Bible-2, Pentateuch 2, Genesis 2: Part 2

LESSON 2

PENTATEUCH 2

GENESIS 2

Part Two:

By Rev. G. E. Newmyer 

No one is telling us to do any aspect of the Law of Moses; however, can we agree on this: There was a Change in Laws. If so, let us look at the division of the Laws, to ascertain if we can gain. If we consider Jacob’s vow, then equate it to our modern culture it would be akin to entering a bank, telling the president of the bank we wanted to borrow a hundred thousand dollars, yet we will do him a great big favor by paying back ten thousand. Any bank going for a deal under those conditions won’t stay in business long. This was not “interest” paid over the amount borrowed, it was giving back ten percent of the entire amount borrowed, it’s no where near faith. Jacob never talked about the tithe before, never talked about giving before, but now he was in danger, he used a principle to protect his future, the children complained and murmured, yet feared entering the Promised Land. They were more like Jacob, than Abraham.

Where did Jacob make this vow? “This stone (rock), which I have set a pillar, shall be God’s house”. Who said it was to be God’s house? God? Or Jacob? Jacob, it was just another form of manipulation, if Jacob was using the rock as a pillow, who then was the “head of the rock”? Jacob. We know the Temple was build in Jerusalem of the earth on the rock known as Zion, Jesus would build His Church on the Rock (Christ the Body), but Jacob made himself the Head of this rock.

When Jacob was returning back home, God came to the same place to receive the promised tithe, the sons of Jacob. Jacob made the vow to God, and God collected. On the other hand Jesus “receives” our tithes through His priests. “Lord, when did we give to you? When you gave to the least of these”. God loves a cheerful giver, not the giving of the giver,  rather the giving is merely a sign of the heart of the person. Do they listen to God? Do they do as the Lord says? The tithes under the New are not ten percent, it’s heart based, there is no Commandment regulating the percentage. The Book of Hebrews says the Levites Take tithes by Commandment, but Melchizedek Received tithes. The same principle we find in “Kingdom Theology”, we are kings, as kings we govern our kingdom (not the kingdom of God, but our space in the kingdom of heaven), we can determine what stays, or goes, the priestly order is the same, we can reject any concept of the priestly Order granted us, but some day we will have to face our High Priest.

The old nature will take advantage of the New Order, assuming “I don’t have to give anything”, or, “I will give because I get so much back”, but it defines the nature of the person doesn’t it? Under the New the priest cannot take (ask for, or demand) tithes, they cannot fleece God’s sheep, or sell the Dove, as Examples they must also Trust God to meet their Need. It’s difficult to tell people we walk by faith, when we sell items at a 400 percent markup. Or worse we don’t put a price on the goods, but make them feel as if they are not Christian if they don’t give, it’s still “taking tithes”.

The Levites had no choice in the matter, they had to Take tithe, thus the power of giving was not in the hand of the giver, but in hand of the taker. The wording used in the Book of Hebrews gives us a clue to all this, the Greek word in reference to taking tithes is Apodekatoo, the Greek word in reference to Abram giving tithes is Dekatoo. The addition of the Greek Apo means From, but it shows the separation of a person or object from a person or object. The Law of Moses took from the people any way it could, but we of the New Order have the power to Give, not to Take. No Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Pastor or Teacher is granted permission, nor do they have legal standing to take tithes, anyone who takes anything illegally is a thief, yet a thief is known because they attempt to use unlawful means. However, all the priests of Jesus have an Order and legal standing to receive tithes as an act of ministry. A laborer is worth his wages, don’t muzzle the ox.

The Pharisees looked at the widow with two pennies figuring, “so, she has to give”, Jesus looked at her and said she was blessed for giving out of her need. Why? She wasn’t required to give, she was a “widow indeed”, she could have demanded for the religious leaders to care for her, but she ministered by giving when it wasn’t required, therein lays the difference.

The wording “take tithes”, and “receive tithes” may not seem like much of a difference, but we begin to see it is the very separation between Laws and Natures. In the Greek the order of Aaron demands for the priests to “tithe the people”, but in Abram’s case he gave without being told. Abram was moved by his own heart, compassion and love for someone who loved God. It’s a far cry from someone threatening us, or demanding we give, or making us feel like a thief for not giving.

What happens if our leaders have to “tithe us”? We’re back under the Law. Will we still receive a benefit from the Tithe under the Law? Yes, the Law has a power, it operates based on the deed, not the person. However, just like circumcision of the flesh we are also in danger of falling from Grace. Perhaps our lack of power can be traced to this area, we give under the Old, but expect the Power from the New, it’s double minded. Or we attack the cheerful giving of others, but in so doing we are attacking the very Priesthood we are called to.

The anointing in the Office will still work, but it’s not given to make the leaders famous, it’s given to the leaders to assist the Body. Three areas will take Power from us, falling back to deeds under the Old to gain favor from the Law, commingling with the world, and unbelief.

When we received the Cross of Jesus we were no longer subject to the Law of Moses, when we received the Spirit of Truth we received a New Nature. The second we imputed ourselves dead by the Cross of Jesus we completed the purpose of the Law of Moses, which Law only granted man a long life until they gave up the ghost. When we can say, “I no longer life, but it is Christ who lives in me”, we have completed the purpose of the Law of Moses, if completed we move on to a Law designed for those who have the life of Christ (Col 2:14-16).

Neither Jacob or Abram were under Commandment to give, but Abram didn’t Vow to God, nor did he use the Rock, or the House of God to swear by, nor did he request or seek after, or expect a return. Where did Abram get the idea of “tithes”? No where, his giving was heart motivated, becoming the reminder for those under the Law. Perhaps the tenth part is associated to Noah, as the sign of being blessed when he saw the tops of the mountains, who knows, it doesn’t tell us. Did Melchizedek tell Abram, “you have to give now”? No, did he say, “I will give you bread and wine for your love gift of ten percent”? No, did he say, “we’re going under if you don’t give”? No, did he say, “if you don’t give you’re a thief”. No, did he say, “give and God will return to you a hundred fold”? No, did he say anything about giving? No, his nature was to bless, thus he gave to the man blessed of God. The nature of Abram was to bless, those who bless are always blessed. Why would God talk about Blessing to Abram, if the man’s nature was not to be a blessing? God saw Abram’s heart, thus He knew what kind of man he was; God never told him, “you must bless, before I can bless you”, rather it was “who blesses you I will bless”. What did the man Melchizedek do? Blessed Abram, yet it’s true the greater blesses the lesser. We are under an Order greater than the Levitical.

What about the heart of the king of Sodom? His motive was self, neither Abram or Melchizedek took a thing from him, thus he was not a member of the grouping; defining why Paul said we minister to the saints. Whether we give tithes, or receive, we all have to check our motive, do we give, or receive to impress others? To have control? To get a return? To brag in our giving? Or to bless? If we reject tithing completely, why? Is it because we don’t like people telling us what to do with our money? Do we reject the New priestly concepts? If we do, we also reject the Order of our High Priest (Heb 7:1-8-6).

This then takes us to Abram (Abraham), and how he gave tithes. The Order of Melchizedek is the key, but Abram is the giver. The Scriptures show us it was “once”, it either made you glad, or made you mad. The time of exposure is here; if you were glad, you need to deal with it. If you were mad, you need to deal with it. “Well mad or glad, the fact remains it was one time”. True but it’s also true God imputed righteousness to the man once, it’s just as true the man only received the bread and wine once. Was righteousness imputed because he believed one time? No, his continued belief brought about the imputed righteousness, so it could be by faith. Did Abraham only give once? No, didn’t he give to Lot? Yes, he gave to others in his family as well. Simply, it was the nature of the man to be a blessing, promoting the area of him being blessed. Some of us get real mad because we are not blessed, but are we a blessing?

The only time we find the word “tithes” connected to Abram is when he was dealing with the priest of the “most high God”; therefore, the concept of “tithes” is giving to those who serve the “most high God”, those who hold the “Bread and Wine” respectfully. The amount is still between the giving priest and their High Priest, the amount isn’t the issue in the New, the principle is. Simply because we give “tithes”, doesn’t mean we are a “Tither”, nor does it mean we gave a “Tithe”, it means we gave something God put in our hands to give: the same principle Paul gave the Corinthians (I Cor 16:2). At first glace First Corinthians 16:2 would seem to connect to the Jacob tithe, after all it was to give from what God give (I Cor 16:2). However, Paul never said “ten percent”, rather it was, “as God has prospered”, a complete opposite of the Jacob tithe. Paul knows God prospered them, thus they are able to give from what they received, rather than give to receive (II Cor 9:10). Corinthians does connect to the principle found in Hebrews, the concept of “tithes” under the New is not by Commandment, it’s a form of ministry (II Cor 9:10).

When we study the giving of Abram to Melchizedek we find the Covenant didn’t come to Abraham until after the giving took place, the giving didn’t take place until after a battle, the battle didn’t take place until after the deliverance from Egypt, the deliverance from Egypt didn’t take place until after the Call. All these aspects point to Paul’s teaching to the Corinthians, affirmed in Philippians. This area is difficult at best, when one begins to teach on this subject they can count on the carnal minded saying, “oh boy here it comes, they’re going to ask for money”, or worse the Pharisees in the Body will resist with their personal attacks. Like the concept of circumcision of the flesh in the early days, the concept of tithes has become the thorn in the Body today. Once we make the Godly division between the two different types, as we did between the two different types of circumcision we can be at peace on the subject.

Why is it important? When we as priests minister the Bread (Body) and Wine (Blood of Christ) we are ministering the delivering agents of God’s Mercy and Grace. Paul equated giving as an attribute of Grace (II Cor 9:8 & Rom 12:8). Abram didn’t sit down and count out, “one for you, nine for me”, neither did Melchisedec sit down to make sure Abram was giving exactly ten percent; however, all those under the Law of Moses must.

Our Priestly function, or Order is defined in the acts of Melchisedec, thus it’s not the man, but his Order (Heb 7:20-21). If we are priests under our High Priest, then He has an Order, we better know the Order. Two elements we know, the Bread and Wine, in the Book of Hebrews the Blood of Jesus is mentioned, as well as the Body. We minister by giving the Bread and Wine, why then can’t we see the giving entailed “tithes” without commandment as well? (Ph’l 4:15 & Heb 7:17-21). Another obvious area, is the respect the two men had for each other, we as priests have a duty to treat the other priests in our Order with respect.

We need to examine this area in order to keep us from being placed in bondage, or retaining strongholds, or holding covetousness, yet calling it “cheerful giving”. If we don’t give, why not? If God told us not to, fine, but if we’re playing God by telling ourselves not to, we have a problem. In the area of giving, how is our kingdom run? If we give then brag on it, why? If we’re making our decisions based on money we really need to examine our motives. Being cheerful because we don’t give, or because we can control our giving is not the context of “cheerful giving”. A cheerful giver is cheerful by nature, they don’t need to jump up and down to be cheerful by expecting a return. A cheerful giver is cheerful before, during and after the giving, whether there is a return or not, it never matters how much they give, what matters is the cheerfulness. Why? A tither under the Law of Moses gets a return, yet they can be nasty, hateful, greedy, unbelieving, or nice, it didn’t matter, since the deed was honored. Under the New Order we find God deals with us on a personal level, He still loves a cheerful giver (II Cor 9:7). We can pay as a Tither, yet never have God notice us. We can be a cheerful giver, finding we are Loved of God. Which would seem better?

The giving of Abram is important, since we find at the very same time there was the king of Sodom who wanted to “give” to Abram, yet Abram rejected it. Wow, he gave, but refused to receive. He refused to receive from someone who would use the giving as a personal tool for self-exaltation, the same reason Paul refused to receive from the Corinthians (Gen 14:23).

The Book of Hebrews uses the Abram – Melchizedek principle showing the two different types of “tithes”, and how they differ from the Jacob tithe becoming incorporated in the Law of Moses. One role of a teacher is to resolve controversy, it’s exactly what the Book of Hebrews does, if we receive it. It seems much of the controversy over this matter is when someone mixes the Old into the New, the same mistake made with circumcision, or the principle of sabbath.

All this shows us how Giving is in part of the spiritual nature of the Christian, Paul connects our nature of giving to Righteousness (II Cor 9:10). Some of us wonder if we’re in Grace, there are signs, the desire to give is one of them. Faith is the evidence of things not seen, by a person’s faith we can detect the source. If they are carnal, then the source of their faith is carnal. If their faith is like the Faith of Jesus, then the source is spiritual. It’s not the amount of money, or even money, we can give words of encouragement, or prayer, which are all facets of giving. On the same note, some of us are afraid to ask God how much we can give, He may say, “give all you have”. “Yikes, wrong voice, get behind me Satan, let me out of here”. Faith has to trust God, we ask, we obey. The same God may say “give nothing”, or “receive nothing from them”, which is supported by Abram refusing to receive from the king of Sodom, or Paul refusing to receive from the Corinthians. Whatever the Lord says, do.

A question we must consider, what happened to all of Lot’s cattle? He left the presence of Abram because there wasn’t enough room for the cattle, but the angels found him in the city, not in the country side. What happened? Why didn’t Lot take his cattle when he left Sodom? It was just one chapter prior when Abram and Lot separated because “their substance was great” (Gen 13:6). Lot lost, or sold his possessions to live in the city, yet he was still delivered because of his association with Abram. How do we know? It was Abram the angels came to first, they only went to Lot based on Abram’s conversation, it was Lot Abram interceded for. Lot in turn interceded for the angels, but separated himself from the vexing of the evil about him on a daily basis (II Pet 2:7), which was his “just” act. Lot was separated from the sin of the community, thus his separation made him “just”, not “righteous”. The Just shall live by faith, Lot is an example of those of us who have to venture into the world, but are not part of the world. As God delivered the just Lot before the wrath of God was poured out, He will deliver us in the Rapture before the Night begins.

Abraham held “imputed” righteousness, but his standing isn’t anything like the standing we have. Abraham did not, and could not come boldly to the throne, the throne came to him. Lot by association of the intercession was treated as if he was a part of Abram, the same will be true with Moses in regards to those who associate with him. Protection and being able to come boldly to the throne are much different.

What has it to do with giving? Abram “gave” Lot a portion, because of the giving and receiving Lot was connected to Abram by association. God so loved He gave, we received making us heirs by association. How would we like if the Scripture read, “God so loved the world He gave ten percent of His only begotten Son”, or “And Jesus went to the Cross and took ten percent of the curse”, or “Father forgive ten percent of their sins, for they know not what they do”, or “And the Holy Ghost has given unto us ten percent of the Seed of God”? Something to think about.

Abram gained his wealth in Egypt (Gen 12:16), but refused the gifts of the king of Sodom (Gen 14:22-23). The difference? Attitudes and intents of the giver. In Egypt the Pharaoh entreated Abram because he knew the importance of Sarai (Gen 12:16). Another example of giving; Pharaoh’s house was plagued, but the respect Pharaoh gave Abram rid the house of the plague (Gen 12:16-20). Pharaoh’s giving was motivated by his knowledge of who Abram served, but the king of Sodom was looking for self-glory. This is important, Abram discerned the king of Sodom’s intent, the king wanted to brag in his giving, making it appear as if he made Abram rich.

There was a process in the giving as well, in Genesis 14 we find the first contact between Abram and Melchizedek is when Melchizedek brought forth the bread and wine (Gen 14:18). Then Melchizedek blessed Abram by saying, “Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth” (Gen 14:19). Melchizedek didn’t say, “bless are you Abram”, rather it was “blessed be Abram”, which means the priest was bestowing a blessing on Abram, without question the greater always blesses the lesser. Here this “Gentile priest” blessed the father of all Israel. From the one blessing Abram knew the heart of Melchizedek was God centered. Further the blessing of Melchizedek gave God the glory, the king of Sodom wanted the glory. The blessing of Melchizedek was part of the Order, indicating our Order is based in being a Blessing to Bless. The king of Sodom felt the things were his, after all he was the king of the land, but Melchizedek knew all things belonged to God. The word Possessor is the Hebrew Qanah meaning To own, or redeem, or possess by purchase. This priest knew whatever Abram had, it still belonged to God. It was a truth Abram knew as well, motivating Abram to give to the man of God. This same concept is found in Hebrews 10:38-39 in the phrase, “the saving of the soul”. The Greek word for saving is not Sozo or Soteria, it’s another Greek word meaning the Redemption of something purchased. The second we came to the Cross, our first sacrifice was to give our souls to Jesus, how then can we present a Sacrifice if we are not priests? How can we be Godly priests, if we reject the Order?

In all this we find three “king types”, Abram as Abraham will be the father of many nations (multitudes), thus he is a type of king. Two of the three kings gave God the glory and exchanged gifts, the third king ran his kingdom from a heart of greed.

Abram fought, won, then brought back Lot, the goods and the people who were taken, all by the power of God. This is important since Abram will give “tithes of all” to the person who recognized the victory was God’s doing (Gen 14:20). Did Abram keep the people? Or did he give ten percent of the people? Not hardly, but we have to see the chain of events: Melchizedek gave the man the elements, then blessed Abram. In truth Abram gave tithes of what he had, including what the king of Sodom thought he owed as well. The premise is still the Order, we as priests follow the Order, we give the Bread and Wine as we Bless, knowing it’s God who provides.

Does taking the Bread and Wine mean Abram was the first human to partake of Communion? No, not at all, please don’t build a stronghold. This is a Shadow, a type of something, showing how the “giving” was predicated by a blessing, the blessing came after giving the bread and wine, which are symbols associated with the Body of Christ. All this relates to our Order of Priesthood; therefore, this lesson is specific in nature, it points to us, showing there is a principle of tithes connected to us, but it’s not the Tithe under the Law of Moses, neither is it by Commandment.

The Communion was shadowed in the Old Testament in several places, but not like it was in the meeting of Melchizedek and Abram. For Moses it was “the passing over of the destroyer”, in Proverbs it was the difference between Wisdom and the strange woman (Prov 9), in Malachi it was the polluted table (Mal 1:11-12), but here it’s Giving, Blessing and Receiving. It’s also important to note how the giving of the Bread and Wine is associated to the “tithes” of the New Covenant, not the “Tithe” under the Law of Moses. The restrictions in the Law came well after this meeting, yet we can get stuck in the wording. If our nature falls under the Law of Moses, then the priests have to take tithe in whatever manner, twisting the arm, manipulation, a promise of a return, or a threat of rejection, but if our nature falls under the Law of the Spirit the priests receive our tithes. If we associate ourselves to the Law of Moses we cannot be priests and kings, since we lack the tribal connections. Therein lays the difference, the nature we operate from dictates which Law we associate to.

For the most part we have no problem with the concept of being a “cheerful giver”, but we really get tight jawed on the concept of tithes. Why? Because with the term “cheerful giver” we can control and regulate the amount given, or not, then say, “well as I purpose in my heart”, but what is the heart? If we are circumcised of heart, then the New Heart is the New Man, meaning we give by Obedience.

Most of us want Fellowship with God, but First John tells us the way we gain Fellowship with God is to treat the people of God, as God does. We can talk all day long about the “attributes” of God, but if we slander the Body we are not of God, rather we Bless as a priestly rite based on the mutual respect between those of the New Testament Order.

This ability to be both priest and king unto God is so great, it almost stuns the mind. No Jew was ever legally a priest and a king, they could be prophet and king, or prophet and priest, but not legally priest and king; yet Jesus has made us Both priests and kings, and all of us are to prophesy. It called for a New Order, one based in a New Law, not an addition to the Old aw. Our Order of Priesthood is under Jesus, the Lion from the Tribe of Judah showing the New is not an extension of the Old. The New Law calls for a spiritual priest, the old called for a carnal priest to carry out carnal ordinances; the differences abound.

The issue in the Book of Hebrews and in Psalm 110 is The Order of the Priesthood, as Abram, the father of the Jews gave tithes to a Gentile. The first concept of tithes is one man of God giving to another, but with Jacob it was God giving to Jacob before Jacob make God his God, much different, on the surface it would seem like Jacob’s giving was more righteous, but manipulation is never righteousness.

In Psalm 110 the word “Order” is the Hebrew Dhivrah meaning Intent, Reason for doing, or the motive for the doing. What “Order” do we find for us in these Scriptures? Giving, Blessing, Receiving the Body (Bread) and the Blood (Wine), it’s the Order. How do we know? In the Book of Hebrews we find this Melchizedek “blessed” Abraham (Heb 7:1). There is no room in the New for any curse, we are not allowed to curse others, really we’re not allowed to accept a curse, neither are we allowed to be cursed. We are blessed to be a blessing, so we can bless. If this was not an important issue, why did the Holy Ghost spend so much time on it?

The “priesthood” being changed shows the type and order of tithing under the Levi order was no longer acceptable for the New Priestly Order, thus the first becomes last, the last becomes first. The Order of Melchizedek would never work under the Old, the nature of the people would not condone being “givers by nature”, but under the Order of Melchizedek it calls for us to be givers by nature, thus the priests under the New cannot engage in taking tithes, they are mandated to receive (Heb 7:12). This change is not something moving from one  Law to another, it means a complete change must take place, including discarding the Old with the deeds of the Old.

The Law of Moses had offerings and sacrifices, we have the Bread and Wine. This is important since Melchizedek was before Levi, but the change took place after Levi. The Shadow was there, but no action until the time appointed. All the exchanges taking place between Abram and Melchizedek become a preview of a change to take place, thus the Order for our priesthood was prior to the Order of the Levitical.

One could argue Jesus taught the tithe under the Law when He told the Pharisees “you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin and have omitted the weightier matters of the Law, judgment and mercy and faith: these ought you to have done, and not to leave the other undone” (Matt 23:23). The wording “to leave” is the Greek Aphiemi meaning To dismiss, or Send away, or Forsake. However, there is more; Jesus said, “you” not “we”, He also said, “under the Law”, which means the Tithe He is talking about is under the Law of Moses, the Pharisees were under the Law, they paid tithe to the penny, but they were Commanded to. The point Jesus makes is not their tithe paying, since it was commanded, but the other matters they were not commanded to do, but expected to do, such as faith and mercy. To the Pharisees it was, “if we’re not commanded to do it, why do it?”. Let not a like attitude trap us. It seems to be the issue, we are not commanded to pay tithes, its an element left up to us as a display of our nature.

The entire point in this shows we can’t confuse the Tithe under the Law of Moses with the Giving of Abram, they are two completely different things. We are not paying a debt to God by giving money; we are giving because we are the Blessed of God. God is not motivated by how much we give, or how little, it’s the obedience He seeks. We love the people of God, we want to see the work of God complete. It’s in our nature, thus our New nature is the same as God’s nature. Alms are monies or goods given to the poor and needy, “tithes” are given to the priests. Under the Old there was only one Storehouse, under the New it’s unto the Priests, by the Priests in the Name of the Lord.

The name Melchizedek means “king of prosperity”, or “king of peace”, since one of the Greek words used for Peace also means Prosperity, relating to the Hebrew word used here; however, where is this land of Prosperity this king was over? The area of Sodom was near the place where Jerusalem would be established, thus Melchizedek is a type of New Jerusalem as well. He couldn’t be king of Sodom, the king was standing there. We often run around searching out “God’s Prosperity”, but here is the Order, be a blessing, minister the Bread and Wine, become a priest in the proper Order. The tithes given Melchizedek were already in the hands of Abram, it was not something yet to come. The main issue in God’s prosperity is connected to the saving of our souls, if our souls are not prospering, how do we expect to? (III Jn 3).

This Melchizedek is by interpretation the king of peace, but Jesus is the Prince (cause) of Peace. This king was from Salem, a place not mentioned again until Psalm 76:2 where we find it’s Zion the Holy Tabernacle of God. Hold it, Zion? Tabernacle? The Tabernacle was never on Zion, rather the Temple was built in Jerusalem, yet Jerusalem was built on Mount Zion. What could this mean? Just what it says, this priest is a shadow, there is a Mount Zion of the earth, and one for the heavenly (Heb 12:8). Just as there is a Jerusalem of the earth, as well as a New Jerusalem of heaven. The use of the word Tabernacle is not by mistake, it’s a mystery opened, the Order of Melchizedek is not associated in any way with Judgment, it’s associated with Salvation (Heb 12:18-22). It’s connected to heavenly Zion, the mount of God appointed to the people of Grace.

Melchizedek was real, but he was not Jesus. The man’s Order fit into the plan, we find all this teaching is based on one meeting between two people causing effect to the entire system God established unto Salvation.

After Abram freely gave to the man of God, the Lord came and told Abram, “Fear not, Abram: I am your shield and your exceeding great reward” (Gen 15:1). The man’s giving was a sign of his love, his love a sign of his belief, his belief a sign of his nature. Abram didn’t give thinking, “now God has to give it back to me, man oh man, I will be the richest in the land”. Abram didn’t know God would become his shield based on the giving, rather he gave without expectation, then came the reward.

