Translate

Sunday, March 27, 2016

Part Two:" And Touch the Face of G-d" May we all seek His face continuosly... Shalom and be blessed. (Thanks Jeff... you know why.)


…And Touch the Face of G-d…[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Part Two

 1 Chronicles 16:8-22 (NASB95)
8  aOh give thanks to the Lord, call upon His name;
bMake known His deeds among the peoples.
9  Sing to Him, sing praises to Him; 1Speak of all His 2wonders.
10  1Glory in His holy name; Let the heart of those who seek the Lord be glad.
11  aSeek the Lord and His strength; Seek His face continually.
12  aRemember His wonderful deeds which He has done,
bHis marvels and the judgments from His mouth,
13  O seed of Israel His servant, Sons of Jacob, His chosen ones!
14  He is the Lord our G-d; aHis judgments are in all the earth.
15     Remember His covenant forever, The word which He commanded to a thousand generations,
16  aThe covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac.
17  aHe also confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
18  Saying, “aTo you I will give the land of Canaan, As the portion of your inheritance.”
19  aWhen they were only a few in number, Very few, and strangers in it,
20  And they wandered about from nation to nation, And from one kingdom to another people,
21  He permitted no man to oppress them, And aHe reproved kings for their sakes, saying,
22  “Do not touch My anointed ones, And ado My prophets no harm.” [6]
 

Look carefully at verse 11: here you see a commandment, a mitzvah – “…Seek His face continually…”

(While there may be some disagreement that this is actually a mitzvah, let me remind you of these:)

Fundamentals of Torah (from the 613 Mitzvot):

1. To know there is a God Exod. 20:2
2. Not to entertain thoughts of other gods besides him Exod. 20:3
3. To know that He is one Deut. 6:4
4. To love Him Deut. 6:5
5. To fear Him Deut. 10:20
6. To Sanctify His Name Lev. 22.32
7. Not to profane His Name Lev. 22:32
8. Not to destroy objects associated with His Name Deut. 12:4
9. To listen to the prophet speaking in His Name Deut. 18:15
10. Not to test the prophet unduly Deut. 6:16…

…76. To say the Shema twice daily Deut. 6:7

…77. To serve the Almighty with prayer daily Exod. 23:25…[7]

 Could we not say that seeking G-d’s face is part and parcel of these?

 Should this not be what believers aspire to, to seek G-d the Father’s face - to yearn to see not only His - but the face of Machiach also? But as we touched on in Part One, the question remains does Yahveh have a face? The word says He is spirit – can we see His face? What does Scripture say about this?

 Exodus 33:18-23 (Tanakh)
18He said, “Oh, let me behold Your Presence!” 19And He answered, “I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim before you the name Lord, b-and the grace that I grant and the compassion that I show.-b

20But,” He said, “you cannot see My face, for man may not see Me and live.”

21And the Lord said, “See, there is a place near Me. Station yourself on the rock 22and, as My Presence passes by, I will put you in a cleft of the rock and shield you with My hand until I have passed by.

23Then I will take My hand away and you will see My back; but My face must not be seen.” [8]
 

Deuteronomy 4:11-12 (HCSB)
11 You came near and stood at the base of the mountain, a mountain blazing with fire into the heavens and enveloped in a dense, black cloud. 12 Then the Lord spoke to you from the fire.
You kept hearing the sound of the words, but didn’t see a form; there was only a voice. e [9]

 Isaiah 40:18 (NET)
40:18 To whom can you compare God?
To what image can you liken him? [10]

 Isaiah 46:3-5 (NET)
46:3 “Listen to me, O family of Jacob,8
all you who are left from the family of Israel,9
you who have been carried from birth,10
you who have been supported from the time you left the womb.11
46:4 Even when you are old, I will take care of you,12
even when you have gray hair, I will carry you.
I made you and I will support you;
I will carry you and rescue you.13
46:5 To whom can you compare and liken me?
Tell me whom you think I resemble, so we can be compared! [11]

 
The B’rit Hadashah[12] also speaks of Yahveh in similar terms: 

John 4:22-24 (NET)
4:22 You people53 worship what you do not know. We worship what we know, because salvation is from the Jews.54 4:23 But a time55 is coming – and now is here56 – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks57 such people to be58 his worshipers.59
4:24 God is spirit,60 and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.[13]

John 6:44-46 (NET)
6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him,66 and I will raise him up at the last day. 6:45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’67 Everyone who hears and learns from the Father68 comes to me.
 6:46 (Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God – he69 has seen the Father.)70 ([14])

1 Timothy 1:17 (NET)
1:17 Now to the eternal king,22 immortal, invisible, the only23 God, be honor and glory forever and ever!24 Amen. [15]
 
So is it fair to say that it has been established by two witnesses, the Tanakh and the B’rit Hadashah, that the Father is spirit and cannot be seen? Yet clearly, the Holy Word says we are to seek His face. How do we do this?

 
As I said in part one, our answer can be found in the Mishkan[16].

Let us look.


 

In Part One, I left you with a description of the three parts of the Mishkan. These parts are:
 
·          חָצֵר (ḥāṣēr) “Chatser” (pronounced khaw-tsare'): The courtyard, or the “outer court”;

·         Kodesh, or בְּמָק֣וֹם קָדֹ֔שׁ  or the “be-maKom kaDosh”: “The Holy Place”;

·         the holy  וּבֵ֖ין H996 between  קֹ֥דֶשׁ H6944 [place] and the most  הַקֳּדָשִֽׁים׃ H6944 holy …” or the Bet Kodesh ha-Kodashim, “the most Holy house” or the “Holy of Holies”.
 
We can see these in the following picture:

The outer courtyard contained the Altar and the Laver; the Holy Place the Menorah, the Table of Showbread and the Golden Altar of Incense; And the Holy of Holies held the Aron, the Ark of the Covenant.

Starting in Bet Kodesh ha-Kodashim, the Holy of Holies, what do we find? Of Course, there is the Aron, the Ark, which contains the Luchot Habrit – לוחות הברית - tablets of the Covenant. Also, some say, within the Kodesh ha-Kodashim there was the budded rod of Aaron and the omer of Manna, which were placed in front of the Testimony. Now there is just a bit of controversy in this here. In the Messianic Writings, Hebrews, chapter 9, it says the Aron contained the omer, the Tablets and the rod, yet Numbers 17:10 (Verse 17:25 in the Tanakh/Chumash) states it differently:

Numbers 17:25 (Tanakh)
25The Lord said to Moses, “Put Aaron’s staff back before the Pact, to be kept as a lesson to rebels, so that their mutterings against Me may cease, lest they die.” [17]

 
The word translated as “before” in English is the Hebrew word (TWOT 1782b)לִפְנֵי  (lipnê) before.[18] This is described in the TWOT as:

לִפְנֵי (lipnê). A preposition, in the presence of, before. This is the most frequent usage of pĕnê (plural construct) with a prefixed preposition. Literally, the phrase means “at/to the face of.” We are dealing then with a case of a substantive which has become a preposition by virtue of its union with a prefix. In the meaning “before” the following object is most frequently a person, God or man, ‘before’ in the sense of ’in full view of, under the eye of, at the disposal of, in the estimation of ’ ([19]BDB, pp. 186–187). [20]

                 Moshe was to place the rod in full view of the rebellious Israelites, so that Aaron’s place as High Priest would not be challenged again, for to challenge Aaron and Moshe was, in effect, to challenge Yahveh Himself. Now, let me say something here.

