

This would seem then, in the context of this work (this version) - that marriage vows are set apart somewhat - perhaps something of their own consideration in a manner not commonly thought of pertaining to marriage vows? peculiar area for consideration which this seeming contradiction sets up.

If it is not to be seen as a contradiction, then there must be other purpose(s) it serves. If nothing else, it would indicate a wedding vow being somewhat different than a vow to the Lord. (Not to be confused with in the presence of the Lord, but only as per it being directed)~

Notably, this then further removes any possibility in those suggested mimicry's of the feminine element being seen as God - given the different level of concern obviously for vows to the Lord and wedding vows. ~

In chapter 31, much of it is dedicated to the description of finishing off the Midianites - and again states that after that, Moses will die! ~

Oddly, it was a priest chosen here to lead them in battle instead of Joshua (who was recently chosen to lead Israel) - which was one of Moses' specific requests in choosing a successor - being battle worthy. ~

It is said that they carried along the holy objects of the sanctuary into battle, and sounded the trumpets as well. ~

In the description of vengeful conquest - it is noted that the Israelites killed Balaam as well. specifically, with a sword. ~

Balaam is the guy who's donkey started talking to him - then further being the man that blessed the Israelites 3 times at great personal loss of wealth - now, further resulting in loss of his life as well. Even after presenting those blessings as per request of the Lord. ~

If memory serves, it was the angel on the road (3 times) that was going to kill Balaam to begin with as he reluctantly made the trip to cast 3 blessings upon Israel. ~

Again, perhaps that dichotomy? Further in relation with the Angel appearing as is becoming consistent?

Most definitely another inconsistency being suggested here - unless of course, killing Balaam was politically motivated? ~

The reasons presented here for doing so are stated to be that it was Balaam's advice that lead the Midianite women to cause the Israelites to rebel against the Lord. Inferring perhaps that his blessings where somehow connected to the sexual encounters and the feasting which resulted in plague. ~

It was then that only the virgins were spared of the Midianites. ~

In seeing such an action depicted brazenly - even seeming to be in a treacherous tone - I have to then give thought to the reasons why such depictions (and other odd inconsistencies) were left in this work (The Bible) over the centuries?

Especially in looking at modern efforts toward what is known as revisionist history with much else - and then further considering the degree to which similar efforts have occurred throughout history.

There must be a reason of some sort that such discrepancies have been left to be seen from generation to generation?

The chronological off sets - the inconsistencies. ~

It definitely shows some potential in reasoning pertaining to the points of contact aspect. ~

Further, this consistency of leaving such in the work - supports the idea of considering the work as a whole, as well. Then of course such coincides with the idea of points of contact as per variations of transference. ~

I found earlier, a thought pertaining to the difference between something such as the Bible - religious works - and philosophy (the idea of philosophy).

I realized that my own perspective sees a philosophical quality within religion (religion itself being classifiable as philosophy) - the Bible for instance - but this only becomes apparent when it is considered on the whole, perhaps even in an applied state on the whole.

The idea of the Bible for instance (most commonly) is that of worship - intended worship in that sense.

The idea of philosophy is human idea - perhaps even applied.

Within religion, there is symbolism and ceremony, which then begets a sort of social consistency. ~

within the idea of philosophy, there is human realization, symbolism wrought from consideration beyond the consistencies of immediate ceremony and worship - though very much of (and as of influence) from the result(s) of religion in many cases. simply as a matter of human progress and conditioning. Especially very early on - and most notably (concerning recent studies of my own) within the 1700's area.

Though this influence is not direct in many cases - it is still there, simply as result of existence. ~

To apply religious text to one's life religiously is very much of religion and the idea of it. such is very much the social design of such structures as desired result. ~

To apply philosophical ideas in such a manner, is to remove even the idea of philosophy from itself in that sense, through relegating it to a religious like bent. ~

I have met with strange responses when approaching the idea that religion(s) are a form of philosophy (and conversely then - philosophy being no form of religion).

I realize now, my difference in perspective concerning such a comparison. ~

It would seem that religious text applied - produces a form of living, unspoken philosophy beyond its own perception.

philosophy is the result of experience and insight (thought) resulting in something between observation and idea. ~

something such as the bible for instance - could be considered a form of philosophy if considered on the whole - as result of the ideas proposed (and not of the applied ceremony per say) - but moves from such a potential in the application of specifics in the form of worship - ceremony for instance; applied, resulting ideology on the whole as opposed to applied literal action. Which, within considering the results of applied literal action through out a given social grouping (ceremonial consistency) then results in an observable philosophical element - though not necessarily within the rigid confines of the religious ceremony. ~ Perhaps an extended result of conditioning in so many words. ~

In regard to philosophy - it seems to have an inverted effect through attempts to apply it literally - that effect being similar in the more literal attempts at application, as within those areas of rigidity within religion.

In my opinion, such then renders less efficiency pertaining to the idea(s) presented. ~

The potentials within the approach to idea from idea, then being hindered in literal rigidity. the effect perhaps of resulting imposed limitations to which we tend as a species? ~

While such works in religion - I believe such an approach to philosophy forsakes it, if not transforms it into a mimicry of existing social structural dynamics. ~

12/30/2006 ; As a note it does present a rather precarious area of consideration between the two ideas of approach - though obviously on simple consideration, it is that they are of kindred cloth so to speak.

A person can approach the resulting effect of religion as idea. Areas of idea even in which to find further inspiration while such may not be readily observable within those rigid confines of ceremony.

It is possible to do so with and within the idea(s) of philosophy without the rigid ceremonies producing the other consistencies.

To approach the idea(s) of philosophy in a similar manner as to those of religion, then only relegates those potentials to a similar area of cognitive existence which then produces a distinction between approaches; that area within the idea(s) of applied literal meaning - which of course is imposed limitation - and that area resulting from idea(s) as and in existence.

Existing as a rigid re-application of literal interpretation(s) opposed to inhabiting existence as it were - of and as such ideas having been applied.

Studies In Theology - 12/06/2006 (Some Number Aspects And The Party Of All Parties?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/06/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/06/2006

The Festival of Trumpets is instructed to take place in early Autumn, and then is followed with the Day Of Atonement which is said to have transpired 10 days later, on the 10th day of that month - which obviously isn't consistent given that 9 days later would be the 10th day of that month following the 1st. ~

I don't readily see anything particularly meaningful about this - beyond perhaps a slight difference in the approach to counting and enumerating, as described briefly in speculations put forward in regard to other seemingly (possible) divergence between then and our modern perspective -the ten number off set example perhaps being one of them. ~

Again, this occurs with the instruction of 5 days later on the 15th day - pertaining to yet another festival - The Festival Of Shelters - which is stated as being a 7 day festival.

