Perception of two anointed ones
Arguably, God’s purpose for His Word is to communicate His plan to ultimately cause a sabbath’s day rest to occur in the life of Israel, and the primary images that depict the beginning of His plan are the anointing of the Levitical priesthood and the house of David within the tribe of Judah. Consider how God first anoints the Levitical priesthood in the wilderness, and how He sets apart the tribe of Levi as His portion. Also consider how God anoints David, and how He selects the city of Jerusalem within Judah to place His name. Critically, God made profound promises to both the Levitical priesthood and to David and his seed (e.g. Jer 33:17-18). So, what happened to God’s covenant that He made with His anointed, and His promises that He said would “never” lack?
Arguably, the early church recognized the significance of the images depicting God’s eternal promises to His anointed, so religion “applied” the image by anointing the papacy, the priesthood, and objects such as relics. Presumably, if God can create holiness by His anointing, then religion can claim the same authority by establishing a sacrament that anoints people or things to make them holy. Of course, the Reformers realized that this “sacramental” practice was not consistent with the apparent NT images, so the tradition of anointing remains primarily in Catholicism. However, just because the Reformers recognized that the church was misapplying the image of God’s anointing, that recognition did not bring any meaningful understanding to the image of being anointed by God. Again, certain dispensational belief systems attempt to reconcile the matter by claiming that a future fulfillment of God’s promises remains for Israel, but how could an image that is depicted as “never” lacking be perceived as a promise that can “take a break” for an extended period? So, how would an ancient disciple have perceived the promises made to the two anointed tribes of Levi and Judah?
Arguably, an ancient disciple would have considered the significance of the “pattern” of the temple that God revealed to Moses, where two creatures are depicted as positioned above the mercy seat where the Lord sits, and ten tables of showbread are positioned beyond the curtain that separates them from the “holy of holies.” Arguably, that temple image inspires no meaningful contemplation for the modern reader, yet an ancient disciple would have deeply considered the image as depicting a simple yet deep understanding of the spiritual condition of the twelve tribes of Israel.
Arguably, after considering the image of the two creatures above the mercy seat in the holy of holies, with the image of Joshua and Zeubbabel before the Lord in the book of Haggai, and the image of the “two anointed ones” in the books of Zechariah and Revelation, an ancient disciple would have perceived those basic images as depicting God’s plan to establish His fourth kingdom of saints through the two anointed tribes of Levi and Judah. Notably, there are numerous inferences depicting the unique character and destiny of the tribes of Levi and Judah, where each tribe is depicted as having their particular “office” in fulfilling God’s plan, and where those two offices are depicted as working together to build the temple of God (e.g. Zech 6:13). Again, religion with its literal historical perspective effectively relegates the significance of these images to absolute nothingness, because how can the odd historical facts of two ancient tribes provide any meaningful insight into its simple message of salvation. So what? Why should anyone care about the pattern of the temple, or any aspect of the tribal images, if the only image that matters is the simple message of salvation through Jesus?
Obviously, if you do not perceive any significance being depicted by the “anointing” of the tribes of Levi and Judah, then you will not consider contemplating the images. Yet, once you perceive how the images depict certain sons of adam’ within the nation of Israel being transformed into sons of God, then the images will inspire immense amounts of meditation, and you will begin to recognize the existence of the new language of symbolism. Because, just as 1+1=2 is an elementary understanding of math, and all analytical understanding builds upon that initial understanding; arguably, all biblical understanding must start with the elementary understanding of the nature of your soul, and all spiritual understanding builds upon that foundation.
The elementary spiritual understanding of God’s Word perceives how every part of your soul is originally born of adam’, yet ultimately every part of your soul must either be atoned for by God (i.e. born again), or perish. As stated, “For the Lord has redeemed Jacob; and in Israel He will display His beauty” (Is 44:23). So, just as Paul and Daniel similarly infer by their images, an ancient disciple would have perceived how the image of “Jacob” (i.e. Daniel’s first kingdom) depicts certain parts of your soul which are “in” adam’ and which must be redeemed, and how the image of “Israel” (i.e. Daniel’s fourth kingdom) depicts those redeemed “transformed” parts which are “in” Christ and which will ultimately display God’s beauty. Importantly, this transformation of the sons of Israel from one kingdom to the other is depicted as occurring piecemeal in a progressive manner over an extended period of time, rather than the entire nation being washed clean in a single moment of time.