 The Word of G-d does not and cannot be engaged without our engaging our minds. The whole Word is, for lack of a better metaphor, condensed in such a way as to require us to search, to ponder, to mik’tam, to contemplate – to study. We must use our mind, to study, to learn, then to study some more. Scripture cannot be linearly learned – say by reading Genesis to Revelation. It has to be examined, compared with itself, and conclusions drawn with prayer and understanding. And what should be the aim of this regimen of study? Truth. Getting to the truth of the Word – leaving behind old suppositions, old traditions of men and misguided and misplaced interpretations. One has to be teachable, and above all else, correctable. If, in the pursuit of truth, you find yourself at odds with what you believed and the plain meaning of Scripture – then you must set aside what you once believed and embrace the truth, no matter the cost, no matter the struggle. When I first began to explore the Hebraic perspective, I struggled, I agonized over the word.

 For what I found written in Scripture flew right in the face of what I had been taught and told was truth – Scripture challenged all that I had come to know – and I grudgedly came to the conclusion that what I thought I knew was not true.

I had to admit to G-d and myself that His Word was the only truth I could trust.
 
The ways of man had led me astray – and I discovered to my delight – that “Law” and Grace walked hand-in-hand; that the Jewish carpenter was more than I had ever thought; that there was only one way of halakha – and that was the Torah, defined by my Machiach – not on tablets of stone, but upon the flesh of my heart. It took three years of “unlearning” what I had thought was true (and to be fair, some of what I knew WAS true, but I didn’t know how to walk properly in that truth) and replace it with the how and why of true love of G-d – the walk of obedience. I had been challenging G-d all along with my lack of understanding and it was time to come under command.

Why this little rabbit trail you ask? Because we must think about what the word says. Was the rod of Aaron and the omer of manna in the Holy of Holies – or in front of it, in the Holy Place? If they were in the Kodesh ha-Kodashim, only the High Priest would ever see them, and that was only once a year. So ask yourself – how was what was hidden a lesson for all? Remember the old adage, out of sight, out of mind? To be honest with you, I only have an opinion – I think the omer and the rod may have been set at the door of the Tabernacle, for all to see, but this is only my opinion. Maybe they were in the be-maKom kaDosh, the Holy Place, outside the veil between – I have to admit, I am not sure – may Yahveh grant me wisdom to study and find out. Rabbinic literature seems to place it within the Tabernacle – but whether or not it be in the Kodesh ha-Kodashim or the be-maKom kaDosh, at this time all I can say only G-d knows. Hebrews 9:4 places in in the Aron, but we have to see the context here:

Hebrews 9:1-5 (NASB95)
1     Now even the first covenant had aregulations of divine worship and bthe earthly sanctuary.
2     For there was aa 1tabernacle prepared, the 2outer one, in which were bthe lampstand and cthe table and dthe 3sacred bread; this is called the holy place.
3     Behind athe second veil there was a 1tabernacle which is called the bHoly of Holies,
4     having a golden 1aaltar of incense and bthe ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was ca golden jar holding the manna, and dAaron’s rod which budded, and ethe tables of the covenant;
5     and above it were the acherubim of glory bovershadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail. [21]

 

This later tradition holds to the rod and omer being within the Aron – yet there are inconsistencies in the description of the furnishings of the Mishkan – namely that the Mizbach Hazahav, the Golden Altar, was within the Holy of Holies – contradicting Exodus 40:26. So what is right? AH my brethren – engage your minds and study, come to your own conclusions – I have mine, but as Hebrews says “…but of these things we cannot now speak in detail…”

We are after all looking for the face of G-d, not controversy. There is a reason for me to bring all this up – for whether in the Aron or not, in the Holy of Holies or not, the rod and the omer of manna have a significance in our pursuit of G-d’s face. This we shall see shortly.

 How is it that we relate to the physical?

With our senses -sight, hearing, smell, touch, taste.

What controls these?

Our minds.

 

Look at the Mishkan.



What do we see in the Kodesh ha-Kodashim? We see a compartment, separate from the rest by a veil. Within it is the Aron, within the Aron is the Luchot Ha-brit. The Kodesh ha-Kodashim represents the intellect, the brain of G-d. For how do we relate to the Law? With our minds. We study, we ruminate, we muse over the great and holy way to live – the Father’s way. On the mind of Elohim is His moral code – absolute, unchanging, perfect. What other objects did He require to be lipnê – before, in the presence of His Torah? The rod, representing authority, the manna, representing His provision, His faithfulness to provide. Whether or not these last two were in the Aron or not, they are a necessary component as a clue toward the mind of G-d. The Kapporet (כפורת), the cover with the cherubim, is also a part of the mind of El – His mercy. But with all things of G-d, there is a threefold story here in the “mind” of Father:
 
1.       The articles represent who He is – holy and separate, a perfect moral code, authority and provision, coupled with mercy…
2.       The articles represent who is to come – His Messiah, the Branch, the Way, the Truth and the Life…
3.       The articles represent mankind’s failings: rejection of His Torah (as seen in the broken tablets of the Law); rejection of His authority (as seen through the rebellion of Korah); rejection of His provision for our lives and salvation (as seen in the mutterings of the children of Israel as they gathered the manna and wished for something more); the mercy seat becomes the judgment seat if we neglect the Way, the Truth and the Life He has provided…
This way of the Father seems so strange to us. That is why He says:

 Isaiah 55:8-9 (KJV)
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. [22]

 For now, let us leave it at that; let us journey to the other side of the veil, to the be-maKom kaDosh,  the Holy Place.

 
Allow me to let Rabbi Fohrman explain what we see next:

 
“…Then right below that we would have sort of the two eyes, which would be the Menorah and the table. And, of course, think of what function the Menorah has, and for that matter what’s on the table. For virtually a whole week what’s on the table doesn’t get consumed. It’s just there to look at. It’s show-bread. And of course, what do you need in order to be able to see anything? You need light, provided by the Menorah. Of course the two elements of sight is, you need something to look at and you need light by which to see it. 

The Menorah, one of the eyes as it were, provides the light. The table, the other eye as it were, provides something to look at: the bread that’s on show. And right below that, right where a nose should be, you've got the incense altar. And of course how do we relate to incense? We smell it. And right below that, we have this very long thing that sorts of looks like a mouth; it’s an altar on which offerings are consumed. What do we do with the mouth? We consume things.