Yet another reference to 7 and particularly notable within this appearance, given the relationships with the Day Of Atonement and the Year Of Jubilee - (seven sabbath years, seven sets of seven years).

Then as another particularly interesting point is the instruction within those instructions for the Jubilee, to blow the Rams horn.

Interesting given the nearness to the Festival Of Trumpets that this is placed. ~

This really must have been a heck of a time of year for the Israelites! It seems as rambunctious perhaps as is our modern Mardi Gras. ~

(Perhaps corroboration in regard to the exploration of modern food service and atonement? If, again, even simply as a matter of social development within the influences of such prominent and Popular imposed limitations as structure.)

(Further notes exploring modern food service and atonement as result of course through existence)

There is an extraordinary amount of ceremonial sacrifice which takes place within the festival. So much so that a person might tend to think that the Lord was insisting on depleting food supplies! Although, in considering the ceremonies and level of consumption of such sacrifices - it was more than likely an incredible celebration - a feast hard rivaled! ~

When a person first considers all of these sacrifices, in addition to what at first looks like a considerable amount daily, it appears to be no less than an extreme amount of sacrifice. That perspective is without considering the consumption aspects of much of those sacrifice examples.

From a certain perspective, such instruction could be as much in insuring no famine like occurrence would develop within the large body of people known as the Israelites. Further as use in stemming the aging stagnation of livestock. ~

In addition to grain and liquid offerings, there is a definite series of progression for each day of the festival pertaining to sacrifice.

On the first day of the festival;

• 13 young bulls
• 2 Rams
• 14 one year old male lambs

Are to be sacrificed.

This then progresses with one less bull each additional day until on the 7th day, there are;

• 7 young bulls
• 2 Rams
• 14 male lambs

This all accompanied each day with the sacrifice of one male goat as a sin offering. ~

In 29:35, the 7 day festival then seems to have 8 days purposefully - as it is instructed that on the 8th day of the festival, proclaim another holy day. ~

The sacrificial allotment for this 8th day of the 7 day Festival Of Shelters is consisting of grain and liquid offerings in addition to;

• 1 young bull
• 1 ram
• 7 one year old male lambs

This of course followed with the sin offering of one male goat. ~

The 13 has thus far been most affiliated with the total number of tribes of Israel, and is at least interesting to see it in affiliation (initial number of bulls as sacrifice in this festival) with sacrificial offerings. Perhaps being an extension in transference of that tendency to associate the priests with a form of sustenance previously explored?

Further then, perhaps associating all 13 tribes with a form of sustenance for the Lord?

The appearance of 14 in such a consistency is somewhat of a new thing at this point.

Then as pronounced is the number of lambs being reduced from 14, to 7 on that 8th day. ~

In Leviticus 23, these festivals are mentioned with instruction to observe them, but it isn't until the 28th and 29th book of numbers that the sacrificial allotment is instructed for the festivals. ~

Again is a continuity aspect a person may see as inconsistency - but again is the folding aspect which becomes potential in addition to that seemingly re-occurring progression. ~

As a rather entertaining speculation; combining the chapter numbers between the chapter in Leviticus (being 23) and each respectively within Numbers at this point (being 28 and 29) - it yields respectively; 51 and 52 - for a total of 103.

When each then is totaled of itself, it then results in 6 (51) and 7 (52) - which, as touched on before, are rather prominent and re-occurring numbers thus far, symbolically - particularly to the as of yet implemented Star Of David.

Further I might add, the sum of 103, is obviously 4 - Numbers is the 4th book of 66 constituting the Bible. ~

Perhaps such may be of interest in the future should I choose to further explore it, and/in conjunction with those folding points of contact presented as speculation earlier in this body of notes? ~

Just as a giggle, in addition to the 6 and 7 result - when combined, those then sum 13 - which further combined, obviously is 4, yet again. ~

Studies In Theology - 12/05/2006 (continued) (Chicks With Their Own Stuff, Good And Evil?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/05/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/05/2006 (continued)

Chapter 26 (Numbers) begins as yet another census - though this time results in instruction to now divide the land they presently occupied (Moab) among the tribes of Israel accordingly except of course, for the Levites as described previously. ~

This would suggest that where they divided this land was the previously promised land, but that presumption then raises some question given that Moses is/was still among them - and even more in the statement of not one on the list of census had been on the previous list of census because the lord said they will die in the wilderness.

This even seems to promote the assumption that it was the promised land, while not stating it to be the promised land. ~

With the presence of Moses, it is most surely not within my opinion given the previous statement that neither Aaron nor Moses would be admitted to the promised land. ~

This then displays a divergence within the body of Israel.

Caleb and Joshua were sent into the previously described beautiful land while the other Israelites continued to wander (and complain in a rather pronounced fashion) - but nothing more has been stated pertaining to Joshua and Caleb except that they had survived as had been stated. ~

Chapter 27 begins with an incredibly progressive subject matter and decision in a social sense - especially for the time period. ~

It describes a petition brought by the daughters of a tribesmen that would have been due an allotment of land, wanting that allotment for themselves.

The claim for the allotment was deemed legitimate by the Lord, then further set standards for inheritance of worldly possessions - including the females in the event that no son was rightful heir. ~

From what little I know about common standards of the time, and even of the area (even today) - this is incredibly ground breaking. Even in respect to most western culture (and even eastern for that matter).

It was (and may still be in that area) un-heard of for a female to possess things of that nature. ~

It is further an incredible comparison in regard to social progress in many parts of the world - including, comparatively, the United States - having been in the fore front of Western cultures embracing the idea of females pertaining to just about everything - beyond bare foot and pregnant. ~

It further supports the idea of the Living Metaphor I have begun to explore - being the United States. ~

Curious thing that many countries, even in the general vicinity of modern Israel are still rather hard lined pertaining to such - even many European countries (pertaining to modernalities) were slow to the up-take of such revisions socially.

Rather an interesting surprise given the popularity of modern Christianity.

