[7/14 first version still unredacted]
… close to giving up — because of this unexpected theme complication
and the text difficulties that never seem to end and now again this problem ,
struggling how to phrase it to make it readable – and interesting – for you
we’re still fighting with the ‘plus forty days’
and it appears that “the anointing of (Aaron-) the high priest” is part of this ,
but it is a massive ceremony with many unclear aspects while it is corrupted
[as shown in Exodus 29 and its mirror Leviticus 8] ,
and the overview is this ,
Aaron (-and his sons) are dressed with the priestly robe , then a number of
sacrifices follow , where at the end Aaron is said ‘to not go out the door of
the Tabernacle for 7 days’ ; and when (in next chapter 9) it is ‘the 8th day’
Moses announces that today ‘the glory of IEUE will appear’ ;
but ,
suppose that this (tampered !) ‘8th day’ originally was ‘the 40th day’ ..? [problem #1]
what possible time frame related to sacred holidays was intended here ?
while we hád the phrase ‘IEUE will appear’ in the 40 days context ;
second problem is that the section about ‘Aaron dressed with the garment’ [problem #2]
shows completely tampered — and who goes to dress pretty and after that
is slaying bulls and rams .. ? that’s most illogical : it feels like Esau made
up this ‘Aaron dressed’ as the alleged reason of this ceremony ,
perhaps corrupted from ‘the 144 receiving a garment — at the 40th day’
third problem is the first “sacrificed bull” : [problem #3]
not only does it show tampered but the important Scroll nowhere appears
in this even where ‘bull’ (PHR) is just Too close to ‘scroll’ (SPHR) while it
is unclear ‘what’ this bull could represent , while a term ‘dung’ is used as
the inversal (PHRSH) as in Malachi – so almost certainly ‘the Scroll’ here
[btw : the alleged ‘red heifer’ Numbers 19 has this same theme ,
so that the fuss Esau now makes in that plot of land is this occult Ritual]
fourth problem : now that the Scroll is involved , [problem #4]
was this ceremony about “declaring” or “accepting” her ? also showing
here are “unleavened breads (to be sacrificed)” that relate to ‘declaring’ ,
so that the context cóuld be that this was ‘the day of Unleavened’ where
the waiting-time is ‘another 7 weeks’ until ‘the 8th day’ in chapter 9 ,
yet too much is happening here and too less in next chapter – plus :
fifth problem is “the two sacrificed rams” where ‘atonement’ shows : [problem #5]
now it gets difficult :
what are these two rams doing here ? it can hardly be ‘Passover’ now
with the choosing one flockling and at the end of time the other (‘Adam’) ,
while it looks suspiciously much like Atonement where ‘the one ram is
sacrificed and the other ram was sent into the desert (‘tribulation’)
[where next chapter 9 séems to be about this latter] ;
here , the first ram appears to be a proper offering to IEUE – very much
like the first Atonement ram – but the other is rather bizarre : the blood
of it “is to be put on Aaron’s left ear and big toe of his right foot”
[which sounds as if Esau was fooling around with us but see below] ;
while in both cases “the hands had to be put upon the animal” which
very much reminds of the Atonement ram sent into the tribulation !
so what was going here .. ?
bonus [in Ex.29] : the two Passover flocklings [problem #6]
… at least both séem to be about this already mentioned theme
and if you think about it it should — since the already at Passover chosen
Adam-flockling is still a floating theme for nothing yet happened until now !
but what if these themes get connected here ?
as in “only if the 144 are judged (the ’40 days’) then Adam will die’ ? <<<<
[we opted this recently – but could it show here ?]
that judgment is ‘a sanctification’ as a term also showing here while the
context of “the final 144 having died to themselves” directly links back to
Passover since they only could because of what Christ did ,
and therefore the same time will have undone what Adam did — so that
with this +40 days theme we still link back to Passover , where these lines
show at the end of this chapter 8 perhaps as ‘explaining the above link’ ?
then : two flocklings ánd two flocklings at Atonement ? [problem #7]
… suppose that this ceremony is at ‘Weeks’ ,
could not , as the start of the probable +40 days , which is about dying of
the righteous ones for the 144 and removal from it of those that did not ,
this be represented by these two flocklings ? where perhaps “the blood
of the first proper sacrificed ram was not “sprinkled on the altar” but was
put as a mark ‘on the forehead’ ? would that not make much sense ?
foreshadowing the time (’40 days’) that the definite 144 are sealed ?
the problem is ‘the second ram’ ,
for the roots used in the alleged ‘on the big toe of the right foot’ etcetera
do not show many clues of what the theme may have been : however ,
if we keep ‘the mark’ as the first ram then could this be a kind of juxta ?
