content of the overview : … there’s bad news , good news and very good news :    the first time that the feasts show in the Scroll is here ! , and they and their names are explained by a prophetic future time-line from Passover until the feast of Booths  when Eden will be restored , where the main running theme will be “the restored Scroll” — so that the same feasts kept by old-Ishral were a foreshadowing (only) ; wherefore the find of this time line is the good news ; however ,  bad news is that Esau corrupted the very clear buildup so that the position of the feast of Atonement couldn’t be confirmed by these chapters even though it lóoked like he tampered with her original position ; but when restoring the alleged ‘Jacob wrestling with a man’ it showed to be ‘the birthright’ as the attribute of Jacob that will be ours definitely at the moment (‘Weeks’) that God accépted the restored scroll ,  followed by our date as Atonement  (section is here)

                                                                                   theme

 
    … ofcourse Jacob didn’t “build cow-sheds so that he called the place Succoth”
    but “the (Eden-) Booth will be rebuilt wherefore the feast will be called Booths” ;            [1 of 7] 
    and now that we found this clue ,
    and because móre of these “and – he called – the·place (=tampered)“ show as
    scattered throughout 32-33 the first instance (32:1) can only be about ‘Passover’ :  
    (1-2)
   “And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him. 
    And when Jacob saw them, he said, This [is]  God’s host : 
    and he called the name of that place Mahanaim.”
    here ,
    it is ‘the angels=angel of – deity=IEUE’ that is Christ who not merely ‘went’ but
    as he ‘(who will) went=cross over (phga=phsach : passover verb !)‘ (-to earth) ;
    where it never said “a camp of – the elohim (‘of God’)” but the réason why He will
    do that as ‘the camp=gift (mchne=mnche) of – deity=IEUE (-to his people)’
    just as the reason repeated in all prophets as “(His-) gift as the sacrifice”    —
    wherefore ‘the name of – the·place (=tampered) = (this) day (mqUM=iUM)    +         
                 b
                 (will be) called : mahanaim=Pass-over (mnCHim=phsCH)‘ ;                                                   [2 of 7] 
    isn’t that so lógical ?
    then you still can see key words (in 3) as ‘… angel … sent … to earth (‘land’)‘ 
    and in (5) ‘the flock’ that is “our Originals” so that we need a line wherein He
    will save ‘our soul’ so that later — after the Scroll is restored — we will similarly
    be restored inside them , and because ‘bull and donkey’ show before ‘flock’ 
    it wrote ‘the bull=souls (SHr=nphSH) of – [..]  the donkey=people (chMr=oM)‘ ;
    then He will return unto God ,
    as in (6) ‘[=then]  – the angels=angel (!) – (will) return (!) – unto – jacob=IEUE’ :
    all as an accurate description to Jacob of what would happen !
    however ,
    it cán be that Passover was called ‘the Gift’ — and even though the cóntext of 
    this extraordinary event as “crossing over with the gift” is virtually the same , 
    the relation to “the 144 that will bring their return-gift as the restored Scroll”
    (together with their soul having died to the flesh’ !) is less clear when we will
  use the term ‘Passover’ ;
  and becáuse of this – and similar roots – Esau *may* have tweaked the name
  [since in olden times God – and Christ – quite regularly crossed over to earth ;
  the above is not to nitpick since two other feasts Esau misnamed on purpose] 
 
    yet first we need some more context please ,
 
    context of this double-chapter 32-33
    … the above “cow stables and called it Succoth” is ofcourse of the childish 
    but oh so effective type corruption , but only on top of a much more evil one :
    Esau saw the time-line here which he could turn into his own made-up story
    that would have ‘a happy end’ — as his “Jacob making peace with Esau” 
    so that he would kill two birds with one stone :
    he would have “written the whole birthright-theme óut of the Scroll” now that
    Jacob and Esau ‘were friends again’ (which is true for it’s hard to discover !) ,
    ánd have mutilated the solid future-time-line showing all the conditions ,
    so that now he would be able to corrupt quite some range of themes that all
    link back to the theme here — and even go corrupt the feasts by adding or
    removing aspects of them [we never trusted , apart from ‘unleavened bread’
    that has a rather solid context , the “four hins of flour and two hins of oil”
    to be sacrificed during feast : from where comes that ? what did it hide ?]  ;
    and who knows even go move entire feasts which we feel he did exactly 
    becáuse of this specific ‘time line’ theme here….
 
but previous chapter 31 was “Jacob making a stand-off (!) with Esau”
so that álso the theme of that was changed , as cover up for the one here ,
which is no exception because he used the same tactic earlier !
now ,
Jacob and Esau agree “that their offspring will decide the conflict” in ch.31
(-see page) so that it will be a future war between Jacob’s sons and those
of Esau under supervision of their respective deities (!) (IEUE vs Adam) ,
as the very war that you are fighting now as son of Jacob !
wherefore this double-chapter continues as explaining that future war ;
 