The contrast definitely reflects the relationship between the United States and Israel in that respect (politically speaking in a supposed manner), even though such things are not as pronounced elsewhere - including modern Israel I presume - given its location geographically. ~

In 27:12, there appears a contradiction to that which was previously described pertaining to Joshua - it would appear - given that Joshua is chosen here as a new leader for Israel - that he did not go into the previous bountiful land as described (as having been suggested). ~

It is again stated in 27:13, that Moses and Aaron were brothers - which then gives me more thought in regard to the depiction of Moses in his youth - and further in the direction of purposeful motives beyond a slave girl providing a better life for her child (Moses), perhaps? ~

It is at this point that Moses receives instructions to climb a mountain and die - but only after transferring the leadership to Joshua through ceremony - further accompanied with instructions to transfer some of Moses' authority to him so he will be obeyed by all of Israel.

This after stating that Joshua has the spirit in him. ~

In a political sense at this point - things diverge to some degree in instructing that when Joshua needs direction from the Lord,I he is to inquire of it from the priest, Eleazar - who will gain it through divination of casting lots.

Sacred lots at that, to determine the Lords will; This is how Joshua and the rest of the community (Israel) will determine everything they do. ~

There is a definite division of power(s) in this action and new standard - surprisingly being similar to previous means and other forms of worship in other structures. But further it signifies a political power division.

Israel is to obey Joshua, but the priest now interprets Gods will.

Deeper within this division is the leanings of the Levites toward the priesthood, while Joshua has no such affiliation being from another tribe. ~

A beginning point between church and state discrepancies and rivalry?

It also represents a distance of separation in a generational sense pertaining to Israel as well, with the transfer and the passing of the previous relationships between the two distinct positions - perhaps a point which fueled political interactions in ways not yet seen within the civilizations of the day - Deity was now a single point of focus within this structure - and presumably - (symbolically) King - and leadership (the body of populous) was an individual meant to be obeyed, who was to directly respond to the divination in such decisions. ~

The person who would have been seen as a King in such a role within other civilizations - was only a leader to be obeyed in similar manners as a king - without the title of such necessarily. ~

Further distance within this new configuration - is very much in that change where interpretation falls entirely to the priest - given that previously it was through Moses that much of the instructions came - the church (Tabernacle), at that point was a place of ceremony to the deity - where now it was to be a more contained and isolated - almost exclusively to certain people (political interests) source of information. ~

Further, within this specific area of transformation, is the aspect of no longer being nomadic, as before. Indicating further, and most definitely a social change in dynamic and motion. ~

In chapter 28, further evidence of change exists in the instructions for offerings now being depicted as to occur at appointed times instead of the previous standard as per offense/atonement and of course in observation of celebrations and ceremonies. ~

The offerings are to be presented daily at this point. ~

Chapter 29 begins with directions pertaining to the Festival of Trumpets - which was established in conjunction with the introduction of the trumpets as previously described. ~

It is very much a celebration, as depicted - in use of the trumpets to make music for the people of Israel. ~

This is another place where it is no less than interesting to consider the relationship between God and Lucifer - given that Lucifer is said to have been the Angel in charge of music. ~

Where is it then, that the split between God and the Devil (Lucifer) transpired? ~

Is such a festival then to be seen as Devils due? Is it before that split? ~

Perhaps as I have put forward in regard to other areas within existence - existence itself is an emulation of something larger?

The more present split within the concentrated social structure described previously as being in relation to that larger split said to have happened between God and Lucifer? That itself perhaps representing something else? ~

Which area then, within that social structure now depicted within this work, is to be seen as more affiliated with either idea within such understanding? God - Lucifer? -

Is it that it is more an amalgamation?

A process in motion? ~

In our physical realm it is arguable that there is not one without the other. ~

Can one be seen as only a given thing as well as the other? ~

Is it that both ideas are only to be recognized personally - which would be all that anyone could really do in our physical realm? ~

That which is catagorizable as evil in traditional and strict (even not so strict) senses within our realm, are very much part of our everyday lives. ~

Such thought then leads me again to the realization of our choice in existence as/is very much up to ourselve(s) as societies. Most especially in those societies where it is that the potentials to embrace that dichotomy are by design - to produce a heaven on earth or a living hell at our own hands - and even more so when considering the concept of Christ within the context of religion (as per Popular Christianity especially). ~

This line of consideration then, makes the importance of driving every evil from our midst as a society, not only somewhat impossible - but less efficient even if it is that the potentials of producing a more livable society are squandered - in some instances even - in the supposed interest of combating evils. ~

Not only to waste the path to efficiently removing evils with the extraneous efforts to do so - but actually promoting the (similar) results upon society in effect - as if evil reigned entirely within those ideas. ~

Is such then producing good for the residence of evil? ~

Productivity only to feed the void of desperation within concentrated forms of that which may be derived as one or the other? Good displacing evil in healthy progress and evil devouring the productivity of good? ~

A paradox of itself. ~

Doesn't such actually then put the good fight in utilizing - embracing that which is - in the better interest of contributing to that potential of heaven on Earth? Recognizing elements within existence which detract from that potential as perhaps not evil, but a precursor - though perhaps pro-active of potential evil. ~

Unless, I suppose our result of good is supposed to result in what would eventually be un-livable conditions. ~

Which then is the better path?

To promote those potentials while sustaining a livable society with directions toward conducive atmospheres?

Hard lined removal of everything deemed evil in opinion (most times tainted with political bent) to the degree of total destruction in the interest only to then attempt existence again - surrounded by that which will only be called good somehow? Amidst and from within the rubble wrought from efforts to destroy evil - now easily being seen as the product of such, itself? Not to mention the classification of/in the reasoning's and effort to do so? ~

I can recall a statement from a distant acquaintance I once had, that was something to the order of; Sometimes the okay stuff gets mixed in... - and I can only see where perhaps he was referring to such concerted efforts - regardless of what precisely he was referring to.