[Lev.14 seems to be an even móre corrupted version of this all]
several roots seem invented and first-used here ;
was this one ‘just slain’ (or sent into the desert) ?
intermezzo : we need to make Atonement ás the 40th day ? [problem #8]
… we postponed this question — until now we cannot , anymore —
though the option “plus 40 days but only in the final Jubilee year” was
a workable one until now , after these two rams we got into big trouble
[or better ‘the neverending corruptions’ cause that] :
if the above “purification of the 144” during this time is true then why
wait for another (about) 120 days until the time frame of Atonement ?
this is about “the atonement of the 144” while the reasoning can be
that “from the proper ‘day of Atonement’ Jacob has to make his one
[which sadly is related to ‘the tribulation’] —
if this (‘extra 40 day’ period) already kind of introdúces Atonement ,
then why the proper day of Atonement cannot BE “that 40th day” .. ?
and suppose ,
that in next chapter 9 (‘the day that IEUE will appear’) where animals
are sacrificed the one was ‘Adam’ and the other ‘Jacob’ ? because
these two are ‘the only two groups left by now’ ? since the 144,000
and those removed from them are depicted in thése (40-) days here ?
true – it feels a bit strange , a ‘5 + 2’ set of spring and autumn feasts
[not to mention that our ‘spring – autumn mirror’ will go down the drain]
but why wait another 120 days – having to go around Trumpets ?
why did Esau rename his moved (at least that we found) Atonement
feast “the day of the closed heavenly gate” ? we knew it was to block
the entrance to Eden but is that theme not ‘this 40th day’ ..?
this is all so difficult and dangerous that I shaking inside ,
so important theme and nothing but corruption everywhere you look
it doesn’t mean that our “double 40 days” [from Unleavened-Weeks]
was wrong : it just may have lacked “.. until the day of Atonement” ;
and how Esau knew the exactly 40th day as his ’17th of Tammuz’ in
his “Three Weeks” occult Ritual ? did he just move Atonement unto
somewhere in the autumn where her “tenth of the seventh month”
date simply was “the seven and tenth of [+the fourth] month” .. ?
was the content of that day instead of “you shall humble your soul”
perhaps in context of ‘Jacob that will (forcefully) get a humble soul’
but Esau deleted the related aspect of “the adm-man humbled” ?
[but then in the sense of “that his proud soul humiliated / humbled”
which is a continuous theme in prophets] —
this would favor two sacrificial animals (on the real Atonement day)
as one killed representing Adam and the other sent into the desert
representing Jacob …
as the proper closing of the entire time frame started at Passover
btw : Esau’s ‘chapter readings’ starting Tammuz 17 included the
section about ‘the two (Passover) flocklings’ in THIS Exodus 29 ,
where it must have said here – considering all context above –
not that “one is offered in the morning , the other in the evening”
but “the one (‘Adam’) that was chosen at the final Passover will be
sacrificed the 40th day’ (the·evenings, tampered, orbim=arboim) ,
probably indeed said “at the 40th day”
for a line as “he sacrificed at Atonement” is spiritually dangerous
[endlessly-] considering all the above ,
the greatest question is “what is Atonement doing so far away” ?
if the most important things happen here – presumably at Weeks –
then what content is left ‘for a day of Atonement in the autumn’ ?
and something else please –
in Lev.9 having “IEUE appear on ‘the·eighth (=tampered) day’ that
can be “the 40th” , we have the case of ‘the circumcision’ :
it is supposed to happen “at the·eighth (=tampered) day” where the
woman “is unclean for a 33 additional days” as total ’40’ (in Lev.12) ;
it’s all so corrupted ,
why ‘a boy could not be ‘circumcised the 40th day’ ? and that she
would remain unclean ‘for seven days after birthing’ ? perhaps this
sounds like ‘searching for problems’ but perhaps it is the opposite :
like people today cannot believe (true) ‘conspiracy-theories’ since
a number of factors part of that true event have been disarmed
[well in fact the same reasons that ‘the corrupted scroll’ is rejected]
also this “8th day circumcision” may be part of hiding ‘the 40 days’ :
instead of looking for “an eighth day” for example as the probably
non-existing ‘8th day of Tabernacles’ ,
perhaps instead it underscored “the 40th day theme” …
for the point please is that ‘circumcision’ is ‘a sanctification’ since
not He made this ugly body [-let alone the demonic phallus concept]
and combined with ’40’ it makes a VERY strong case for the male
sons (‘manchild’) being set-apart as foreshadowing of the 144 , no ?