Jacob was shown everything
… validating the interpretation of these chapters as prophetic ones ,
our problem ofcourse is that Esau fed us so many toddler stories about 
the lives of Abraham and Jacob that we need to adjust a bit knowing that
God múst have explained much to them concerning Eden — as the very
multifaceted theme which His covenant with them was about !
with this in mind fortunately we found that the famous “Jacob’s ladder” 
[akin to the vision of John in Revelation]  was about him being shown our 
imprisoned beautiful Originals and even you & we restoring the scroll ! 
(-see page) , so that the context of thése chapters is embedded within a
logical buildup : first seeing our Originals now the road to there is shown ;
does that make sense please .. ?
 
saying this because the same is true for ‘the interpratation of this 32-33’ ,
because though the (known) embedding can point to the aspects here ,
the chapter(s) itself needs a solid buildup , as well ,
for only that can protect us from mistakes like our initial one that the story
of ‘Jacob fighting the man/angel’ was ‘about Christ’ : it is just frightening 
how many themes can be projected ‘upon any corrupt text’ … 
 
           the idea was to now work out the examples of the other feasts
           but the below section became so interesting that it follows here 
           as the Atonement section — please judge & ponder & enjoy ! : 
 
problem : ‘the birthright’ — and ‘what feast’ ? 
… continuing the above ‘buildup theme’ ,
this séems an unrelated aspect but it is rather important , please  :
our “birthright sceptre” is what we must obtain so that God will restore
us in our Originals — not repeating that extensive theme here ,
but it also is THE most important Attribute linked to Jacob and compare  
that corrupt “give me red soup” story so that it should return in a feast ,
but in what way then ?
(or is it hidden in the few chapters we didn’t succeed to decode yet ?)
 
we know that it was not “given to him by Esau over a bowl of red soup” 
so that the chapter of “Jacob pósing as Esau to steal the blessing after 
which Esau swears to kill him” is restored but ‘still unposted’ because it 
kept on feeling too dodgy      —
not Isaac can have given the birthright-blessing for it wasn’t his’ to give !
because he did “not own” (had no Legal right) the birthright so to speak ;
instead , the birthright was with Adam — as the ‘deity’ showing in those 
earlier chapters — who in turn had stolen it from Eden (-long story) ;
now ,
in the Abraham chapters appears the mysterious figure “Ishmael”  
(but as another corrupted story and probably not even called ‘Ishmael’) , 
likely “a corrupt-type-soul yet born by Abraham” — just as Esau was one ! ;
that likely was the protégé of Adam and hence carrying ‘the birthright’ 
or somehow “destined to inhérit the birthright” ,
and because Esau was that similar type-corrupt-soul , and because it did
not seem to have written “.. yet Isaac loved Esau” but instead and even 
more logical “.. Esau did nót love Isaac and Rebekah” ,
it suggests that also Esau was a protégé of Adam so that he was not
about to receive the blessing from Isaac but from his uncle ‘Ishmael’ !
whom Esau loved !
so that the (stolen !-) birthright would stáy in their own evil bloodline !
          [sub :
          is that why Esau subconsciously fabricated the nonexisting ‘Lot’ as
          the alleged ‘nephew’ (!) of Abraham ..? since , because there never
          existed a “Sodom and Gomorrah burning like an oven” for that is the
          theme of “mystery-Babylon” — following after the ‘tree chapter’ where
          not “Abraham sat under his tree” but “Adam ate again of that tree” ,
          this alleged ‘Lot’ has no reason for existing] 
 
this is howfar we came in this matter ,
and you understand the question of “what happened with it” :
was it ‘poténtially ours’ now because of Jacob – and would become final
but ónly on condition that we would understand the Scroll .. ? it seems 
possible just we haven’t yet found that type reasoning anywhere 
(but who knows where it could be in the many deeply corrupted chapters) ;
if wé need it while hé is linked to that attribute then how it can show in
this 32-33 as a time line unto the very end – even to Eden ..?
  
interestingly , in the alleged “Jacob fighting with an angel” here also shows          [text attempt :] 
a line where ‘someone is blessed’ which immediately reminds of the ‘war’ 
between Jacob and Esau and the blessing of the birthright !
in that case ,
and since Jacob ofcourse never was ‘(struck on-) the hollow (-of the thigh)’ 
the root (-khph) is a candidate for ‘scroll’ (-sphr) , and the shown “prevailed”
can form a line “(we) will have prevailed (by understanding) the scroll” ! 
but then where is ‘the birthright’ ?
could “the·dawn + ascending” be “the birthright + ascending” (shchR=bkR)
because it had been ‘on earth’ until that moment ? and see above 
[but why a separate ascending ? would it not ascend with US ?]  ;
in that case it could be “win (‘prevail’) + the birthright” ! – if 3201 (-iakl)                                      <<<<
shows as “overcome, overpower (‘win’ !), prevail, ability” etcetera ;
while the next “name change” section (32:27-29) ,
was that “restored in the Originals” as ‘change’ becáuse of the birthright ?
leaving us with one important problem still : what feast was this ?
because in (30) ,
again shows the phrase “wherefore the name of the·place=feast …..”                                          [3 of 7] 
and added right after that “the soul + will be rescued” ; 
now perhaps it is not ‘the Acceptance’ (‘Weeks’) because that root is in 33 ,
where here a ‘Peniel’ (-PHn) shows but since it never was ‘a place’ the 
root of ‘Atonement’ (-khPHr) is the best candidate      —
so do we have an “Atonement + soul delivered” concept here which is
like the “extra 40 days of consecration” theme that we are doing now ?  
however ,
to válidate this we need a solid reasoning , perhaps in closing lines 31-32 ,
like “because they will have made atonement (-for themselves) unto God 
by having returned the birthright (-to Eden)” : 
 
