[1st version]  

this turned out to be an important page   — usually we need to hunt for again another theme but this time they seem to fit in a beautiful setting and base-10 was the key to understand this day : having written this as readable as possible and very much hoping you will agree & enjoy ; )   the overview starts with ‘the day of Unleavened’ for Esau deliberately has confused the buildup tó the day of Acceptance , but now we got that right , previous Mt.12 (page) of the ‘gleaning wheat’ linking to the “dual-realm” completely unexpected was the same theme of  the ancient ‘description of the feasts’ in Gen.33 ! that would only be fullfilled in the latter days ..

                                                                                            theme
 
          the matter of ‘Pentecost’ deriving from ‘the feast of Weeks’ is not that clear-cut
          since christianity got both of their meanings Wrong — due to Esau’s corruptions ,
          while ‘Pentecost’ certainly is not ‘the prophetic fulfillment’ of Weeks ;
          in fact it’s such a mess that we first need to go back to “the day of Unleavened”
          to can see what really happened at ‘Weeks’ 40 days later …
 
          [due to the confusion of names ánd their aspects we be using the term ‘Weeks’
          even though also that was not the correct name — but was “day of Acceptance”]   
 

          first : the scroll (the covenant) was NOT given (but) at ‘Weeks’ 50 days later
          because that is Esau’s massive corruption :
          he had old-Ishral arrive at Horeb only in the third month, 50 days after Passover ,
          in order to conceal the important day of Unleavened as the intro (!) únto Weeks :
          old-Ishral “had to hurry” at Passover , right , but not “to run 50 days to a mount
          somewhere in the South-peninsula or Arabia” but had to be on time for the feast
          of Unleavened to mount Horeb 6-7 days travel in the desert !
          [and fortunately we understood that , see page] 
          it was on this mount that thunder and fire showed when God appeared to them ,
          as the event that Esau moved to some mountain far away at the day of Weeks !
 
          Esau deliberately confused the situation ,
          in order to confuse “the declaring” (at Unleavened) and “acceptance” (at Weeks) 
          as the “main attributes of both the feasts” : at Unleavened the people declared
          that they would follow Him (-ofcourse after he asked that question first) .
          while 40 days later at Weeks God would accept them — if everything was good :
 

 
          in that first meeting with God he spoke the condition of his covenant unto them 
          [and they said “yes we follow you” and were upset about His thunderous voice] 
          which áfter that was phrased in the Scroll : but óf the SAME Covenant ,
          when Moses was called up to the mount “to put the covenant terms into writing”
          which indeed may have been some ’40 days’ — representing a time of trial —
          that the people promptly failed to keep by making the idol before Moses came
          down from the mount : the sequence shows how the latter happened at Weeks
          wherefore God did not accept the people at the feast of Weeks !
 
          in similar manner we did understand some years ago that ‘the restored Scroll’ 
          should be declared ‘at Unleavened’ where His acceptance of it came at Weeks
          as following the same pattern
          [though sometimes we even lost thát knowing but because of pressure , Sir]  ;
          yet you see how Esau completely mutilated the time frames and for evil reason :
          Jacob would never understand that first he would have to decláre something
          let alone knowing ‘what’ (the Covenant) so that he would always be “Too Late”
          with consequence that God could never accept us – at His day of Weeks !
          think about that !
 
          then Esau set his next trap   —
          he had Moses descend from the mount with ‘two stones of the commandments’
          [the first was true : but with the Scroll , and 40 days earlier , and another mount] 
          and ever since , those jews consider that “the moment of giving the Torah”
          as an opinion sadly followed by christians ,
          but which was only “a bringing down of the written version óf God’s Covenant” ;
          while he glued a devious concept to the story , having invented that horrible 
          concept of “two stone tablets having 10 commandments as written (!) by God” ,
          while adding a visual by “a furious Moses smashing both tablets to the ground” :
          Moses can have been furious — but ofcourse these ‘two tablets’ never existed ,
          for it was but intended to corrupt the Covenant ,
          that had “the commandment to keep base 10” as the 10 month Eden year                  [sic]       
          which is a absolutely crucial PART OF the Covenant !
          how easy it was for Esau to put those but two words in a different context !
          in fact — but not even wé knew that half a year ago — the way how God spoke
          as ‘formulating’ the covenant to which the people could agree can well have 
          started with the famous first four lines , but after that (-when it gets a mess) it
          100% must have contained the base 10 theme ,
          simply because base 10 is THE condition for the return to the Eden land !
 