After saying we’re the only ones who can legally hold the positions of “king and priest” (Rev 1:6), one could argue how the Hasmonean family, who were descendants of Aaron during the Second Temple era maintained kingship for themselves. However, the Talmud said it was an illegitimate kingship, since it was not “in the order established by God”. God set up an order of check and balances, it never allowed a priest to be king. The reason seems somewhat obvious, a king was anointed by God, confirmed by the anointing of a priest, thus if a priest was allowed to be a king, then any priest could say, “you know what, I’m going to anoint myself king”. We call it “self-appointed”, or a “Jezebel spirit”, which is what happened in the Hasmonean family, the next step was God allowing Rome to possess the land, it has been trodden under foot by the Gentile since.

The Hasmonean family were during the Apocrypha period, more specifically during the Maccabees time. Around 163 BC there was a war freeing the Jews under Judas Maccabees; the Hasmonean rebellion did achieve some success, but cost the nation greatly in the long run. The revolt gained the Jews freedom from about 163 BC to 37 BC, only to fall into the hands of Roman domination, since then they have been under the rule of the Gentiles in one form or another. “No wait, they have their own land now”. They have the land, not the rule, the city is still trodden under foot of the Gentiles, today Israel has to answer to more nations then it did under the Hasmonean order, the Dome of the Rock mosque proves the point.

During the time when the Hasmonean family ruled, Jonathan was able to take advantage of another Seleucid succession, gaining the appointment of the High Priesthood. He was the first Hasmonean High Priest, he began the unbroken line of Hasmonean High Priests from 163 BC to 63 BC. In 104 BC another Hasmonean, Judah Aristobulus, the grandson of Mattathias had himself crowned as king of Judea. This self-appointed mess was still illegal, God called the priests from Aaron, the kings from the line of David. Instead of seeing the job of “high priest – king” as an opportunity, it became evident it was illegal; this new generation of Hasmoneans saw their post as an opportunity to get rich. They violated the Procedure set forth by God, becoming an example of what happens with “self-rule”, or “self-appointment”. It was the last time Israel had a king appointed by them, God removed the entire system from them for the violation of the “Order”; today they have a Parliament, but no king.

Herod the Great killed what was left of the Hasmonean ruling order, including his wife and two of her sons. The “high priest – king” element of the Hasmoneans was short lived and illegal; there has never been a legitimate king who was also a human priest in the land of Israel since. After the Hasmonean fiasco we find Rome appointing kings, Herod being as an example, yet Rome could not Anoint kings. The Hasmonean self-appointment is another type and shadow of the Wicked, the personification of the Jezebel self-appointed mentality to usurp authority or take positions outside of the order God has established (Rev 2:20). The only people in a Godly group granted the privilege of being both king and priest are Christians. This is a division, as kings we have kingdom duties to attend to, as priests we have an Order to attend to. Let us be faithful to the calling.

The Hebrews were the wandering ones searching for their Promised Land, but the Jewish people were separated from the Gentiles. One could say there were no Gentiles before there were Jews, since one defines a Gentile as anyone not Jewish. It is true a Gentile is anyone who is not Jewish, but we must also consider Israel was separated from the Gentiles, becoming known as the “Sand of the Sea”. In Genesis 10 we find the use of the word Gentile, if a Gentile is anyone who is not Jewish, then it would cover all those from Adam to Israel (Jacob), since they were not “Jews”. Simply the Jews were separated from the Gentiles, not the other way around.

Noah had three sons, from two came the ten toes of the Gentile nations, from the other came Abram, yet Abram would also be classed a Gentile until he was Abraham. How? Abraham had three families, one was Abram and Hagar, the result was Ishmael; then Abraham and Sarah, the result was Isaac; after Sarah died Abraham married Keturah (Gen 25:1-6), the result was Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. The only son who was granted the Promise was Isaac, thus we can expand the term Jew to those who are subject to the Promise, all the other children of Abram or Abraham were not subject to the Promise. Ishmael was not a Jew, he was not of the twelve tribes, rather he was Gentile, because he was born of a Gentile. Therefore, in order to be a Jew, ones mother must be Jewish. In order to be associated with the kingly order, ones father had to be a direct descendent of David.

Paul shows there are only two classes of people who are earthly, Jew and Gentile. Paul said God was not a Respecter of persons, denoting anyone of the two classes had the ability to accept Jesus (Rom 2:11-12). John saw Israel as those who pierced Jesus, the Gentile as those who wail because of Jesus (Rev 1:7). The only other people would be Christian, who are neither Jew or Gentile. “Okay, what about the Arab?” They came from Ishmael, thus they are Gentile, showing the city is trodden under foot by the Gentile even today. There are many tribal or nations associated to the Gentiles, yet they are still Gentile. Abram is the first person called a Hebrew, thus the term was not originally given to a “people” it defined the man as a Sojourner. The separation began with Abram at the time when God called him, but it wasn’t finished until Jacob became Israel. Until then there was one group of people on the earth, these are really side issues, but should be cleared up.

Abram would now have the sign of the sacrifice, with the prophecy concern­ing the children yet to come (Gen 15:9 & 15:13). The Covenant was at hand with Abram, but would it have a token with Abraham (Gen 15:18 & 17:2)? This shows a process, in Genesis 15:13 Abram is to know of a surety his offspring will be in captivity, in 15:18 we find God made Covenant, but the token or Seal to the Covenant didn’t come until circumcision (Gen 17:10). This area in­troduces God’s intent was to grant Abraham’s belief the Imputed Righteousness; thus we find there is Imparted righteousness, Imputed righteousness and self-righteousness. Imputed means God views something regarding someone with a favorable standing in order to enter Covenant, in the case of Abraham it was his continual belief. Imparted righteousness is God’s Righteousness birthed in us by the Seed of God (Eph 4:24); we know what self-righteousness means. When we look at Genesis 15:6 we can’t presume Abram believed God only for the mo­ment, then righteousness was imputed unto him; the man began his belief way back when he was called, thus he continued in his belief to establish a position where God could view his belief in a “supposed” position.

Abram Believed in the Lord, the Lord counted it unto Abram for right­eousness (Gen 15:6). It was not the faith of Abram, it was his Belief, the righteousness came so the man could enter Covenant, so it could be by faith; therefore, faith is not an issue until there is a Covenant. We have to look at this verse to find the mystery; Abram didn’t believe the words alone, rather he believed In the Lord, which means he believed in the ability, faithfulness, and integrity of the Lord. The Lord didn’t say Abram was righteous, rather it was counted to him For righteousness, there is a big difference. Abram was a man, a man still under the cloud of the sin nature, yet we find he was able to believe, thus God looked at the Belief, thus the Righteousness was imputed on the it, the man was able to gain from the position.

When God looks at the belief of Abram He also sees us as the prophetic message “Let us make man in our image”; the connection enables God to view Abram as if the man is righteous. Just as God saw “Grace” in the purpose of delivering Noah, we find He sees Righteousness in the purpose of granting Abraham a Covenant. Perhaps it’s based on this reason for Paul rebuking the Galatians so strongly, we have Imparted Righteousness, but with Abraham it was Imputed. If we accept a Covenant which was established on Imputed righteousness, yet claim the Righteousness of God we have mixed elements being found as a double-mind person.

The key is “belief”, the door opener to the New Covenant as well, rather than look at the man, God looked at his belief, then He was able to account righteousness to the man, so a Covenant could exist. The same is true for us, the Father looks at the Son on the Cross with the words, “Father forgive them”, we believe in the Cross by accepting the words, thus the Father imputes righteousness on us, so it can be by faith until we receive the New Birth, therein we are granted Imparted Righteousness. Our water baptism is based on belief, not faith, we believe in the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus. Belief is a Now Confidence based on past knowledge, or experiences (Mark 16:16-18). The measure of faith drew us to the Cross, but it’s still mandated for us to believe God raised Jesus from the dead. Without firm belief, faith is left without purpose (Heb 11:6).

When Abram gave his sacrifice to enter the covenant, he took five different animals. His method of sacrifice was to cut the animals in half, representing the two sides of any Covenant, but we can see the allegory of the Word in us separating and dividing (James 1:21). When the fowls of the air come to devour his sacrifice, Abram remained faithful by fighting them off. The Fowls are a symbol of the Wicked, who come to spoil the sacrifice; thus as soon as the Word was sown, the fowls of the air came to devour the seed (Mark 4:4). Like Abram, we must be watchful, as we remain faithful, the subtle envious fowls will attempt to spoil our sacrifice; however, we also have the power to send them away.

Abram was told his people would be held in bondage and afflicted four hun­dred years, but they would come out with more than they had going in (Gen 15:13). Here is the blessed man of God, the land was his, what gives? He found the blessing in his giving, the “price was paid” for the safety of his family, all the children had to do was receive it. Sounds like Mercy doesn’t it? The purpose for the wilderness was to instill correct leadership ability, the children would know what it felt like to be captive, thus their training was to hold a position of mercy. Yet, they didn’t like the method God was using, it didn’t fit their agenda, they considered their discipleship the same as being captive in Egypt, causing them to murmur and complain.

Not only did Abram’s giving lay the foundation for the children to receive more than they entered with, but the man heard there would be children, not only confirming the promise, but adding confidence to his belief. Words from the Lord are important, they are sent so we can believe, giving our faith foundation. If God was speaking of “children” yet to come, it would sound real stupid to think God wasn’t able to bring the promised son. Once Abram heard, “people” he knew it was more than one, thus knowing God was fully able to bring the promise to pass. It’s also clear, there are many times when we must be afflicted before we seek deliverance, in the deliverance we know it was God and God alone. It’s also just as true if God is speaking to us about a ministry, or an ability yet to come, then it’s just as true He is fully able to bring it to pass.

The Word also went to the children, they knew God promised deliverance, thus they were looking for a Deliverer; therefore, if God has delivered them, they have a reason to believe God Is, leading them into faith, but they failed at the belief aspect.

The phrases “a deep sleep”, and “a horror of great darkness”, coupled with Abram sleeping through the night gives us another mystery. The term “a deep sleep” is the same phrase, with the same Hebrew word used in Genesis 2:21, where God caused a “deep sleep” to fall on Adam when the Woman was taken. This is not a type of the “Church” who are taken in the Rapture, rather it’s a type of those who ”sleep in Jesus through the Night”. The division shows some do “soul sleep”, but they also wake up at the end of the 1,000 years (I Thess 4:14, Rev 20:5-6 & 20:13-14).

The rest of the statement here tells what happened in this “deep sleep”: the Deep Sleep by itself isn’t bad, but add Horror and things begin to get shaky. Darkness by itself is bad enough, but Horror of Darkness, what could this mean? The word Horror means A terror, the word Darkness means Withholding light, thus this experience of the Fowls and Night relate to something yet to come. In the Book of Revelation we read “And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he comes, he must continue a short space. And the beast who was, and is not, even he is the eighth, is of the seven, and goes into Perdition” (Rev 17:10-11). The Eighth? There are Seven Angels, Seven churches, Seven mountains, Seven Horns, but an Eighth? The mystery is found in the words “Fallen” and “Perdition”; the word Fallen means either to fall backward to a place one came from, or to fall for­ward, as one would fall down forward and worship the Lord; this one word defines the “broken Body of Christ”. These verses are a key showing the Day and Night are divided, as well as defining the “sons of perdition”. If some Fall forward to worship the Lord, yet some Fall backward, where would both groups be from? Could they relate to “one is taken, one left”? The ones who fall forward are seen in Reve­lation 7:9 before the Throne in heaven at the same time the 144,000 are marked on earth, as a representation of the Rapture. The reasoning is how Christ must be removed before Judgment begins. The other group who falls backward are associated with Perdition, making them sons of perdition, they are seen in Revelation 13:11 as the Beast of the Earth defined in Hebrews 10:38-39 as those who draw back to Perdition.

When Paul said the Body was broken, he used a word meaning A branch of a tree being completely removed (Greek Klao). When we break the Bread we actually separate the two pieces, a symbol of the Broken Body, we don’t break the Body, rather it means we know it will be. We are not of them who “draw back to perdition”, but of them who believe unto the saving of the soul (Heb 10:38-39). The word “Rapture” may not appear, but the concept does.

The Seven churches are not The Church, for the most part we find the gates of hell had invaded a majority of them, but the gates shall not prevail against the Church. There is also the “synagogue of Satan”, it doesn’t mean Jewish, rather the word synagogue means a gathering, the word Church means Called out ones. This synagogue of Satan is found within the seven churches, but at the same time not of the seven churches, making it the “Eighth”. We also find when this Eighth appears as the Beast of the earth five of the seven churches are gone, with one active, then one lukewarm one yet to come, thus when we read the events of the Fifth church we find things relating directly to the Rapture, such as walking in White, or having Jesus con­fess them before the Father. The Sixth church is associated with Phileo love, known as the House of David, the Seventh is the Lukewarm who opens the door for the Eighth to set up the abomination. This connects to John telling us about the antichrists, who came from us, but were not of us; as well as Paul’s comments about the drunken who go into the Night, as well as Jude telling us they separated themselves displaying this “Eighth” cut themselves away from The Faith, ending as the Beast of the Earth. Like wars and rumors of wars, the Body must be Broken, but it doesn’t mean we have to be the cause, rather we continue to Believe by holding to God Is thinking.

Don’t forget the workers of Iniquity work at their Iniquity. It’s no secret the Remnant are of the Seed of the Woman, they will be overcome, but on the same note don’t confuse what happens to them, with what happens to us. We all want Jesus to “confess us before the Father”, but which church of the Seven has the promise? The Fifth (Rev 3:5). This “Eighth” is seen as antichrist in our Season, noted in reference to the church of Smyrna, who are the victims of the sons of perdi­tion, showing how the sons of perdition are of the “synagogue of Satan”, the same “synagogue of Satan” will worship at the Feet of the Sixth church as well (Rev 2:9 & 3:9); if at the feet, they are the footstool. The Gathering of Satan uses the working of Satan, as Paul pointed out (II Thess 2:9). This explains how the devil can be bound, yet the false prophet runs about deceiving people. They are the vessels of dishonor, they don’t need to be devil possessed to be evil, they made the choice to trample the Blood under foot, they end as the footstool of Jesus.

The Sixth church is called “Philadelphia”, but why? The word Philadelphia means City of brotherly love, defined by the Greek word Phileo, not Agape. We know the Rem­nant “keep the Commandments of God”, yet which Commandments? They will operate in Mercy, but then comes the Seventh who is lukewarm, thinking the wealth is a product of their hand. Wait, don’t they also have “the testimony of Jesus”? Yes, Jesus said the Testimony was the Old Testament (Jn 5:39). The key is they don’t have the Witness, nor do they have the Blood, but they have the Two Witnesses of the Law and Prophets.

There are two groups of God in the Book of Revelation, the Remnant who come last, those of the Faith of Jesus who come first. The Rem­nant are the thousands from thousands, the Firstfruits of God, but the Firstfruits of the Spirit are those of the first five churches who number ten thousand times ten thousand, thus we find the Night is appointed to the Lesser Light as the Remnant, the Day to us as the Greater Light; therefore, God has separated His Salvation from His Wrath, with Salvation in the Day, His Wrath in the Night, we have not been appointed to God’s Wrath.

Now the “Terror”, God said there would be a Captivity, there was, but there was also a deliverance, but the Terror was the attitude of the children in the wilderness. The only element keeping the children from joy was their unbelief, they failed to enter the wilderness with a “God Is” thinking, which eroded their potential for faith. They crossed the Red Sea by faith, but it was a faith based in depression. Pharaoh was in pursuit, the Sea parted, their faith was bases in avoiding one danger while seeking the other shore. They danced and sang, but three days later they were murmuring and complaining.

Here in Genesis the sacrifices were laid out, the blood was between the halves of the heifer, goat and ram, then a Smoking Furnace and a Burning Lamp passed between the pieces, as God’s signature to the Covenant (Gen 15:17). There was also a turtledove and a pigeon, but the turtledove and pigeon were not Divided (Gen 15:10). These five items of the Heifer, Goat, Ram, Turtledove and Pigeon pointed to something not within the knowledge of Abram, showing how the man did things he knew were right, but he really didn’t understand the meaning. Five is the number of Grace, so is this Covenant of Grace? No, we know better, but we find two seasons for the Jew, one before the Cross, one after the Rapture, with Grace between the two seen as the blood.

A principle which seems to slip our minds from time to time; some things we think are in­significant in the natural are important in the spiritual, there are times when we do things in the natural we assume have great importance, yet they mean little in the spiritual. The Smoking Furnace is a type of Judgment, the Burning Lamp is a type of candlestick, but it was one lamp, not seven. This shows us the Smoking Furnace is associated to the one Lamp of the Sixth church. Although the Sixth and Seventh churches have the two witnesses of the Law and Prophets, we are told “Hear ye Jesus”.

We can move now on to the Ishmael type and shadow, which usually comes in about now. This type and shadow explains how any of us can “birth an Ishmael”, the son (product) of manipulation. The premise is simple, the belief was there, the promise given, but there remained one problem, Where is it? Patience must have her perfect work, in the process of her work we must not jump out of the boat, rather we maintain the course, or we might give birth to an Ishmael. The birth of Ishmael was the result of testing the promise to determine where the fault laid; however, the presumption assumed there was a fault, when there wasn’t, making the presumption the fault.

Abram heard, “he shall come forth out of your own bowels shall be your heir”, but at the time God didn’t say, “from you and your wife”, thus Sarai was not sure if she was part of this promise or not (Gen 15:4). Faith came, but time passes on, in the process of time, it looked like the promise disappeared. Both Abram and Sarai are types of the old nature, thus God changed their names, their New Names are types of the New nature. It’s not saying they had the New Man, only the type is pre­sented so we gain a lesson. This is important since Abraham didn’t produce Ishmael, Abram did. Ishmaels are products of the old man, not the New.

The birth of Ishmael came when Abram was 86 years old (Gen 16:16), he was 99 years old when the confirmation came regarding who would mother the Promised son (Gen 17:1-16). At the time of the confirmation the Covenant Token was introduced, as well as the changing of names from Abram to Abraham, and from Sarai to Sarah; therefore, it is clear Ishmael was not born of Abraham the father of many nations, but of Abram the father of many. The difference is of course great, Ishmael will have character traits to identify him more to his mother, than father, yet his father was no longer a factor when the Covenant was established with Abraham. Nonetheless, before the confirmation Sarai wanted to test the premise, but in the Ishmael experience we will find many things relating to the times when we tend to test the Promise. Hagar was an Egyptian, being such is a type of the world; when we test the promise of God by the world, it will end in an Ishmael.

This Ishmael experience is the product of Presumption, the counterfeit to faith, yet presumption always entails manipulation. Sarai presumed there would be no child, the fault had to lay with her, or Abram, yet the presumption of fault was the error, it lacked patience. Putting wood where there is no fire often births Ishmaels. God had a Time and Timing, presumption figures the time must be now, so why isn’t it coming to pass? There must be a fault, if a fault, we have to find who is to blame, then correct it. After all, this is a promise of God, since it’s not coming to pass in the manner and time we want, we must find out why. Ahh, the problem, when it doesn’t come to pass as we presume it should, then we think we must help the process, the result is a back riding, mocking Ishmael.

If God knew all this, why not stop it? Ishmael had to be, in order for us to learn from the lesson. It also held things in the future Abram knew nothing about, but we see on a day to day basis. The differences between Ishmael and Isaac are vast, Ishmael is an emotional wreck, one day it’s thank you, the next he either mocks or attempts to kill you, an Ishmael will never take the blame for his wrong, rather he will blame everyone else. We are fully apprised not to use world to find the promises of God; however, Abram didn’t have the prior teaching, his experi­ence becomes our example, not our excuse.

The error came after hearing from God, thus the danger of this error comes after we have heard. Once the promise is spoken, faith takes its stand, but then comes Patience, in the testing of faith. Ishmaels begin as a wonder, “I wonder if God forgot?”, “I wonder if I can make the prophecy come to pass?”, “I wonder who’s at fault here?”. The seeds of the imagination conceive Ishmaels. What do Ishmaels do? Mock the son of promise, keep us in bondage to wild emotions, they also prevent us from finding the Precious. What did Ishmael have? The token of the Covenant, he was circumcised, but he was not subject to the Promise. God will speak about Ishmael, He will even send an angel to tell Hagar about Ishmael, but God will not speak directly to Ishmael (Gen 16:11). No Ishmael or product of Ishmael will hear from God, since they are not of faith, but of manipulation.

When Hagar was found with child it appeared to Sarai the fault was surely in Sarai. She was the one who sent Abram in to Hagar, thus he did as he was told. When Hagar conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes (Gen 16:4). Then Sarai said to Abram, “My wrong be upon you” (Gen 16:5). What? Ishmaels do tend to make us blame others for our faults. However, she sent the man in, so where is her logic? Ahh, the Fall, Adam male obeyed the voice of his wife, Sarai presumes it’s the same error. Not so, the error was in thinking there was an error. If either would have held on a little longer, they would have seen the promise was dependent on God’s time and timing, not man’s.

Why did Sarai say she was sending Abram in? For a child, to bring the promise to pass, but what was her hidden agenda? To see where the fault laid. When she found Hagar was with child by Abram, she got mad, it didn’t turn out the way she wanted. The manipulation produced the Ishmael, not the other way around, thus all Ishmaels are products of manipulation, they are not the manipulation.

Not all this is on Sarai’s head, Abram did go in. After Hagar conceived she looked at Sarai differ­ently as well. The word Despised in verses 5 and 6 is the Hebrew Qalal meaning Small, or To make light of, thus this isn’t hate, but Hagar looking down on Sarai, by the “look”, Hagar was mocking her mistress. All of us have been subject to “the look”, those times when some­one views you with condemnation, or mocking in their eyes, thus Ishmael is more like his mother, than Abram. In essence we can see how Hagar was going about showing off her conception, making Sarai feel small, or inferior. When we go about showing off our Ishmaels, we, like Hagar are acting presumptuous.

Prior God told Abram how the off-spring would be held captive, then the nation holding them captive would be judged, here in Genesis 16:5 Sarai says, “judge between me and you”; however, we have two different words for Judge. In Genesis 15:14 the word Judge is the Hebrew Din meaning To punish, or Litigate, here in Genesis 16:5 the Hebrew word for Judge is Shaphat meaning To decide, or Give justice equally, thus Sarai wants Abram to make the decision regarding Hagar, based on the premise “My wrong be upon you”, but Abram says, “Behold, your maid is in your hand” (Gen 16:6). Sarai took those words to mean she could do as she pleased with Hagar, Sarai then dealt hard with Hagar, causing Hagar to flee. It would almost sound as if we can beat our Ishmaels causing them to depart, but it’s not the end of the story.

Later Abraham will send Hagar away, but here Hagar made tracks in the sand to get away from the oppressing mistress. The purpose for Hagar and Ishmael in this thing was not finished, Ishmaels have a purpose; they can be training tools, but Abram only had one, about as many as it takes for us as well. When we presume we can test God, or force some prophecy to come to pass, if so, we will birth an Ishmael. We end in bondage to the Ishmael ridding our back, or mocking the Promise. Is there a way to be rid of the Ishmael? Yes, God will provide the means, He always does.

Hagar came to a “fountain of water” in the “way to Shur”, Shur means A Wall, thus she hit a wall. Hagar heard an angel of the Lord telling her to “Return to your mistress, and Submit yourself” (Gen 16:9). Ishmaels need not hang on us for years, since we birthed the thing, we are the ones to Submit to the Lord, He is fully able to turn it around for Good, but in the process we will learn of Ishmaels, oh yes, we will learn (Gen 16:11-16).

Hagar was then made a promise by God, she was told Ishmael would multiply, but he would also be, 1) a wild man; 2) his hand will be against every man; 3) every man’s hand against him; and 4) he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren. Prophetic? Seems so.

Ishmael is in a place between places, yet it’s not a wilderness since he is not of the Promise. Nonetheless he has the Token of the Covenant, but is not subject to the Promise. He will be blessed, but not because of him, it’s because of Abram. Ishmael will be a “test” to his brothers, Abraham will have other children, but here Ishmael had no “brother”; however, the promise called for one “brother” yet to come. What gives? God’s knowledge of what was not yet, thus by knowledge God is able to call something a were, which is a not to us. Hagar had a key, God said Ishmael would be a test to his brothers, thus there would be brothers, the Promise was not lost, or cast off.

Ishmael would have a future, he became the father of all Arabs, they still dwell in the presence of their brothers, generally they still mock those of the Promise. Hagar called the “name of the Lord” who spoke to her Attah-El-Roiy-Kachash (You God see me). Is this “the name of the Lord”? No, it’s the name Hagar gave Him, the name Ishmael means “God will hear”, thus we find Ishmaels are Seen by God, God hears them, but it doesn’t mean the Ishmael hears God, nor does it mean God speaks to the Ishmael.

Ishmael came between the opening of the Covenant in chap­ter 15, and the making of the Covenant in chapter 17. Something to think about in the process of the saving of our soul. We can hear of the saving of the soul, then attempt to use our soul to bring about the process, if so we will birth an Ish­mael. A soul attempting to heal a soul is still the blind leading the blind, only the Spirit of Truth can heal our souls.