Arguably, an ancient disciple would have perceived the anointing of the tribes of Levi and Judah as depicting the beginning of the prophesied fourth kingdom of saints, and he would have noted particular distinctions between the two tribes. For instance, the tribe of Levi is depicted as being anointed on the day of atonement in the wilderness (Lev 16), whereas the tribe of Judah is depicted as beginning their transformation much later with the anointing of the house of David. Notably, the Levites were given a particular mission (Lev 10:10-11), yet they are clearly depicted as not receiving any land. Importantly, the depiction of the Levites not receiving land is both unique and profound, because the image depicting no inheritance of land symbolically infers no temporal manifestation of those spiritual elements.
Arguably, the anointed “office” of priestly prophet currently exists within your unconscious nature, fulfilling a role in this life as depicted by the priesthood in the wilderness. Specifically, that priestly office is currently limited to the conviction of sin, and to provide the spiritual gift of prophecy to disciples. Notably, based on Israel’s “unfaithful” response as depicted by the Sinai event, the current priestly office within you is mostly effective in promoting an “ungodly” character in this life (e.g. Ex 32). Arguably, the office of the “priest” is not significantly effective in transforming the life of Israel until the office of “shepherd” of Israel is also born of God. Presumably, a wise and faithful shepherd must also have a presence before the Lord before justice can be established and righteousness manifested in the conscious life of Israel.
Significance of being anointed
In order to understand the significance of being anointed, there are several basic aspects to consider regarding the unique nature of becoming a Levitical priest or a king in David’s lineage, and thoughtful consideration of those aspects is essential in order to build an elementary understanding of the mystery of salvation.
The first basic aspect to consider is the ability to stand before the Lord, an image that should cause the reader to question how anyone can stand before a holy God. Arguably, since God is spirit, the image of “standing’ before the Lord should not be perceived in a literal sense. Yet, religion promotes the image that you should perceive God as being your literal friend, such that you can sit an empty chair in front of you, and imagine talking to Him as you would any other person. Of course, they say you should do so “respectfully,” because that is how religion perceives the image of having a “fear” of the Lord. Yet, has the god of this world convinced you to disregard all of the images that depict the awesome reaction of a sinful creature standing in the presence of a holy God (e.g. Ex 20:18-19).
Perhaps the most popular depiction of a sinful creature standing before the Lord is the image of Isaiah being “ruined” or “undone” (Isa 6). Of course, the scene starts with an image of the Lord sitting on His throne in the temple, with voices calling out “holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts.” Isaiah’s iniquity is then taken away, his sin is atoned for by God, and he becomes a prophetic voice of the Lord. Arguably, this scene replicates the day of atonement when the office of the Levitical priesthood was first “anointed” in the wilderness (Lev 16). Notably, the Isaiah 6 prophecy ends with the image of a holy seed remaining after the devastation of the land, and the desolation of Israel from the land (Isa 6:11-13). Arguably, Isaiah 6 depicts a sinful portion of Israel becoming part of the “remnant” of “the holy seed” (singular), where Isaiah becomes an anointed “priest” from the tribe of Levi standing before the throne of the Lord in holy of holies within the temple of God.
Perception of Knowledge
Consider that, in addition to the ability to stand before the Lord, another basic aspect of being anointed is the gift of knowledge. Notably, John depicts the image of an anointed one having all knowledge, and the importance of knowing the truth (e.g. 1 John 2:20-21). However, perhaps the best depiction of an anointed one being given all true knowledge of God’s Word is the image of Solomon, where he is given the wisdom to rule justly over the nation of Israel.
Consider how religion often minimizes the importance of having a deep understanding of God’s Word, and instead focuses your attention on the importance of having a “relationship” with God. Again, religious people stress that the only necessary knowledge is regarding the “essentials” of the faith, and all other knowledge is not important because it is often vague or difficult to understand. Notably, perhaps the most difficult images to understand are the many odd statutes that God depicts in His Word.
Consider how God repeatedly and emphatically proclaims that whoever keeps all of the commandments shall live, and Paul states that righteousness is based on the law of Moses (e.g. Lev 18:5; Neh 9:29; Ezek 18:9; 20:11; Luke 10:28; Rom 10:5; Gal 3:12). Notably, not only does God command us to love Him with our whole heart, and to love our neighbor as ourselves, but Jesus also states that the two great commandments depend on the entire law and the prophets (Matt 22:37-40).
Consider how religion claims that one of the primary purposes for God’s Word, if not the Bible’s only purpose, is to provide instructions for how to become a “better” person in this life. So, do you study the law and the prophets such that you are a more righteous person? Presumably, there are over six hundred commandments specified in scripture; yet, how many can you name? If you cannot even name them, then how do you know whether or not you obey them? And, if God’s Word is the absolute truth for exhibiting a righteous behavior in this life, then why is our civil law not based solely on all of the Mosaic law? Importantly, if the Bible is perceived as providing the knowledge necessary for “proper” living, then should not every Christian parent be sitting down with their children each night to review the Mosaic law?