Such could then be seen as an evil within such efforts - not only then producing more evil, but even detracting from the proposed good as well with and of such designs in effort - regardless of political alignment and reasons/justifications to do so. ~

Odd that one topical society is based much on promoting the doing away with some perceived evil - even in extremes - with concerted efforts in all sorts of imaginable designs - but always, it seems, within the confines of that process which begets as much ill, as it is said to remove. Especially while being surrounded with many things once thought of as evil themselves - if not then utilizing such in everyday life - somehow no longer seen as such extreme. ~

Much of our society depends upon good and bad classifications - when in observable truth, no such separation actually exists within those extremes. ~

some even attempt to drive such ideas, through promoting the need for one or the other, but it doesn't seem as though there will be a shortage of either, anytime soon. ~

Interesting potentials for inversions with such a dynamic and paradox. ~

Supposed good having the potentials of evil in its motion and action - Supposed evil having the potentials of good in a similar respect (quality of life through technology, for instance - tools used to combat evil). ~

Enough thought in writing for this evening.

Studies In Theology - 12/05/2006 (Deadly Coodies, infiltration And The Potential Affiliation Of Human Sacrifice As Atonement?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/05/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/05/2006

Chapter 25 again show incredibly severe punishment for what is described as sexual relations with Moabite women - though the punishment is applied for having feasted and worshiped with them of false idols - being the Gods of Moab. ~

This brought the execution of the ring leaders supposedly, as well as a display from a grandson of Aaron (Phinehas) in pursuing an Israelite still with one of the women and thrust a spear through him into the woman as well. ~

This supposedly stopped yet another plague, but only after having killed 24,000 Israelites. ~

This is somewhat unique thusfar in a priest killing other people - having been described only as participating in sacrificial ceremonies to this point. ~

It definitely signifies a threshold having been crossed.

There was no ceremony to the emotionally charged execution of the man and woman - but is further described as being rewarded by the Lord for turning the Lords anger away from the people (Israelites).

This done for; Being as zealous among them as I was. ~

Suggesting - alluding to having had a physical presence in the past at this point. further perhaps suggesting of an embodiment within Aaron - even suggesting the present transcendental form - to be that of Aaron, through mentioning Aaron immediately previous to the statement regarding the state of former presence. ~

There is definitely an aspect of the movement of such embodiment here - which then is made all the more interesting in the recent reference to God being King of the Israelites. Then being more intriguing in the respect of that King now being referred to in a past tense physically, though obviously somehow present in the voicing of such statements. ~

This zeal shown by Phinehas was rewarded - and I have to chuckle some here, as the reward was in the form of a special covenant of which he was already a part - being that he and his descendants were already guaranteed a permanent right to the priest hood (sans of course some ailment). ~

What then is really being said about such action? ~

In 25:13, it then even refers to the killing as an act which purified the people of Israel - making them right with God. ~

Obviously this definitely associates the killing of the man and woman with not only a sacrificial offering as atonement, but then with priestly actions as well. This definitely then presents various shifts in symbolism as well as potential transference. Most definitely potential deviation through association at this point, especially when considering the various forms of other mimicry's which are quite present now, in the modern day. ~

As a note; the man (Israelite) killed - was from (the leader of no less) the tribe of Simeon. Previously noted as having been cursed for brutality by Jacob. Perhaps, as I read from 25:16 - it is that Simeon is becoming somewhat of a scapegoat in this example? ~

In 25:16 there is insight into the association and activity at Acacia Grove perhaps having political leanings - as it is stated that the Israelite leader (The Simeon), was coupled with the daughter of the Midianite leader. Which gives a different impression than some orgy like chaos.

More to the side of purposeful intention in such relations for which ever reason.

This is substantiated to some degree in stating the reason of the attack on the Midianites being that they assaulted with deceit and trickery! Definitely indicative of deeper political reasons given that the Israelites must have known of the form of worship of the Midianites before entering into such orchestrated relations with them which would have paired tribe leader with comparable social status in said relationship and exchange. ~

This being very much a possibility as the Moabites (Midianites presumably) are described as local to the place that they (the Israelites) camped - being the Acacia Grove. ~

In a larger social sense, it could be likened much as was described in 22:04 of Numbers - describing the destructive potential of the Israelites as a mob devouring everything in sight. ~

In regard to yet another example of plague - with the consistency of the plague as it is depicted, it gives me thought toward - yet again - the subtle differences perhaps between different civilizations in that area (at the time depicted).

In a similar respect, though not in the same extremes - interaction between different civilizations - and different elemental consistencies - may have made for variations of the plagues as they manifested.

Different people having different - though slight at this point - immunities and tolerances. ~

Something such as the large scale social exchanges (feasting - sexual) depicted in chapter 25, could very well have been enough to breech those subtle differences, and transmitting - even exciting - various strains being dormant (perhaps no longer even communicable in the air borne sense) until such opportunities arose?

With what is now known of such viruses - such stands to reason, especially in regard to the obvious manipulation of that larger influence depicted thus far. Perhaps the concentration in that single point of focus - then resulted in a physiological shift as well? ~

Something further to consider here is within that level of tolerance - perhaps a developed immunity through the larger scale (variations) of exposure within the nomadic aspects of the Israelites? Especially in the building of resistance and immunity to various strains as they were exposed to them - then of course transferring them to others not yet with the same tolerance? ~

Something yet further to note as previously touched on, is the difference in the idea of civilization(s) from our current perspective. We now regard such as a whole in civilization within the shrinking effect of growing population and modern communications (among other things) - where at the time of this depiction, such was definitely not the case.

Studies In Theology - 12/04/2006 (Lion And Lioness - Metamorphosis, Curses, Blessings And God Being The King Of Israel?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/04/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/04/2006

As chapter 23 begins, again is the number 7 in a prominent use; To build seven altars, seven young bulls and seven young rams. ~

It is then stated that the two of them (bulls and rams) are sacrificed one each per altar as burnt offerings. ~

Another oddity appears in 23:03 with it being stated that Balaam goes to a hill and is met by the Lord where Balaam states: I have prepared seven altars..... ~

This is odd in that he bade the King to prepare the altars. ~

He then returns with the message which is blessing instead of curse on Israel - referring to Israel as Jacob even - in 23:07 - which at least suggests a deeper relationship than is topically discernible given the length of time (presumably) since the reference to Jacob as Israel initially. ~

From another point of perspective - this might be more as result of that continuity illusion within the most common chronological perceptions of this work - meaning that perhaps somehow this occurrence is more in the time period nearer Jacobs generation than presently suggested? ~

It at least suggests a presence of information and knowledge far greater than is depicted given such a reference through Balaam - presumably somewhat of a stranger to the Israelites but obviously familiar with their concept of god. ~

As a note pertaining to this interesting relation - in chapter 20, verse 15 - it states that the Israelites had ancestors that went down to Egypt and were then enslaved. This of course was before (is in reference to) they were enslaved in Egypt for some 500+(?) years - if immediate memory serves. ~

Given that Balaam is obviously not Israelite and more especially that he is in residence somewhere North of Egypt - and then given the reference to a similar form of worship as is the single point of focus, then further that Moses (having been raised as an Egyptian) then returned from banishment/exile/escape(?) from a presumed northerly direction - as well as the familial history of Joseph - it then eludes to deeper relationships beyond the Israelites, with the Israelites being a sort of figure head within this rather popular work. ~

It is widely known of a cousin sort of relationship with Christianity and other mid-East faiths - but that is not this line of thought.