After the birth of Ishmael, the Lord changed Abram’s name to Abraham (Gen 17:5); therefore, Ishmael was not born to Abraham and Sarah, but to Abram and Hagar; whereas Isaac is born to Abraham and Sarah. The misconception of Ishmael being a product of the New Man is dashed here, our Ishmaels are products of the old man, they are Egypt related.

God also changed Sarai’s name to Sarah; Sarai means Dominating or To dominate, God changed her from one who domi­nates to a Princess of the Lord (Gen 17:15). The paradox indicates how the Dominating One caused Hagar to leave, but the Princess received her back. A princess holds a place of honor without having to dominate, or manipulate.

Ishmael was born before the sign of the covenant was given (Gen 17:11), yet he was circumcised when he was 13 years old (Gen 17:25). History shows Muslims circumcised their males at the age of 13 based on this; however, they also changed many elements of the story to make it appear as if Ishmael was the one to gain the promise. Ishmael would receive his own promise, he will even be blessed, but he will not be a partaker of the Promise, since he will not be a part of the Covenant, it should be enough incentive to cast the Ishmaels out of our lives (Gen 17:20-21 & 21:12).

Ish­mael also gives us the difference between “Sealed by the Holy Spirit”, and “Grieve not the Holy Spirit by whom you are Sealed”. Ishmael had the Token of the Covenant, but God said he would not be included into the Covenant (Gen 17:20-21). We can have the Token of water baptism, even the Seal of the Holy Spirit, but if we remain “half Egypt (world)”, we are in danger of not obtaining the Covenant. The Wicked are a type of Ishmael they have the Token of water baptism, but they mock the Promise. They are “princes” who never make it to being a “king”.

The offspring of Ishmael were never kings, they were princes, who have been fighting with the offspring of Isaac ever since. The problems in the middle east are still between two brothers. Prior to the promise being evident the two brothers got along fine, but once the promise was clear, envy and jealousy entered Ishmael, then the son of manipulation mocked the promised son.

At this point in time we find two brothers, but from different wombs, this is not the same as Cain and Abel, since Cain and Abel came from the same womb. Abram felt the event with Hagar was within the bonds of marriage, after all both he and Sarai were products of a like event. The difference? God in their lives, with God comes the Promise, with the Promise comes the responsibility.

Here we find a product of the mixed seed (Ishmael), and a product of the promise (Isaac), as the mixed seed mocks the promised seed by setting hindrances in the path. Ishmaels will fight the promise of God, they don’t bring it to pass; they hinder it, attempt to steal it, or kill it. So, is Ishmael a Jew? Or a Gentile? He has to be one or the other, since there are only two groups of the earth. We seem to get confused and assume there are Jews, Gentiles and Arabs. Not so, there are Jews and Gentiles, the Arabs fit into the Gentile group. Ishmael’s mother was not Jewish, either did she have anything to do with the Jewish lines, thus Ishmael was Gentile.

We also seem to think all Arabs are Muslims, or all Muslims are Arabs. The Muslim religion began in the area, it was later established by Mohammad who was an Arab, but it doesn’t mean all Arabs are Muslims, nor does it mean all Muslims are Arabs. Just as it doesn’t mean all Americas are Protestant, or all Protestants are American. Ishmael will be the father of all Arabs, but Isaac the father of all Jews, yet God is the Father of the Christians. This is important, since the Book of Revelation says during our Season Jerusalem will be trodden under foot by the Gentile (Rev 11:2). It is, not only by the Dome of the Rock Mosque being in Jerusalem, but by the Gentile Christians as well.

When Sarai sent Abram into Hagar, it wasn’t to see if Sarai was unable to conceive, it was to determine fault. After all, God did promise, but where is it? Could it be God was unaware of the age of Abram? Could it be the fault was in the body of Sarai? Or could it be God was waiting to prove it was God and God alone? We know the last premise is the case, but Sarai was sure it had to be one of the former reasons. This act caused pride to surface in Hagar, but anger in Sarai, the result was strife. Simply, Ishmaels begin when we question God’s prom­ise, or assume we must do something, rather than wait and hear from God. Of course, if God tells us to do something, we do it, it’s still based on hear­ing. The event is never our problem, it’s our soulish reaction to the event pro­ducing our problem. Sarai heard the promise, then looked at herself and Abram, saying, “No Way”; therefore, we find Ishmaels begin when we fail to believe “God Is”, causing our faith to turn into manipulation to make something happen.

Sarai then used her own soulish determinations to prove the fault, if any, rested with Abram, not her. This shows the pride issue, humbleness waits on the Lord, pride tests Him. This also explains why she was so perplexed at the result; in her mind, the birth of Ishmael only proved the fault, if any, was her, yet the evi­dence will later show there was no “fault”, only the time and timing of God. The word Presumptuous means To dare, or To challenge, or To take for granted on probable grounds, or To move on self-determinations with the misconception of the act being righteous. Presumption comes when we fail to put our Trust in God. God gives us a word, we add our own reasoning on how God should perform as we add our thinking, but when it doesn’t turn out the way we want, we get mad. This reasoning comes from an overconfidence based on certain natural conclusions. Presumption comes when we take a promise not afforded to us, or make one up on our own, or twist one given, then chal­lenge God to fulfill it. Faith comes from hearing God, presumption comes from unbelief and doubt. After Sarai’s name is changed, she becomes a different person, under a different authority.

The Token or Sign of Abraham’s Covenant is circumcision of the flesh, or a cutting away of something by the hand of man, it had to be a sign associating to the Covenant promise. With Noah it was the rainbow, relating to the rain. With us it’s the Holy Spirit relating to “let us make man in our image”. It’s interesting this token is for the male’s only, since the testing of Sarai produced Ishmael. However, from this premise we find a male circumcised on the eighth day has a right to enter the Abrahamic Covenant, meaning his wife and daughters also have the right. However, since Isaac came from Sara we also find in order to be Jewish, ones mother has to be Jewish. This also shows Ishmael and the third family of Abraham would not qualify as Jewish.

The purpose for the Circumcision not made with hands in the New, is the Saving of the Soul, the cutting away of the fleshly heart, the establishment of a Spiritual one. Our souls are not evil, they have picked up things along the way associated with the flesh designed to destroy us, those things need to be removed. Of course we have used them to our advan­tage, or have been tricked into thinking they are tools of our trade, but they are works of the devil planted while we slept in the darkness of the world. Light comes, we see, then we join to the Spirit to be cleaned from all unrighteousness by the Blood of Jesus. This is not a one day, one prayer event, but a Process of Being Justified (Rom 3:24 & 5:1). Why don’t we see the act of Circumcision of the flesh in the Ten Commandments? If the Ten Commandments are part of the Covenant, why not? Why not even mention it? Why is the Token to the Law of Moses the Sabbath Day and not Circumcision? Very good questions, to be answered shortly.

Which came first? The token? Or the Covenant? Good questions, God established the Covenant with Abraham, then came the Token, then came the son of promise, accordingly the son was circumcised on the Eighth day. Ishmael was 13 years old when he was circumcised, we know what the number 13 stands for. The Eighth day is more important to us, we can see how God rested on the seventh day from all His works, here He pronounces an “eighth day”, why not the sixth day? After all, we’re not talking about a week as such, but the age of a male baby. The number Eight from this experience became known as the number of New Beginnings, yet it’s also associated with the son of perdition, how can it be? The son of perdition is not of the seven churches, nor the seven toes, since he made the choice to be separated from the world, yet never made the commitment to be of the Body. In this case we find the New Beginning is established after the Seventh Day of rest: if we study the Resurrection of Jesus (which we will), we will find He was discovered Resurrected on a Sunday, which is the first day of the Week, but when did He go to the Cross? The week prior, thus the Resurrection was an extension of the prior week, showing the Discovery of the Resurrection was on the Eighth day. This connects to the famed “Eighth”, showing they are subject to the New Beginning, but have separated themselves forming their own group known as the synagogue of Satan, yet they consider themselves the only ones doing the work of God; it’s their type of thinking which will bring about sudden destruction.

The title LORD first appears in Genesis 2:4, but at this point in time it meant Almighty God, since the Name Jehovah was not known to Abraham, Isaac or Jacob (Ex 6:3). Abraham used the word LORD as a title regarding certain locations, rather than the Name of God. The position of Jehovah is often referred to as the Covenant name of God, but here God was making Covenant as “Almighty”; Jehovah is mainly connected to the Delivering power of God, thus Moses knew God as Jehovah, but Abraham didn’t. On the same note we find the title Jehovah being used with Noah, as well as using “God” (El – Gen 6:13, 6:22, 7:1 & 7:5). Noah built an altar to Jehovah, thus Noah knew Jehovah was his deliverer. The name Jesus means Salvation of Jehovah, or Jehovah’s Salvation, thus Salvation is a Deliverance, showing Jesus is our Deliverer.

In all this, “no man has seen God at anytime”, something we talked about in the last Lesson. The voice of the Lord can be so firm in our hearts, it’s like “seeing” God. Often we find angels in the Old Testament speaking on behalf of God, as if they were God (Gen 16:11-12). How can this be? Angels deliver what they hear, without change.

Abram came face to face with a person who loved the Lord, he received Bread and Wine from this king, then he ran into three angels, one of them the Scriptures do identify as “Lord”, but remember angels speak on behalf of God, as the angel will when Abraham is about to plunge the knife into Isaac. For this reason, and many others we have stayed away from the use of Theophany, but if we define a Theophany not as the Physical appearance of God in the Old, but as an appearance of God through an angel, then it fits the context of the saying, “no man has seen God at anytime”.

In Genesis 18 the figure appeared as flesh and blood and did eat, but it doesn’t mean he was God. The Resurrected Jesus did eat as well, but John tells us the Word took on flesh, thus He was not flesh and blood prior to the time. After the Resurrection Jesus said a Spirit does not have flesh and bone as He has (Luke 24:39), He didn’t say “as you have”. We also find the Lord Appeared to Abraham, so did He? (Gen 18:1). The word Appeared is the Hebrew Raah meaning to see intellectually (Job 3:16), or to perceive, thus we find the Lord appeared in the message, or through the angel. It doesn’t mean the angel is the Lord, rather it’s like those who are Born Again as representatives of Christ on the earth. Not all prophetic messages begin with “so saith the Lord”. We represent God to the world, thus the world will gain their “view” of God by watching those who represent God. Of course the enemy sends Tares as natural minded religious people to cloud the issue. The issue is to keep in mind no man has seen God at anytime, yet we find angels represent God.

The purpose of the appearance is to tell Abraham of the pending doom coming to Sodom, since Lot, Abraham’s son (nephew) was still in Sodom, plus God promised the man the land (Gen 18:1-20). God wasn’t asking Abraham’s per­mission, He was informing him what was about to happen. This is important, it shows why God tells us about the Night (restoration of Israel), yet He also told us we are not appointed to experience it (Acts 1:6-8). The purpose is for us to have the knowledge of the Night, but we are not to experience the event. Our goal is to warn others of what is to come, by presenting the escape God has provided Now, which is the Salvation of the Day.

This type and shadow shows how the Spirit will tell us things to come, it’s not to gain our permission, but to prepare us. So then, where is faith? Faith is allowing what must be, to be, while trusting the Lord in the process. There are many things we “think” should be changed, but should they? Faith still comes by hearing, the Just still live by faith.

It’s also important to recall how God gave Abraham the land, yet judg­ment was coming to a part of the land. Indicating the earth may be in the hands of man, but it doesn’t mean man has sole ownership. God still owns the cattle on a thousand hills, the earth and the fullness thereof still belong to God. Man thinks he can do as he pleases on the earth, but man must answer in the end.

The anointing on the Body of Christ is a type of protection, explaining how the Wicked can get away with so much wickedness in our Season. We are the Body of Christ, Christ being a title referring to the Anointing, thus Christ is not the last name of Jesus. Jesus is The Anointed, the Body of Christ is Anointed, thus the anointing (unction) protects us all who are in the Body during the Day. The same person who is Wicked today, can turn to become Righteous tomorrow, thus during the Day we find God correcting us in the chastisement of the Lord, thus there is no destruction of the Wicked during the day, they are protected as we, they can repent as long as it’s the Day.

What other evidence do we have? Paul told us to work out our salvation by fear and trembling, why? Because of the anointing, everyone who enters the Body of Christ becomes part of Christ (Anointing), thus the Wicked think they can get away with all sorts of things, including attacking other members of the Body, then claim they are doing God a service. They presume it’s ordained of God, because they get away with it, but it’s not ordained, only tolerated for the Season. First John is our warning, if we say we walk in the Light, yet we hate (slander) our brother, we’re in darkness. The Anointing is a sign of the Power of God, His Power is delivering, while protecting. The purpose for the Law of Moses was protection, the purpose of the Law of the Spirit is protection unto deliverance. Paul will make this point clearer in his first letter to the Corinthians, which is a call to repentance. Ishmaels are one thing, beating other members of the Body of Christ to death another.

During this meeting Sarah would hear the promise of the son, but will laugh “within herself” (Gen 18:12). She was still comparing the promise to her flesh, as well as questioning the ability of Abraham considering their ages. It would seem as if she is now mocking the promise, but she is really questioning the ability, considering how the birth of Ishmael proved Abraham was still able then, but now? The Lord will Speak, the Word will expose for the purpose of healing Sarah. The Lord said, “Is anything too hard for the Lord?” (Gen 18:14). The Lord didn’t say “is anything too hard for Abra­ham?” nor did He say “Woman, I come against you in the Name of Jehovah”, nor “is anything too hard for you?”. Clearly the Ability is at question, Sarah said, “the old man”, God said, “Is anything too hard for the Lord”, a place to fortify her belief. Paul shows Abraham believed God was able, here we find Sarah needs to grasp the same precept. If the Lord says it will happen, then He is fully able to make if come to pass. The Lord is al­ways able to bring to pass promises He has made, it’s our self-initiated visions, or self-promoted promises we attempt to bring to pass, which produce troubles, or Ishmaels.

This phrase helps us un­derstand why God allowed Ishmael; Ishmael was a product of manipulating the promise, here God says, “Is anything too hard for the Lord?”. Don’t make more Ish­maels, wait, hear and obey. When God gives us a vision, word, promise or dream, we be­lieve it, but we never devise our own methods of completing it, then expect God to perform to our reasoning.

The self nature holds some re­vealing thoughts, it wants Christ to identify with us, rather than submitting to the Spirit to identify with Christ. The self nature wants the things of God, but wants to keep the Old nature as well. The self nature wants to control the anointing, rather than allow the anointing to work. The self nature wants to control the blessing, rather than be a blessing. The self nature wants to control the prophecy, rather than wait in faith for it to come to pass. The same is true when we give something or someone to God, then get mad when God begins to work. We gave the labor, not the control to God, thus we want God to do the work, but do it according to our desires. The “foolish woman” tells us stolen waters are sweet; whereas, Wis­dom tells us to submit at the table of the Lord (Prov 9:17 & 9:5). The self nature wants to retain the pride of life, yet hold the Keys to the Kingdom. It’s still “half Egypt” (world), in the end the self nature is left holding an empty bag of useless agendas. Faith and Patience are sisters, they work together to bring the Godly result; impatience is an Ishmael maker.

Abraham heard the news about Sodom, then started his negotiations, but Abraham didn’t know how many righteous people lived in Sodom, if any; whereas, the Lord knew there remained one man in the entire city who was covered by Abra­ham’s position, yet the man was not “righteous”, but “just”. If Abraham would have changed his position to “the just”, rather than “righteous”, then narrow it down to one, Sodom would have been spared. However, it’s speculation, the truth shows us why Abraham used “righteous”, rather than “just”. Paul tells us none of us were righteous, no, not one. Wasn’t Abraham? No, Paul isn’t talking about im­puted righteousness, but imparted righteousness. It’s the act of self-righteousness producing thoughts of someone being able to march up to the throne of God, yet ending in ashes before the altar. The only Righteousness allowing us to come boldly to the throne, is the Righteousness of God found in the New Man (Rom 10:3 & Eph 4:24). Now wait, Peter says Lot was righteous, but it couldn’t be, could it? (II Pet 2:8). First Peter says Lot was Just, it’s in the parenthetical phrase we find the word Righteous, but Peter is making a metaphoric example between the people in Sodom compared to Lot, as Lot being a type of the “righteous” who God will deliver. Abraham made a prophetic statement which Peter refers to, God will never destroy the Righteous with the Wicked. A Promise, as long as there is one Born Again believer, there is someone with the Righteousness of God (Eph 4:24).

The Letter to the Romans tells us there is none Righteous, no not one (Rom 3:10)., thus Abraham’s belief gained the Imputed righteousness. What about Noah, Jehovah said Noah was righteous (Gen 7:1). True, but it was limited to Noah’s “generation” as well as in conjunction with the meaning of “unrighteousness” (violence toward God). Nonetheless, viewing Romans and Peter, we either have to say Peter was in error, or the Holy Ghost is telling us something about God’s power to deliver. We pick the latter, in II Peter 2:9 we find the connection; The Lord knows how to deliver the Godly out of temptation and reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished. The example of Lot being delivered refers to the just, the ungodly to the unjust, so what is unjust? The prefix “un” means to Remove a specific thing, in Hebrews 10:38-39 we find the Just live by faith, thus the Unjust don’t, then we find the Just are not of them who “draw back to perdition”; therefore, Unjust means someone has the ability to be Just, but removes themselves from the position back to perdition. Peter’s point shows Lot remained loyal to Abraham’s beliefs, he fought for the angels against the ungodly as he obeyed the “voice” of Righteousness, thus he was Just, giving him a position to be delivered, as a type showing we are being delivered daily.

This lesson gives us great hope, as it divides the day from the night. Ephe­sians 4:24 tells us the New Man is created (or formed same Greek word) after God’s true Holiness and Right­eousness, thus we have the Righteousness of God within. Here we find an anchor for our souls, the Lord will not destroy the righteous with the wicked. This is a promise for the dead in Christ, as well as those who will Sleep in Jesus (Gen 18:23). The en­tire negotiation process centered on this one point, Abraham knew one thing above all, God will never destroy the righteous with the wicked, it’s a promise for us as well. Lot was spared, not because of Lot, but because of Abraham; we will be delivered because of Jesus.

Abraham was on a roll in his negotiations, but stopped short. God knew where Abraham would stop, So, why didn’t God simply say, “Now Abraham, the only righteous one around here is you, yet it’s imputed” or “Abe change to Just, you might have a better chance”? Abraham received the imputed righteousness, yet considered anyone around him to have the same standing, thus he appreciated the gift, but was humble enough not to consider himself the “only one on the earth”.

Nonetheless, he was on a roll, we can’t forget it was Abram who delivered these same people from the hands of the evil kings, it was their own king who stood there while Abraham and Melchizedek spoke of the Lord (Gen 14:17); therefore, the king of Sodom had information regarding God, he simply refused to believe it. All these peo­ple had “warning”, they had the evidence of God’s delivering power, but they twisted it into an illusion of overconfidence, thinking God would never destroy them. After all, Lot was with them, the man of God (Abram) delivered them, so they must be under the hand of the Almighty, right? Wrong, their protection reached an end, it’s the very lesson Jesus makes when He speaks of the End Times being as in the days of Lot. They felt they were holy, they had God’s past deliverance to prove it, but they were sinful because they rejected the purpose for being delivered. They separated themselves and worshiped the creation, rather than the Creator.

This event holds many truths, God is telling Abraham of the destruction to come, so Abraham wouldn’t be surprised, attempt to stop it, or get mad at God. Therefore, God allowed Abraham to use the negotiations as a confidence builder, thus the man is attempting to save the city, but God didn’t come to ask the man his opinion, rather it was to inform him of what God was going to do. The character of Abraham is displayed for us, he was a giver by nature. Rather than say, “You know what? I was just thinking about those jerks, here I save their worthless hides, then they get all involved in idols and the such, yeah sure, do it, get rid of them”. No, his nature was mercy based, he still wanted to see deliverance. However, if God does destroy the city, the righteous were either delivered, or there were none. The Wheat will never be bruised by God in the removal of the Tares. The same is true in the healing of our souls, God will not damage the Precious by taking the Vile.

God telling us of things to come is based on this same premise, the evi­dence is seen in many prophecies regarding the End Times. We can’t stop the prophecies from coming to pass, but we can pull as many as we can from the world, saving them from the fire of destruction (Jude 22-23). Jesus told us we will hear of commotions, see pestilence, and famine, but we are not to be Terrified (Luke 21:9-11). The word Terrified means Moved to act based on a fear, or Interfering in things which must come to pass. Do the phrases War, Rumors of War, Famine and Pestilence sound like something going on now? Yes, it doesn’t take a genius to figure it out, but where else do we find these elements? Doesn’t the second horse go about with a Sword taking Peace (Rev 6:4)? Yes, War and Rumors of War. Doesn’t the third horse go about causing Famine (Rev 6:6), Yes, and the fourth goes about causing Pestilence (Rev 6:8). Where do these horses and horsemen get their command? From the dragon? No, we find they go forth after the First Horse. What about this First Horse, the White one? Is this “As” a White Horse, or is it A White Horse? We read, “and Behold A White Horse”, the Rider also has a Bow. The root word for Bow means an instru­ment to plant Seed, the phrase “conquering and to conquer” shows two places of activity, the words Conquering and Conquer mean Victory, it’s the same Greek word used in the phrase, “Who is he who overcomes (conquers) the world: but he who believes Jesus is the Son of God” (I Jn 5:5); and, “for whatsoever is born of God over­comes (conquers) the world and this is the victory (conquering) overcoming (conquers) the world, even our Faith” (I Jn 5:4). The “beast” in heaven with life shows John this Horse has a face “like a lion”, thus some presume this Rider is the famed Antichrist, but the Horse is not “like a white horse”, it is a White Horse, the Rider is not destroying Seed, He is planting it, therein lays the clarity. The Sower sows the Word, the Sower is the Holy Ghost (Mark 4:14 & II Cor 9:10). If we presume this Rider is the Antichrist, then we must also presume he sows the Seed of God in the hearts of people, bringing them Victory by The Faith of Jesus while wearing a Crown of Righteousness. What? The word Crown used for this Rider on the White Horse is only used in conjunction with the Crown of Righteousness, or the Crown of Life, thus this can’t be a “counterfeit”. This White Horse must be a Promise of something sent forth before the other horses are sent forth (Rev 6:2 & 19:11). This Horse doesn’t come As a white horse, it is a White Horse, thus we find the Rider of this First Horse is the Holy Ghost. The other three horses are separated from this Horse by the word “another” (Rev 6:4), which means they are horses, but with a different purpose. The last three horses are running about now, why? If we understand the Time of Comfort with it’s Peace and Safety we can also see in our Season the world is in turmoil, but in the Night all will seem well, but in truth it is just the flip side of the test. In our Season some want the world to be like the Garden, if it is, they will come to the Lord. In the Night God will make it like the Garden, will them come to the Lord?

It’s better to be a Partaker of the First Resurrection, than subject to the Judgment. We tend to confuse the fire of God’s affliction, with the fires of hell, causing us to charge God foolishly, or run off presuming we can change proph­ecy. God delivers us out of the fires of hell, but He delivers us into the fire of afflic­tion. The fire of hell is bent on destroying us, but the fire of affliction saves us. We are told the end of the world will be as Sodom, a hint to the famed “lake of fire”. Why then do so some want to be in the Season of the Night A falling from the Faith is a falling from the Faith of Jesus, which allows one to use their faith anyway they want to, without obligation or restraint; however, this is still the Day of Salvation, as we Rightly divide the Word we can see The Day is far better than the Night.

God never puts lusts in our heart, but He will expose those lusts, there is a vast difference between planting evil and exposing it. One might say, “well Sodom wouldn’t be Sodom if God would have stopped the fall, so it was God’s fault to begin with”. The people in Sodom had the same opportunity to be like Abraham, as Abraham had, thus the “fault” was there own, they took the lust then used it, loved it, promoted it, then twisted the purpose of creation into a self-based lustful life style. They wanted God’s protection, but held the mindset of the spirit of man. If Abraham doesn’t prove anything else, he proves one can walk in mercy and believe in the Lord, even without the Gift of the Holy Ghost. It’s not whether they became just, it’s whether they had the opportunity to be Just.

The Judgment is not God bringing destruction, but God giving to man, what man gave to God. The many plagues are a result of the prayers of the saints, mixed with the wrath of God in the Cup of Indignation being poured out on the wickedness of the people (Rev 8:4 & 14:10). This Cup will be seen again in the Prophets of Old, again at a place called Gethsemane. Did Geth­semane come before or after the Passover Supper? After of course, coupled with the Three prayers, but why Three prayers, why were the last two alike? Could it be the first was in reference to Judas before the Cross, the other two regarding the Wicked during the Day, then during the Night? Before Jesus entered the Garden He gave us the Cup of the New Covenant, the Cup in the Garden is the Cup poured on the last day (Rev 16:9). The Garden was not a war of wills, but a matter of whether the Cup should be taken or not. The Father knew what the Son was willing to die for all mankind, whether they received Him or not. The Father was thinking of the Son, the Son of the Father, but the Son came to fulfill the will of the Father, we are sent to complete the Will of God by the Holy Spirit. The Cup of the Covenant separates us from the Cup of God’s wrath, thus the prayers in Gethsemane connected to the Cup of Wrath, pointing to those who would be­come the enemies of Jesus; thus Jesus prayed for those who persecuted Him, before they persecuted Him; an example we need to follow.