Consider that only a very small percentage of people can confidently name all Ten Commandments, and arguably no one can make reasonable sense of the many odd Mosaic laws. Notably, a dispensational perspective would claim that the odd laws were intended just for the people at that time; however, Jesus proclaimed that He came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it. So, do you understand the significance of the statute not to muzzle an ox while it is threshing, or not to boil a young goat in its mother’s milk? If not, then how can you obey a command if you do not understand its meaning nor appreciate its significance?
Consider how Paul states that the stories of Israel have been given to us “so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved” (1 Cor 10:6-11). Yet, in order to appreciate what Paul is claiming, arguably you must understand the images that he is depicting. So, do you understand why Paul employs the OT image depicting that “the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play” (Ex 32:6)? Or what it means to be destroyed by serpents or by the destroyer? If not, then have any of these images from the story of Israel actually caused you not to crave evil things? Arguably, the images provide no meaningful “instructions” when perceived literally, so how can Paul reasonably claim that the images will help us to avoid sin?
Arguably, the images depicting God’s law are not intended to be perceived literally, rather they are intended to depict symbolic truths as Paul states emphatically (1 Cor 9:9). Yet, does it make sense that God would effectively “hide” the truths of this world by employing odd symbolism in the OT? However, would it make sense for God to employ symbolism as a means to provide knowledge of the unobservable world (e.g. 1 Cor 9:11)? Is it truly too difficult to imagine that you will ultimately perceive the odd Mosaic laws as depicting profound images of internal spiritual truths?
My basic premise is that, since we do not currently have intimate knowledge of our internal nature, we cannot meaningfully fulfill God’s commands to love Him with our whole heart, and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Obviously, the truth must first be understood, before the knowledge of the truth can set anything free. Yet, God’s primary complaint with Israel is not just their lack of knowledge, but also their oppression of others such that they allow injustices to continue in the land (e.g. Eccles 5:8; Jer 22:17; Ezek 22:29; Amos 4:1; Zech 7:10; Mal 3:5).
Arguably, the story of Israel depicts God’s plan to establish His name in the nation by anointing certain sons of adam’ to become sons of God; such that “those who were not My people; you are My people” (Hos 2:23; 1 Pet 2:10). Notably, prior to employing that OT verse, Peter depicts the image as living stones being build into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, and who are obedient to the truth (1 Pet 2:5, 8). God’s gift of knowledge allows those who previously could only eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, arguably a depiction of man’s wisdom, are enabled to also eat from the tree of life, the wisdom of His Word (e.g. John 6:63, 68; 8:47, 51). Arguably, they are given ears that hear, and eyes that see, such that they can perceive the symbolism of the Mosaic law as the “rules” within a spiritual realm.
Consider if you perceive these images as literal rules of a past time, then the images are meaningless or confusing. Alternatively, while I do not understand the meaning of the Mosaic laws, it is logical to assume that the sons of God are intended to employ the knowledge to establish justice between our spiritual elements, such that any internal oppression or injustices can be resolved. And, according to the depicted timeline of the story of Israel, a portion of your unconscious nature is given that knowledge in this life, as depicted by the wilderness anointing of the office of “priest” from the tribe of Levi. However, the conscious knowledge of God’s Word is depicted as being given in the future, when God anoints the “shepherd” from the house of David within the tribe of Judah. Importantly, “ignorance” of the law is no longer a possible excuse, such that “forgive them Father, for they know not what they do” does not apply to the sons of God.
Consider how, after repeatedly lambasting the leaders of Israel for their poor stewardship, God explicitly proclaims that He will shepherd His people, which He arguably accomplishes by anointing the house of David to the holy office of “shepherd” in Israel, such that justice can be established, and righteousness ultimately manifested in the land. The transformation of the nation of Israel is to begin in the tribe of Judah and the city of Jerusalem, but how does God depict Judah’s response to receiving the gift of knowledge? Ultimately, based on how Solomon is depicted as responding to his gift, we will learn that knowing the truth of God’s Word is only half the battle against sin. Yet, the pertinent point is to appreciate the significance of the gift of knowledge that God has given to the anointed office of shepherd within the nation of Israel.
Perception of the Holy “One” of Israel
So far, I have discussed how the image of being anointed depicts having the holiness to stand before the Lord, and having the knowledge of the truth of God’s Word. Yet, perhaps the most profound aspect of being anointed is the image of having a “oneness” with God in some manner. Arguably, this image of oneness is simple yet extremely deep, so my goal is not to convince you of a particular understanding. Notably, there are NT images that depict the church body as being made “one” in some sense, so this image of oneness should sound familiar. Therefore, consider briefly a couple images that depict becoming “gods” and a partaker of “one” divine nature.