This is more in exploring the suggested extension which this tends to depict the Israelites as. ~

Why then out of all of the people presumably of a form of single entity religious structure - were the Israelites said to be a special sort? The newer version, to say the least - of a larger type of worship. Unique most definitely (to my knowledge) within that nomadic aspect (as well as other particulars; commerce, liberal bents) - but how nomadic was it in having had rules for trade (in business) and rules pertaining to agriculture?

Does the presence of such indicate that serogate aspect mentioned previously? ~

Perhaps, in considering this - it could be seen that the nomadic aspect coupled with the various dictation, could have been in the interest of a naturalization aspect, itself? An effort toward familiarization and conditioning to standards of those other - obvious - single entity civilizations? ~

The king then asks that they go to another place and look upon the Israelites (presumably being quite numerous at this point - a horde no less, I could imagine) and perhaps curse at least as many as could be seen - then again, seven more altars and similar sacrifice (which is depicted very much in that repetition form) - and again Balaam meets the Lord - Returning, the King actually asks; What did the 'Lord' say? Which further indicates a previous familiarity with such a form of worship - substantiated with King Balak actually having known that Balaam would say only the message that god puts in his mouth. ~

In every respect, Balak seems to have known of this religious structure. ~

Again, there is a reference to the Israelites as Jacob with the blessing that Balaam delivers (23:21) - while simultaneously referring to Israel as well - then stating that god has been proclaimed their KING (which very much substantiates previous explorations) - it seems to suggest an inverted use of such a proclamation as well, in that anyone proclaimed (proclaiming) to be King of Israel - is then likened to god for what ever purpose.

This gains interest in regard to Christ being mocked as King of the Jews (at a later point) - which then adds more interest into the symbolism(s) and transference of previously explored relations as per Jacob, Israel, Christ. ~

In another thought pertaining to Jacob/Israel and the nomadic tendency described, as well as that which befell them - using similar lines of reasoning within the idea of transference - those years could be likened to the discomposure process in having been compared (as a body of people) to the person known as Jacob/Israel. ~

I happen upon that rather abstract perspective in considering 23:23. 'No curse can touch Jacob, no magic has any power against Israel.' ~

"Of course no curse can touch Jacob" was my thought - "at this point, he (personally) was long dead."

I then considered the obvious relation implied within those two lines and realized that perhaps such a relation in transference as a metaphor, extended farther? ~

In 23:24, it is eluded to that Israel is like a lioness and a lion - which now actually refers to Israel in a feminine sense, though coupled with the masculine of the same - perhaps suggesting a duality within the meaning of the presented body as it were?

Then even stating that within that state, they even drink the blood of the slaughtered! ~

(While this is rather foreboding in the propaganda sense, it is notable that such is actually a direct violation against the decree of Moses, Aaron and God in forbidding the consumption of blood)

Could the symbolic, ceremony consistencies actually have acted to produce a result through the tendencies of people - which then preceded them in myth as and with such prowess? ~

The consistencies within the ceremonies of worship and offerings, had much to do with the use of blood as is readily observable - even in anointing their priest. ~

Again in 23:29, it is that seven more altars are built, and the same sacrifice took place. ~

After this sacrifice, it is said that Balaam realized the Lord was determined to bless Israel, so he did not resort to divination as before. ~

It is then said that the spirit of god came upon him and he again delivers a blessing - again referring to Jacob and Israel, this example even complimenting their tents and homes, respectively. ~

In reviewing the tribes at this point, it is rather intriguing that the reference to lion and lioness is used - given that in Genesis 49:09, Judah is referred to in a similar manner, though as a lion he crouches down after eating its prey. ~

Most definitely a familiarity beyond some topical relationship here. Perhaps even depicting a metamorphosis of sorts, in a symbolic sense. From one version of existence, to another.

Something else I find now in review of Genesis 49, is in Jacob cursing Simeon and Levi for murderous and malicious leanings - 'to be scattered among the descendants of Jacob' (speaking of himself presumably in third person). ~

As it results thus far in the Bible, Simeons tribe of descendants is listed second in the census and leads the procession in travel - while the Levites have gained (have been appointed) a rather trusted and important post as is obvious - even extended a secret sort of status in being left out of the census, though empowered to some degree - even as dealers of justice. ~

Strange results thus far for a curse from Jacob. ~

The curse suggests that Jacob was wanting of a peaceful and productive Nation, where the result thus far has been in not regarding that curse, but perhaps utilizing the perceived tendencies in both the most forward position in travel, and as a sort of security for the Tabernacle. ~

24:17 suggests perhaps a prediction of Christ - but further may suggest a more in depth plan of sorts pertaining to the descendants of Jacob - known as the tribes of Israel. ~

It is hard to believe that a traveling horde comprised of several divisions, would be those which could put forward such potential designs - which then suggests further the serogate aspect - but more in depth perhaps with something in mind beyond immediate perception. ~

As it stands in the modern day, even these early depictions of a newer version of a religious structure, can be seen echoing in several different layers and effect. Even some rather transparent emulations seemingly in some effort to gain acceptance within some of the larger extremes of the more consistent continuance, otherwise. ~

Studies In Theology - 12/02/2006 (A Bronze Snake, A Talking Donkey And Evidence Of Supernatural Political Discord)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/02/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/02/2006

Chapter 21 in the book of Numbers describes victory over the Canaanites! ~

It is said that as the Israelites traveled, they were attacked by Canaanites and some were taken prisoner. ~

It then states their pleading with the Lord and presenting a deal of sorts, in exchange for victory over them - being that they would destroy all of their towns if they were given victory over the Canaanites. ~