The prophet Ezekiel said the Iniquity of Sodom was Pride, Fullness of bread, and Abundance of idleness (Ezek 16:49). However, the city was destroyed because of it’s “sin” (Gen 18:20). The “cry” came before God, but Iniquity is a failure, so what kind of failure is Pride? A failure to be humble; yet pride always leads to naughtiness. Full­ness of bread leads to ignoring God’s power to meet our need, in essence we find Sodom held to the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life. The sin of Sodom was the result of the iniquity, yet the prophet points to the end times, then John tells us the “city” is spiritually known as “Sodom and Egypt”. The prophets Ezekiel, Jeremiah and Isaiah all say the same, in the end the city will be known as Sodom and Egypt, the iniquity of Sodom will be visited on the “daughters of Sodom”.

When the two angels came to Sodom, the people sought after the men, thus they proved the curse of Canaan was prophetic in nature (Gen 10:9, 10:19 & 19:1-4). Everything was still producing after its own kind, one has to change sources to change the result. However, was there not three angels prior? Yes, showing the one was sent to represent the Lord to the man Abraham, but was not assigned to destroy the city (Gen 18:2).

Man attempts to change the result, but retains the source, ending with a bigger problem than he started with. The angels blinded the wicked men, but their iniquity became the seeds to their blindness (Gen 19:11). God receives us as we are, but He doesn’t intend on leaving us that way. Local churches are not made up from murders, thieves, sexual perverts, or the such, they are made up from Ex-murders, Ex-thieves, and Ex-sinners, who are now Saints. When we want to remain in the same condition and position, yet walk about proclaiming God, we are liars, the Truth is not in us. “Well maybe they were born that way”, we were all born into the sin nature, excusing it doesn’t make it right.

Lot was told to take his wife, two daughters and two sons-in-law, giving us six people, did they fit the “negotiations”? No, we found eight people were saved with Noah, here we find another lesson, not all six will make the choice to be saved. Lot’s two sons-in-law made their own decision to remain; therefore, giving us four people. When Abraham was negotiating with the Lord over Sodom, he stopped at ten (Gen 18:32), the Lord said, If there were ten, He would spare the city. Abraham thought, surely there were ten! Out of all the people in the city, there was only one just man, but we find God’s Mercy is extended, God knew there were none righteous, but God spared Lot because of Abraham.

The remaining four would be Lot, Lot’s wife, and Lot’s two daughters, but as they were leaving his wife would turn to long for days of old, missing her chance at deliverance. Now there are three, a far cry from ten, less than a third of the lowest number Abraham spoke of. The daughters of Lot and Lot were the only ones, a Few, yet in this we find more prophecy and hope. From the “family” of Lot two remained in the city, one turned, yet three made it, thus only half (3) of the family made it. The term Few is only relative to the number from which the Few are taken. If we’re talking about “10” a few would be three, but if we’re talking about sixty trillion, million, a Few can’t be numbered, there is room for us.

Jesus also used Lot’s wife as an example of one who turns back longing for what was (Luke 17:32). The desire for the things of the past is a sign showing there remains some desires from the old nature, as lusts from the past longing to be regenerated. The word Principality means a Place whereof the prince is known, it also means a Beginning, here Lot’s wife failed to war against the Principality, by receiving the Deliverance, all she saw was destruction of her past, yet her past was a nightmare.

Lot’s escape is a perfect example of the teaching of Jesus, “one taken, one left”. The one left faced the judgment, not the one taken. To presume it was one “taken to judgment” twists the teaching, since the example is here, Jesus also equated it to Lot’s time. The Just did not remain, thus the Wicked remained within the city as it turned into a “fire”. It’s very important in our view of the End Times, if we think we have to face the wrath of God, what then is the use of Salvation? Paul said we are not appointed to the wrath of God, if it’s the case, then we will be delivered before the wrath to take place. Our belief builder is here, God delivered the Just, before the Unjust saw destruction.

Why would Lot’s sons-in-law want to stay anyway? Genesis 19:8 shows Lot’s two daughters had not “known man”, meaning they were still virgins. It has to tell us something about the sons-in-law, as it goes back to the prophetic word of Noah regarding Canaan. This type of sexual behavior is noted by Paul in Romans, but the purpose is showing how some pervert the natural course of nature; God has laws, the nature of fallen man rebels against God’s laws, Lot’s two sons-in-law are an example.

Lot was delivered with his two daughters, but they felt the world had come to an end, resulting in the two daughters laying with their father to preserve the species, when it wasn’t necessary at all. The result was Moab from one, and the children of Ammon from the other (Gen 19:37-38). Of course further down the line we find Ruth who was a Moabites, who would be accepted into the Promise based on her love for her mother-in-law. God still uses, whom He will use.

When Abraham journeyed to the land of Abimelech the promise was still at hand, not in hand (Gen 20:1-4). Abraham assumed the promise may be in the womb of Sarah, after all God did say, within a year, thus Abraham knew it took nine months before Birth was a fact. This example is given to us regarding the New Birth, the process is like the birth of the flesh, making it a process. Some of us confuse conception with birth, they are different. There must be a conception time, a fetus (root) time, then Birth. Jesus said, the Seed and Root stages don’t prove Birth, the fruit proves the Birth (Mark 4:28-29). Is there a time of travailing before Birth? Yes, but it’s the birthing bringing us clarity. When we reach the Blade (little children), then we can proclaim Birth.

Although Abra­ham knew the promise was at hand, rather than in hand; he also knew his part of the promise could be complete in the womb of Sarah. Abraham told Sarah to say she was his sister, Abimelech believing what he was told took Sarah into his house, but when Abimelech thought about Sarah, the Lord came to him in a dream saying, “Behold, you are but a dead man” (Gen 20:3). This could also read, “Touch her, and you’re dead, man”. When we find ourselves under the hand of the wicked king, we know our trust in God protects us (I Pet 3:5-6).

This lesson established Abraham and Sarah in their belief, thus it had a pur­pose; judging the event by the event never proves a thing. Here it appeared as if the man sold out his wife, or he aban­doned her, but God had a plan, in the plan both Abraham and Sarah found God is able to Protect and Deliver. Once this lesson and experience was affirmed, the promised son would come. Often we need to walk the path in order to affirm our belief, so it can be by faith. The Word came, the testing came, then came the manifestation. Some want the promise without walking the path; however, it’s not the manner or method God uses. The path is for our own good, we must remember Ishmael is still in the camp, silent for a time, but nonetheless there.

In Genesis 20:7 God calls Abraham a Prophet, but what proph­ecy did Abraham say? Do we find any “so saith the Lord” attributed to him? Or could it be the man himself was a walking prophecy? Genesis 20:7 is the first place we find the word Prophet, it’s also the only place in Genesis where we find the word Prophet. What did this Prophet do? God told Abimelech, the Prophet would pray For him and his House would be healed. During the entire time Sarah was under the roof of Abimelech the wombs of his house were shut, but as soon as the Prophet prayed, they were opened again (Gen 20:17-18). This Prophet didn’t curse the darkness, nor did he curse anything, he Prayed For the man causing a healing based on Abraham being a Blessing. Af­ter this prayer, the womb of Sarah would be opened as well, thus give and it shall be given, blessing for blessing.

Abraham was a hundred years old (100) when his son Isaac was born, the promise came when God was ready (Gen 21:5 & 18:14). When Abraham first heard “leave” he was 75 years old (Gen 12:4), when Ishmael was born he was 86 (Gen 16:16), Ishmael was circumcised at the age of 13, making Abraham 99 years old (Gen 17:24-25), then Isaac was born when he was 100; now it’s some 25 years after Abraham left Haran and 14 years after Ishmael was born (Gen 12:4). The promise didn’t come overnight, yet after Isaac was born, Ish­mael became the problem child just as any product of manipulation will become our problem when the promise is in hand (Gen 21:9). Until the promise was in hand, the son of manipulation remained silent, but as soon as the prom­ise was fact, the son of manipulation turned like a mad dog on its owner. This type is like unto the old man, who sits around telling us how he is our friend, until One Stronger comes along, then the mocking comes from the old man in a fury, yet what is exposed often retaliates to show its supposed power. Ishmael was happy being the only one, but the promise came, showing Ishmael refused to believe, or he would have believed the Promised son would appear.

The son of manipulation mocked the son of promise, the mother of the promise demanded for the son of manipulation with his mother to be cast out (Gen 21:9-12). However, this is a sign to us; the Ishmael danger will not be evident until the New Man begins to grow, then we must join to the New as we cast out the bond (old man) to be free in the New (Gal 4:24-29). The bondwoman would become another symbol, one Paul talked about, we just can’t toss out the Ishmael, we must also send the bondwoman with him. What produces Ishmaels must not be resident in our life, neither the by-product. When Paul uses Hagar as an allegory we find there are two women, one of bondage, one free, each had a son. Paul equates Hagar to the Law, but was she around then? No, thus we find the allegory shows us although the Law of Moses came from the Same God as the Law of the Spirit, the Law of Moses is nonetheless designed for those in bondage, the Law of the Spirit for the Free (Gal 4:25). Both sons (laws) have the same source, but with two completely different mothers for two completely different purposes, something to remember when we venture off to do deeds under the Law of Moses to gain favor. Ishmael was still loved by Abraham, but only Isaac gained the Covenant. The Wicked are still loved by God, but God will not force Grace on anyone.

Ishmael is gone, Lot is gone, now Abraham has his promise in hand, then the Lord would say, “take now your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love and get you into the land of Moriah and offer him there for a burnt offering” (Gen 22:2). Clearly, we are told God is tempting Abraham, yet James said, the Lord doesn’t tempt us to do evil. James also shows we can’t tempt the Lord to do evil either, even in prayer (James 4:1-4). The addition of the word Evil changes the context in James, as it does here. God is not tempting Abraham to do evil, God knows the outcome, it’s Abraham who doesn’t. Evil temptation tempts us to do evil, God’s testing exposes evil so we can be free (James 1:14). In order to tempt someone with evil, there must be an evil in us: in order to be enticed by the evil temptation there must be an evil in us. If our Faith is being tested, then the one doing the testing must have Faith. The difference shows the devil has no faith, but he does have evil. God has no evil, thus the testing of God is always unto Good. In the case of Abraham the testing is to firm up the man’s faith, displaying to him how strong his faith really was. Surely this isn’t to show God the man’s faith, since God knows all things, the test is for Abraham.

There are times when we get an evil thought out of nowhere, then wonder, “where did that come from?”. A dart out of darkness looking for a target, but it found none, in truth, we are in the process of Discerning the spirits by the Spirit. If the thought enticed us, it found a target. The evil temptation is really evil enticing evil, thus God has no evil in Him to entice us with, nor does He have any evil in Him to be enticed by. If God cannot be tempted in anyway we’re in trouble, since we find God, Himself said the children in the wilderness tempted Him (Ex 17:7, Numb 14:22, Deut 6:16, Ps 78:18, 78:41, 78:56, 95:9 & Heb 3:9), the key is unto Evil, the children sent their evil temptations, but God sent back a test. This explains how the devil “tempted” Jesus, yet Jesus was never Tempted to do evil. The evil was in the heart of the devil, there was no evil in Jesus, thus the temptation was not complete since Jesus didn’t act on any of the temptations. If someone tempts us with evil, there must be an evil lust in us to be tempted, thus God will allow to expose, so we can be cleaned.

Knowing God cannot be tempted to do evil, there are some who would look at certain events in the wilderness presuming God was tempted. The great quail hunt is one, the people tempted God for “meat”, God provided the quail. However, when quail meat is coming out of your nose, it’s a good sign you didn’t tempt God at all, He knew your heart and exposed it. Simply because there appears a “result”, doesn’t mean God was enticed by the temptation, He merely used it to expose the lust in the one who was tempting Him. James also shows God is the giver of Good Gifts, but we can take the Good Gift filter it through a lust, making it evil (James 4:1-4).

We must also remember, in the case of Abraham the testing was not to expose some evil or lust, it was to affirm the Covenant showing Abraham loved the Lord more than he loved the promise. The evil, or lust would have been loving the promise more than the Lord. This lesson opens the area of knowing what God has said, but being open to what God is saying. God tells Abraham to take the lad and offer him; then God says, “no”, if Abraham would have rejected the Proceeding Word of God, Isaac would have died on the rock. However, the call was to “offer”, not complete the sacrifice, which Abraham did.

The location is not by accident either, this Moriah will be later known as “Zion”, the rock upon which the city of Jerusalem was built (II Chron 3:1). Also we have to find out what Moriah means; it’s made up from two Hebrew words, meaning “JAH has Seen”, but Abraham didn’t know God as Jehovah! Ahh, the man will name the place Jehovah, from the place Jehovah will be seen on the Cross.

This test of Abraham is like many we face, our mouths say one thing, our actions another. Many of us thought we loved God with all our heart, until the time came to test our heart, then we found our mouth ran off, but our heart wasn’t running with it. On the same note, we can find the testing proving we do Love the Lord more than we thought. There are times when God will have us re-visit an area where we were defeated, just to show us how much we have grown. To be defeated again? Nay, to find we have overcome.

Abraham did as he was told, his faith proved he was willing to listen, even to the proceeding word. This is also a beginning of a principle which carried over to the New Testament, one the Pharisees missed by miles. It’s important to know what God has said, but it’s also important to know what God is saying. God’s ability to be in all places at the same time brings about some interesting truths. First God cannot change His mind, as one would suppose by these events. In order to change ones mind, they must be subject to time, thus one must have a yesterday, today and a tomorrow in order to change their mind. Does God change His mind, or does He do something else? Progression in the plan, nothing more. God is moving forward in the plan, yet He sees the entire plan all at once. Man is subject to time, God accommodates, but it doesn’t mean God is subject to time. We know it’s a hard concept, but nonetheless it’s the basis of God’s om­nipresence. However, God does intervene in man’s time, when God said “offer your son” at one moment, when He said “no” it was another moment in the time of man, but it doesn’t mean God changed His mind, it means the Plan called for the two times to exist in the one event.

God spoke in the days of old through His prophets, now He speaks In His Son, each one of us who are Born Again have His Son in us, one does not hear from God in this Age unless they have His Son. As far as the Night is concerned, God has said all He is going to say, it’s completely written in the Law and Prophets.

Jesus said our Father knows what we have need of before we ask, so does it mean we shouldn’t ask? Not at all, the asking puts us on the path God has for us to find the need. Jesus told His disciples, He had many things yet to say, but they were not able to “bear” them (Jn 16:12). The word Bear means “to perceive”, or “grasp”. Why? They were not spiritual in nature, the Spirit had not yet been given (Jn 7:38-39). Therefore it’s just as important to know what God is saying to us, as it is to know what God has said. In this case Abraham could have held to what God said, rejected what God was saying by killing the lad. If we reject the Proceeding Word it would be just as much disobedience as rejecting the prior Word.

God never told Abraham to “kill” the lad to begin with, it was, “offer him there”, which means to make the offer, it doesn’t necessarily mean to kill the sacrifice. The same is true with us, we present our­selves a living sacrifice, which means “to offer” ourselves, it doesn’t mean to kill ourselves.

Jesus said, “I say unto you” several times, we know in the Book of Revelation the Spirit “says” unto the churches. All these things God is saying, yet there are many things God has said. God could tell us something to test our obedi­ence, but if we close our ears from then on, we could miss the reward. An example we all know is Peter with the sheet appearing from heaven in Acts 10, Peter knew God had named “unclean” animals in the Law, yet in this sheet were all sorts of them, but the voice said, “Peter, kill and eat”. Peter said, “Not so Lord”, then he got the preceding word, “what God has cleaned no man call common” (Acts 10:15). The Proceeding word opened the Door for Cornelius and his house (Acts 10:44-48).

The word Temptation has two sides, one is evil coming from the mouth of the devil, or his workers; however, the other side is found in John 6:6 where Jesus “tempted” Philip. In John the context and usage means to Test, not tempt into evil, yet it’s the same Greek word James uses. Philip was tested to de­termine where he would look for the provision, he looked to the bag, yet his Provider was standing in front of him. The test would be if Philip said, “You are the provision Lord”, the temptation was done by Philip when he looked into the bag for the Provision, considering the thief (Judas) was holding the bag. The result was evident when Jesus blessed the bread and fish making them sufficient. God will allow something to be exposed to be cleaned before it becomes sin. God didn’t put the evil there, He is not tempting us to commit the evil, He exposed it so we could be rid of it; therefore, if we discern we can take joy when we are tempted. Joy in being tempted? What say thee? We are the only group who can, the temptation caused us to fall, we know everyone is drawn away by their own lust, but we can be Cleaned of the lust by the Word in us.

James talks about divers temptations, what does the word divers mean? Different, yet  there are only two temptations, one unto evil, the other a testing unto good. The devil is called The Tempter, because he goes about tempting unto evil, the devil can never Test us, he has no good from which to operate. God will not tempt us to do evil, since God has no evil from which to operate. We cannot assume all Temptation is of the devil, this places us in a hard position in light of John 6:6, as well as the events happening here with Abraham.

There are 153 points to the Abrahamic Covenant, Peter would face his test of faith when he held a net holding 153 blessings, but he heard, “Do you love Me, more than these” (Jn 21:7-15). There it is, do we love the Lord more than the bless­ing? Or do we love the Lord for the blessing? Like Abraham, how many are willing to give back to God, what  God has given them? The test is still faith based, since faith pleases God, thus wanting to know what God desires is the heart of true faith.

Peter looked at the net of blessing, then looked at Jesus and said, “Yes, Lord; you know I love you” (Jn 21:15). While this was going on Jesus al­ready had the Need on the fire as the meal was preparing, thus on one side Peter had the great net before him, on the other Jesus with the need, the choice was now in the hands of Peter. Peter was willing to give up the promise for the sake of Jesus based on love; not reward. As long as Peter had his hand in the net, he could feed himself, but as soon as he turned toward Jesus, he heard, “Feed My lambs” (Jn 21:15). Not with the fish, but with the Gospel, building them to become fishers of men.

Abraham knew God brought the promise, thus the promise was God’s property, but the promise was given to Abraham to care for as part of the Cove­nant. However, if God wanted the promise back, so be it, the love and faith still remained with Abraham (Gen 22:1-17). Abraham had confidence in “from thy Seed Isaac”, he knew some how, in some way God would do it, even if God had to raise the child from the dead (Heb 11:19). Raised from the dead? Could it be, just perhaps, this is a type and shadow of the Resurrection of Jesus? Yes, the connection is also seen in Genesis 22:4, as Abraham lifts his eyes on
”third day” to see the location.

Before Abraham took Isaac up the mountain he prophesied about the loca­tion by saying, “God will provide Himself a Lamb for a burnt offering” (Gen 22:8). It was this statement of faith which assured his belief was based in God Is thinking. The faith was still future, but the foundation was his belief in God. He said “God will” making the statement one of faith, but it denotes the words of a Prophet. Although Abraham didn’t say “so saith the Lord”, we still see the Prophetic wording. James points to this one experience as Abraham’s test, but why? Prior God said, then God did, now Abraham said, would he do?

Abraham would cut his sacri­fice in half, then burn it, thus this entire event is a type and shadow, since Jesus was not cut in half, or burned. However, the Body of Jesus will be Broken, but the Scriptures say not one bone of His Body was broken on the Cross (Jn 19:36), yet we know Paul clearly says it will be (I Cor 11:23). Paul places the Broken Body in the same context with, “the same night in which He was betrayed” (I Cor 11:23-24). Why not the same Night as He prayed? Or the same Night He gave us the Cup? Another mystery pointing to something to do with Night, but who will cause the Body to be Broken? The sons of perdition. This Broken Body concept is given to us in the Psalms and Prophets as well. Paul used a word meaning A branch broken, then removed from the tree, surely the arms of Jesus didn’t fall to the ground; the context has nothing to do with the flesh of Jesus, rather it relates to His Body. God will provide Himself as a Lamb, the same one slain from the foundation of the world, yet the granted Body will be broken at the Rapture, in the end there will be a “burnt offering”, but it will be the goats, not the sheep who enter the lake of fire.

This one move on the part of Abraham pointed to the Rock, the Ram (with two horns) of bondage, the Promise was to be set free, yet the goat was given. This ram has Two Horns, the metaphor Horn represents power, but did this ram come freely, or was it in bondage to the Thorns? Ahh, another mystery, the metaphor Thorns means the curse (Gen 3:18), the two horns represent two seasons of evil power, both of which are noted in the Book of Revelation. This mount is not the place where Jesus was crucified, rather He was crucified outside of the city, but in view of this Rock. This Rock is representative of the Rock known as Christ, every time someone comes to the Lord they make their statement of belief regarding the Cross and Resurrection.

The promised son appeared to be led to the slaughter, but the ram was found slaughtered. What was the ram doing there anyway? Was it the “lamb”, no it was a Ram. The Ram is a type of the wicked, they stand afar off, mocking the promise, but soon find they are still in bondage (II Pet 2:19-22).

Was Isaac baptized with fire? No, but he was going to be a burnt offering. We encounter four baptisms, bringing us the Doctrine of Baptisms, but they all center in One purpose, giving us One Baptism. We know about water bap­tism, anyone who has been baptized in water, can baptize others in water, it’s the only baptism we conduct. The others are “Holy Ghost”, “Fire” and “Service”. We submit to the last three, but we don’t conduct them. We pick up our Cross, we don’t crucify ourselves.

The proph­ecy by Abraham has different ways it can be read, all three are correct. The first is the obvious, God did provide the sacrifice Himself, thus God did provide Isaac; therefore, what God did with Isaac was His business. God has provided the Lamb in Jesus from the foundation of the world, we Receive the Lamb, we don’t control Him. Next God would provide His Word as the Lamb, which came to pass; however, there is another, God did provide the “ram in bondage”, God didn’t cause it, rather God used it. Regardless of which one we pick, we find they all came to pass.

Isaac wasn’t facing a butter knife, he was looking at a sword, sharp enough to cut him in half. Isaac submitted to this, most of us would have assured Abra­ham “this thing is not of God brother”, the rest of us would have told Isaac, “run, get a good lawyer”. This experience also shows Jesus is the only way, there are no rams in the thicket wherein man can be saved. Another obvious lesson in the conviction of Abraham is his knowledge of “no substitutes”, it was Isaac, it would not be Ishmael, or any other son, thus God had to protect Isaac, since God told Abraham about “children”, yet this child didn’t have any children yet. If Abraham was being obedient, God would protect the lad, or bring him again from the ashes. If Abraham missed God, perhaps he was hearing the devil, God would still protect the lad by protecting the Promise (Heb 11:13 & 11:19).

What about Isaac? Was he fighting his father? No, he submitted, Paul tells us how Jesus humbled Himself, becoming Obe­dient unto death, even the death of the Cross (Ph’l 2:8). This was a like figure of Jesus being Sacrificed, then being raised on the Third Day, but Abraham wouldn’t have to wait three days for his son to be raised from the altar, yet Abraham had no idea he was conducting prophecy regarding the Lamb of God, his mind was on God, he heard, he was obeying without question. Here the lad had to appear dead to be raised before the Seed could manifest. This type and shadow shows the Church came after the Resurrection of Jesus, not before. Jesus said He would build His Church on the Rock, thus the Church was birthed on Pentecost.

An angel came with a message from God, now Abraham saw his belief and faith as God saw them (Gen 22:12). Abraham called the Place Jehovah-Jireh, he didn’t call God Jehovah-Jireh (Gen 22:14). Every Jew who has been to a synagogue knows the place was called Jehovah-Jireh, they just don’t know why; however, we do. When Abraham looked about he saw a ram caught in a bush by its horns, Abraham knew the horns of an animal meant Power, but this is a Ram, not a Lamb. Jesus as the Lamb of God destroyed him who had the power of death, who is the devil; the Wicked are seen in the Day and Night, but in the end the goats will be separated from the sheep (Heb 2:14 & Rev 20:10).

Jesus said the Cross was akin to Moses lifting the brass serpent, but it doesn’t mean Jesus is a serpent, rather it shows the Cross destroys the power of serpents, making them ineffective. The Ram had Two Horns, but we can’t confuse these “horns” with the Trumps of God, although we do find an allegory. There are Three trumps of the Lord, the First, the Last, and the Great. The First Horn sounded when God wanted to be among His people, the Last Trump opens the Restoration of Israel as the Rapture takes place wherein we are Changed (I Cor 15:51-52). The Great Trump is blown when Jerusalem is under siege, announcing the end of time as man knows it, producing the Judgment. The Last trump is the Last of two, but not the Last in order, thus we find the First, the Last (Second) then the Great (Third – Isa 27:13).