It seems like a face. And not only does it looks like a face, the functions of each of these things line up with exactly their corresponding function within a face. It seems like there must be something here. But what do we make of this?  What does it mean? The notion that God would have a face seems theologically very scary. We don’t believe that God has any form at all. You can’t touch Him; you can’t feel Him. What are we supposed to do with this idea?” [23]

 
What do we do indeed? To say that the Mishkan is G-d’s face is of course just a metaphor. If we said it was definitely, then the Mishkan would be a part of G-d, and we know that it is only a building, a dwelling place. But then why do I say that it represents G-d’s face?

Let’s face it. We are human beings, and as such, the abstract tends to get away from us – we like the concrete better. For those who do not understand what I am referring to, please allow me to repeat something I have said before concerning what is abstract and what is concrete (this comes from an unpublished {hint: LONG} study on the Book of Revelation through the Hebraic Perspective; if any are interested in this study, let me know…):
 
“… Revelation, Chapter 1

1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, 2who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. 3Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near. Revelation 1:1-3 (NKJV) [24]

So it begins.  The word “Revelation” is defined by Thayer as:

G602 ἀποκάλυψις apokalupsis

Thayer Definition:

1) laying bear, making naked

2) a disclosure of truth, instruction

2a) concerning things before unknown

2b) used of events by which things or states or persons hitherto withdrawn from view are made visible to all

3) manifestation, appearance[25]

If I were to make the choice for which definition to use, I would use (1).  While the general consensus of scholars is the definition of “disclosure” or “unveiling”, one has to pause and begin to ask new questions, to ponder things in a new way.  For truly in these times in which we now live, what is happening?  Is not all of man’s works being laid bare before him?  And is this not true concerning of all the ages of man? Before we can begin to understand the end of times, we must see how we have gotten here.  All around us, in every endeavor and in every era of man, stand the testimonies of monumental failure.  We’ve seen the collapse of leadership in every aspect of life, social, economic, militaristic, governmental, education, the arts and entertainment, science and medicine. Some examples:

 
·         In our age colleges cannot turn out independent thinkers- men and women capable of rational, coherent thought; political parties are consumed with the pursuit of power and with the entitlements they believe are due them for the positions they hold.

·          While the United States may have the world’s most powerful military and we can still be held at bay by the simple code of morality our brave soldiers employ upon themselves to try to lessen the deaths of innocents, even at the cost of victory.

·         We also face the situations where our military prowess is held in check by those in leadership who lack the skills necessary to or are unable to wield it effectively, thereby rendering it almost useless.  Those who identify themselves as our enemies have no such qualms but the very fact of their brutality renders them vulnerable to the same sword that they so callously employ. 

·         Science and medicine have become almost irreversibly linked to the bottom line, and the cost in economics and ethics has turned these disciplines into cultures that promote a cavalier attitude to the sanctity of life, encouraging euthanasia and infanticide with no regard for the moral questions that beg to be asked. 

When moral people try to push back at this juggernaut of humanism and secularism that pervades most of society they find themselves marginalized as the dominate media and vocal minorities cast them as intolerant and hate-filled religious fanatics or bigoted racists.  Evil is touted as the good while the good is blamed for all the evil.  There is no shame in calling what was once profane sacred and the sacred profane.  Is not then nakedness a better definition for the Revelation?  Are not our failures as civilized nation-states being laid naked before us, our seemingly utter contempt for all that is holy and righteous baring our soul and revealing the body of death that is strapped to our backs? 

Now I know that this seems a very cynical and pessimistic view, but in truth, I haven’t even begun to touch on this raw exposed nerve of humanity’s soul.  O beloved, while we seek to understand this sacred writing, the sixty-sixth book of the Holy Scriptures, ask yourself this question: 

Are we or have we ever been even remotely capable of governing ourselves in a moral and ethical way?

 
If your answer is truthful then you would have to conclude that we have not and are not.  Since this seems to be the case, why have we abandoned the precepts and principles of the other 65 books? What other tome in the history of mankind can stand shoulder to shoulder with this book we call the Bible?  If we are “morally driven people” ask yourselves, why do at least 29,000 (or more) children die every day before their time all over the world?[26]  Why do billions of people make less than a dollar a day?  How is it that disease, famine and war still rage all across the globe today in the 21st century?

 
We are laid bare my brethren.  Even our “religions” have failed us.  Converts to Christianity fall back into sin at the rate of 80%; that means 8 out of every 10 people that main-stream denominations see make “a decision for Christ” backslide or fall away.  Addictions, sex scandals, divorces; these are just as common in the pew (or more so) as they are outside the church’s walls. Except for a few pockets of real power and strength the modern church is helpless in light of what is happening today.  We see a real hunger for the things of Yahveh in those that are seeking Him going unfed, or worse, snapped up by the wolves and masters of false teachings and cultish, self-driven opportunists. 

Naked we are before this onslaught, but the story of the Revelation of Jesus Christ is two-fold.  On the one hand, Christ’s Revelation to this dying world is to show to the world its full and complete failure.  It shows us how instead of being the stewards of the most blessed planet in the cosmos, we have squandered this, our blessing, in greed and upon the altars of selfish ways.  

 On the other hand, the Revelation of Jesus Christ is the only hope we have, praise be unto Him.  For in our weaknesses and in our failings He has chosen to show us hope, a way out of the mire; through grace and mercy to those who believe He will preserve their faith, even if it costs them their lives, yet peace, rest and glory awaits those who endure.  In our faith in Him, we can and will show untold numbers of the lost there is a Way of Truth and Light, and many will come to know and fear our Lord, and thus be counted in the family of Yahveh at the end of the age.  So there is good news, yes, O how I praise Him for this Good News of the Revelation of Christ. 

 
First and foremost, in this great undertaking of studying the Book of Revelation we must understand why we are; notice what John says in verse one:


“…The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place…”

 
 Let us now define some terms:

Abstract

ABSTRACT', v.t. [L. abstraho, to draw from or separate; from abs and traho, which is the Eng. draw. See Draw.]

1. To draw from, or to separate; as to abstract an action from its evil effects; to abstract spirit from any substance by distillation; but in this sense extract is now more generally used.

2. To separate ideas by the operation of the mind; to consider one part of a complex object, or to have a partial idea of it in the mind.

3. To select or separate the substance of a book or writing; to epitomize or reduce to a summary.

4. In chemistry, to separate, as the more volatile parts of a substance by repeated distillation, or at least by distillation.

 
AB'STRACT, a. [L. abstractus.]

1. separate; distinct from something else. An abstract idea, in metaphysics, is an idea separated from a complex object, or from other ideas which naturally accompany it, as the solidity of marble contemplated apart from its color or figure.