They then proceeded to destroy all of the towns presumably of the Canaanites. ~

The footnote describes this as referring to the complete consecration of them, to the Lord, either through destroying them or presenting them as offering. ~

To be consecrated through being destroyed? Definitely more depth to explore within this symbolism and meaning. ~

Further then is the aspect of human sacrifice within this symbolism and current example. It suggests that anything could be sacrificed, as long as it was in the interest of consecration. ~

How similar is this to various occult activities? The act of destroying human life (among other things) in the interest of consecration - in the interest, in so many words, of becoming one with even such an idea as is god. ~

Again, it isn't difficult to see certain aspects of a duality perhaps. Further then, aspects of that multiple within a single point of reference. ~

Other cultures of the time, practiced human sacrifice regularly - many even spent human life in sport - demonstrating a level of brutality which cannot be labelled as callous given that it has been within human development and social progress, that such normality was discontinued - changed as it were. ~

Those things definitely indicated a much different level of human cognitive thought in that time period. Animal-like in regard to very few seeing such as cruel - most likely only ever being opposed in reasoning with the likes of basic fear. It was simply the way things transpired. ~

Kind of odd.. and even an oxymoron, that even the idea of recognizing something as cruel - seems to have stemmed from the concept of Christianity as well.

Again presenting another facet of the dual aspects within the progression of it - built upon the blood of countless numbers, much in similar manners as many other cultural aspects within various civilizations of the time period - but from it (and from the result of the conflict(s) within it) producing much of what we now know to be humanitarianism. The realization of even ideas we have titled with names such as cruelty and even kindness.

Then simultaneously within this dynamic and as result of human tendency, many times seeking ways around such ideas as they may be in relation to how one person sees another - but somehow never being acceptable to ones self being without the benefit of such developed (safeties) recognized perceptions. ~

In fact, our modern civilization has even produced the use of such standards in human perception, to then perpetuate a pronounced lack in recognition of it upon others - in a series of efforts.

The use of the idea of something else being cruel - so cruel as to then justify actions seemingly beyond the established idea (in standard) of cruelty itself. ~

Human development; in that sense - looks to be a rather curious thing to say the least. ~

In 21:04 it depicts more complaints from the people of Israel and subsequently more punishment in the manner of being beset with poisonous snakes. ~

Then again, apparent contrition which gains a prayer from Moses to the Lord - then further gaining instructions to fashion a bronze snake for anyone bitten to look upon and be healed. ~

Here is actual instruction from the Lord to fashion an effigy - this in the interest of countering the effect of having sent the snakes. ~

It presents as well, another point of focus besides the Tabernacle, to be established in the physical realm for the purpose of interaction (connection) with something of another (realm) - in the effort and interest of effecting physical results within the physical realm. ~

Further another example in the use of transference to effectively lift the otherwise normal result of venomous snake bite. Interceding between the venom and the physical result to the person. ~

Presuming such is the case (and process) as per example - where then is it that the initial resulting effect(s) are transferred to? could it be collected in that sense, then to be wielded?

The sins of people were placed within Aarons medallion - how un-heard of is it then, to apply the same line of thought with the bronze snake and that which it presumably acted to impede (being the effect of the venom)? ~

21:10 then tells of travels that again contradict the cultivation aspects described earlier - as is demonstrated in much of the complaining - at least such would seem to be the case, though their travels look as though they could be patterned in some degree - mentioning again, places already having been or near to. (There are 41 moves recorded of the tribes of Israel while in the wilderness)

21:21 depicts defeating a king and occupying his land, then utilizing the new found fortification to capture a near by kingdom as well. ~

In chapter 22, it states that the Israelites again traveled - A person has to consider that having captured and occupied two kingdoms would imply that it was no longer all of the Israelites that were traveling. Especially in considering the efforts in rebuilding that which was destroyed when conquering. ~

Even upon approaching another kingdom in the recent travels, they (the Israelites) are referred to as being from Egypt - even after it being acknowledged that the present king recognized the previous victories of the Israelites. ~

The present king then sends messengers to summon someone to curse the Israelites - A person that is depicted as having a relationship with God as well. God first telling him to refuse and that the Israelites are blessed. ~

A second request for the individuals presence for said purpose received an explanation that he was powerless against the will of god having instructed him to refuse previously - but now proposing that the messengers stay another night, that god may have something else to say. ~

Both instances that Balaam refers to god are associated with a communication at night. Moses and the Israelites commonly refer to such interaction in day time - though non-exclusively. It even being stated that none in the camp receive visions because of the status of Moses and Aaron (previously). ~

As stated, god then speaks to Balaam that night, and instructs him to go with the messengers (of a stately variety) - but only to do what the Lord tells him to do. ~

Almost immediately following this in 22:22 - it is said that god was now angry that Balaam was going with them and sent an Angel of the Lord to block the road. An Angel which Balaams donkey saw himself and bolted off of the road.

Then further, the Angel blocked the way so the donkey just laid down - all three instances Balaam responded with beating his donkey. ~

At this last example, it is said that the Lord gave the donkey the ability to speak, with which it immediately asked about the three beatings. ~

Instead of being amazed that his donkey could suddenly talk - Balaam began a conversation with it in direct response to the posed question about beatings. ~

After a few exchanges in this conversation, Balaam again saw the Angel who inquired about the beatings and further stated his intention to kill Balaam for having stubbornly resisted his efforts to block the way - which of course Balaam concedes and offers to return home. ~

Again is a multiple aspect here in the Angel somehow superseding the previous command of the Lord to make the trip - and further in the suggestion of blocking his way to comply with the Lord. ~

The Angel then states that Balaam should continue his trip - but now he is only to say what the Angel wants him to say - then in 22:38, the Angel is referred to as God in stating that he (Balaam) could only say the words that God placed in his mouth. ~

Again, with the introduction of an angel making such statements, there is plausible cause to consider no less than at least a multiple aspect similar to that I have explored - and further, possible evidence that rebellion which was/is said to have transpired in heaven between God and Lucifer.

Both extremes most definitely having Angels. Both extremes (as represented in God and Devil), as is widely known - caught up in a power struggle which can be seen in various instances through out human history.