At times our faith is the only element we can relay on, the event may seem horrid, but it’s the event, not the result. If we entered with belief in God Is, we will be looking for God by our faith. At the time when Jesus was on the Cross, it didn’t appear Good to the disci­ples, rather they assumed it was all over, but in reality it was a Beginning of some­thing wonderful. The disciples failed to under­stand, the event appeared evil to them, but to Jesus it was very Good. There are times when we can’t discern the event because we are looking at the event, rather than finding the purpose of the event. We are attempting to use natural reasoning to discern spiritual matters, which is judging the event by the event. If we seek the Precious, we will find it. Of course if we seek the evil we will find it as well; evil seeds produce bitterness, faith produces joy.

Since the place was called Jehovah-Jireh, we need only to know where Jehovah provided Himself as the Sacrifice to detect where Abraham was at this point in time. The wording, “In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen” (Gen 22:14) doesn’t say the event will be on the mount, it means those of the mount will see. The mount then becomes the “place of vision”, today the Muslim assumes the Dome of the Rock Mosque is the place where Mo­hammed went into heaven, but it’s their place of hindrance, not deliver­ance. The place or Rock has been sitting on the site of the old temple for years, the old temple was built on the Rock which was the center place of Zion, or Moriah (II Chron 3:1 & Gen 22:2).

The Jew knows from their his­tory Mount Moriah was the location, but the location covers more than the tem­ple sight. The Apostles knew Jehovah did Jireh (provide) on the Mount of the Skull, the one rock and mountain overlooking the temple as part of mount Moriah, which Mount joins to the Mount of Olives, the place where Jesus gave us the Commandments for Mercy. We have come unto heavenly Zion, the Rock (Body), we can see clearly now, but at the time of the Cross those in Jerusalem could clearly see the Cross, yet they didn’t have clue to its importance. Abraham being a Prophet is giving prophecy to an act he had no knowledge of. We think if we prophesy, we must know the event first hand. We don’t have to know the event, all we need to know is God is using us to say, or do. Abraham the man was looking at one thing, but God saw something many years in the future which Abraham had no exact knowledge of.

There was another connection to this offered sacrifice pointing directly to the Church. Genesis 22:17 shows God saying, “In blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying I will multiply your Seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the seashore, and thy Seed shall possess the gate of HIS enemies”. This is a very important verse, one has to wonder, “Where is the curse part”? We saw it before in Genesis 12:3 with Abram, but what is this? Something new? Yes, look at the verse real close, notice the “Seed” is referred to as “His”, not “them”. This is the connection Paul used in Galatians showing the real Seed is One, yet in Romans the same man said the Seed of the flesh of Abraham was many. What gives? Was Paul under the anointing when writing Galatians, but in the flesh writing to the Romans? Hardly, to the Romans it was in reference to the seed after the flesh of Abraham, known here as “the sand of the sea”. However, to the Seed as One we find the “stars of heaven” pointing to the Church. This verse also connects to Hebrews chapter six were we find there are two things in which it’s impossible for God to lie, “surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you” (Heb 6:14 & 6:18). These two things form a foundation of our hope, becoming an anchor to our souls (Heb 6:19). They relate to the New Testament person, who is Blessed to be Blessing unto the Lord most High. Therefore, the promise to Abram was directed to the seed as many, including blessing and cursing as the Law of Moses confirms, but to Abraham the curse aspect was missing, thus it’s to the Seed as One, all blessing, no cursing. The Blessing of Abraham is not in material things, it was the Seed.

Time marches on, it came time for Isaac to wed, the word of the Lord came unto Abraham saying, “Behold, Milcah, she has also born children unto your brother Nahor” (Gen 22:20). Not only did she bear, she bear eight children, one of them was named Bethuel who became the father of Rebekah (Gen 22:23).

Both Sarah and Abraham died, but the promise lived on in Isaac, but before Abraham died the bride of Isaac was obtained and secured. Isaac’s bride is a sym­bol of how the Holy Ghost secured the Bride of Christ. Abraham sent the word through his servant, the servant obtained the bride for the promised son (Gen 24:1-9). The allegory shows how the Holy Ghost goes forth seeking the Bride for the Lord by planting the Seed.

Jumping ahead to Genesis 25 we find another family for Abraham, but why even tell us? (Gen 25:1-6). What does this family hold which is so impor­tant? This family along with Ishmael proves God could have brought all twelve tribes from Abraham, but it was not the plan. This is an area where “God could have”, but God didn’t because He is God. From Abraham came forth one son of promise, but there was also the son of manipulation, then other sons, but only one as a “son of the covenant”, just as Jesus is the Only Son of God, yet we know the Spirit of God bears witness with our Spirit, which is of God how we are sons of God by Adoption through the Spirit. Jesus came from the Bosom of the Father, we are part of the Body of Christ, from the bosom of the Body, Jesus builds His Church, then the Church becomes the Bride, thus the Bride makes herself ready by belief and faith.

In essence we find three families for Abraham, the first was with Ha­gar producing Ishmael, the second with Sarah producing Isaac, then lastly or third with Kethurah. It was Isaac, or middle one God picked, thus pointing to the New Covenant, the one we have, the One of great importance. This also shows it wasn’t the First Adam the Father was looking for to produce the Image, but the likeness of the Second Adam, the heavenly One, as the Seed of God is making our souls into the Image. All of Abraham’s children, regardless of which family would be in contact over the years; not always on friendly terms, but in contact. From Ishmael would come the Arabs, from Kethurah would come Medan, from Medan would come the Medians, from them came Balaam. This explains not only why Balaam was a prophet, but points out his association to Israel based on Abraham.

Although we look at Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as three men who are related, we find two things missing in respect to Isaac not found in Abram and Ja­cob. Isaac never had his name changed, neither did Isaac have the word Curse, or a cursing associated with his connection to the Covenant. Why would this be? After all God changed Abram’s name to Abraham, and Jacob’s to Israel, it’s not fair! Oh, Abram was named by his natural father, and, oh, that can’t be right since Jacob was named by Isaac. Wait, God didn’t change Ishmael’s name either, is this a mys­tery? We can’t change the name of our Ishmael, or ignore it, neither can we change the name of the Promise (Isaac), both show us some­thing can’t be changed, yet we can be saved from our Ishmaels because of the Promise. Isaac being the middle family shows how Paul saw Hagar and Ishmael as the Old Covenant, the Seed as the New, then the house of Jacob appointed to the Night.

Although Ishmael came from Abram, and the third family from Abraham one could still view them all as “family”, but only Isaac was picked by God to carry the promise. Why didn’t God tell Abraham to leave those other women alone? Could God have stopped Ishmael? Yes, but true Power will not force the issue, it simply makes a plan around the issue, or fits the issue into the plan. One element Paul kept teaching was the Power of God, all things are under the feet of Jesus, nothing is over Him, nothing controls, or dictates how Jesus acts, or reacts.

Was the Law of Moses from God? Yes, but didn’t it accuse the children? Yes, because the fall nature needs a schoolmaster, it must have the incentive of gain as a motivation, or punishment of a curse to keep the doer in line, as a schoolmaster would. Was Abraham under the Law? No. Why not? Belief, faith and obedience, he was still subject to the conditions of the Covenant, yet the Covenant didn’t restrict him from being married more than once.

How about the commandment in the Beginning, didn’t God say it should be one man and one women? Yes, a man shall leave his mother and father and cleave unto his wife. However, the nature of man at this time had no “law” saying “NO”, thus man reasoned the commandment to multiply would override “one wife”. It’s the reasoning of man, we have the Mind of Christ, thus Jesus cleared the issue when He said, It was not so in the beginning, there were two, one male with one female. God didn’t take a half of dozen wives from Adam, it was the two shall be one, not the six shall be one. Even Adam knew this, thus he remained with Eve all his days, as she remained with him.

ISAAC

We found a Hebrew is a sojourner, but what about a “Jew”. First off Abraham was never known as a Jew in his day, neither was Isaac, Jacob, or Judah. The first time we find  a reference to the people as Jews is when Ahaz ruled around 735 BC, but the first time we find the word Jew it has to do Mordecai the one who raised Esther, after Esther’s mother and father died around 400 BC (Esther 2:5-7). Although the Jews as a language or generally as a people were seen in II Kings 16:6 and 18:26, but calling a person a Jew or using the exact term “Jew” is first found in Esther. We know the term Jew is con­nected to the tribe of Judah, but here we have a problem, since Mordecai is from the tribe of Benjamin (Esther 2:5). Mordecai was related to Esther, as her cousin (Esther 2:7). How does this connect? The captivity joined all the tribes of Israel into the general term “Jew”, from then on a “Jew” became a generic term for anyone born into the family line of Jacob, but the definition doesn’t end there. The term “Jew” points to two things, first it shows how the Tribe of Judah became the central focus of the nation Israel, we also know Judah means, “Praise”. Of course the Bible tells us Jesus is from the Tribe of Judah, although they didn’t know it, those of Israel joined them­selves into one grouping under the King of kings. The second definition of the term “Jew” is defined in the New Testament, no where do we find “Spiritual Israel”, or “true Israel”, but we do find the term True Jew used in reference to the Body of Christ. A “true Jew” is one circumcised of the heart, the other type of Jew is circumcised of the flesh. Since circumcision is a Token to a Covenant we find the term Jew means one who has a right to enter a Covenant obtained by another. Abraham obtained the Abrahamic Covenant, it’s why it’s named Abrahamic, yet it’s open to those of the family line of Isaac if the male in the family was circumcised on the eighth day. To be a True Jew one needs the Token associated to Jesus as a proof of the cutting away of the old heart by accepting the New Heart, becoming the same Spirit who raised Jesus. A True Jew then is one who is Sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise.

The New Covenant is like circumcision of the flesh, the Covenant came first, then the Token, with the Jew it’s the Token giving them right to enter into the Covenant. The same is true with us, until our hearts are circumcised by the Holy Ghost, we lack the Token of the Seal of the Holy Spirit to enter the New Covenant. However, not to fear, the Holy Ghost never missed a one in 2,000 years. We never read, “and the Holy Ghost said Oops”.

Israel is a nation is made up from all 12 tribes, not just one, an “Israeli” is one from the land, or lives in the land of Israel, but a Jew need not be an Israeli, they can live in Europe, yet be a Jew. Nonetheless, we follow the Lion from the Tribe Of Judah, which is One, not many. A Jew is simply a person who has the Token allowing them the right to accept a Covenant presented by God if they are in the line accompanying the Promise.

A male Jew who is circumcised of the flesh, thus their wife, or daughters have a right to accept the Covenant God made with Abraham as well. The problem with the Galatians was their zeal was taking them backward, they presumed the Covenant God made with Abraham was as good, or an addition to the Covenant the Father made with the Son. Paul said anyone who teaches us to enter the Abrahamic Covenant is bewitching us (Gal 3:1-3), but why? The Abrahamic Covenant had many blessings, but it was based in the flesh, not the Spirit, like the baptism of John it cannot grant us the Cross. The premise behind the Abrahamic Covenant is the Seed as One, if we are Born Again we have the Seed in us.

Isaac was the only one to carry the Covenant, but not the only one circumcised. In order for the line to continue Isaac was to obtain a family, it was nonetheless connected to Abraham.

When the Holy Ghost calls, it still takes a decision to follow; however, at times when God calls, the flesh will present it’s call of hesitation. The name La­ban means To gulp or Swallow, associating to fear. The name Rebekah means Fettering by beauty, or binding by one’s beauty, she becomes a symbol of the promise to the Bride of Christ, who is seen as a great beauty in the eyes of God. Rebekah didn’t have to say she was beautiful, she proved it, just as the Bride doesn’t have to say She is Christ Like, She proves it. Paul says God picks the weak (comatose), the base (ugly) and the foolish (morons), but He doesn’t leave us in the same old condition. He gives us the New Man to form our souls into a vision and prophecy going beyond our minds conception. Although the evidence of our beauty isn’t always present, the promise for our beauty is (Rom 8:18).

Rebekah will be far removed from a direct relationship with Isaac, but nonetheless they are related. The “family line” was to continue on; Isaac would receive a Bride by the hand of a servant (Gen 24:1-9). The ser­vant of Abraham went into Mesopotamia, or the land of Babylon, thus the Holy Ghost moves into the world (Egypt) calling us forth into the kingdom for the Father’s sake (Gen 24:10).

The bride (Rebekah) was willing to go, it was her brother who sought gain from the wedding (Gen 24:29-30). Rebekah’s brother (Laban) not only attempted to make gain, but wanted Rebekah to wait a few days, which shows a type of a hin­dering spirit (Gen 24:55). Both Laban and Rebekah were related to Abraham through Nahor (Gen 22:20). Going back to Genesis 11:29 we find Nahor married Milcah, who was the daughter of Haran, we know Lot was the son of Haran (Gen 11:29 & 11:31). From Nahor and Milcah came eight children, with the eighth being Bethuel, who would be the father of Rebekah and Laban (Gen 22:22-23). Bethuel, the father of Rebekah would appear to be dead from some of the context here, but then, behold, we find Laban and Bethuel giving a answer in Genesis 24:50. Bethuel is a type of those who side with the Labans of the world, saying one thing, but meaning another. Laban will appear again when Jacob ventures to the house of Laban, at the time the real Laban will be seen for who he is. Laban had little room in his heart for anyone but Laban, his words were deceptive in nature, yet he is associated with the bride of promise. However, he is not the bride, nor is he included in the Promise. Laban then becomes a symbol of the hindering action of the self-nature. What clue do we find concerning this? Looking at Genesis 24:50 we read, “Then Laban and Bethuel answered and said, The thing proceeds from the Lord: we can­not speak unto you bad or good” (Gen 24:50). It sounds all well and fine, but what was their first premise, good or bad? It was bad, showing their focus.

The servant was very ex­cited, God answered his prayer, he found the bride for his master’s son, it was all Good, but what was the premise of Laban and Bethuel? If they couldn’t find anything bad to say, why say anything? Has this happened to us? We had a good report, yet it seems to fall on deaf ears. Laban is a master of deception, yet our warfare calls for us to tend the Precious, not the Vile (Jere 15:19). The word Vile means Retribution or Vengeance, whereas, the word Precious means Greatly esteemed, Truth, or Valuable, holding the Precious when the Vile pops up keeps us from ut­tering words from the Laban mentality.

The Corinthians were Precious in God’s sight, but they were anything but spiritual in nature, rather they were car­nal, meaning they were unable to understand spiritual matters, yet Paul says they had the Spirit, and were members of the Body (I Cor 3:1-3 & 3:9-17). There must be more to being Spiritual than having the Spirit, yet no one can be Spiritual unless they have the Spirit. The Corinthians were rebelling fetus’ ignoring the process of the New Birth. Paul took great pains to explain spiritual matters to the Corinthians; not only was he provoking them to enter the spiritual, but he removed their blood from his head. Corinth was self-based, the evidence was in how they were ignorant of the spiritual aspect of God, yet they claimed to be Christian. Paul asked them to follow him (I Cor 11:1); however, this didn’t mean to place Paul between them and God, rather it means to use Paul as an example of one who follows Jesus through a personal relationship.

When Paul was a child, he acted like one, but there came a time to grow up in the Lord. The Corinthians were so carnal they had to see a man of God, in order to know what a man of God acted like. Paul knew the prob­lem in Corinth was based in their leadership, as the leadership was a reflec­tion of the family unit, thus he used the marriage and family unit in a metaphoric sense to show natural people the danger they were causing to their potential spiritual nature within the family of God (I Cor 11). We can take his words to mean some gender relationship, but we have a real problem. Why? If one takes the context in First Corinthians chapter 11 to mean gender they soon find the husband and wife do not include all males and females, thus the widow, single female, single male, and widower are not included, thus they need not remain “silent”, of course making Paul and God respecters of persons, which James calls a sin (James 2:1-9). However, if we keep Paul’s words metaphoric, we gain, learn to discern. Another problem is the head of the woman is the man, the mouth is connected to the head, if the woman is to remain silent, it’s the man’s head which has to keep silent. Must be more to the teaching, Amen?

This still relates, the authority of the Covenant based in who presents the Covenant. In First Corinthians the problem is not Power, rather it was misuse of Authority. The servant of Abraham didn’t venture out on his own, he received a command as he held to the responsibility of performance. In like manner Paul points out the Head (authority) of the wife (congregation) is the husband (leadership), the Head of the husband (leadership) is Christ, the Head (authority) of Christ (Anointing, or Body) is God (Jesus as God the Son – I Cor 11:3). The term Christ used here doesn’t take away from Jesus, but expands the concept to the Authority given to the Body of Christ (I Cor 10:17). We can never separate Jesus from being The Christ, but we can veil, or yoke the Authority of Christ from the Body of Christ. The leadership is at the Shoulder of Jesus, the Head of the Body is still Jesus, yet if leadership places a carnal yoke on the neck, they have dishonored their Head. Which means the congregation cannot speak, or they shame their leaders.

The carnal yoke prevents the anointing from operating, both issues were the concern of Paul for the Corinthians. The carnal yoke is restrictive in nature, yet the Yoke was destroyed because of the anointing. Carnal elements separate us from the Authority of Christ, included as carnal, but not limited to are the: the Law of Moses, the flesh, self-based reasoning, unbelief, doubt, carnal approaches to spiritual matters, or self-deceiving theology. All these elements are self yokes placed on the neck of the authority of the Governments, restricting the Authority and Anointing from coming from Jesus to the Body (Isa 9:6). When it happens the wives (congregation) cannot pray or prophesy, they must learn at home, while remaining silent in the gathering. If they pray openly, they shame their husband (leadership). If they have to “learn at home”, surely they are not gaining anything in the gathering. Later in Chapter 14 he speaks of praying and speaking, they have to relate, thus if the leadership is carnal, the congregation must remain silent, or they shame their leadership. The metaphor Hair points to the anointing, the anointing should be long and flowing, but in order to achieve the goal the Authority must be in Order. Paul gives us a clear example of what happens when we in the Body have the Spirit, but fail to be spiritual in nature. Power used outside of Authority is witchcraft, a concern Paul had for the Corinthians (I Cor 11:3-5). The reason for the silence is when she (congregation) prays or prophesies in the gathering, her head (husband) becomes an open shame (I Cor 11:5 & 14:34). We can take these verses to form a dress code, but we only prove we’re carnal. We can take them to force the women to remain subject, but again we only prove we’re carnal. All of which means we are unable to understand spiritual matters. Far better to be spiritual as we operate in the perfect law of Liberty, then in bondage to a self-induced Ishmael.

Isaac was looking for a helpmeet, not a slave. Laban was looking for the self-gain thus he acted as if he was the head of the family, yet his father lived, he was misusing his role by usurping his father’s authority. What has this to do with the Corinthians? Much, while Rebekah was under the roof of Laban, she had to remain silent. However, when she moved to the house of Isaac she found freedom. In Corinthians we are given the results of carnal leadership coupled with the ineffectiveness it produces. Corinth allowed “false apostles” to enter in, if we are in a carnal church, it’s better for the women (members) to remain silent, rather than make an open shame of the carnal husbands (leaders). However, a woman whose head (husband or leader) has long hair (flowing anoint­ing, not a false covering), her head (husband or leader) then has Power (Authority), becoming a Glory (I Cor 11:15 & 11:10). “Oh wait, the woman’s head is to have long hair”, right, but who is her head? The husband: Yikes the 60’s revisited, no, it’s Authority, not a dress code.

Rebekah’s beauty was open and noticed immediately by the servant of Abraham (Gen 24:16). Her beauty was on the inside as well, as the New Man is us works to bring our souls into perfection; but it takes time, faith and patience to reach the goal. It also takes some yoke busting times of exposure, as well as times of joy, peace and simply knowing we do have victory in Jesus. When the fire of God burns away all the wood, hay and stubble, the Glory of the Lord will shine in the child of God who holds their love and faith in God (Rom 8:18).

Rebekah made up her mind, she was going (Gen 24:28-30), even to the point of taking the “tokens”. However, Laban saw the bracelets or gifts given to the “bride” by the servant, as he was moved by his greed. Rebekah could not leave the “carnal house” without permission, it was Paul’s problem with the Corinthians as well. He couldn’t write the famed one liner, “you are carnal, I don’t know you, please don’t call”, rather three times he approached this thorn in his flesh, each time he found Grace is sufficient, it always is, yet he couldn’t leave them. It wouldn’t be God’s way, they could leave God, not the other way around.

Although Abraham had Ishmael by Hagar, and eight sons by Keturah, the only one to receive the Covenant was Isaac, the others did receive gifts, but not the promise (Gen 25:5-6). Which do you think is more important? Abraham “gave up the ghost”, which means his soul left his flesh, or he died physically (Gen 25:7-11). He was buried by in the field he purchased from Heth, the same place where Sarah was buried. Abraham was not around when Jacob and Esau were born (Gen 25:8 & 25:21), thus the saying, “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” becomes a sign of God being in all places at the same time. Nonetheless we move on to Isaac, the only son born to Abraham and Sarah.

Isaac’s story would continue, yet we now know Ishmael ended with twelve princes all in Assyria, a prince is always subject to a king (Gen 25:18). Assyria and Babylon are close to one another, at times they are considered the same metaphorically. God would use Babylon to hold His people captive under king Nebuchadnezzar only after years of warning: yet king Nebuchadnezzar also became an example of a man making an image to represent himself (Dan 3:1). God wounded the head (authority) of the wicked house, but in the latter days the Wicked One will use the ways of Assyria (idol worship) to bring the abomination to the Woman who becomes known as Babylon (Hab 3:13, Isa 11:11-14 & Rev 13:11-15).

It’s also evident God blessed Ishmael, but not for Ishmael’s sake, rather God blessed Ishmael based on the prayer of Abraham, yet God also said Ishmael was not of the Covenant (Gen 17:18-19). All the Ishmaels we produce can appear to be blessed, but they are nonetheless outside of the Covenant, they will become a “wild man” coming against the promise (Gen 16:12). Lead­ers must keep in mind how their Ishmaels are paid for by others, it was Hagar, the symbol of bondage, who ended carrying Ishmael on her back.

Rebekah would deliver two sons to Isaac, the twins become examples of the split between the one who holds the promise, and the one who was delivered the promise, but rejected it. These twins go back to Cain and Abel, one was not loved of God, the other was. Wait, doesn’t God love everyone? God loves those who love Him, yet hates the ways of the wicked, but it’s not the case with Esau. Esau would do something to turn God’s love for him into hate. What would it be? A disrespect for the birthright, something those who are Born Again should never forget (Heb 12:16).

Wait, God is no Re­specter of persons, right? It’s true, if we act like Judas, He treats us like Judas, if we act like Paul, He treats us as Paul. In the Season of the Day we do find the Longsuffering of God is found in His Love, thus during the Day the premise of “God loves us all” is correct to a point, but we also find God hates the ways of the Wicked (Prov 6:16-19). The question is never, “doesn’t God love all?”, rather the question is “Do you love God?”. The Commandments are based on our Love toward God and others, not God’s Love toward us. God loves cockroaches and rattlesnakes as well, thus it’s not whether or not God loves us, but whether or not we love God (Ps 11:5 & Prov 8:13-17).

Paul used these twins to explain how God knows us before we are even born, also showing we are born into the sin nature, but it’s the doing of sin making us sinners. God said, “The elder shall serve the younger” with, “Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated”, yet these statements were made before the twins did right or wrong (Malachi 1:2-3 & Rom 9:12-14). Pointing to God’s foreknowledge, or how God knew Esau would treat his birthright with disdain, as he used it as a tool to get what he wanted for his flesh; until he found it gone forever. Esau and Jacob are types and shad­ows, neither was a pillar of goodness, but nonetheless we find the difference between them was really which one would desire and respect the birthright.

Esau means Rough and ready, later the same term is defined as a Wild Ass in Jeremiah. The soul without the Spirit is a wild ass, he sits when he should stand, he stands when he should sit, he moves when he should wait, waits when he should move. The New Man hears from Abba Father, as we are formed into God’s Son to be sons of God.

Was Esau a sinner as a baby? Paul says before either Esau or Jacob did either good or evil. What evidence do we have? A baby, ever notice how a baby can be naked, yet not make it an issue? Then one day the same nakedness becomes a shame? Guess what happened? Being under the sin nature means we are more prone to sin, then not. The time comes when we were presented with the fruit, we did partake, at the time we became sinners, entering “there is none righteous, no not one”.

The form­ing process is the justification process to bring our souls into line with the Spirit, thereby proving the elder shall serve the younger. On the same note, we know the younger will Submit to the elder, thus our souls can submit to the Spirit, or take Control, when we take control, the Spirit will submit, allowing us to build our towers of Babel, or birth our Ishmaels, we have the keys. The soul out of control is a Wild Ass look­ing for an Ishmael to happen, the saved soul is happy, pleased to be a servant, sitting in a pleasant state. This allegory is not to say the Spirit and the old man are of the same father, rather it shows Esau and Jacob are of the same womb, each had the same opportunity. Esau is a type of one who enters the Body, but rejects the purpose for entering. They are more interested in the flesh, than the Spirit.