Consider Paul’s discussion of the promises spoken to Abraham and his seed, where Paul emphasizes that the image of seed is being depicted in a “singular” sense, “and to your seed, that is, Christ” (Gal 3:16). Notably, the image of God as being “one” is depicted in both testaments, and the NT often depicts an image of becoming “one” with Christ (e.g. Deut 6:4; Mark 12:29; John 17:11; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:15). Arguably, there are numerous images that depict a “oneness” with God, such as the images of being “in” Christ, and of being a “holy one” in the assembly of God, and of being a “holy one” in the fourth kingdom, and of being gods or the sons of God. Arguably, the image of the Holy “One” of Israel is not intended as simply a depiction of God, rather a depiction of the “one” divine nature that exists within all sons of God. Because, since there is only one God, any part of your soul partaking of His nature cannot have anything else but the same holy nature.
Also, consider again the depiction of being made in the image of God, which arguably depicts the image of a person having both a soul and a spirit. Critically, a distinction between adam’ and God is how Genesis depicts that the “spirit” is taken from adam’, such that he is arguably no longer “one” in the same sense as God (Gen 2:22; 3:16; Deut 6:4). Notably, the arguments regarding the supposedly “trinitarian” nature of God are foolish from my perspective; because, God is simply depicted as spirit, and His soul and spirit exist as one entity as depicted by the original creation of Adam. And, as argued, Jesus is simply depicted as being the physical manifestation of the nature of the spiritual God, and not another nature of God by Himself. However, the pertinent point to recognize is that God’s ultimate goal for you is that every part of your soul and your spirit is to become “one” as originally intended, such that you conceive holy seed which manifest His perfect beauty in your life.
Consider also the image that God depicts of joining the tribes of Israel into “one stick” in his hand (Ezek 37:15-28). Arguably, a primary image of God’s Word is the depiction of divided Israel becoming “one” holy nation; and, at the risk of oversimplifying the image, the journey towards this “oneness” begins when parts of your soul receive the mind of Christ with full understanding of His Word (1 Cor 2:16). Again, the goal for the “church of God” is to become of one mind and one heart; however, at this point in the story of Israel, the image depicts that only certain parts of your soul from the tribes of Levi and Judah have one mind, and they certainly do not have one heart. Because, God depicts how the sons of God continue to join with foreign adulterous spirits, or with the daughters of adam’, so they obviously are not of the same divine heart (Gen 6:4; 1 Kings 11). Consequently, as we also learn from Solomon, the transformation of certain parts of your soul from the sons of adam’ to the sons of God resolves only half of the problem. They are washed clean and born of water, but they have not yet been born of the spirit (e.g. John 3:5). At some point, the Holy Spirit must be made available to the sons of God such that their godly offspring can manifest the fruit of the Spirit in the life of Israel.
Perception of adultery
Of all the symbolic depictions, perhaps the most critical to appreciate is the image of adultery. Again, and again, and again, God expresses His displeasure with the nation of Israel because they join with foreign women that lead them to worship idols. So, was God truly concerned with Israel literally being sexually attracted to foreign women?
Consider how modern society perceives adultery as the breaking of the monogamous relationship in a marriage, yet oddly the Bible rarely promotes the idea that a married couple should have an “exclusive” relationship, and notably God never condemns polygamy. Paul does “recommend” one wife in a specific circumstance, however there is never a law pronounced against polygamy. So, is the modern perception of adultery causing you to miss the symbolism being depicted by the biblical image of adultery?
Consider how the image of adultery is depicted as being pervasive throughout the OT story of Israel, starting with them joining to the daughters of Moab in the wilderness, and ending with them joining to the daughters of the land during their building of the second temple (Num 25; Ezra 9; 10; Neh 13:23-31). Importantly, adultery with foreign women is depicted as God’s primary concern at the end of the OT.
Consider how, before God saw that the wickedness of man was great enough to cause the flood, the sons of God are depicted as “taking for themselves” the daughters of adam’, whomever they chose, and together they bore a heart where “every” imagination was “only” evil “all” of the time (Gen 6:1-5). Similarly, consider how Solomon, also depicted as a son of God, took for himself a thousand foreign wives, princesses, and concubines who turned his heart away from the Lord, “the” God of Israel (1 Kings 11). Arguably, the image in Ecclesiastes of “trying everything under the sun” depicts the same understanding as the image as Solomon taking a thousand foreign wives. Notably, God’s displeasure with Solomon is not that he had a thousand women, rather that he “clung” in love to foreign women, such that he went after “other gods” and did not keep the covenant and statutes that the Lord had commanded (1 Kings 11:11).