now please , after the “(Atonement when-) the soul is delivered” (in 30)
can follow the corresponding action in next line ,
(31)
“And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.”
attempt ,
[=for]  – the·sun = the angel of IEUE (Christ) (line 1) – (will) rose=gather – [..]  him=them ,
b
which=when (?) – he (will) cross over (‘to earth’, line 1) – (at ?) penuel=Atonement                [sic !] 
c
[=because]  he=they (‘sons / you & we / 144’)       +
d
(will have) limping=won (‘secured’) (‘prevail’) (?) (tsLo=ikL)     +
e
the thigh=birthright (irk=bkr) (24) ;
… wow ,
perhaps the proof that we can be right is the Total Debility of that KJV line —
this is a very interconnected line with juxtas — if true ; 
– the “soul be rescued >> because Christ returns” feels okay ,
– the “birthright with us ascending >> when He will cross over (-to earth)” also ,
     matching lines 1-5 explaining Passover as “the crossing over to earth” !
     still visible in line (3) as “sending [….]  to earth (‘land’)” ,
     all having the same colour as “returning upon the clouds” !
so that in the next final line (32) must have shown the réason that He returns ,
as the mentioned “for the sons will have made atonement by the birthright” 
[but that won’t be an easy job]  :
(32)
“Therefore the children [=sons]  of Israel eat not [of]  the sinew which shrank , 
which [is]  upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day : 
because he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew that shrank .”
[line continues :] 
on=through so=which – the sons of – Ishral      +
b
(will have made) eat=atonement (aKl=Kphr) – not=for [+themselves]  (‘swapped’)                            
c
[from here can be anything – next ‘thigh’ is same ‘scroll’ ? :] 
–
    ath=to – sinew=IEUE (gid=ieue , the -i ?) , 
d
the·one-benumbed = the=because one=they (will have) restored (nSHE=SHEb)
e
which=unto – to=him – the hollow=scroll (kph=sphr) of – [+his]  the·thigh = words (irk=dbr) 
           f
           [impossible — probably no ‘day’ (=tampered) but ‘die’ , b/c of atonement theme ? :]    
          –
           unto=by – the·day = dying (?) (iUM=MUth) – the·this = the=to this=themselves (‘juxta’) ;
                f #2 :
                 [=as]  – the [=gift]  (‘death’) (iuM=Mnche) of – this=their the=soul ;             (?)
           g
           [……. unknown ……]  ;
here ,
– again appears the relation “restored scroll & the birthright” after the
     earlier alleged ‘Jacob fighting with the angel’ that also shows ‘scroll’ ,
     where the restored scroll causes the birthright to be ours , definitely 
     [though that decision likely happens at Weeks, the day of Acceptance]  ; 
– the juxta “unto IEUE >> for themselves” feels right ,
     though perhaps the “dying” line is too much or was phrased differently ,
     it can refer back to lines 1-5 about Passover where also “gift” shows
     where in prophets what Christ did is termed “the sacrifice as the gift” 
 
 conclusion : beautiful 
… the buildup is véry strong , the birthright theme looks as the right key ,
the thoughtline (‘the way it was said’) is ‘majestic’ and is all interlinked ,
as a good indication that this indéed was the intended text ;
however , to be sure ,
one aspect is still missing here : ‘the sanctification theme’ , but that can
have shown right at the start of next chapter 33 in “the three groups”                                         <<<<
that – how can it be else – ‘cross a river’ which was “to Eden” ofcourse ,
the same “crossing over” as in thése lines ;
Esau had these groups crossing over ‘one by one’ and because Christ
already returned (here) the first group must be “the 144,000” and the
last group “the people (-Jacob)” — so that perhaps the middle group 
were the ones filtered out of the 144 during this consecrating time ?
just ,
the theme here closes rather pretty , wherefore the ‘three groups’ can
have appeared in the text about “the feast of Acceptance (Weeks)” 
[see the “receive the gift (‘scroll’) … accepting [=it] ” in chapter 33:10] 
said as “because when IEUE accepts the scroll a time of consecration
will follow (-until Atonement)” and these three groups are mentioned ;
this latter buildup also shows in Gal.3 (-see page) !
 
[7/20] 
                                           restart of feasts theme
                                           [but unsure if it will be completed]