 

  • Abstract terms are those which express abstract ideas, as beauty, whiteness, roundness, without regarding any subject in which they exist; or abstract terms are the names of orders, genera, or species of things, in which there is a combination of similar qualities.
  • Abstract numbers are numbers used without application to things, as, 6, 8, 10: but when applied to anything, as 6 feet, 10 men, they become concrete.
  • Abstract or pure mathematics, is that which treats of magnitude or quantity, without restriction to any species of particular magnitude, as arithmetic and geometry; opposed to which is mixed mathematics, which treats of simple properties, and the relations of quantity, as applied to sensible objects, as hydrostatics, navigation, optics, &c.

2. Separate, existing in the mind only; as an abstract subject; an abstract question: and hence difficult, abstruse.

 
1. A summary, or epitome, containing the substance, a general view, or the principal heads of a treatise or writing.

2. Formerly, an extract, or a smaller quantity, containing the essence of a larger.

 
  • In the abstract, in a state of separation, as a subject considered in the abstract, i. e. without reference to particular persons or things.[27]

Concrete

CONCRETE, a. [L., to grow together, to grow. See Grow.]

1. Literally, united in growth. Hence, formed by coalition of separate particles in one body; consistent in a mass; united in a solid form.

  • The first concrete state or consistent surface of the chaos.

2. In logic, applied to a subject; not abstract; as the whiteness of snow. Here whiteness is used as a concrete term, as it expresses the quality of snow.

  • Concrete terms, while they express the quality, do also express, or imply, or refer to a subject to which they belong.
  • A concrete number expresses or denotes a particular subject, as three men; but when we use a number without reference to a subject, as three, or five, we use the term in the abstract.

CONCRETE, n.

1. A compound; a mass formed by concretion, spontaneous union or coalescence of separate particles of matter in one body.

  • Gold is a porous concrete.

2. In philosophy, a mass or compound body, made up of different ingredients; a mixed body or mass.

  • Soap is a factutious concrete.

3. In logic, a concrete term; a term that includes both the quality and the subject in which it exists; as nigrum, a black thing.

 

CONCRETE, v.i. To unite or coalesce, as separate particles, into a mass or solid body, chiefly by spontaneous cohesion, or other natural process; as saline particles concrete into crystals; blood concretes in a bowl. Applied to some substances, it is equivalent to indurate; as, metallic matter concretes into a hard body. Applied to other substances, it is equivalent to congeal, thicken, inspissate,, coagulate; as in the concretion of blood.

CONCRETE, v.t. To form a mass by the cohesion or coalescence of separate particles.[28]

 

Before we can get into our study, let us review a bit.  Those who have read my epistles before know something about how I approach a subject.  To get at the deeper meaning that lies below the surface of most subjects, we must define terms.  With the Revelation, we must go another step first; we have to make a decision that what is before us is an abstract document or one that is a literal, concrete exposition.  Many of the “interpreters” of Revelation have opted for the literal approach; Hal Lindsey, Paul Crouch, Jack Van Impe, and John Hagee are but a few that come to mind.  One might ask what is wrong with this approach.  Well, let us look at our terms.  We pull our definitions from my favorite, the Webster’s Dictionary of 1828.  Written and compiled by Noah Webster, this dictionary is said to have the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. Webster considered education "useless without the Bible".  Webster claimed to have learned 20 different languages in finding definitions for which a particular word is used.[29]  We use it as an aid in understanding how words were used; in the King James 1611 version, to properly define words, it is best to consult a dictionary from the 1600’s.  Since Webster based his dictionary upon the King James, his is the closest we have in this modern era in which to see how English words were used in their proper Biblical context.  When we discuss the original intent of the Holy Writ, we have to go to the Hebrew and the Greek.  Now some of you already know this from previous studies, but we must review the rules we follow for new readers. 

 
Context and intent: only in this manner can we begin to discern Yahveh’s message to us.  That is why we must make a decision.  Is Yahveh’s word concrete, abstract or both?  Let us take a look this in another fashion. Pick up your Bible.  Hold it, feel the grain of the material that covers it.  Turn its pages, feel the quality of the paper, hear their sound.  If it is new, you can even smell it; new Bibles smell like a new book, while old Bibles have a smell to them also, the smell of well-worn pages and the hands that have handled them.  This is concrete.  Concrete is something that can be perceived by the senses; with your senses you can tell something is real, solid and actual.  Now, take your Bible.  Put it next to your heart.  Does it enter into it?  Of course not.  You have to read it, interpret the message given, and then do something with it to make it apply to your life.  Look at the highlighted definitions given for abstract.

 

Number 2 says: To separate ideas by the operation of the mind.

 
Now this is a simple explanation, but a very complex operation.  When we look at Yahveh’s word, in the Tanakh (Old Testament) we see concrete ideas and situations interspersed with those of the abstract; the rituals of sacrifice mixed with the reason for the sacrifices.  We can see, touch and hear the act of the sacrifice, the smell of the blood, even the feel of the altar leads us to deduce the act is very concrete.  But can we touch the abstraction?  Can we get our hands around the remission of sin by the death of the lamb or bullock?  We know of the act, yet the providence that gave us the act and the lifting of the weight of sin cannot be held onto by our senses. The remission of sin is a concept, one that takes a spiritual dimension to make it come alive in a man’s heart.  This is the abstract.  This is parabolic imagery, the types and shadows used throughout the Word of Yahveh, yet found most profoundly in the B’rit Hadashah (New Testament).  Parabolic imagery is better known as the parables used by Christ in His teachings, and then later by His Apostles.  It is found in the Tanakh but here we have to also grasp the concrete, that which was set in stone so to speak. 

Eternal truths are concrete, set down by Yahveh as never changing, never compromising, and yet it still takes the abstract for them to reach a man’s soul. So to try to follow the Bible as a literal device, we will run into problems that can only be surmounted by the unyielding, relentless pursuit of our minds and hearts by the Ruach HaKodesh (the Holy Spirit). This pursuit by the Spirit drives us, the pursued, to the abstract- the making and the application of the concrete into our hearts.  The parabolic approach to understanding Scripture is the piece of the puzzle that has been lost to the Christian church, especially in the western church.  The eastern orthodox church is not immune to this either, as they adopted ritual and form over the ὑπόστασις (hupostasis), the substance of faith…

Hebrews 11:1 (KJV)
1Now faith is the substancea of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.[30]

 

To further illustrate this, look at the rest of Rev.1:1:  “…And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John…”  The word used by John here for “signified” is the word [G4591] σημαίνω sēmainō, defined by Thayer as: 1) to give a sign, to signify, indicate or 2) to make known.[31]  This derives its original meaning from the Hebrew word [H2368] חתם    חותם chôthâm  chôthâm kho-thawm', kho-thawm' From H2856; a signature ring: - seal, signet.[32]   We see an expanded translation below: (note the underlined portion)

 


Figure 3 From: THE BROWN - DRIVER - BRIGGS - GESENIUS HEBREW AND ENGLISH LEXICON [33]

 The idea is to seal the identification of a thing, such as the banners that troops would display before their respective groups, or the identifying markers that officials would use to put the king’s seal in the wax that sealed documents. Barnes puts it this way:

“…And signified it - Εσήμανεν  Esemanen. He indicated it by signs and symbols. The word occurs in the New Testament only in Joh_12:33; Joh_18:32; Joh_21:19; Act_11:28; Act_25:27, and in the passage before us, in all which places it is rendered “signify, signifying, or signified.” It properly refers to some sign, signal, or token by which anything is made known (compare Mat_26:28; Rom_4:11; Gen_9:12-13; Gen_17:11; Luk_2:12; 2Co_12:12; 1Co_14:22), and is a word most happily chosen to denote the manner in which the events referred to were to be communicated to John, for nearly the whole book is made up of signs and symbols. If it be asked what was signified to John, it may be replied that either the word “it” may be understood, as in our translation, to refer to the Apocalypse (Revelation), or refer to what he saw (ὅσα εἶδε  hosa eide), as Prof. Stuart supposes; or it may be absolute, without any object following, as Prof. Robinson (Lexicon) supposes. The general sense is, that, sending by his angel, he made to John a communication by expressive signs or symbols…”[34]

What had been signified to John was the things that would not only shortly come to pass but how Jesus Christ would be revealed to the Gentile Church over the course of the next two millennia.  Not only was the end to be foretold, but also the way and means of how Christ would manifest Himself.  Now how does all of this tie into the idea of abstract vs. concrete? Simple: by signs, visions and symbols, Yahveh revealed the plan to John.  It was the abstract that was communicated to John and it is the abstract that is understood by the mind.  The literal used in the Tanakh is always seen as a type or shadow.  Look here at Hebrews 10:1-10:

1For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.

 4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

5Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

“Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,

But a body You have prepared for Me.

6     In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin

You had no pleasure.

7     Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—

In the volume of the book it is written of Me—

To do Your will, O God.’ ”

 
8Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), 9then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. [35]

Notice what it says in verse 4.  “…it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins…”  Is this not proof of what I had stated before, that even though in the concrete sense the blood of bulls and goats was shed for the remission of sin, this did not remove the sin.  Only in the abstract is that possible, from a source outside of the natural.  So it is in the words used by Yahveh to give us His message and plan of salvation.  To the Jews in Christ’s day, when baptism (βάπτισμα baptisma bap'-tis-mah) was mentioned, they understood it for what it was; the ceremonial washing that converts into Judaism undertook.  When Christ inquired of the Sons of Thunder in (Mark 10:38): “And Jesus said to them, Ye do not know what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup which *I* drink, or be baptised with the baptism that *I* am baptised with?”[36] the baptism He spoke of in this verse was the true baptism, the baptism of blood. The Jews of the 1st century understood martyrdom, and what it meant when Christ told them to pick up their cross and follow Him.  They knew these were words of death (or better, the absence of life), yet the concept Christ was speaking of was death to the self. These were concepts in the abstract and The Christ was speaking to them with the language of parabolic imagery.  With this imagery He was able to start them looking into the shadows for the type and reality of the spiritual, to look into their hearts, that place of understanding where we die to our way of thinking and come into the understanding of Yahveh’s.

             I put all this out to you to help you see that there is another way of looking at Scripture than the way that is commonly taught in today’s church (or religion).  I… I want you to know what I’m about to say is hard, but necessary.  First, I have no exclusive hold on truth.  I am just a seeker of Yahveh’s face as I hope you are.  If I lose you after this qualifier, then so be it.  I do not hold myself up to be a great scholar.  What I teach, you can easy confirm with a careful study of Yahveh’s word on your own.  If I am found to be wrong in my teachings (and Scripture is the only judge of this that is acceptable), then I will gladly repent and humbly amend that which I teach.  I truly believe though that Scripture and the Holy Spirit will bear witness to what I teach is the Truth of Yahveh’s word.

 

 The qualifier to these lessons is this:  What has been taught to the church in the past (most notably that since the introduction of dispensationalism, replacement theology, and the promotion of the doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church since the early to Mid-1800’s) are, and this will be where I lose some of you, doctrines of born of hell.  All of these positions taken by learned men, some who at least on the outside appear very devout Christians, are based on man’s traditions and erroneous interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.  They are fables and outright lies and those who teach them and promote them are at the very least deceived or worse yet, false teachers. 

 What is also born from the very heart of satan himself is the unashamed and unrestrained hatred of the Jewish people and the total disdain of the Torah of Yahveh.

 
I have made a careful study of Yahveh’s word, and have agonized over the words I just said to you, for I know they will not be received by many and I will be reviled by the majority for even saying them.  Praise Yahveh to be counted worthy to be hated for His Name’s sake.  The time is short, beloved, and no teacher of Yahveh’s word has the time or the right to lie to anyone. I will stand before my Yahveh and have to give an account for every word I speak and every doctrine I teach, and I humbly believe that in this matter, I can stand and say I have taught from the whole counsel of Yahveh and have faithfully done my duty, which is speak the truth with love.  That which is true is sometimes bitter, but to a starving man, even the bitter is sweet.  If you will bear with me throughout this study, I can show you in Yahveh’s word that what I have said is true. I mean no one ill will; for there will always be disagreements on doctrine, no matter what.  But if we come to the knowledge of the Truth, then we are accountable for what we do with it, and if we choose to hide the truth, so that we don’t offend or so that we are liked, then we are guilty of the blood of those we have hidden the truth from.  And the truth is that throughout the history of the “church” we have trampled upon the truth and upon the Chosen People of Yahveh…”[37]

Now some issues I’ve raised in the previous section cannot be fully addressed here, but I stand by my comments. What can be addressed is this: if we are to seek Yahveh’s face, we must do so in humility and in truth. We must lay aside all the extra baggage that the church has put upon us – and this includes Christians, Messianic believers and even our Jewish brethren. The fire did not fall on the altar in front of the Mishkan until Aaron and Moshe were reconciled to one another and they came and blessed the people together – in unity. The fire won’t fall for us either today until we do the same, and only truth will allow us to do this.

 

The Mishkan represents Father’s face because we, as human beings, need the tangible, the concrete. Why it is so hard for us to acknowledge the supernatural is a mystery to me. Perhaps it is simply our times – we see images all around us, for good and evil; we hear, touch and smell life in the physical realm and have become desensitized to that which exists outside of what our senses can detect. That is why ghost stories and the like so intrigue us – we want to experience that which we cannot see or touch, yet that part of our being has been shut down by the hardships of life itself. All we can handle is stylized imagination, safe because it comes to us in the form of movies or shows. To experience the true reality – that which is eternal – frightens us, because we have no control over it. The Mishkan though, gave our fore-fathers a way to see G-d, first in the dwelling place itself, and then in the Cloud by day, and the Fire at night.

G-d took from Himself something and turned it into everything we know. Man’s way of thinking of the creation as “something coming from nothing” requires as much faith and religion as does the believers view that “…In the Beginning, G-d created the heavens and the earth…”; actually, maybe more because they, the non-believers, have to suspend rational thought to believe what they do. Believers don’t. We just accept on faith that what is was created from something – by Someone – and the something had to be that which was a part of Him.