Consider how religion argues that these images depict how a Christian should not marry an “unbeliever” because they would be “unequally yoked,” but is Paul intending to literally depict unbelievers as being lawless, darkness, or evil (2 Cor 6:14-15)? What truth is Paul depicting by employing the OT image of “My people” coming out of “her,” such that you “do not touch what is unclean” (Is 52:11; Jer 51:45; 2 Cor 6:17; Rev 18:4-5)? Is Paul giving odd advice to “holy ones” about how to perceive unbelievers, or is he depicting how to overcome “unclean” affections that are preventing the righteousness of God from dwelling in them (2 Cor 6:12-18)?
Consider how Peter, Paul, and James depict the image of adultery, and how Jesus lambasts the evil and “adulterous” generation (Matt 12:39; 16:4; Mark 8:38; Rom 7:3; 1 Cor 6:16; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 2:14). Why is Jesus being depicted as specifically lambasting “this” generation for being adulterous? Do any of these images depict the modern perception of adultery?
Arguably, the images of adultery, as depicted by “sons” joining with “adulterous” or “foreign” women, are not intended as a depiction of sex-addicted men going after women of other cultures, rather as a depiction of a simple yet deep spiritual truth (e.g. Prov 23:26-28; 30:20; Jer 23:10; Ezek 6:9). Arguably, the image of “sons” joining with “daughters” to conceive seed or offspring is intended as a symbolic depiction of the soul joining with the spirit to produce the fruit of the womb. Simply stated, every word and deed that you manifest in this life results from the combination of a thought and a desire; where a thought from your soul joins to a desire from your spirit, either consciously or unconsciously. Arguably, all of your thoughts and desires in this life are “common” or “profane” in God’s eyes, regardless of whether they are “clean” or “unclean.” Therefore, in order to manifest any “righteous” fruit of the womb in your life, you must first have the pure knowledge of what is required to perform a righteous act, but also you must have the holy desire to do a righteous act. So, assuming the sons of God have the pure knowledge, when are they depicted as having the opportunity to “join” with a holy desire?
Consider how God states that no man should separate what “He” has joined together, but notably He does not state what should happen to the things that man has joined together? Certainly, God would not join your soul to any foreign or adulterous spirits, but would you consider joining your thoughts to those spirits? Arguably, the image of a man “leaving” his father and mother is intended to depict the son joining to the “holy” spirit, and thereby separating him from his parents’ “common” nature (Gen 2:24; Eph 5:31-32). Notably, as Jesus proclaims in His mission statement, He brings a sword to separate a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother (Matt 10:34-35). Arguably, that image makes sense when you can perceive how God’s plan of salvation from “adultery” is depicted by “His” holy sons of God each joining with His Holy Spirit, and that is the same image as “Christ and the church,” the great mystery of which Paul infers (Eph 5:32).
Consider, if your current thoughts are not pure because you do not yet understand “all” things, then can there be any hope of producing righteousness in this life? Could anyone with thoughts that are evil (i.e. not pure) and desires that are adulterous (i.e. not holy) ever produce a moment of righteousness? Of course, religion claims that you can have “pure” thoughts, and that you can be filled with holy desires from the Holy Spirit, such that you can perform righteous works of God in this life. Importantly, that claim is based on a literal historical perspective, where the NT images are perceived as occurring “in the past,” such that the depictions of God’s truth should be applicable today as they were in that day. However, an ancient disciple would not share that perception, because he perceived the NT images as depicting the fulfillment of the promises from part one of God’s Word. Consequently, while the modern reader perceives the need to have “pure” thoughts and exhibit righteous behavior, the ancient disciple would have perceived the NT image depicting the giving of the Holy Spirit as an affirmation and fulfillment of God’s plan of salvation for the “entire” nation of Israel.
Arguably, the image of the “sons of God” before the flood, and the image of Solomon with his wisdom, both depict the aspect of having the knowledge of the truth of God’s Word. And, both images depict them as committing adultery by joining themselves with “foreign” spirits that cause them to cling to other gods and worship false idols. Arguably, neither Solomon, nor the sons of God in the flood story, could use “ignorance of the law’ as an excuse for joining with adulterous spirits. In both scenarios, God gives His wisdom in response to them calling out to Him, and in both scenarios “His” people are depicted as responding to this knowledge by pursuing “other” gods.
Next: Part 7