and it must be said : Esau’s invention of his            cursed “two tablets of ten commandments”           became ingrained in the mindset of Jacob ,           and ofcourse stimulated by Esau’s movies           like that famous 50’s one where tablets are           written ‘by fire’ and after that a livid Moses           furiously smashes those sacred abjects    —           but this is all deliberate Sorcery ,           since Jacob’s own ’10’ was involved here           as a deeply subconscious theme for him ,           giving energy to Esau’s horrible Ritual that           he mercilessly milked out since olden time

        
          concerning Unleavened , one more aspect please ,
          because the difficult ’40 days trial’ must be for later :
 
          unleavened wafers : declaring to follow the uncorrupted covenant [‘wheat’] 
          in the first years ,
          we did understand that ‘leaven’ was a bad thing by “the leaven of the Pharisees”
          representing “the by Esau corrupted scroll” that was to be restored again [by us]  ,
          but only in the past half year we percieved the deeper reason for it :
          that the Covenant is about base 10 with her ultimate aspect “the ears of wheat” 
          which together with the sceptre and his star represent base 10 as our birthright 
          [so as a kind of triple-construct of ‘the sceptre-axis, his star and the wheat ears’] 
 

[and for a visual reminder of those themes ; the sceptre-axis standing over the Sanctuary carrying his star as the dwelling place of the virgin-daughter of tsiun , where probably the both wheat ears stand in the Sanctuary >>]

 
          hence , after the Scroll had been given to old-Ishral ,
          the people were to offer unleavened wafers symbolizing the complete covenant
          as token of their agreement to follow it — though they probably didn’t know whý
          exactly they had to offer “unleavened bread”, since the details of that only came
          at the time of the Prophets much later [-and were short-lived ….]  ,
          where instead they did understand the animal-sacrifices for sin and guilt , etc
              [sub :
              not to go off track , but also this type wafer was hijacked the past 1500 years
              as used by the RCC in their “Eucharist” which however was based upon the 
              corrupt lines in NT as if it had to do with ‘the body of Christ’ ;
              where the “transubstantation” of it was a highly debated theme from Thomas 
              of Aquino until Luther — but which had nothing to do with God pr with Christ 
              but was an alchemical (Sorcery) concept of “the god of the West” [long story] 
              that camouflaged (!) himself with the attributes of Christ ;
              it just again shows that Esau didn’t do half work ..]    
          yet in these late times ,
          in fact you & we again offered the ‘proper unleavened’ – through the Scroll
          now restored so that it contains all the above mentioned aspects of our base 10
          including the final one of that which is the wheat ;
          and mentioning all of this ,
          for now we will need to see how this ‘cereal theme’ relates to ‘Weeks’ , next :                   <<<
 
                                                                                          second hurdle
 
                                          the day of Acceptance (‘Weeks’ aka ‘Pentecost’)
 
         ‘Pentecost’ was not ‘a fulfillment’

because per definition it cannot have been    —           the original gospel stopped with the ascension           of Christ and did NOT continue with disciples           being in a room when tongues of fire appeared           for that’s Esau’s morbid deceitful toddler story ,           and writing up a (corrupt) prophecy in ‘Acts 2’           suggesting that some fulfillment had happened

 
          we saw that the disciples were ‘our caretakers’
          because He explained everything unto them as they would intercede for you & we
          in this end-time so that we would find in the Scroll what they also had understood ,
          wherefore ‘Pentecost’ maximum is but “a partial fulfillment” as ‘an ongoing theme’
          namely until the réal day of Acceptance will come to pass : wherein God will 
          decide whether ‘the conditions of His covenant’ were properly understood [by us]  :
          and this causes a new look upon the feasts :
 