Yahveh exists outside of our concept of time and space. Yet, in His dealings with us, He has to enter our time, our space from that place where He is. Consider the priestly blessing of Aaron:

B’midbar (Numbers) 6:22-27

22 Adonai said to Moshe, 23 “Speak to Aharon and his sons, and tell them that this is how you are to bless the people of Isra’el: you are to say to them,

24             Y’varekh’kha Adonai v’yishmerekha.

[May Adonai bless you and keep you.]

25             Ya’er Adonai panav eleikha vichunekka.

[May Adonai make his face shine on you and show you his favor.]

26             Yissa Adonai panav eleikha v’yasem l’kha shalom.

[May Adonai lift up his face toward you and give you peace.]’

27 “In this way they are to put my name on the people of Isra’el, so that I will bless them.” [38]

 

We are given this blessing in B’midbar, yet it was actually said at the completion of the Mishkan and the consecration of Aaron and the priesthood on the eighth day when the fire fell:

Vayikra (Leviticus) 9:22-24

 22 Aharon raised his hands toward the people, blessed them and came down from offering the sin offering, the burnt offering and the peace offerings. 23 Moshe and Aharon entered the tent of meeting, came out and blessed the people. Then the glory of Adonai appeared to all the people!  24 Fire came forth from the presence of Adonai, consuming the burnt offering and the fat on the altar. When all the people saw it, they shouted and fell on their faces.[39]

 

For seven days Aaron and his sons remained in the Mishkan, set apart as they were consecrated unto G-d. Many of us fail to grasp what it means to be consecrated unto G-d – to be set apart, to be made holy for Him. I confess I have that problem; I can go to congregation, come out touched by the presence of G-d and in five minutes be muttering about the antics of other drivers on the road. What happened to my consecration? Before I go to work I say a prayer over my wife and family – yet I walk into work and am unable to mutter a single good word over my co-workers, because I find offense in them – when the offense is really in me for I did not bring the light of the world into the building with me. I fill my eyes and ears with the news of the day – depressing news, news of wars and rumor of wars, news of talking heads battling one another for a position of power over all the rest of the people, and because I take garbage in, garbage spews out. To be fair, this is not an everyday occurrence, but it occurs with enough frequency that I must constantly be seeking repentance for my actions – instead of my actions being representative of the Kingdom of G-d. I tell you these things so as not to pretend to you, my readers, that I am somehow above the fray – I too am liable to succumb to the act of muttering and gossip if I do not make the conscious decision not to engage in this behavior. Loving G-d and man is a decision – one we must make every day, every hour, every minute, every second of our lives. This is the act of seeking G-d’s face – staying consecrated unto Him, and in turn reflecting upon a dying world His love and the love of Messiah Yeshua. It is, for us all, a tall order.

 

This is the act of seeing the face of G-d in the Mishkan; this is the act of us connecting to the spiritual. When we think of how G-d chose to interact with us “Ki b’anan ereh al ha-kaporet.” “I will appear in a cloud, hovering over the Ark..”[40] then we must look at the Aron, for it is the mind of G-d, and with the mind we must connect, we must contemplate this G-d, we must connect to His Torah and then connect to the rod of His authority -  the bread of life Yeshua Ha’Machiach. It is all tied together.

 

Whether or not my beloved, you are convinced, this is not up to me. Each one must take the time to study, to michtam, to find the connection between the physical and the spiritual in your lives. With so much on our plates, from terrorism, to hatred, to race problems, to all the struggles just to stay alive every day, can you find time to set yourself apart, give a moment to the G-d of Heaven who is calling out to you? Who are you really? Are you just the sum total of all your experiences, good and bad? Or are you more than that?

 

I say we are more than that. For the sum of our experiences shapes us to a degree, but we each have a conscious decision to make – to rise above or sink below that collection of experiences. Take myself for one example. If I was just the sum of all I experienced, I would still be lost in the wilderness. 40 years I wandered – lost in a haze of violence, of drug abuse, of neglect, of being haunted by demons - those real and self-inflicted; I could have stayed in this realm, and continued until it ended, but G-d had a different idea. He chose not to let me descend further into the abyss, but instead lifted me from the mire and put my hind feet on high places. But I had to decide. I had to decide not to follow that path of unrighteousness, of lawlessness, of futility and remorse any more. The beauty of G-d is that He gives us a choice, between life and death, and urges us to choose life.  Just as the G-d of all things created for us a place within time and space, He allows us to create for Him a place within our own time and space for the timeless – for the eternal – and we can choose to invite Him in and be a part of us, and in the cool of the day we can walk with Him. Rabbi Fohrman says it best:

 

“…God says, “I will connect to your world the same way you connect to your own bodies.” And maybe that’s the message of the Mishkan. That, as crazy as it seems for a being that is outside of space and outside of time to somehow inhabit the world of space and time, it actually happens. We can help make it happen. We can create something, a place for God in our world, and invite God in and it actually works. Can we understand it? No. Does it make any sense? No. It makes just as much sense as how your own sense of consciousness inhabits your own face. Can you understand that? No. Is it real? Very much so. God’s presence in our world can be real too.

 
In our day and age, we have no Mishkan, we have no temple, but maybe our task at some level remains the same. The Mishkan teaches us not to be intimidated, not to give up on inviting the transcendent God into our world. It can happen. We can make places for God. What place will you make for God in your own life...”[41]

 
Indeed, what place will you make for G-d in own life? It isn’t a question to be taken lightly. It isn’t “what place can you..” but “what place will you…” make for Him. It seems that the closer we get to the return of Messiah, the farther and harder it seems to be to focus on the things of G-d, yet it is as Sha’ul said:

Philippians 4:5-8 (HCSB)
5 Let your graciousness be known to everyone. The Lord is near. d 6 Don’t worry about anything, but in everything, through prayer and petition with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses e every thought, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. f

8 Finally brothers, whatever is true, g whatever is honorable, h whatever is just, i whatever is pure, j whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable—if there is any moral excellence k and if there is any praise—dwell on these things.[42] 

The Mishkan shows us the face of G-d, His mercy and His provisions for what troubles us in this life. Through the Messiah we have seen our peace offering, we have been reconciled to G-d through Him, and by Messiah Yeshua, we now have the ability to write the tablets of the Torah upon our hearts and obey G-d as we should. The Torah, for me, is not just something to follow strictly, or to the letter; I will fully admit, that much of it I cannot do, not without making many missteps along the way. But I have a mind – and with it I can ask the questions I need to ask in order to follow the spirit of the Law – that of justice, of mercy, of grace, of obedience, of love and compassion.

 
 I can look at the mitzvoth and ask “What is Father’s intention here? What is the principle He wants me to see?” When I answer these questions, then upon my heart is the Law, and I’ll walk according to it. Far be it from me to redefine Torah observance – or to dictate to anyone else how they should approach the Law, the Torah. Let each be persuaded in his or her own heart, and then reconciled to G-d as He sees fit; for what duty is it of mine to question G-d’s servants? I deal with G-d on a personal basis – I seek His face and His alone – and may my victories be more than my consequences[43].