Studies In Theology - 12/01/2006 (Moses Speaks To A Rock With A Big Stick!)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 12/01/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

12/01/2006

Chapter 20 describes more travel and arrival in the wilderness of Zin- Having no water available in the area, Moses was instructed to speak to a rock and it would flow with water - this after another round of complaints and rebellion. ~

It then states that Moses did as he was told though later is said to not be allowed to lead Israel into the land promised them, because he supposedly failed to demonstrate the lords holiness. ~

I have to wonder if this is in reference to Moses striking the rock twice with his staff as opposed to speaking to it?

Perhaps it was due to the attempt of looking as though it were he and Aaron that created water from the rock - as opposed to crediting the lord? ~

In 20:14, Moses states in a message to a local king, that an angel lead the Hebrews out of Egypt. Which then makes a person wonder if he was likening himself to an angel?

Perhaps there was some un-mentioned influence (other than the lord) - perhaps again is the idea of angel representing the presence of god? ~

Here, Israel was forced to turn around at the threat of the king of Edom and his army. ~

It then goes on to describe Aarons death - which contains some interesting aspects which are rather civilized given the time period. ~

It depicts Aaron giving his son his priestly garments (Moses being the presenter of them) and then dieing on the top of a mountain. It obviously symbolises a succession of the sort which is/was rather common in other civilizations. ~

As I write that word in reference to that time period - it strikes me as interesting when considering that then, it very much was "civilizations" - in our modern day, most is referred to as civilization. Even given the differences between various cultures. ~

This further demonstrates the motion of that larger process - even within the reasoning of modernization as understanding. This further than the shrinking aspect of perspective and perception demonstrated in such an example. ~

When considered beyond that effect on human understanding and perception, it demonstrates (though in a large result) - the resulting effect of that larger process.

What used to be considered separate civilizations independently - are now widely considered separate cultures as part of a larger body. Then further, placing the idea of representative democracy in its own light. ~

12/18/2006 As a note in tangent - while sitting and pondering the various aspects I have recently explored pertaining to representative democracy itself, and of course the manner in which it has manifested and continues - I notice a rather comical consistency... though it really isn't all that funny beyond the comical aspects of it, if you can understand that.

Given what anyone can research about even recent history - for instance, the consistent levels of corruption which have been brought to light and some of which have just been chided at through a lack in effort to bring them to light; There is no way to find any information pertaining to current forms of corruption. There is no way to investigate for ones self... to view the situation(s) which currently reside in positions of power. Within this, is then the prevailing attitude that such forms of corruption have never existed, much less could possibly be present in which ever current governing body happens to be in effect.

This audacity, even in the consistency which anyone can research. This definitely maintains until far after the violations and presumably the terms served, until ANYONE will even begin to address what may or may not have been otherwise flagrant transgressions in the forms of abusive corruptions. It doesn't seem to matter which political side a person may be on... it simply is as though it just cannot be approached in the current term(s). As if it is some fraternal, un-spoken rule.

It is very much its own punch line, as this cycle then is continued with the next term and power shift (if any) and so on and so forth... only looking to sometimes really grotesque violations long after the fact in the effort to appear to gain some leverage in political competitions. Then of course, within the ease of modern day communications it would be rather easy to simply manufacture the sort of insurance which would keep anyone from addressing current violations immediately - if even only gossip to gum up the gears so to speak.

Either way, it is a rather funny social occurrence to witness time and again, sometimes even the very same people over and over, step up as if the previous (and very long line of consistent corruptions) did not exist... much less in the current moment. Not even potentially within the current moment, is usually the posturing.

It is truly amazing when you think about it.

I would imagine that in the more rudimentary progression of that... that it eventually just becomes a decision making process of splitting up what ever can be procured in that go around and then of course, dishing it off to some pre-selected scapegoat. I would imagine within the consistency of it, that the scapegoat(s) may even opt to be the scapegoat(s) in some social hierarchical procession. But then, I suppose that poses the problem of convincing everyone else outside of those relationships, that the chosen scapegoat(s) is sufficient regardless of the effecting ramifications on the rest of society. I would imagine that it just becomes that mundane and everyday sort of thing. Rather entertaining.

Studies In Theology - 11/30/2006 (continued) (Fast Food, Rentals & Holy Water Which Can Defile?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 11/30/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

11/30/2006 (continued)

In 18:20, I am nearly set aback with realizations in regard to developments we live within currently, having remarkable similarities with those earlier developed rules - if even only from the level of saturation of/from Christianity itself - through out western culture. ~

Instead of an allotment of land for Aaron and his line - priests (including the Levites), they will be compensated with a portion of the tithe collected from the Israelites (tithe representing 10% at the time).

This suggests to me the beginnings of both welfare and rentals as we know them in the modern day. ~

I hesitate to say that I see everyone on welfare and renting housing in the modern day - to be of Aaron, or priest like - but I would say that it is probable that such social consistencies and developments could have some relation. Especially given that the entire tribe of Levites were to receive no allotment of land, either. ~

Something further of interest is the permission to eat of the offerings, anywhere you wish pertaining to the Levites and their families. ~

Again perhaps a distant relation - perhaps a reason for need of - what we now see as modern restaurants and Inns. This along with the need to accommodate earlier holy day celebrations as well.

It strikes a personal chord in memories from youth of setting an extra plate at the table on occasion - mores so, a place setting. ~

It is at this point (chapter 18) where the Tabernacle itself becomes off limits to any except the priests, Levites and Moses presumably. ~

Chapter 19 describes the ceremony in preparing ash of a red heifer to use in the water for a purification ceremony - it must be burned with some cedar (or juniper), hyssop and scarlet yarn - which again likens to casting of spells previously, within earlier societies and forms of worship (now casting lots within the tribes of Israel?).

I am curious with reading the instructions for handling this preparation ceremony being that anyone involved with preparing the ash to be used to purify - is then seen as unclean until evening.

Rather a strange thing in preparing that to be used to purify those finding themselves in a state of defilement. ~

This being stated as in regard to someone dieing inside of a tent as well as being defiled in the presence of a dead body, even a persons bones or a grave. ~

There is an emphasis on using the ash in water with hyssop used to sprinkle it on the third and seventh day. ~

If the water is not sprinkled on them, they are said to remain defiled - but again, in some twist, anyone touching the water will become defiled until evening.