God knows us, it’s we who don’t know God; God knows our decisions and choices before we make them, it’s we who don’t know the decision, or the result of the decision, but on the same note, it’s our salvation at stake, not God’s. However, we find the “father” sent a “servant” to obtain a bride for the son of the promise, Isaac married Rebekah, he loved her deeply, she was a compassionate person displayed in how she comforted Isaac after Sarah died (Gen 24:67). She was no longer bound to the “room of silence”, she was able to minister to her husband in his time of need.

Like father, like son, as Abraham found famine in the land, so would Isaac. Like dad, he would come into the land of Abimelech the king and tell his wife, “say, you are not my wife, lest the men of the place should kill me” (Gen 26:1 & 26:7). Wait, is this the same Abimelech? He must be as old as water by this time. This is the son of the Abimelech Abraham faced, thus we must go back a few chapters, so we can understand what is about to happen. When Abraham was in the land of Abimelech, Abimelech knew this man had connections with God (Gen 21:22). Abimelech wanted some assurance he would not end on the wrong side of God, so he wanted to enter covenant with Abra­ham (Gen 21:23). Abimelech laid out the premise, “you will not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son: but according to the kindness I have done unto you” (Gen 21:23). This is conditional, it doesn’t bind Abraham to doing only good, rather it’s “as I have done unto you”; however, Abraham reproved Abi­melech, since the servant’s of Abimelech just took a well of water from Abraham. This is really an “huh-oh”; “do to me, as I have done to you my good friend, what? I stole from you?”. Abimelech then told Abraham how he didn’t know of the event, but the words of the covenant still didn’t have the escape clause, there was no, “unless I don’t know of course” statement. The title and name Abimelech means “father of a king”, at this time the son of Abimelech was alive, thus when we see the second Abimelech it doesn’t mean it’s the same person Abraham faced, it means this is a son of the man Abraham faced, yet he is still bound to the promise his father made to Abraham (my son, nor my son’s son).

Isaac will assume some things, we can’t forget Isaac is really a human without the Spirit, although a type based on the Seed (Gal 3:16). We have to keep in mind these are real people, but they also become allegories and types. Isaac’s statement re­garding Rebekah sounds like Abraham, but there are some differences. Sarah was the half-sister of Abraham, but Rebekah is not the half-sister of Isaac, although she is distantly related. Sarah was taken into the house of Abimelech, Rebekah was not. This time the entire land suffered, then Abimelech said, “What is this you have done unto us?” (Gen 26:10). This Abimelech had a basis to complain, he was part of the Covenant made between his father and Abraham, but he isn’t in the clear, as we will see. Once the error of Isaac was exposed, he corrected it, then he was able to sow in the land, reaping a hundred fold in return (Gen 26:12). This shows how we can sow, but if we have error we reap not, or at best very little, yet when the deception and error are removed our sowing becomes beneficial.

These were people of God, people God talked to, or worked with, yet they lied, used tricks, for the most part were self-centered. So why would God even use them? The spirit of man, these people didn’t have the same opportunity we have, they were under a nature without escape. They didn’t have the New Man, thus what they desired to do, they couldn’t, but what they didn’t want to do, they did. On the same note, to whom much is given, much is required (Luke 12:48). We can’t look back and say, “well Abra­ham did it, so can I”. We have a better foundation, one established in Christ. During those times God spoke to these people by the prophets, but now He speaks to us in His Son (New Man). God didn’t change, He simply progressed in the plan, it got Better.

Even after gaining the increase Isaac found the wells of his father were de­stroyed by the Philistines, yet Abimelech was the “king of the Philistines” (Gen 26:1), thus the same attitude Abraham faced, Isaac faces (Gen 26:15). These Philistines saw the Blessing, but they allowed envy to take control their minds, the same premise holds true today when the spirit lusting to envy becomes involved. The world could care less if we are unblessed, but the minute we talk about “the blessing of God”, out they come for the attack, for the most part we believe the voices of the uncircumcised Philistines, over the people of God. The son of promise never attacked the son of the bondwoman, if we want victory we must follow in like manner.

Abimelech asked Isaac to leave, Isaac bowed to the wishes of Abimelech and left, but from his submission he attempts to make amends, the Lord would appear to Isaac telling him, “I Am the God of Abra­ham your father: fear not, for I Am with you and will bless you and multiply your seed for My servant Abraham’s sake” (Gen 26:24, Gal 3:18 & Heb 11:18). Wait, where is “I will curse him who curses you”? It’s not there, the promise to Abraham was two fold unto two nations; the sand of the sea (Jews), then the stars of heaven which can’t be numbered, yet this Promise is only complete in Christ.

Later in the Book of Revelation John makes entry through the Door into heaven, thus he is rep­resentative of the Stars, later we find him standing on the Sand of the Sea where he sees one Beast come out of the Sea, and another out of the Earth, thus the Sand of the Sea still plays a part in the End Times, but they are nonetheless appointed to the Night, not the Day (Rev 4:1 & 13:1-12). The Blessing for the stars without number points to the Day; Jesus used One mountain for the Blessing of Mercy, but He never said “cursed are you”. We are not the Sand of the Sea, but the Stars of Heaven, the products of the Kingdom of God. Also in the Bible we find the Remnant of the Seed of the Woman are reduced in number from the total, but the people of the Day are ten thousand times ten thousand (Dan 7:10 & Rev 5:11).

The humbleness of Isaac brought the Lord’s comfort to him, thus if we remain humble, we will find God’s comfort in any event. Although the appearance came as a result of Isaac’s actions, the promise came because of Abraham’s belief. God is still the God of the living, as long as one lives who is subject to the promise, regardless of the promise, the benefit of the promise will not pass away; however, unbelief, doubt and iniquity will diminish our ability to receive the fullness of the promise.

From Abram would come several nations, some of which are products of the twelve princes of Ishmael, as well as the sand of the sea, other nations, but more important a Promise for Christ and the Stars of the Heaven. Abram and Jacob were both told “cursed is he who curses you” (Gen 12:3 & 27:29), but Isaac was not, rather for Isaac it was Blessing and Multiplying, which promise becomes an anchor to our soul (Heb 6:14 & 6:18-19).

There is more than one Hebrew word for the word Cursed, but in reference to Abraham and Jacob the word is Arar meaning To bind, but in reference to the earth being cursed for Adam’s sake it was the Hebrew Qalal meaning To make small, giving us the introduction of the concept of tares. The cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches, or the lusts for other things do not “kill” the Seed, but they will separate the Seed from us, or choke it out of us. The old nature is driven by the things of the world, thus the New Man is changing our souls from the flesh to the Spirit. Not an easy task, but one the Greater He is fully capable of.

Grace is all blessing, if we are of Grace we are a Blessing, thus all curses are still nailed to the Cross. The Day is a great time to be in, the place of Grace and understanding, a place where we find the saving of our souls by the Spirit.

ESAU AND JACOB

Esau and Jacob were brothers who broke the womb at the same time, Esau was the oldest, since he broke the womb first, the promise should go to him, however, God has means going beyond our understanding. Ishmael was first, but Isaac was the son of Promise; however it was based on their mother’s being different people, here it’s the same mother. When the time came for the promise to pass from Isaac to Esau, Rebekah would intervene, the promise would go to the deserving one; therefore, the first was last and the last became first (Gen 27:6-17). This was also predicated on Esau rejecting the birthright inheritance many days hence (Gen 25:31-34). This Barter attitude of Esau is the same attitude the Wicked hold, they will barter away their Life for the authority of the Beast, thereby, giving us the term, “giving life to the Beast”.

Esau despised his birthright, evidenced by him trading it for the pleas­ures of the flesh (Gen 25:34). On the other hand, Moses suffered affliction with the people of God, instead of enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season (Heb 11:25). Sin has a short spanned pleasure in the flesh, if it didn’t have a fleshly pleasure, no one would sin. The blessing of the Cross is the ability to impute the flesh dead (ineffective), once dead the Law of Moses is no longer effective, making the law of sin and death no longer effective; indicating the law of sin and death really points to the second death.

Esau was used in the New Testament as an example of one who is so flesh centered they lack appreciation for the birthright (Heb 12:15-16). Esau was moved by the moment, yet the flesh is always moved by the moment. Unsaved emotions are the fuel to feed the flesh it’s pleasures, yet God has a wilderness for us, so special we can impute the flesh dead, while our emotions are being saved, as we become useful.

Jacob will face some tough situations, yet we remember the times God has delivered us, “man you know what I just went through?”; it’s the point we’ve been through it, it’s time to move on. Those times of pressure secure us in the birthright, but Esau thought more of his flesh, than his birthright. Esau failing to respect his birthright is the reason we find God loved Jacob, but hated Esau (Malachi 1:3 & Rom 9:13). Wait, Esau was firstborn, yet in addressing the situation we find God put Jacob first. Esau’s lesson is our example, we respect the Birthright God has granted us, we never sell it for the flesh, or for the pleasures of the flesh. It doesn’t mean we won’t fall, it means we won’t sell our birthright for the flesh.

Esau sought Pardon, but the time passed after Jacob obtained the inheritance, meaning there was a time of repentance for Esau, until the time when the birthright was secured by Jacob, then there was no repentance. Rather than Esau telling his father, “I have sinned, and sold my birth­right”, he will use Subtlety, by accusing Jacob of the same (Gen 27:35). No where does it say Jacob stole the blessing, Esau freely traded his right for the pleasure for his flesh, Jacob merely accepted the offer. It was Esau whom God hated, because Esau gave away his standing, then acted as if it was stolen. Esau used the ways of the wicked, thus by association to the ways he drew the hate of God. Using the ways of the wicked to gain the wealth of the wicked, doesn’t produce God’s prosperity. Esau entered self-repentance, he was remorseful, but only because he found the result of his folly didn’t please him. He was not repentant, he was not sorry toward his birthright, or to his brother, rather he accused his brother. Judas was remorseful only because his plan failed to turn out the way he wanted, thus Judas and Esau are types of the Wicked, who have the birthright in hand, but reject it for the flesh.

In our case we find Pardon, it didn’t cost us a thing, it’s granted based on God’s Mercy, not our greatness. The works of Pardon consist of giving Mercy based on the Mercy God gave us. Grace doesn’t cost a thing to get, but it still costs us to keep it, yet the cost is denying the self, which brings much more gain, than loss.

Jacob also becomes a type and shadow of the time between the Root and Born Again, the time when the internal groanings are bringing forth the product. Jacob will remain Jacob until God calls him Israel, then Ja­cob will become Israel, same man, different nation. This Jacob – Israel principle shows how God can take the person we were, add the “name change” which is the removal of the old authority of darkness, then apply the Name of Jesus as the Authority above all authorities to produce a change in us. God’s Mercy will transform us, His Grace will transfigure us.

After Esau found Jacob received the blessing, he was so angry, it caused Jacob to run for his life (Gen 27:18-42). Rebekah would send Jacob to Laban, her brother, where Jacob would find; Whatsoever a man sows, he shall he reap (Gen 27:44-46). This doesn’t mean Jacob stole a thing, rather Jacob was a negotiator, yet Laban will be his mirrored match. The Mirror of God will shine on Jacob for many years, yet it’s Good, the mirror has purpose.

Although Jacob had the blessing in heart, he had yet to hold it in hand. Be­fore Jacob would hear the word “Israel”, he would be tested and proven. Before one can take a leadership role they must be proven as well. Jacob’s wilderness experi­ence would bring him to a position to appreciate the blessing. However, before Jacob would leave, he would again face his father, this time Isaac told him where he should ob­tain his bride. Jacob received the word from his father, his obedience confirmed his blessing (Gen 28:1-4). Esau was advised where he should, or should not ob­tain a bride, but he didn’t obey, rather he did just the opposite as his father desired, as he took wives from the children of Ishmael (Gen 28:9). Esau didn’t change, yet he was a “son”, but he treated the words of his father with the same disrespect as he did his birthright.

Esau heard the command, but did the opposite, he used his self-will through rebellion to twist his father’s desire to fit his agenda. Esau picked the parts of the com­mand pleasing to him, then used his own determinations to complete the rest. He did take wives as commanded, but take them based on his desires, not the desires of his father. The rebellious will say, “I did all God told me to”, but they also added their own desire to the promise, twisting it to the flesh, then becoming self-deceived in their own rebellious pride.

Esau becomes a symbol of one who runs around doing what they’re not sup­pose to, while they ignore what they are called to do, it’s called Iniquity, or being unequal. We are also given the result, Esau lost his promise. If we listen to the Spirit, then we’re in good shape, but if we listen to the carnal reasoning of man, we’re in deep trouble. Jesus hates Iniquity, but loves righteousness (Heb 1:9). God hates the ways of the Wicked, yet those ways are attached to people. It is difficult for us to comprehend God hating, but we must remember why He does. The Wicked have victims, people who lack knowledge, but not love. Fellowship with God always begins by treating the people of God in the same manner as God does. The opposite is treating the people of God as if they were our slaves.

We know about the “tithe of Jacob”, so we pick up when Jacob reaches the house of Laban, where he sees Ra­chel, he knew immediately she was his wife (Gen 29:1-11). Laban was still attempting to get what he could out of the deal, when Jacob wanted Rachel for his wife, Laban figured out a plan for personal gain (Gen 29:15-20). Abraham sent the servant to obtain a bride for Isaac, but Jacob went to find his own. When the father sent the servant, Isaac gained without effort, but Jacob would find a hard labor involved before he could hold his wife. For seven years Jacob served Laban, thinking he would receive Rachel as his bride; however, Laban had another daughter who was older by the name of Leah (Gen 29:16). Laban’s plan involved manipulation and deception, the man was a slave to his own greed, yet Jacob held the birthright and blessing; however, Jacob, like us had to learn the responsibility of the calling.

When the time of the marriage came, Laban gathered all the men for a great feast (Gen 29:22). The Labans of the world always gather together to bring about their nefarious plans. When Laban was able to get Jacob into a drunken con­dition, where he didn’t know his elbow from his knee, Laban had Leah lay with Ja­cob, in the morning the marriage between Jacob and Leah was consummated, Laban then assumed his manipulation worked (Gen 29:23-25). Like all the tools of the devil, he allows us to control the tool until the tool controls us. Laban thought he was a free thinking man, but he was in bondage to his greed. Laban’s excuse was, “It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn” (Gen 29:26). Didn’t he know it before? Yes, Laban revealed the matter only when it benefitted him, but withheld it at a time when it was needed, therein lays the deception. For seven years he could have told Jacob this custom, but didn’t Jacob have seven years in which to find it out? Knowledge is important, here the lack of it brought a false wife, but God is able to turn it around to Good by working it into the plan.

This goes right back to Jacob being the younger and Esau as the elder, only in this case neither the younger or elder gave up the right, thus Jacob had to honor Laban’s decision. If God knows all things, why didn’t He warn Jacob? Jacob had to travel his own wilderness to find his calling in the promise, Jacob is one who hears from God when Jacob wants to hear, we are no different when we run around in our Jacob stage of growth. Why would God even talk to us, if we keep rejecting half of what He tells us? Because we receive the other half, the time will come when we will have ears to hear. Why do children only hear what they want to? Same growth syndrome.

Laban told Jacob to remain with Leah for a week to fully complete (accomplish) the marriage vows, then Jacob could work another seven years, then Laban would give him Rachel before the fact (Gen 29:28). The Labans attempt to substitute one thing for another, yet retain as much as they can in the process. Laban figured he not only found a husband for both his daughters, but obtained free labor for fourteen years, yet the best laid plans of the Labans often go astray (Gen 29:30-31).

Leah conceived and brought forth Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn (Gen 29:32). When Rachel’s sister conceived and she didn’t, she allowed envy to enter (Gen 30:1). Jacob’s anger against her was the result, when we allow envy to enter, we blind ourselves to the Light. All this activity is still bringing the tribes of Israel into the plan, but at this point in time Israel was still in the future. The first mention of Israel won’t happen until chapter 32, so we are still looking at Jacob, who had yet to make the Lord his God. So much for using the acts of Jacob as an excuse to have several wives, yet claim God.

There are times when others appear “to be blessed out of their socks”, while we remain with empty pockets and empty pews. There is the timing of God, the tim­ing of man, the time of God will intersect the time in the Plan for us. We hold the promise until our time joins the Lord’s timing, rather than looking about to find excuses, or forming envy (James 1:1-7). Jesus told Peter, “What is it to you, you follow Me”; the same holds true for anyone who has made Jesus both Savior and Lord. Don’t ever look to oth­ers to determine our own walk, look to Jesus. Rachel presented Bilhah her handmaiden to Jacob, Bilhah conceived and brought forth Naphtali (my wrestling). The name Rachel means The predomi­nant element of a flock, the name Bilhah means Trouble or timid; the predomi­nant one brought trouble from her envy, but God was still able to turn it to good, since Naphtali was called according to God’s purpose. When Leah saw Bilhah con­ceived, the race started, the “nature of competition” took effect. Jacob became the “soccer ball” in this competition, Leah’s handmaiden (Zilpah) was sent by Leah to Jacob, Zilpah conceived and brought forth Gad, then she brought forth Asher, the competition really opened up (Gen 30:14-17). Leah conceived and brought forth Issachar, finally Rachel conceived and brought forth Joseph (Gen 30:22-24). When Joseph was born, Jacob made a deci­sion to leave the land, to go back to his own home (Gen 30:25). When Jacob left the “land of manipulation” he would also break the nature of competition, but his recourse was to leave the place, after leaving only one other son would be born, thus God used the surroundings to bring forth eleven of the twelve.

CHART SHOWING ORDER OF BIRTH AND TO WHOM BORN

Name:	Order:	Mother:	Order/Blessing:	Symbol/Blessing:
Reuben	1	Leah	1	Reckless
Simeon	2	Leah	2	Violence
Levi	3	Leah	3	Violence
Judah	4	Leah	4	Lion
Dan	5	Bilhah	7	Serpent
Naphtali	6	Bilhah	10	Doe
Gad	7	Zilpah	8	Troop
Asher	8	Zilpah	9	Rich Food
Issachar	9	Leah	6	Donkey
Zebulun	10	Leah	5	Ships
Joseph	11	Rachel	11	Fruitful
Benjamin	12	Rachel	12	Wolf
Joseph	11	Rachel	11	Fruitful
Benjamin	12	Rachel	12	Wolf

The example given by Jacob shows the Bride of Promise didn’t come until after Leah, thus showing how the New Covenant and the Bride of Christ came after the nation Israel. Both Leah and Rachel had handmaidens, thus their handmaidens also represented something. We know Zion is termed a Mount, a City, as well as “the city of David” (as one of the three cities known as the City of David), but the city is in a nation, it is not the nation, thus the City is akin to being a Handmaiden. Zion is the mount upon which Jerusalem of the earth is built, thus Jesus said “I will build My Church on this Rock”, rather than saying, I will build it here in Jerusalem, or build it on one person, building on a person is how the Law of Moses operated. The Bread was first, then the Wine, the symbol shows the Rock was in place, the Church would be birthed on Pentecost. In Jacob’s case the foundation for the tribes would be established before he could be Israel.

With all these wives and children, we still have to consider none of them had made the Lord their God, we will find at least one of them is still holding idols. To place all this into some time element, we know Jacob worked seven years, then married Leah and Rachel, then worked another seven years for Rachel, giving us a total of fourteen years for the two women, then he makes a another deal for a third seven, but will he finish the last seven?

Laban, again had an offer for Jacob (Gen 30:26-29). Up to this time Jacob served Laban fourteen years, yet Laban sought more years, again for the sake of his own benefit. Laban knew he had the advantage, he was using it to the limit for his self-benefit. Jacob was clearly under ungodly authority, the purpose was to see what it’s like to serve under those conditions, so he would not to use the same methods on those who would be under his authority. Jacob also had a plan, he requested the speckled and spotted cattle, since they were considered inferior (Gen 30:32). It will turn out the supposed inferior will be the cream of the herd. This is another symbol of the promise taking the infe­rior, then making it the blessing.

Labor and skill are different, labor produces the material, but skill takes the material turning it into a useful product. God gave many the skill to turn materials into useful products during the building of the Tabernacle. Labor without skill is bondage, forcing labor without teaching a skill is slavery. Intellect without Godly knowledge is slavery, laboring in the works of religion without Godly wisdom is still slavery. One can memorize every verse in the Bible, yet be unable to use spiritual skills.

This next act of Jacob could be termed by some as magic, but faith knows there is more to this. The key to this plan of Jacob’s is found in Genesis 31:10-11, where we find Jacob had a dream as an angel came to him regarding the “ringstreaked, speckled and griz­zled” animals, thus Jacob’s use of the green poplar, hazel and chestnut branches stripped of the bark were signs regarding the promise in the dream (Gen 30:37-39 & 31:10-11). These sticks point to the promise given to Abraham, the nakedness of the branches gives us three branches “stripped”, one for Abraham, one for Isaac and one for Jacob, the man was not playing with magic, rather he was applying the signs of the promise before the cattle, with the premise of multiplying I will multiple you.

After the increase came, Jacob prepared to leave with his wives, chil­dren and cattle with one year still left to serve (Gen 31:38); however, Rachel stole Laban’s images (idols – Gen 31:17-19). These images, or gods were more important to Laban than we think. According to the laws in the land of Laban they represented the man’s possessions, we find from history these images were akin to land deeds. Rachel didn’t take them to worship them, she took them “just in case” the prosperity of Jacob failed, she felt she deserved something from Laban.

Jacob applied his skill to his labor, but Rachel attempted to hide her idols, but her hidden idols almost defeated the escape. On the same note, when we take the idols of the world with us, we provide the devil a path to find another he can devour. Abraham left his father’s house of images, but Rachel attempted to take her father’s images with her, when she did, she brought the fire of Laban’s anger down the road after her and Jacob.

Some of us have a tendency to bring our idols into the kingdom, excusing them as needed methods to fill the treasury, or we think they are some gift God gave us in the world, but a golden calf is still an idol, even if we hang a cross around its neck. Later when the children of Israel enter their wilderness, they will take their golden earrings to make a golden calf. God told them to take the gold from Egypt, but He didn’t tell them to make images. They took a Good gift God gave them, then turned it into something evil. God will give us knowledge and skill, but we can twist the skill, just as we can twist the knowledge. God created the Smith, the Smith used his talent to make an image in the fire (Isa 54:16-17). God didn’t make the image, or create the Smith to make images, the Smith took his God granted talent, then turned it to an evil use. Yet, no weapon “formed” against us shall prosper (Isa 54:16-17), they are still formed, not created.

Laban didn’t know Rachel stole the idols, rather he simply knew they were gone, but so was Jacob, thus he pursued Jacob. God came to Laban in a dream and said, “Take heed how you speak not to Jacob either good or bad” (Gen 31:24). In the Hebrew this could read “good to bad”, it was the same when he and his father faced the servant of Abraham. However, like the Laban mind, Laban will seek some way to get around the command in order to insert his own desires and self-will. Prior Laban said, “bad or good”, now God says, “good or bad”, thus Laban was not to speak anything other than “nice day, huh?”; at times it’s good advice for us as well.

After Laban heard the warning he reached Jacob, he didn’t speak from good to bad, rather he spoke from bad to good; however, the King James has the correct intent in the saying, thus Laban was not to say a thing to Jacob. However, Laban was seeking some manipulating way to say something, thus he said, “What have you done, you have stolen away unawares to me and carried away my daughters, as captives taken with a sword?” (Gen 31:25-26). Laban like Esau accuses Jacob of stealing, to Laban this wasn’t a “saying”, it was a question. Laban traded his daughters for labor, then kept his daughters and Jacob in slavery, how can he say they were still his? Laban felt he had standing, after all Jacob failed to complete the last seven.

Jacob didn’t know Rachel took the idols, as he told Laban, “Go ahead and look”, when Laban came into Rachel’s tent, Rachel hid the idols in the camel’s furniture, then told Laban, “Let it not displease my lord, I cannot rise up before you; for the custom of women is upon me” (Gen 31:35); the “custom of women” re­fers to her menstrual period. When Laban couldn’t find the images, Jacob found his nerve, by accusing Laban (Gen 31:36). Since neither man trusted the other, they made a vow and called it Mizpah (Gen 31:44-49). We tend to think Mizpah means, “God will watch over us, when we are apart my dearest” but it means, “Since I can’t trust you at all, may God watch over you for me”. With this Mizpah we find the “pillars” of sepa­ration reflected in, “you stay on your side, and I’ll stay on mine, unless it’s un­der very friendly conditions” (Gen 31:52). Mizpah is used when two are separated, yet have no trust whatsoever between them, hardly a vow for two who should be one.