May the same be for you all also. I hope this lesson has touched you today and may I leave you with this blessing (with utmost thanks to Father Yahveh, Yeshua and a good servant of G-d, Dr. J. Vernon McGee):

 

…May G-d richly bless you my beloved, Amein…




[1] This study is inspired by Rabbi David Fohrman at https://www.alephbeta.org/... I encourage all my readers to go to his site for AlephBeta Academy and to broaden their understanding of HaShem (“The Name” – Yahveh, the living G-d), the Torah and His words for us all…AlephBeta is generously supported by the Hoffberger Foundation for Torah Studies. The Hoffberger Foundation for Torah Studies
[2] Authors note: Use of information from Jewish-themed websites should not be construed as these sites endorsing or confirming any thesis introduced by the author of this epistle. I present the information from their respective sites for instructional purposes only and/or to aid in the readers understanding of the subjects discussed. The inverse is also true – by using these sites in no way confirms or denies that this author holds to all things found on these sites – but brethren, we all can learn from one another, Jew and Gentile; may it be so in shalom and love and respect.
[3]  Author’s note:  Throughout this study I’ll be using the Net® Bible and  the Net® Notes: within the notes you’ll see symbols like this: ( א B Ψ 892* 2427 sys). These are abbreviations used by the NetBible© for identifying the principal manuscript evidence that they (authors and translators of the NetBible©)  used in translating the New Testament. Please go to  https://bible.org/netbible/ and see their section labeled “NET Bible Principals of Translation” for a more complete explanation on these symbols and other items pertinent to the way the NET Bible uses them.
[4] Author’s Note: In these studies I have used the notes that come along with the passages I cite from the sources that I cite: these need a bit of a disclaimer though. As in all things, not everything that is footnoted is something that I necessarily agree with, especially if it contradicts what I believe pertains to any matters of the Torah or the commandments of G-d. I give you the notes as they are written by the authors of the material I cite from, so that you can see the information contained within them. It truly is not my place to edit or correct them; if they state anything that is in opposition to what I teach, then so be it. I will address these issues if requested, but for the sake of brevity (as if any of these posts of mine are brief ) I insert them and let them stand as they are. If I don’t agree with them, why do I include them you might ask? I don’t believe in censuring anyone’s opinions or scholarship; as I would not want mine censured, so I will not do to that to another. As Rabbi Hillel once stated, “What is hateful to you, do not do to another. That is the whole Torah. Go and learn it.” Torah leads me to respect others, even if I disagree; it leads me to present both sides of the coin, even if it could mean I’d lose part of the argument. That is not to say I should not challenge something I believe contradicts the truth of G-d’s word; that I will do in the main body of my epistles; that is where my gentle dissent belongs. Most (but not all) of the differences will come when I quote from the NET® Bible (but not exclusively); it has a decidedly Western/Greek mindset to it, but as a wise man once said “How do you eat chicken? Swallow the meat and spit out the bones…” I do though want to present the NET® notes because there is a wealth of information and research contained within them that I hope you find helpful.
[5] One may wonder why I omit the “o” when I write the title “G-d”. While there are many who say that to leave out the “o” is a sign of being under the influence of the Rabbis who forbid saying the name of Yahveh, I say, one must come to a conclusion on their own, and do as their heart convicts them (within the bounds of G-d’s word of course). I believe in the power of the name of the Most High – the name of Yahveh – and in uttering it in awe and reverence, yet find no contradiction in my soul for the hyphenated title “G-d”. I have written it both ways – stopped doing it, and now I have returned to the practice – as I said, one must follow the conviction of their heart. I do not disrespect anyone else’s opinion on this matter, and regardless if you think it wrong or right, I ask for the same respect. Let each be fully persuaded in their own mind and heart – and let G-d sort it out with each believer. For now, this is right for me, till the Father corrects - or confirms; I am after all, a work in progress. Shalom. 
a  1 Chr 16:8–36; Ps 105:1–15
b  1 Kin 8:43; 2 Kin 19:19
1  Or Meditate on
2  I.e. wonderful acts
1  Or Boast
a  Ps 24:6
a  Ps 103:2
b  Ps 78:43–68
a  Ps 48:10
a  Gen 12:7; 17:2; 22:16–18; 26:3
a  Gen 35:11, 12
a  Gen 13:15
a  Gen 34:30; Deut 7:7
a  Gen 12:17; 20:3; Ex 7:15–18
a  Gen 20:7
[6]  New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
[7] From the Fundamentals of Torah_2013.pdf , www.weshaddaiministries.us resources.
   