[very strong ,
trumping ‘the scientist’ that (unprovenly-) claimed that ‘the 8th day
was the ideal time for circumcision per the red blood-platelets ] ;
so that this seems an unrelated theme ,
but if you think about it , it could very well support ‘the 40 days’ as
the time that the final 144 are sanctified ! and that Esau may have
séen this connection (in Lev.12) and therefore disarmed it !
no ‘sons (-of Aaron)’ but ‘us’ [problem #9]
… if there was NO “Aaron being consecrated as high priest”
then neither this was ‘some generational thing’ by including “his sons” :
these weird ‘sons’ very much seem to cover up “the sons in the end-time”
not only through the ceremony itself but by phrases as “a forever statute”
where by context this ceremony should point (connect to) the end time ;
[this seems off but is related :]
the ‘Meribah event & Aaron dies’ (page is in progress) appears to have
been “the original reason of the extra 40 days” after which not “Aaron is
coming to mount Hor to die there” but “the final 144 come to mount tsiun
as those that died to self” (sic !) ,
where again that weird ‘son’ appears there ‘stripping Aaron of his priestly
clothes to put it on himself’ : it is utterly bizarre yet the same ‘Aaron sons’
link back to THESE two chapters — that son did not ‘dress’ with the ‘clothes’
but ‘understood’ (ishb=bn) God’s ‘words’ (bgd=dbr) ; we bet ?
so that the ceremony here very likely was ‘at Weeks’ when the Scroll is
accepted in order that the next 40 days (-of judgment) will be ignited ,
because at that point in time they still had the genuine Scroll , and that
when the Scroll will have been restored , she will be accepted , so that the
intended same 40 days (-of judgment) will be ignited but for real this time —
is that a workable reasoning please ?
it was incredibly easy for Esau to swap the subject “the sons of Ishral” as
the title of you & we into suggesting ‘the people old-Ishral’ called similarly ,
wherefore it needs incredible close reading “who was who” here —
but if the ceremony here starts with “accepting the scroll” (no slain bull) ,
then “the sanctifying part of two groups” , then “linking to the final Passover
in which Adam will be chosen” any ‘Aaron sons’ are not maintainable –
instead it HAS to be about you & we and compare line 43 (of 8)
“and I will meet with the sons of Ishral” : why say that if He used to go
appear in their time whenever there was a problem .. ? it was said to US !
hence the phrasing (in chapter 9) “now you will see the glory of IEUE” :
that makes little sense if He used to ‘appear to them on a regular basis’ ! [7/15:]
the ‘heave-offering and wave-offering’ [problem #10]
… these strange events are a mystery in itself —
the point is not ‘that we search to dismiss them’ (!) but because we never
trust anything that Esau wrote , and the only way to can find whether a
concept like this is true is to see ‘where it first appears in the texts’
[this section became a longer one – but because it is important !] :
a) wave-offering
the phrase (-thenuphah) ‘wave offering’ first shows in this Ex.29 as said
from verb (-nuph) having many forms but also ‘to yield, swing’ ; where the
object usually is ‘the breast [-of an animal] ‘ that is ‘waved’ — but this word
also shows here for the first time , derived from (-chazah) ‘to perceive ,
to prophecy’ : what bizarre U-turn can change that into ‘breast’ ? ;
then suddenly Lev.23 starts about the famous “waving the sheaf” (at the
day of firstfruits) then “waving two breads” (at Weeks) : can just anything
be waved since even ‘gold’ and ‘copper’ show ? – that makes no Sense …
b) heave-offering
… the phrase (-therumah) from verb (-rum) ‘to rise’ , first used in Ex.25
but as “an offering (-of gold)” ; then here ‘shoulder-of the·heave-offering’
where ‘shoulder’ is (-shuq) “thigh” [-also first use here] from an invented
root (-shoq) ‘to overflow’ (3x) : you see how impossible this is.. ?
why would God order this type unsubstantial act ?