Jacob went his way, the closer he came to home, the more the fear of seeing Esau overtook him (Gen 32:1-5). Jacob sent messengers and gifts to ap­pease Esau, then Jacob prayed “the prayer of fear”, rather than the prayer of faith (Gen 32:9-12). Nonetheless this prayer was the one in which Jacob named the Lord, he was getting closer to making the Lord his God; the tithe vow he made prior is now becoming important. Jacob continued to send messengers and gifts to Esau, then he separated himself, his two wives and the two women servants, but his own soul found him (Gen 32:22-24). At this point Jacob had yet to make the Lord his God, so he prayed “O God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac”, rather than “My God” (Gen 32:9). However, remember the Vow Jacob Vowed? It was almost time to pay. Jacob wrestled with “a man”, yet we find the man was himself, as Jacob the man of fear fought Jacob the called of God, yet when morning came the old Jacob wanted to leave, but Jacob the stout said, “I will not let you go, except you bless me” (Gen 32:26). The blessing came as, “Your name shall be called no more Jacob but Israel: for as a prince have you power with God (Elohiym) and with men, and have prevailed” (Gen 32:28). The word Prince means one who begins something, or one known by the territory they rule. Jacob, not God named the place Peniel, or The face of God, yet no man has seen God at anytime. It’s important to keep in mind this wrestling match was with a “man” (Gen 32:24), the word Man is the Hebrew Ish meaning mankind. The word Angel means one who brings a Message, the message was the calling. Here we find Jacob the stout fought with Jacob the manipulating fearful one, or better, the called Angel (Israel) fought against the man of fear. Although the man of fear thought he won the battle, he was the only one injured. Why did he suffer in the Thigh? Going back to when Abra­ham sent his servant, we find the servant had to place his hand under the thigh of Abraham (Gen 24:9). This act was one of keeping a vow, even unto death. Jacob made the vow back in Genesis 28:20-22, now he was back in his father’s land, the vow of “then shall the Lord be my God” came to him in this battle. If this “Man” Jacob is fighting was the Lord, then we have many prob­lems, first this man tells Jacob “your name shall no more be called Jacob, but Israel” (Gen 32:28); however, later when God comes to Jacob we read where God said, “your name is Jacob”. Jacob was fighting with his own vow and calling, after this battle Jacob will move to the front of his family to face Esau, rather than hide behind them.

Moreover, we see how Jacob asked the man his name and heard, “Wherefore why do you ask after my name?” or “Why would you have to ask?”; he knew the name, this battle is one we all face. In essence the role for Jacob to be Israel was hanging in the balance, he had to repair his relationship with Esau. There will be a time in the saving of the soul when we enter the mother of all battles, the fight against the flesh which doesn’t want to be Crucified with Christ, yet the New Man who knows it’s the only way to reach the reward, will win when we join him. This is the classic Jacob – Israel conflict, the moment of the calling becoming part of us.

Jacob’s injury in the battle caused the hollow of his thigh to be wounded (Gen 32:25). Based on the event the children of Jacob refuse to eat the hollow of the thigh, but they missed the point (Gen 32:25). Jacob the fearful one used his legs as a means of escape, he was attempting to run from his vow, but his vow came to him, leaving a sign he would not forget. Jacob knew he came face to face with the purpose and power of God, the result was the loss of his ability to run from God (Gen 32:30). This type shows how God will do what God will do to keep us on the path, but we also find if we struggle enough we can leave the path to enter the wide road. Jacob the man had to cease, before Israel the Nation could come forth. The old Jacob would appear now and again, just as we find the flesh knocking on the door to our “house” now and again; however, we have the granted Power in Grace to refuse the flesh any room in our quest to become Spiritual.

Jacob had eleven sons when he faced Esau, Benjamin was not yet born, but other than the sons he had one daughter who stood out, Dinah.

DINAH AND HER BROTHERS

Dinah was the daughter of Leah and Jacob, she was a fair young woman: Dinah is special in at least one regard, she is listed in reference to the tribes, but not as a tribe. Dinah’s importance begins when Jacob was in the land of Hamor the father of Shechem, Shechem looked on Dinah through the lust of the flesh (Gen 34:1-2). Shechem raped Dinah, then wanted to marry her, when Jacob heard of the rape, he kept his peace, but two of his sons formed a plan to get even. The spirit of man is bent on validation and vindication, but he Spirit of Christ is to bless.

Shechem had his own plan of deception; it appeared as if Shechem is making amends, but his father wanted to mix the daughters of men with the sons of Israel, with the intent to possess Dinah (Gen 34:9-10). The sons of Jacob said, there could be no mixture unless all the men of Shechem’s house with those under his rule, were circumcised (Gen 34:14). It takes more than circumcision to produce the called, the plan of Jacob’s sons was as deceptive as the plan of Shechem. Hamor and Shechem agreed, they gathered all the men of their land then circumcised them all in one day (Gen 34:20-24). Simeon and Levi knew the men would be inca­pacitated, to say the least; thus Simeon and Levi killed all of the men, taking the children, women and cattle captive (Gen 34:27-29). Shechem raped a daughter of Jacob, then turned right around and wanted her, if he was more honorable, what would the rest of the house of Hamor be like? It’s for this reason God allowed the two sons of Jacob to kill all in the city of Hamor, but Jacob would see it as “destruction on the house of Jacob”.

We don’t serve a multiple God, but we do serve a God who has multiple les­sons in the events. For Jacob the mirror of God came again, he saw the same old manipulation he used in his sons, Jacob the fearful said, “They shall gather themselves together against me” (Gen 34:30). He didn’t say, “against us”; therefore, he was worried about his own hide. God told Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel”, there are times when God tells us to run, but whether it’s run or stand, it’s hearing God then obeying what we hear becoming faith (Gen 35:1). Al­though Jacob left, the news of how his sons revenged the daughter of Jacob sent terror into the people of the land.

Jacob was told to go back to the place of his vow, it was time for the vow and calling to come together. Jacob traveled to Canaan where he built an altar calling it ElBethel (The God Of Bethel – Gen 35:5-7). Like Abraham, Jacob called the Place something in reference to God, but here we find the Hebrew El, rather than Jehovah, nonetheless the naming shows Jacob has now recognized God as God. God appeared to Jacob and said, “Your name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be your name and He called his name Israel” (Gen 35:10). The name Israel means “God prevails”, metaphorically it means to rule as God by holding the responsibility to act on behalf of God in dealing with God’s people (Ps 82:1-8)). This is much different from the experi­ence with the man in the wrestling match, prior the man said, “you have the power of God” but here it’s “God prevailed”; therefore, Jacob the man had the vision of being the called one (Israel), but his own soul fought the concept by adding to it, causing the soul to seek the escape; however, when God came to him, the concept was to be a nation for God’s people. The call is one thing, being picked another, being trained another, then the service to the Lord still another. Each step is no less important than the other, even the wrestling match shows we can struggle with the things of God, yet the things of God will win.

God also told Jacob, “kings shall come out of your loins” (Gen 35:11). Prior in the wrestling match Jacob was called a prince, here we find kings coming from him. This is one of the basic divisions between Israel and Ishmael, Israel shall have kings, Ishmael shall have princes, thus Israel shall be God’s nation. Jacob was a man of fear, but Israel a man of faith. Fear brings the storms, faith answers them. The cares of this world are fear based,  thus natural man is still motivated by fear.

These people were not Born Again, it’s something we have to keep drumming into our own minds. They didn’t have the Cross, the Blood of Jesus, Grace, the Spirit of Truth, the Bible, tapes, or any of the advantages we have. Abraham didn’t began this with a church full of people, rather it was just one man who heard God then obeyed. An entire nation with a religious system recognized and ordained of God came from one man. The example of course points to Jesus, the Son of God from whom all things come, especially the Body of Christ, meaning the Body of Christ is the only ordained element on this earth with the God given right to water baptize others, or to hear from God. From the Body comes the Church, from which comes the very Bride of Christ, all by one Lord, one Cross, one Sacrifice, based on His love for us.

This paradox between the human Jacob, and the nation in the man (Israel) is seen over and over, faith speaks from Israel, but from time to time Jacob with his fears will also speak. We’re no different, faith comes from the New Man, but the flesh still interjects its “Jacob fears” from time to time, we learn the difference as we learn to stand with the New, while rejecting the flesh. Paul gives us a three step process, we put off the old man, but we must also put off the deeds of the old as well, then we put on the New. Just as Abraham sent Hagar and Ishmael away, we must send the old man and his deeds away.

This  same paradox of Jacob – Israel is seen in us, usually during the battle we put on the “mask of faith” in front of church folks, but in private we’re Jacob, crying, barking at the devil, kicking holes in the wall. However, when the New Man steps up, all things change, the Spirit is our confidence, as our souls join to the Spirit we see our Hope, we engage our belief unto our faith to gain the victory.

We know Jacob sought a wife who would make his mother happy, Esau took wives from Canaan against his father’s wishes. Esau took his family to Edom, becoming the father of the Edomites (Gen 36:1-43). Esau’s attitude was to rebel, he rebelled against his birthright, he also rebelled against his father’s wishes. This attitude was not always noticeable, but it was something Esau would be known for.

Jacob had many faults, as do we all, but from him would come the one natural nation on the earth picked by God for His work. Joseph would have a story all his own, in Joseph’s story we again see the Jacob – Israel principle. Joseph will be a sign of one who faces adverse circumstances, yet God is with them.

JOSEPH

Jacob loved the land, but Israel loved Joseph more than all the children (Gen 37:1-3). Joseph was the last son born under the roof of Laban, but he wasn’t the last one born. After leaving Laban’s presence and arriving at Bethel, the place where Jacob made his vow Rachel went into hard labor (Gen 35:14-16). She gave birth to Benjamin, her second son, only she wanted to call him “Ben-oni” meaning The son of my sorrow, but Jacob called him Benjamin meaning The son of the right hand. Rachel was the favored one, she was the one Jacob saw as his wife, yet here she is dying. Is it fair? The man comes back to the place of the Vow then loses the most important person in his life. Fair is only relative to the one interpreting the event, Rachel’s death is in the one place to bring another event further down the road. Like the blood of Abel, the voice of Rachel will travail for her children again (Matt 2:18). Rachel is buried in the way to Ephrath, also known as Bethlehem, the birth place of Jesus, the very town where Herod had all the children two years old and younger killed, yet the prophetic voice of Rachel will intercede for them (Matt 2:16).

Joseph and Benjamin grew up without a mother, they were very close, but Joseph was also Jacob’s favorite. Joseph’s brothers saw this favoritism, they allowed envy to grow in their hearts. Envy is the desire to possess something someone else has, without having to pay the same price they did, envy will destroy, just as Cain killed Abel, just as the religious rulers crucified Jesus based on their envy (Matt 27:18). Jealousy on the other hand is the fear of losing something we think we possess, it will set itself to destroy those who oppose it, at times it will destroy the possession rather than lose it. God’s jealousy is much different, it’s based on someone taking something from Him; however in His case He possesses all things: in man’s case it’s a assumption of ownership. Greed holds possessions for self-based reasons, hating those who attempt to take them, but in God’s case He knows the one doing the taking is bent on killing what they take from Him, thus He uses Love to hold His own, rather than force and manipulation.

The sons who held envy toward Joseph mocked him, as Ishmael mocked Isaac, shoving him to one side, belittling him, thus the spirit of man is not a pretty sight to behold. Joseph received a dream from God, not only did he receive a dream, he also had the God given gift of inter­preting dreams. This is different from one who dreams their own dreams, or guesses at the dream’s interpretation, or uses some chart to determine what the dream may mean, this is also different from one interpreting prophecy. Dreams like metaphors at times are plain, other times God produces a mystery, but interprets it as well.

Joseph had two dreams, the first came after the “coat of many colors” was given to him by his father, which is important, the coat means his father gave him a coat of honor. In this first dream the brothers were all in the field binding sheaves, but Joseph’s stood upright as the sheaves of his brother’s made obeisance to Jo­seph’s (Gen 37:3 & 37:7). This dream shows the labor of the brothers was bowing to the labor of Joseph. Later when Joseph is in Egypt it will be evident, when the brothers bring the product of their labors to gain favor from Joseph. This first dream clearly shows it pertains to the brothers labor (your sheaves), but the brothers took it personally.

Joseph’s second dream expanded the concept, he saw Israel the nation as the Sun (Jacob), the Moon (his Mother, or Zion), with eleven stars (the tribes); however, he also saw himself, thus making it twelve stars (Gen 37:9). This reference to Joseph’s mother cannot be Rachel, since she died back in Genesis 35:18 giving birth to Benjamin. Joseph told the dream, but the mother is seen as the Moon, making it Zion of the earth, as the Sun points to the nation; nonetheless the dream made the brothers envy him the more. Jacob understood the dream, he knew the metaphor Sun pointed to him as Israel, the stars to the other sons, the moon as the mother, or Zion as the foundation of the nation. A like description was seen by John when he explained the Woman in the Book of Revelation (Rev 12:1). One can’t run all the way back to Genesis chapter one to find the Sun, Moon and Stars to define the elements around the Woman in Revelation 12:1, since Genesis 37:9 is the first place we find the ac­tual Hebrew words for moon, sun and stars combined. In Genesis chapter one we find the Hebrew words for Lights, not the words for Moon or Sun, thus God didn’t want us to form an imagination attempting to force the Greater Light into the story of the Woman in the Book of Revelation.

The Woman in the Book of Revelation has the Sun as her covering, the twelve tribes as her crown, the moon as her foundation; she is not the Moon, or the Stars, or the Sun, they are around her, she is termed a “city”, not a “nation”, thus she is Jerusalem the city, the only city on the earth connected to Israel and Zion belonging to the nation. No matter what man builds on the mount, God still sees it as the foundation for Jerusalem. Later this same Woman uses Zion as her footstool, then she is seen riding the Beast. Jerusalem of the earth, is the one Paul says is in bondage, New Jerusalem is Free (Gal 4:25-26). The title Jerusalem is used some 700 plus times, not all are relating to Jerusalem of the earth; Israel is used some 2300 times, they do relate to the nation. However, not all those who are called Israel, are of Israel, some go back to become Jacob, entering the House of Jacob in the latter days, rather than remaining in the House of David (Rom 9:6, 9:27, Rev 17:1-3 & 13:18). Not all those who say they are Christian, are Christ Like, some are false christs, thus we find the Tares in the same field as the Wheat (Matt 13:25 & 24:5) .

In Joseph’s dream the eleven stars gave obeisance to Joseph, this is different from the first dream, here it’s the actual brothers, now they are really mad. They attempted to interpret the first dream, but failed, the second dream interpreted itself. Their envy was now bringing forth hate to produce an action. There are times when the vision or dream is best kept to ourselves, but in this case God had a plan in the plan.

When the brothers were tending their father’s flock in Shechem, Israel sent Joseph to determine if the watchers of the flock were safe (Gen 37:12-14). Shechem? Didn’t we hear that name before? Shechem was the son of Hamor who raped Dinah, but Joseph found the brothers in Dothan (Gen 34:1-2). These brothers were about to rape the life of their brother, but instead of greed, they are consumed with envy. At this time Benjamin would be too young to leave home, thus the brothers numbered ten, with Joseph as the eleventh. However, from this act we find the Jewish method of a Quorum, or the smallest number of members to make a decision. To the Jew ten makes a quorum, taking this to the New Testament we find Judas hanged himself, Peter was temporally removed from office until his conversion in John 21, so he could strengthen his brothers, leaving ten disciples. When Thomas was not present they lacked a quorum, thus Thomas doubted Jesus would appear unless they had a Quorum, according to Jewish rules, but Jesus said when two or three are gathered, making the New Testament Quorum two or three.

Envy causes us to toss the prophet in a pit, but in so doing, we are tossing ourselves in the pit. Joseph’s brothers not only wanted to discard Joseph, they wanted to kill him,  envy always gives birth to hate, hate gives birth to murder in one form or another.

Reuben would intervene for his brother by saying, “Shed no blood” (Gen 37:22), but Joseph was still sold to the Ishmeelites, thus whether we kill them out­right, or sell them to the enemy, we commit murder. Part of the promise was sold into the hands of the offspring of the son of manipulation, but it started with envy in the hearts of Joseph’s brothers (Gen 37:27). Judas was a member of the ministry, the religious leaders couldn’t touch Jesus, but one from the “family” sold Him for thirty pieces of silver. Judas was warned more than once, yet Judas was one person, his acts were not in line with his office, making him a traitor.

In all this we find God was with Joseph, God doesn’t always lift us out of the pit, but He will raise us above the pit. Here it would seem as if Joseph went from bad to worse, but it’s not the case. This is still the event, not the end, in the end we find God raising Joseph far above what attempted to overcome him.

The word Theocracy means God’s ruling order, it was displayed in the dreams of Joseph. God was going to place Joseph as the head, but the brothers re­belled against the called of God, they held a board meeting to remove the called, placing their own order in position. This is the first group “takeover”, God gave His man a dream with the mantel of many colors placed on him, yet those in the family order refused to bow to the one God picked. Here the eye said to the Head, we have no need of you. Their plans may have been evil, their intent was surely evil, but God had a plan bringing this to a Good result. God didn’t form the evil in the minds of the brothers, He merely formed a plan around their evil to bring about His plan of Goodness.

This is a classic example of an event appearing evil, yet God having a plan above the event to bring about good. Even if the devil had a hand in it, it doesn’t mean God doesn’t have a plan to turn the event around for Good. Seeking the precious is like faith, it begins when we believe God is.

So far Joseph’s story sounds anything but Good, but God had a purpose going far beyond the reasoning of Joseph or his brothers. The Ishmeelites sold Joseph into Egypt unto Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh’s court (Gen 37:36). While this was going on, Reuben thought Joseph would be safe in the pit, but no one is safe in the pit. When Reuben saw Joseph was gone, he rent his clothes in repentance and anguish (Gen 37:29). The brothers used Joseph’s coat of many colors (coat of esteem, or mantel) by cov­ering it with animal blood in their effort to cover their deed (Gen 37:30-32). Jacob the man saw the coat then rent his clothes saying, “Joseph without a doubt is rent in pieces” (Gen 37:33-36). To Jacob this was as bad as Rachel dying. From Rachel came the son he loved above the rest, just as Rachel was the one he loved, now both are gone. How can this be good? Maybe Paul missed this part when he wrote Romans 8:28. No, this story is not over yet, the Good will be obvious.

The chain of events is interrupted by Judah’s folly, but Judah’s folly connects to Joseph’s story. Why put Judah’s folly in the middle of this? Could it be he was about to reap what he sowed? Who had the idea to get rid of Joseph? Judah (Gen 37:26). There is a purpose for putting the folly of Judah here, later we will see how Judah must be the one to repent before Joseph.

Accordingly, if the oldest son was married, yet died before fathering a son, it was the responsibility of the next son in line to take the dead son’s wife, in order to produce a son under the dead man’s name, thereby keeping the line to the promise going. All this was predicated on the concept of “be fruitful and multiply”, without regard for “the two shall be one”. Nonetheless, Judah took a wife from the Canaanites by the name of Shuah, she conceived bringing forth a son by the name of Er (Gen 38:1-3). She again conceived then had another son by the name of Onan, then another by the name of Shelah (Gen 38:4-5). Judah picked a wife for Er, the oldest son, but Er was wicked in the eyes of God and God slew him (Gen 38:7). If God is a Good God, why would he slay one subject to the promise? Some of us say, God loves the sinner, but hates the sin; however, God uses the repentant sinner, the evidence of Er shows God hates the ways of the Wicked. Er was subject to the promise, but his wicked heart made him opposed to the promise which would taint the intent of the promise through his offspring. This is still the foundational work, thus the second step in the process shows Er would taint the process with his wicked ways.

It’s the word Wicked separating Er from the rest, the word Wicked is a metaphor for one who has accepted the calling, but reb­els against the commandment; whereas, a sinner is yet to receive the call, thus we find God does love the sinner, but hates the ways of the Wicked, yet He won’t deal with them until the Night. This is still the Day of Salvation, let us Rejoice and be glad in it.

God slew Er, based on the wickedness of Er, not the pleasure of God. After Er died, Judah sent Onan into Er’s wife, as was the custom, but Onan knew Er was wicked, instead of continuing the line, he felt it should be stopped (Gen 38:8-9). However, it was based on knowing Er, who at this time had no part in the matter. Onan should have talked with Judah, just as Reuben should have talked with Jacob, just as Jacob should have talked with Isaac; however, it’s just as important to hear what is said, when nothing is said. Prayer is also a method of communication, but communication is a two way street. One can talk for days, yet never hear what is being said to them, but Faith comes by hearing, not talking.

Onan assumed it was up to him to put a stop to this wicked line; however, it was Er who was wicked, not the line, or the promise, or Tamar. Onan made a self-based decision, then spilled his seed on the ground, rather than allow the line with Tamar to continue; however, his intent was still corrupt, not only did he rebel, but he entered the act yet refused to finish it. If he felt the line should cease, he should have never engaged in the act. By Onan agreeing, then engaging in the act, he rapped Tamar by trick and devise. He had the knowledge, but used it in a wicked manner, by his own wickedness he died (Gen 38:9-10).

Judah looked at this situation, then saw his last son, his only son now, the vis­ual evidence appeared to be one of destruction. Judah saw two sons die as a result of one woman, his natural mind concluded it must be the fault of the woman, thus his mind went to “it must be the woman you gave me”. Judah failed to remem­ber Abraham, instead of giving his only son, he told Tamar to remain a widow in his house until Shelah, his last and only son was full grown (however long it may be – Gen 38:10-11).

Tamar knew Judah was walking in fear, she disguised her­self as a prostitute, placing herself in a location where she knew Jacob would pass-by. So, was she as deceitful as Jacob? Yes, but God used her as a mirror, she knew the promise included her, yet Jacob was blaming her for the wickedness of his sons. Tamar knew she had a right from her granted position to be ac­cepted by these people by having a child from the line of Judah. Without a husband or male child, she was not privy to the Abrahamic Covenant. Tamar’s intent was to get what was rightfully hers, her method may be somewhat questionable, yet it was Judah’s iniquity forcing her to use the method. God allowed it to expose, the healing from the exposure would go much further than Tamar’s predicament. This is not our excuse to mix with wicked people, or use wicked means to accomplish what we assume is a Godly result, the fact remains, To whom much is given, much is re­quired. There is a vast difference between God working something into the plan, and someone using their own plan to complete their own agenda.

Judah’s folly was effecting others, yet he would find his folly in his face. We are required to seek the Kingdom by obeying the methods God give us, not make up our own, or use the mistakes of other people as our excuse. When Judah came by the place, Tamar enticed him, but Judah didn’t have the cost with him, thus Tamar settled for a kid from the flock. Several things are important here, first the man fell into the enticement, thus there was a lust there, to assume Tamar was all the fault in this is event, fails to consider Judah’s involvement. Everyone is led away by their own lust; before Judah was afraid of losing his son, here is the evidence the fault wasn’t with Tamar, since Judah didn’t die.

Judah didn’t have the price with him, rather he had to obtain it from the “flock” which was not in the area. This symbol not only went to Ju­dah’s other son, but shows how one will take from the flock to cover their error. Ju­dah missed the point, but sent a servant to obtain the kid; however, Tamar wanted security, showing her distrust, which was a sign to Judah of his distrust. The mirror of God was exposing the heart of Judah, but he failed to see it at the time.

Judah gave Tamar his signet and bracelets, which is like his passport, or proof of ownership (Gen 38:18). When the servant (Hirah) re­turned with the kid, Tamar was no where around. Judah was told by Hirah, “I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, there was no harlot in this place” (Gen 38:21). This Hirah the Adullamite was the same one in Genesis 38:1, it was Hirah Judah was visiting when Judah found and married Shuah (Gen 38:2). After being told there were no harlots in the place Judah said, “Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and you have not found her” (Gen 38:23). In essence Judah said, “Hey, let her keep the stuff, let’s keep this to ourselves”. The same attitude he had when Joseph was taken. This also shows he knew his act was wrong, instead of facing it, he was attempting to hide it, another incident like the “blood on the coat”.

Later Tamar was obviously pregnant, Judah was going to punish her by burning her to death (Gen 38:24). She came forth bringing the signet and bracelets as proof, Judah acknowledged she had been more righteous than he, for she held to the promise, while Judah was attempting to save his son based on his own fear (Gen 38:26). Judah was willing to save his own son, but he wasn’t willing to save the son of his father. This mirror or lesson doesn’t seem important in the beginning of the story of Joseph, but it becomes very important when Judah faces his brother Joseph later.

Tamar gave birth to twins, when one of the twins came forth, he retreated, thus the second was born first. She called the first, Pharez, the second Zerah (Gen 38:29-30). The name Pharez means Breach, or Breakthrough, Zerah means Arising of Light; this allegory in the birth of the twins shows a little light came, yet withdrew, then came the Breakthrough, then the Light came forth. Pharez would be included in the line to David, as well as the genealogy of Jesus (Matt 1:3-5). We know Jesus is the Lion from the tribe of Judah, yet everything produces after its own kind, but does it mean Jesus is like Judah? No, Jesus obtained flesh from Mary, the soul of Jesus is the Word made flesh, not the other way around.