 
b-  Lit. “My face will go and I will.”
-b  Lit. “My face will go and I will.”
[8]  Jewish Publication Society. (1997, c1985). Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: A new translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the traditional Hebrew text. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
e  4:9-12 Ex 19:10-19; Heb 12:18-19
[9]  The Holy Bible: Holman Christian standard version. 2003. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers.
[10]  Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
·         [The following notes are taken from the NET Bible® footnotes, copyright (c) 1996-2006 by Biblical Studies Press L.L.C. All rights reserved. Used by permission from www.bible.org, n.d. Numbering system is unique to NET® Notes.  For more information, see footnote #3 and 4.]
8 tn Heb “house of Jacob”; TEV “descendants of Jacob.”
9 tn Heb “and all the remnant of the house of Israel.”
10 tn Heb “from the womb” (so NRSV); KJV “from the belly”; NAB “from your infancy.”
11 tn Heb “who have been lifted up from the womb.”
12 tn Heb “until old age, I am he” (NRSV similar); NLT “I will be your God throughout your lifetime.”
13 sn Unlike the weary idol gods, whose images must be carried by animals, the Lord carries his weary people.
[11]  Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
[12] B’rit Hadashad should truly be called the “Messianic Writings”. The new covenant is not the “New Testament” as so many say. The new covenant is Jeremiah 31:31-40 – the restoration of the kingdom of Israel, of the Jewish people as G-d’s people and of all believers who hold to the Torah of Moses and the Machiach of Elohim.
53 tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to indicate that the Greek verb translated “worship” is second person plural and thus refers to more than the woman alone.
54 tn Or “from the Judeans.” See the note on “Jew” in v. 9.
55 tn Grk “an hour.”
56 tn “Here” is not in the Greek text but is supplied to conform to contemporary English idiom.
57 sn See also John 4:27.
58 tn Or “as.” The object-complement construction implies either “as” or “to be.”
59 tn This is a double accusative construction of object and complement with τοιούτους (toioutous) as the object and the participle προσκυνοῦντας (proskunountas) as the complement.
sn The Father wants such people as his worshipers. Note how the woman has been concerned about where people ought to worship, while Jesus is concerned about who people ought to worship.
60 tn Here πνεῦμα (pneuma) is understood as a qualitative predicate nominative while the articular θεός (theos) is the subject.
·         End NET® Bible Notes
[13]  Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
·         [The following notes are taken from the NET Bible® footnotes, copyright (c) 1996-2006 by Biblical Studies Press L.L.C. All rights reserved. Used by permission from www.bible.org, n.d. Numbering system is unique to NET® Notes..  For more information see footnote #3 and 4.]
66 tn Or “attracts him,” or “pulls him.” The word is used of pulling or dragging, often by force. It is even used once of magnetic attraction (A. Oepke, TDNT 2:503).
sn The Father who sent me draws him. The author never specifically explains what this “drawing” consists of. It is evidently some kind of attraction; whether it is binding and irresistible or not is not mentioned. But there does seem to be a parallel with 6:65, where Jesus says that no one is able to come to him unless the Father has allowed it. This apparently parallels the use of Isaiah by John to reflect the spiritual blindness of the Jewish leaders (see the quotations from Isaiah in John 9:41 and 12:39–40).
67 sn A quotation from Isa 54:13.
68 tn Or “listens to the Father and learns.”
69 tn Grk “this one.”
70 sn This is best taken as a parenthetical note by the author. Although some would attribute these words to Jesus himself, the switch from first person in Jesus’ preceding and following remarks to third person in v. 46 suggests that the author has added a clarifying comment here.
[14]  Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
22 tn Or more literally, “king of the ages.”
23 tc Most later witnesses (א2 D1 Hc Ψ 1881 M) have “wise” (σόφῳ, sōphō) here (thus, “the only wise God”), while the earlier and better witnesses (א* A D* F G H* 33 1739 lat co) lack this adjective. Although it could be argued that the longer reading is harder since it does not as emphatically affirm monotheism, it is more likely that scribes borrowed σόφῳ from Rom 16:27 where μόνῳ σόφῳ θεῷ (monō sophō theō, “the only wise God”) is textually solid.
24 tn Grk “unto the ages of the ages,” an emphatic way of speaking about eternity in Greek.
·         End NET® Bible Notes
[15]  Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
[16] Throughout this epistle I’ll use transliteration to introduce Hebraic names – if there be any error in spelling or translation – let it fall upon me. I have attempted to do the translating of the Hebrew as best as I am able – be as patient with me as you can, for I mean no disrespect, and have tried to check my transliterations with multiple sources – but if I err, please let me know. The Lashon Kodesh is so precious to me – I only seek to honor it, not make mistakes, but I am fallible.
[17] Jewish Publication Society. (1997, c1985). Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures : A new translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the traditional Hebrew text. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
[18]BDB Brown, Driver, Briggs, A Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1905
[19]Harris, R. L., Harris, R. L., Archer, G. L., & Waltke, B. K. (1999, c1980). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed.) (728). Chicago: Moody Press.
 
a  Heb 9:10
b  Ex 25:8; Heb 8:2; 9:11, 24
a  Ex 25:8, 9; 26:1–30
1  Or sacred tent
2  Lit first
b  Ex 25:31–39
c  Ex 25:23–29
d  Ex 25:30; Lev 24:5ff; Matt 12:4
3  Lit loaves of presentation
 a Ex 26:31–33; 40:3
1  Or sacred tent
b  Ex 26:33
1  Or censer
a  Ex 30:1–5; 37:25f
b  Ex 25:10ff; 37:1ff
c  Ex 16:32f
d  Num 17:10
e  Ex 25:16; 31:18; 32:15; Deut 9:9, 11, 15; 10:3–5
a  Ex 25:18ff
b  Ex 25:17, 20; Lev 16:2; 1 Kin 8:7
[21]  New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. 1995. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.
[22]  The Holy Bible : King James Version. 1995 (electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version.). Bellingham WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
[23] From the transcript of “Terumah: Is There a Face Hiding in the Tabernacle? Parsha 5774/2014”; https://www.alephbeta.org/course/lecture/terumah-is-the-mishkan-the-face-of-god ©2014 By Rabbi David Fohrman, all rights reserved, used with permission.
 
[24]  The New King James Version. 1982. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
[25] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Joseph H. Thayer, Copyright ©1977, Baker Book House Company
 
[26] Source, www.WorldVision.org
[27] Webster’s Dictionary, 1828 Edition, (electronic edition) e-Sword®, v. 9.5.1 Copyright ©2000-2009 by Rick Myers
[28] Webster’s Dictionary, 1828 Edition, (electronic edition) e-Sword® v.9.5.1, Copyright ©2000-2009 by Rick Myers
[29] Preface to The American Dictionary of the English Language, By Noah Webster, © 2008 Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
a  substance: or, ground, or, confidence
[30] The Holy Bible : King James Version. 1995 (Electronic edition of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version.). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
[31] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Joseph H. Thayer, Copyright ©1977, Baker Book House Company
[32] Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, by James Strong, ( electronic edition), e-Sword®, v. 9.5.1,  copyright ©2000-2009 by Rick Myers
[33] THE BROWN-DRIVER-BRIGGS-GESENIUS HEBREW AND ENGLISH LEXICON WITH AN APPENDIX CONTAINING THE BIBLICAL ARAMAIC, by Francis Brown with S.R. Driver and Charles Briggs, ©2005 Varda Books
[34] Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, by Albert Barnes, ( electronic edition), e-Sword®, ver. 9.5.1,  copyright ©2000-2009 by Rick Myers
[35]  The New King James Version. 1982. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
[36] King James Version, Red-Letter Bible, by James Strong, ( electronic edition), e-Sword®, v. 9.5.1,  copyright ©2000-2009 by Rick Myers
 
[37] From an unpublished study titled: …A Study in Revelation… A Search for the Truth at the end of the Age αποκαλυψις ιησου χριστου (The Revelation of Jesus Christ)  By David Robinson.
 
[38] Stern, D. H. (1998). Complete Jewish Bible: an English version of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and B’rit Hadashah (New Testament) (1st ed., Nu 6:22–27). Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications.
[39] Stern, D. H. (1998). Complete Jewish Bible: an English version of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and B’rit Hadashah (New Testament) (1st ed., Le 9:22–24). Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications.
[41] Ibid…
d  4:5 1Co 16:22; Php 1:6; Heb 10:24-25; Jms 5:8; Rv 1:7; 3:11; 22:20
e  4:7 Php 2:3
f  4:7 Rm 16:7; Eph 2:6; Php 1:1, 15; 1Pt 5:14
g  4:8 Jn 8:14
h  4:8 1Tm 3:8, 11; Ti 2:2
i  4:8 Rm 1:17
j  4:8 2Co 7:11; 11:2; 1Tm 5:22; Ti 2:5; Jms 3:17; 1Pt 3:2; 1Jn 3:3
k  4:8 1Pt 2:9; 2Pt 1:3, 5
[42]  The Holy Bible: Holman Christian standard version. 2003. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers.
[43] Thank you Jeff….