Again, a transference of some sort in using the heifer ash - but with a two way exchange of sorts in it as well, being of a dead creature? ~

To note yet again similarities - this could be more foreshadowing in regard to the use of holy water within some areas of Christianity. ~

Further is support of this in the statement that any who are touched by a defiled person, will become defiled - which shows use in ceremony within some divisions of Christianity, in sprinkling holy water through out the congregation - and in similar use for entering places of worship. ~

(There is a seeming connection of this ceremony - purification water - and the golden calf as well, which I further explore within later entries)

Studies In Theology; 11/30/2006 (More Special, Smoke & Un-Clean Rejects?)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 11/30/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

11/30/2006

In Numbers 16, it describes an uprising from none other than the Levites! Being said to be from three Levites specifically together with 250 other leaders of the community and further yet - prominent members. The initial three being stated as from the tribe of Reuben - then somehow affiliated with the tribe of Levites. (Perhaps in some transference regard as per eldest sons?)

The reasons for the iconspiracy is said to be a discrepancy about Moses being more special than the community of Israel (having themselves been set appart by the Lord - though obviously forgetting the recent transgressions) then as well, complaints about dieing in the wilderness and not yet having been brought into the new homeland.

Strange to read why they had just been told why it was they were not shown into the promised land - and again it is said that they are complaining about it. ~

Again Moses spares them from the wrath of the Lord, but only temporarilly as in 16:31 it describes the wicked men and their families being swallowed up by the Earth - opening its mouth to do so, then again closed over them.

Then fire is said to have burned up the 250 others. ~

With their passing, the bronze incense burners they brought to the Tabernacle as offering were hammered out and used to overlay the altar - introducing a further metal to the Tabernacle configuration; Bronze. ~

This was done to warn others against such uprising and unauthorized burning of incense. But again more complaints, and again Moses attempts to spare them from the wrath. ~

It is then stated that a plague had already begun among the people - but Aaron burned incense and purified them, "standing between the dead and the living" with the incense and stopping the plague. ~

This is rather remarkable as described being that the dead are numbered at 14,700. ~

From a more analytical consideration as per metaphor perhaps in description - this could represent smoke acting to effect the contageon and then thwarting air born transfer of the disease - which seems a possibility in the culmination of because the plague stopped, Aaron returned to the Tabernacle. Indicating in a given interpretation that there waws some extended effort in the ploy to seperate the dead from the living in such a way - beyond simply standing there with an incense burner.

It also tends to suggest an effort of assigning the reason for the plague stopping, to that single incense burner as opposed to the effort it would take to seperate 14,700 dead from the living.

This perhaps in the same line of reasoning as per focus of attention and of course, focus then of belief. ~

Chapter 17 begins with efforts in settling the issue of chosen special guy through the use of staffs belonging to (yet again) 12 of the ancestral leaders with each having their name inscribed on their staff - to be placed in front of the Tabernacle - more so - in front of the Ark itself, where buds will sprout on the staff of the chosen. ~

(More tyhan likely, this being a very popular passage in the bible itself, from the perspective of several of the modern mimicry's in version of interpretation given the level in popularity of certain variations of sprouting buds)

Within this is something which supports the idea of Levites being considered as 0 (zero) in the enumeration order of tribes with it being said that all 12 leaders will present a staff, as well as Aaron to represent the Levites (which then was 13 staffs total - including that of Aaron/Levites). Further this idea of 13/0 is supported in the dictation that the Levites are to recieve no allotment of land as will the other tribes. ~

Aarons staff then sprouted, budded, blossomed and produced almonds - and then was to be permanently placed before the Ark of the Covenant. ~

This brought more complaints in the tone of fearing to go near the Tabernacle because; everyone who even comes close to the Tabernacle, dies! ~

In considering the symbolism of the almonds now being affiliated with Aaron - yet more in the direction of suggested sustenence. ~

Perhaps extending symbolically to his line as well within the described occurence of sprouting, budding... etc.... ~

Chapter 18 then begins with what appears to be another area of the developing repititions (points of contact/transference?) that describes the priestly duties around the Tabernacle and Ark. ~

In 18:10 there is an interesting point of seperation being that all males in Aarons family may eat of the most holy offerings. With sacred and special offerings being available to all members of his family. ~

It is then stated that everything in Israel being set apart for the Lord, also now belongs to Aaron. This also includes the first born of every mother except for cttle, sheep and goats - which will still belong exclusively to the Lord.

It is then stated that with this, Aaron must always redeem his first born sons and ceremonialy un-clean animals (all when one month old) with 5 pieces of silver. ~

Besides seeing this as another foreshadowing in the regard to Baptism concerning modern forms of Christianity, I see another intriguing possibility with the combination of first born sons - and ceremonially un-clean animals not only being associated in similar treatment symbolically, but as well now being seperated from that exclusively as the Lords. ~

Perhaps more in the direction similar to that which gained Jacob the blessings while being the youngest?

12/17/2006 - Further diversity in segregating unclean and clean? Duality, symbolic transference using the un-clean animals having been redeemed consistently while being seperate from all other variations? Since it is that they are unclean would this then lend more to Aaron of lording over the rejects? Then further symbolically, in regard to the lord having stated the Israelites as being not good and a stubborn people - is this then a symbolic relation considering the Israelites to the ceremonialy un-clean (and not good) in the care and redemption of Aaron? Such definitely stands to reason - especially when it is that anything seen as ceremonially clean, is sacrificed and consumed.

This presents an area of divergence which becomes more interesting the more it is considered. Symbolically in some ways, this then affiliates Aaron and his sons with that of the ceremonial un-clean animals. Those animals which are not good in the eyes of the Lord. As well, in regard to the previous cited statement of the Israelites being not good, it in some way affiliates them as well. Yet further this then presents somewhat of a contradiction in the various ways that Israelites can be seen as ceremonially un-clean with a priority on rectifying such to again be seen as ceremonially clean.


Perhaps it is that this presents a symbolic safety net in some respects being that Aaron is to always redeem those unclean first born? This in regard to the unpredictable elements of the Israelites becoming unclean individually as a matter of course (even in childbirth). So they will have a symbolic staging area so to speak, until they again become ceremonially clean?

This further then presents areas of consideration within the larger duality seeming to develop. Is this, beyond being a social divergence, suggestive of a sort of purgatory having been constructed through such consistent actions as presenting such separation? Could this then be seen as Aaron (and the priests) being lords to some degree, over a sort of hell in symbolism? Redeeming, and in that then, shepherding to some degree - that which is seen as ceremonially unclean?


I can see where this is very possible as the precursor to what is commonly known within certain variations of modern Christianity, as representing purgatory.