Pharez being a type of Breakthrough appearing before the Light, becoming a symbol regarding Joseph. Although Joseph was reaching out, he was shoved back and forgotten by his brothers, but he was never forgotten by God. When Jo­seph was in the pit, God was with him; when Joseph was sold, God was with him. By looking at the event, it didn’t appear as if God was even in the same coun­try, yet God was there through it all.

From the folly of Judah we move back to the story of Joseph. Joseph was brought to Potiphar’s house where Joseph served Potiphar in the main house (Gen 39:1-4). Poti­phar’s wife lusted for Joseph, this paradox between Judah’s sons being in rebellion for rejecting their call, yet Joseph rejecting the advances of Potiphar’s wife, gives us the difference between doing what God says, even if we don’t understand it, while refusing to do what the world wants, even though the world’s ways may appear enticing, or easier. Judah fell for the enticing in a heartbeat, but Joseph rejected it, thus we find the lust in Judah enticed him, but Joseph honored the house of Potiphar, by keeping his charge, yet gave God honor and respect.

Joseph was subject to Potiphar, but he was in charge of Potiphar’s possessions, but his duties didn’t include taking advantage of the advances from Potiphar’s wife. Joseph remained loyal to God and Potiphar, but the event won’t appear as if he will be rewarded for his loyalty. Joseph rejected Potiphar’s wife, yet she lied by falsely accusing Joseph of rape (Gen 39:7-18). Joseph knew God was with him, the one verse showing this is Genesis 39:9; in the verse we see Joseph would have considered the sin a wickedness against God. Potiphar’s wife was attempting to rape Joseph, when Joseph rejected her, she turned it around to make it appear as if Jo­seph was the culprit. Why would she do this? Joseph rejected her, if Joseph said anything to Potiphar, it would have been death for the unfaithful wife. Jo­seph attempting to justify himself, would only make him look guilty. Her accu­sation went beyond slander to libel, yet it would appear as if her lies would win out.

Up to this point Joseph had done nothing wrong, after all, it started when God gave him a dream, then he shared it. From then on, it would appear as if God was punishing Joseph, but it’s hardly the case. Joseph is in training to be a man of God, a training not based on knowledge alone, but on experiences. Joseph will know the hurts and pains of those who suffer under the hands of the ungodly, as well as what it means to be hurt by one’s brothers, just as important, what it means to be falsely accused. When it’s all over he will be able to minister by having the experience, yet not allowing the experience to guide his ministry. We cannot minister through our pain, we end as another victim all over again. We must be healed, yet retain the lesson of the experience, but we don’t relive it daily.

God was with Joseph, God had a plan and a purpose for all the events, whether Joseph under­stood them, or not, or whether the events appeared Godly, or whether those involved knew God was there. Joseph didn’t know the plan, but his faith knew God did. When Joseph was with Potiphar, Potiphar’s house was prosperous (Gen 39:2), when Joseph enters prison the keeper of the prison sees how the Lord is with Joseph, thus those around Joseph became prosperous (Gen 39:23). Wait, Joseph was a slave, in jail, he looked anything but Prosperous. The prosperity was granted to others, but it was still by the presence of Joseph, although Joseph didn’t have a dime, he was nonetheless giving. Joseph was at peace with himself, he knew God was with him, even if others didn’t, even if the event didn’t appear so. Jo­seph was planting in the lives of others, he was faithful to Potiphar, instead of stealing from him, he made the man’s house prosper. The truth of give and it shall be given was working for Joseph, although it didn’t appear so at the time. This shows it’s not always immediate, but it will come to pass if we are faithful.

Joseph is one example of a natural man believing in God, when all around looks as if the devil has full control. Joseph was walking his personal wilderness, he didn’t consider faith a mountain top to mountain top experience, rather his experiences in the valley were building his belief, his belief gave him foundation for his faith, as God was building his ability. Joseph held the abilities of labor and skill, yet he was a slave, sub­ject to the whims of his master. Many years ago, several men came to various islands to train the natives to grow sugarcane, but they didn’t train the natives to make sugar. The growers were slaves, limited to labor; however, freedom did come, the slaves were given land to grow cane, but they still couldn’t make sugar. They held the same slave mentality trusting in the masters to buy their cane at the master’s price. It wasn’t the labor versus skill, but the attitude of remaining a slave producing defeat. Although they were free, they were still in bondage to a slavery mentality. The slaves could have developed the skill of grow­ing the best cane in the world, instead of being forced to ask the masters to buy, the masters would have begged to buy their cane. We can learn a skill from man, but we are still limited to the knowledge and ability of the one teaching us, or we can ask God to bring the skill to its fullness for the glory of God. We seem to think man invented computers, or God said, “Oh my, look Michael, I wonder how they work”. Man creates nothing wherein God didn’t know all about it before Adam was formed. God can give us skills for any machine, later God will give Uzziah the skill to make all sorts of machines (II Chron 26:15). God granted Joseph the skill of interpreting dreams, it will be the one element to free him in the end. However, at this point in time, Joseph was falsely accused, found guilty without recourse, then tossed into prison (Gen 39:19-20). In all this, “The Lord was with him” (Gen 39:21). Joseph found favor with the keeper of the prison, but he was nonetheless in prison (Gen 39:21).

After a time, either the butler or the baker of Pharaoh would attempt to kill Pharaoh, not knowing which one was guilty, Pharaoh tossed both of them into prison (Gen 40:1-3). How do we know this was a plot to kill Pharaoh? In Genesis 40:1 we find the word “offended”, which is the Hebrew Chata, meaning to sin, or to endanger, or better to cause a serious breakdown in a relationship. We put this with the positions of the butler (cup bearer) and baker, plus the only time those two would have contact with Pharaoh would be in the preparation, or service of food and drink; also the dreams these two had point to service of food products. History also tells us Pharaoh used a taster, not always but generally. Putting it all together we can see how Pharaoh’s taster became the proof of danger, not knowing if the danger was baked in, or in the cup, Pharaoh placed both in jail until he could discover who was attempting to kill him.

Both the butler and the baker had dreams, Joseph interpreted the dreams through his God given skill (Gen 40:12). Dreams are generally warnings, but not all dreams are from God, some come as a result of not watching what we eat. There is a vast difference between a dream given by God, and one based on eating too much. Even the first dreams of Joseph were warnings to his brothers, but they rejected them, rather than bow, they tossed their brother into a pit. The Wise Men were warned in a dream, plus other examples of dreams being warnings. A vision is not a dream, visions do reflect the future, but one is awake, usually a vision is a guide, rather than a warning, as was Peter’s on the roof top in Acts 10.

Joseph not only interpreted the dreams, but knew they were warnings. The dreams were of importance, both the butler and baker knew it, but there was “no interpreter” (Gen 40:8). Joseph made a statement carrying over to First Corinthians and Second Peter, when he said, “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Gen 40:8). If we understand the premise, we can also understand how Peter can say, “no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation” (II Pet 1:20). Any attempt to interpret the Scripture by the natural intellect of man isn’t an Inter­pretation at all, it produces a cunningly devised fable, which is Nothing (II Pet 1:16). Therefore, there is no Private Interpretation, as Peter says.

The Bible doesn’t interpret itself, it defines itself. Translation is taking a word, phrase, book, or document from one language and putting it in another, without changing tenses, meanings, possession, or purpose, with the one main rule in translation as the Objective Genitive, meaning to keep things in proper possession and order. If it’s the Kingdom of God, if it’s the Faith of Jesus, we keep it so. Any attempt to force theology as our personal interpretation ends in deception. If the verse disagrees with our theology, we don’t change the verse, we change our theology.

The butler’s dream was good, a warning can be good, as well as a sign of pending danger. The warning to the butler was not to interfere, the charge would be dismissed, he would be restored (Gen 40:13-15). The chief baker hearing the butler’s dream jumped up expecting to gain the same comfort, but his dream spelled doom (Gen 40:16-22). Joseph asked the butler to remember him, then he told the butler his story of innocence, but like most, when the butler was freed, he forgot Joseph for a time. Three days later was Pharaoh’s birthday, he made a feast for all his servants, then “lifted up the head” of the chief butler, then set the chief baker back among the servants (Gen 40:20). This doesn’t mean he cut their heads off, rather the wording “lifted up” means he took a Census, leaving the fate of the two men up to his servants. The servants voted, the dreams came to pass.

After two years Pharaoh had a dream wherein no one was able to interpret it, then the butler remembered Joseph (Gen 41:1-13). This would seem like the butler was doing a good deed for Joseph; however, the intent of the butler was to gain favor before Pharaoh, not keep his vow to Joseph. If the vow was the issue, then the butler would have kept his word without waiting so long; yet the man remem­bered when it benefitted him. Nonetheless, Pharaoh sent for Joseph, yet Phar­aoh thought Joseph possessed the power, but Joseph told Pharaoh the ability came from God alone (Gen 41:14-16).

Pharaoh’s dream was a warning of seven years of good, followed with seven years of famine (Gen 41:27). God didn’t tell Joseph, Pharaoh would be spared, rather He showed the provision to survive would be given before the famine. If they cared for the provision, they would make it through the famine. This is an example of why we have the Book of Revelation, a warning before the fact telling us this is the Day of Salvation.

Joseph was placed in charge of making sure Pharaoh’s house would survive the famine. Phar­aoh received the prophet in the name of the prophet, thus receiving the reward. Pharaoh could have said, “What? are you crazy, off with his head”, ending with his own head burning in the famine, but God knew Pharaoh would “hear”, then act accordingly.

God started all this with giving Joseph two dreams many years prior, each event thereafter added to Joseph’s faith in God, thus God trained Joseph to handle the position through experiences. The events may not have looked good, but God was with him, if God is with us, then God has something special for us even in the most horrid events.

Joseph had a sign in the dreams of Pharaoh as well; therefore, there are times when we hear a word given, wherein we can benefit as well. God said the plenty would first come, then the famine, in the dreams of Joseph the plenty was in hand, thus Joseph knew what God said, God would do, it was time and timing he was waiting for. Although Joseph’s dream was many years prior, it did come to pass. The dream laid out the plan of the promise, the promise survived, even though the various events Joseph faced on the way seemed anything but good (Gen 37:7-9).

The famine yet to come was in the plan, God didn’t stop the famine, or start it, rather He worked it into the plan showing God has full knowledge of the future. When Joseph stood before Pharaoh, Joseph was thirty years old (Gen 41:46), when he was placed in the pit he was seventeen years old, thus Joseph was kept in bondage for thirteen years, the number thirteen doesn’t mean Joseph was in rebellion, rather it shows Joseph was trained to reject rebellion. The number 13, as we found, has three sides, here we find rebellion being destroyed through the experi­ences of Joseph. It doesn’t mean Joseph was in rebellion, as much as it means the rebellion caused by his brothers is about to be broken. This is an example of someone going through events for the benefit of others. Joseph did nothing wrong, yet it would appear as if he was being punished, thus the event isn’t our problem, it’s our soulish reaction to it becoming our problem. It’s not just the dream, or the number, but discerning them bringing us the blessing.

When the famine hit, many of the people failed to store up, thus they rejected the Word, meaning they had to come to Joseph to obtain food (Gen 41:48-57). We find Pharaoh listened to Joseph, the people didn’t, when the famine came, they were found without, which shows if we receive the words of the prophet, we receive the reward.

The famine continued until it came to Jacob, thus God will allow famine in order to bring about a Godly purpose, but He will also warn us by His prophets. God told Abraham the people would be in bondage to Egypt, it would appear God is setting this entire event up to trap Israel, but it’s hardly the case. God saw the famine before the foundation of the world, then worked it into the plan, as well as the bondage of the children, He also saw them delivered, it’s the issue.

Joseph was the instrument God used to provide the path for Israel to get through the famine, rather than be destroyed by it. This shows God will use various events to show us His Power of Deliverance, each event is a foundation for our Belief to grow thereby. Some can say the famine was a plan of the devil to destroy Israel, perhaps all the events against Joseph were planned by the devil, but it doesn’t mean God didn’t know about the event, rather the devil makes his plans by the moment, not knowing the future, yet God had the victory in hand from the foundation of the world. Perhaps God did plan all these events; however, the event never tells us if it’s evil or not, the result always tells the tale. The result in this case was good, not only did it provide Joseph and his family food during the famine, but it placed the people of God in Egypt where their training would begin.

Once Joseph was trained, there remained a healing be­tween him and his brothers, the restoration of Israel had to take place. God puts us through the fire of affliction to remove the unwanted, by bringing us to a place of joy and understanding. God is a good God, it’s our concept of good confusing the issue. God’s concept of good is always based on the result, not the event. Our flesh determines good by the event, or how the circumstances in the event please us. Judging the event by the event never tells us a thing, looking for God in the event does.

Joseph was gaining the understanding, but Jacob was still unsure acting as the man of fear, thus Jacob sent his sons to Egypt, Israel didn’t (Gen 42:1-5). By this time Joseph was governor over the land, when his brothers came to him, he knew his brothers, but they didn’t know him (Gen 42:7-8). The brothers grew up together, were in the same position and condition, but Joseph grew in the Lord, his countenance showed his new position and condition, thereby making him appear different. When we exit the wilderness of God, those who remained in the world won’t know us either.

The only brother who didn’t go was Benjamin, although Jacob sent the sons, it was the sons of Israel who went forth (Gen 42:4-5). When the brothers came before Joseph, they bowed as Joseph remembered the dreams (Gen 42:9). Then Joseph accused them of being spies, they assured him they were not. Joseph then told them the conditions of being able to obtain food from Egypt, they were to bring back Benjamin. They pleaded with Joseph, but as surety Joseph kept Simeon by binding him before their eyes (Gen 42:24).

Joseph’s brothers felt their guilt, they saw this experience of distress as punishment from God; however, it was not punishment, but restora­tion (Gen 42:21). The reaction of the brothers is an example of how our flesh attempts to determine the event by the event, thus the event isn’t our problem, it’s our soulish reaction to the event becoming the problem (did we say that?). Joseph commanded their sacks to be filled, but in the process he put their money back in the bags without their knowledge (Gen 42:22-27). When the brothers found the money, they feared, causing them to run to Jacob, but they should have sought Israel (Gen 42:28-29). At this time Simeon was still in Egypt being held by Joseph as surety, by now Jacob thinks Joseph is dead, Simeon is dead, and Benjamin is about to die, yet the promise from God was for all to live. When the food ran out, Jacob started to speak, but Israel finished the conversation (Gen 43:1-14). Jacob was full of fear, but Israel said, “God Almighty give you mercy before the man, so he may send away your other brother and Benjamin” (Gen 43:14).

The brothers returned with Benjamin, when they saw Joseph they con­fessed finding the money saying they didn’t know the money was in the sacks (Gen 43:21-25). Joseph’s heart started too long for his father and family, the po­tential seeds of bitterness were turning to mercy (Gen 43:26-31). The brothers were invited to eat, but had to sit at another table, since it was an abomination unto the Egyptians to eat with the Hebrews (Gen 43:32). The Hebrews at this time not only ate red meat, they raised it, thus any shepherd was an abomination to the Egyptians, since the Egyptians didn’t eat read meat. When the children are taken captive, they will pick up the traits of the Egyptians, not only the eating habits, but some other cultural problems as well.

Again the sacks were filled, but this time Joseph wanted Benjamin to stay with him. Joseph had his steward put his “cup of silver” or his cup of authority into one of the sacks (Gen 43:32-44:1-2). The silver cup was used for trials or testings, however, silver is metaphorically identified as Redemption. Jesus will take the fourth cup in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matt 26:39), but Gethsemane is a condition, not a location. The word Gethsemane is a compound word meaning “Wine Press, Place of pressure”; Gethsemane comes from two words, the first is the same word used for Winepress, the second means place of pressure to bring forth the oil, thus on the day of judgment we find the Winepress is made ready, but Jesus took the Cup under Pressure in the Garden. The fourth Cup is the Cup of God’s wrath, the Third Cup is the one we take. The first cup is taken when God desires to be among His people, the second cup is the cup of Separation, the third cup is representing the New Covenant (Blood), which keeps us from facing the Fourth Cup of God’s Wrath (Luke 22:17-20 & Rev 16:19 & 19:15).

Joseph gave his brothers food, but put the silver cup in the sack of Benjamin, all this is still in the plan of restoration; the tares of revenge in Joseph’s heart had to be removed,  before restoration could take place. Silver being a sign of redemption indicates how God was redeeming His own, but the means was hidden from those involved. When the brothers left the city, Joseph sent his steward after them to accuse them of taking the cup (Gen 43:3-5). The brothers had no idea the cup was hidden in the sacks, when the steward found it, they thought for sure Benjamin would be killed (Gen 44:12-17). Instead of going home with the news of death, the brothers went back to Joseph seeking mercy (Gen 44:14-20). When they appeared before Joseph, they found what it was like to be falsely accused, but Joseph’s tears washed away his tares.

This stage of Joseph’s life is an example of how the enemy will move in with tares to disrupt the wheat. Jesus said the enemy plants tares then leaves, the tares become the hindrances, not the enemy (Matt 13:25). Often we assume the devil is the problem, but it’s the works (wiles) of the devil we battle (Eph 6:11). The enemy has planted tares in all of us, wicked words of discour­agement, thoughts, ideas, hurts, pains, fears, including the fear of rejection. We also were held under the spirit of disobedience (spirit of man), leaving many scars, fables and strongholds in our souls. The Spirit of Christ is more than willing to clean the field, but it takes our permission and cooperation. We have a New Heart, known as the New Man, one able to bring the Promise to pass by forming our souls into the Image of God’s Son. The Son of God is manifested to destroy the works of the devil, all we need do is cooperate in the effort (I Jn 3:8).

When Joseph’s steward finds the cup he says, “Is not this it in which my lord drinks, and whereby indeed he divines” (Gen 44:5), it was to con­vince the brothers they were dealing with an Egyptian. This doesn’t mean Joseph engaged in witchcraft, thus to assume this one verse made Joseph a witchdoctor is foolish, he interpreted dreams through the power of God, not the cup of silver (Gen 41:16). The cup of silver was a sign of his position in Egypt, thus as a symbol it was akin to a seal. This is another area where we find someone saying something about someone else, the fact they said it is true, but it doesn’t mean what they said is true. Later Peter will assume Jesus cursed a fig tree, when he makes mention of it, Jesus will say, “have faith in God”. Jesus didn’t curse the fig tree, He made a statement of fact, Peter assumed it was a curse, but Jesus said “have faith”, rather than, “Yeah, when you cruse believe you shall receive”. Paul tells us to bless and curse not, when Jesus gave the Sermon on the Mount He never mentioned “cursing”, only “blessing”. We have to view the statement to the fig tree as intended, not a “curse” to make it happen, but a statement of fact regarding what was happening (Mark 11:20-21). Here the steward assumed Joseph found his knowledge in the silver cup, but it was God, not the cup who gave Joseph knowledge.

Joseph had two sons by the names of Manasseh and Ephraim, Jacob had twelve sons by the names of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebublun, Gad, Asher, Dan, Naphtali, Joseph and Benjamin. Jacob’s twelve sons became the building blocks to the nation, but the foundation goes back to Abraham. So then what does it make Isaac? The cornerstone, from Jacob the man would come Israel the nation. The blessing was divided between the 12 sons, but Joseph gave his blessing to his two sons, bringing the total to thirteen. Ouch, but then the Tribe of Levi was removed from the governmental list, to become the priestly order, the governmental ruling number ended as twelve (Gen 46:9-24 & 48:1-22). God separated the priestly order from the government, yet governments are a part of the Church structure. We have many gifts within The Gift, but two orders of function, governments making the decisions, helps carrying out the decisions. Theocracy is not only God’s form of rule, it’s His government order. The best examples of Theocracy are heaven,  but the best is the manner in which Jesus established His ministry, then how the Church was to be established, and maintained.

The order of function for Israel was for the government rule with the religious order separated, thus no one could lawfully be king and priest. However, before the nation could take effect there had to be a foundation of Restoration. The restoration took place within the family order, all the land of Egypt heard the good news, joy filled the land (Gen 44:33-45:16). This a type and shadow of the joy when someone comes into the family of God; the entire Kingdom rejoices.

There is no mention in the Bible of a “healing ministry” or “deliverance ministry”, they are inclusive in the Ministry of Reconciliation, the very ministry we’re all called to (II Cor 5:19). The motive behind Reconciliation is Restoration, the power behind Restoration is not imputing the faults of others on them, but as ambassadors for Christ we are examples of mercy (forgiveness). It’s what Joseph did toward his brothers, he extended Mercy when there was really no cause to. The brothers were right, they were guilty, but Joseph refused to impute their sins on them, his love overpowered the urge to gain vengeance.

The restoration of Joseph and his brothers is summed up in Joseph’s own words as he said, You thought evil against me, but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive (Gen 50:19-20). The result determined if the events were good, rather then judging the event by the event. As a result of God giving Joseph, Pharaoh wanted all of Joseph’s family to live in Egypt as guests of the land (Gen 45:16-28). Israel took his journey, along the way stopped to give sacrifices unto the God of his father Isaac, then God spoke to Israel saying, “Jacob, Jacob” (Gen 46:1-2). Wow, God can’t even tell the difference between Jacob and Israel. No, the paradox again, Israel gave the sacrifice, but Jacob was wondering if it was really a good idea to venture into Egypt. We can tell from the conversation, God tells Jacob, “fear not to go down to Egypt”, then the promise, “I will go down with thee into Egypt: and I will also surely bring thee up again” (Gen 46:3-4). Wait, didn’t they end captive? Yes, so God must have left them right? Not at all, God was there all the time, watching and waiting. Those times when we think God has left us, He hasn’t. It’s during those times our faith couples with our belief causing us to stand. Abraham also knew they would end captive, some promise? Wait, it didn’t end it in bondage, they would be delivered. Not only did God say they would be delivered, but He promised them a time of deliverance into their own land. Abraham was promised the land, but did he truly possess it? No. The promise went to the children, but they have yet to possess all the land according to the promise, thus the reminder of the land is yet to be possessed.

Jacob then blessed his other sons, then Jacob died. Joseph obtained permission to bury his father in the field of Ephron, where Abraham was also buried (Gen 49:29-33 & 50:1-13). Jacob’s death did not cause the nation to die, rather the nation lived on in those who followed. Joseph died in Egypt, but prior to his death he said God would visit them, and they would take his bones back to the land of his fathers (Gen 50:24-26). In the Blessing Jacob gives to his sons, it would seem some of them were rebuked. In reference to Simeon and Levi it was “Cursed be their anger” (Gen 49:7). In reference to Dan it was, “Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, who bites the horse heels, to that the rider shall fall backward” (Gen 49:17). Yet many were blessings; in reference to Judah it was, “the Scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet” (Gen 49:10). In the Book of Hebrews we read, “but unto the Son He said, Thy throne, Or God is forever and ever, a scepter of Righteousness is the Scepter of Your Kingdom” (Heb 1:8); along with, “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law” (Heb 7:12). Jesus is our High Priest, but He is also the King of all kings.

The record of the family order, or how many entered Egypt in relationship to the number who came indicates even in captivity God’s people increase. They may not have increased in material goods in the land, but they did increase in number. Adding the family orders of 33, 16, 14 and 7 as listed in Genesis 46:6-34 we end with 70, but if we remove Joseph and his family, who were already in Egypt we end with 66 souls, or better, “threescore and six”, this num­ber would reflect to the number of a man later in Daniel, as well as in the Book of Revelation (Gen 46:26, Dan 3:1 & Rev 13:18). When man worships things, including the people of God they enter a very dangerous area. The Nation is a Nation, it was granted favor by God, but the Nation is not God. The sixty-six doesn’t mean these people were idol  makers or idol worshipers, it’s a “number” relating to Jacob going into Egypt, but it wasn’t the same number coming out of Egypt, thus the reference shows going into the World, not coming out of the world. In Exodus the number given is 70 souls, but it reflects the number “in Egypt”, which would include Joseph and his family. In Acts 7:14 Stephen said it was threescore and fifteen souls (75), but if we add the wives it’s the number we come up with. Three different numbers, 66, 70 and 75, yet all are correct. Jacob entered Egypt, but many years later Israel (the nation) would leave. Over the years Egypt changed hands, a new Pharaoh came into power. The new Pharaoh felt the Hebrews would someday attack him, thus to protect himself he placed them in bondage. However, God had a plan, there would come a time of deliverance. Did God know of the change in governments? Yes, it was in the plan, when the children entered Egypt they were treated as highly regarded guests, but this new Pharaoh was paranoid. This new Pharaoh took the land by force, fearing the many Hebrews would take his army by force causing him to keep them in bondage. The bondage became the incentive to leave Egypt, thus it was in the Plan all along. With the incentive to leave, they wouldn’t desire to. Now we move to Exodus, the Great Departure from Egypt.

By Rev. G. E. Newmyer – sbi les2rev9/© 2003