Lev.9:21 even has “the·right (!) leg [-to be heaved] ” – is that the same
corruption as ‘put blood on the big toe of the right foot’ ?
the ónly justification we can think of is the Khepesh-thigh in the Spells
which ‘they hold up’ but that probably is a too complicated stretch ; BUT
because Esau knéw the egyptian Spells he may have intended this !
| this thigh is cut-off from the sacrificed (!) bull representing ‘the Eden gate’ where the thigh is ‘the main eden-vector’ of her , which is the birthright-sceptre theme (see pages) ; where the cut-off thigh was ‘held up’ by Egyptians to show their victory : does this not 100% dismiss any ‘thigh’ here ? for it would be “an evil Mole” within a sacred act as the animal-offering itself … |
|
again please – we’re searching the origin of this specific aspect —
the theme of ‘offering the fat or the kidneys’ appears probable enough
and there cán “have been heaved” objects : just definitely NO ‘thigh’ !
so : was it a similar root ? :
since (-shuq) is ‘nothing’ perhaps it was (-oshq) “to oppress, exact”
[but that can hardly be connected with the offering] or , as in Lev. 7
showing just befóre the heave-offering (-shqts) ‘abomination’ but as
said of “this physical body” : this makes móre sense ;
in that same chapter , first half (-also very corrupted) , the start may
have been about “you cannot eat unclean (‘of animals’) flesh” but
after that show the words “the soul” and that “abomination (‘body’)”
which probably was about “the unclean + soul + in this flesh” !
21 : ‘the soul + [..] touching + [..] the unclean one + (by) the adm-man’ ,
perhaps as introduction tó the animal-sacrifice command where the
animal symbolizes as intermediary of ‘the own body’ ;
now ,
at the end of Ex.29 where ‘a link is made with the sons in the end-time’
[see problem #9] a phrasing appears which must be the same as next
line from Lev. 7 , following áfter the ceremony which Aaaron was to do ,
(34)
“For the wave breast and the heave shoulder have I taken of the children
of Israel from off the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and have given
them unto Aaron the priest and unto his sons by a statute for ever from
among the children of Israel.” ,
possibly as
because – the […chest = ?..] – […the·wave-offering (=tampered) = ?…]
b
[=as] the thigh=abomination (‘body’) – (by-) the·heave-offering = the adm-man (thrum=adm)
c
I (shall) take awáy – from – the sons of – Ishral ,
[rest is unclear still] ;
doesn’t that immediately make much móre Sense .. ? as a promise ,
a foreshadowing directly related to the (animal-) sacrifice ? even we
don’t know yet what “chest-of + the·wave-offering” can have been ;
an earlier line may confirm this ,
(32)
“And the right shoulder shall ye give unto the priest
[for] an heave offering of the sacrifices of your peace offerings.” ,
as
[=so that] – [+your] thigh=abomination (‘body’) – the·right = the=as the ram (?) (imin=ail)
b
you (shall) give – (as-) [+your] heave (-offering)=offering – to the priest ,
so that in chapter 7 ,
first is said “that the soul is unclean inside her body (-by the adm-man)”
then “that the body will be represented by a sacrificial animal” and at
the closing is said “but in the end-time I will take awáy that ugly body” :
how does that sound please ?
Esau would not have this : since we were to think that God made this
abomination for us so that he consistently corrupted this aspect ,
but the above context is so strong that we must dismiss this practice ;
then we only have one problem left : ‘the waving of the sheaf’ —
only showing in Lev.23 related to “the firstfruits of the harvest” which
elsewhere is only decribed as “a grain offering” ;
the question is whether the concept of waving is “polluted” because
of the connection that Esau made with the Khepesh-thigh so that in
fact nothing ‘should be heaved’ , neither grain-stalks , since he may
have seen another possibility to block the mentioned birth-sceptre
but now through the ‘firstfruits’ theme here , since his occult rituals
typically link to several related aspects —
wherefore it’s best to just keep “present the sheaf before IEUE” as
exactly what Christ did (and will do soon , properly)