          because if the above reasoning is true – and it seems so ,
          then we must have a 3-fold ‘Weeks’ or “that same day fulfilled in three stages” :
          first in the days of old-Ishral , then ‘at the time of Christ’ , and lastly “these days” !              <<<
 
          the 40th day : Christ’s ascension — at ‘Weeks’ [and the Spirit came down] 
          as the “second stage” [though that sounds a bit profound]  ;
          with Christ ,
          – the first feast “Passover” was fulfilled ,                   V
          – and the second one “Firstfruits” as well ,                V
          – the third one “Unleavened” is a bit tricky ,              ?
          – and the fourth “Weeks” not yet ;                                  X
          but with the remark that He had made the rest of the feasts possible ;
          yes the graph is a bit silly but then see what Esau did to disconnect Him from the
          feast of ‘Weeks’ by allegedly (!) having Him ascend ’10 days befóre that feast’ ,
          which from whatever side you look at it just doesn’t make Sense :
          in ‘Acts’ 1:3 it has Him still on earth “for 40 days [-after Passover] ” wherefore the
          disciples allegedly “had to wait 10 days in Jerusalem” until the day of Pentecost 
          would be “fulfilled” by the Spirit coming down ;
          however , Esau can have left clues : after He ascended it has this ,
              (11)
             “this same Jesus,which is taken up from you in to heaven ,
              shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”
              but this is superfluous ,
              how much is the chance that it said ‘the same day‘ : namely “at Weeks” ?
              next ,
              (12)
             “Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet ,
              which is from Jerusalem a sabbath-day’s journey [=way] .”   
              that’s even móre silly — what the hell is ‘a sabbaths-day journey’ ?
              (and no it wasn’t because Esau “was to travel only 0,7 mile on a sabbath”)
              the freaking hill is just outside the city !
              we bet he swapped the line from the start to ‘being line 12’ ? :
              12
              then they went [=fróm]  Jerusalem [=únto]  mount Olivet [‘for the ascension’!] 
              b
              …. [on the day of-]  sabbath=Weeks (‘same word’) ;
         by the above ,
         it is not impóssible that He ascended at the day of ‘Weeks’ , right ?
 
         but the reasoning is this please    —
         add to this that He did NOT ascend “during one of the Fall feasts”                                                  <<<
         and if “return the same day” is true : then He never would return ‘in the Fall’ !                       [sic] 
         for He would have made sure “that the third stage of ‘Weeks’ would be fulfilled” !
         and what was that condition ?
         – to have the proper Covenant declared including the themes of base 10 !
         then HOW much is the chance that “at the day of Acceptance” (‘Weeks’) when 
         God thinks it is good enough how we formulated the themes , as the ‘3d time’
         in which the theme of that day is finally fulfilled , also Christ returns .. ??                                 [sic!] 
         where He already made a link between his ascension and his return ?
 
         so what did it réally say :
         a “49 days” – as the time from Passover until the ‘Weeks’ ,
         or indeed “40 days” – but as the time from Unleavened untill the day of ‘Weeks’ ?
         and if the latter , what again did Esau conceal ?
         the key must be that both ‘Unleavened’ and ‘Weeks’ were to be fulfilled by us ,
         which as we saw is true since first we had to collect all the themes (Unleavened)
         and wait through the ’40 day trial time’ until we have one more thing to do
         (at the day of Acceptance — see section below) ,
         and becáuse He had nothing to do with ‘Unleavened’ it probably said “49 days” ;
              [sub :
              however , He may have said something about it .
              and we highly suspect that Esau hid this in the alleged “40 days temptation”
              which is an affront because His réal ‘temptation’ was his mission itself ; 
              as thought experiment [Mt.4:1-11]  :
              what if the ‘temptation’ described “the 3-fold nature of the day of ‘Weeks” ? ,
              as “the time of old-Ishral”, that when Christ was here , and these very days ?
              (1)
              the “stones & (unleavened?) bread” for old-Ishral ,
              and the “not by bread alone but by God’s word” (in 4) , how old-Ishral was 
              commanded to do it but didn’t know yet what it was about ?
              (2)
              for the first christians ?
              since it has “temple” and “cast you down” >> but “when He was on earth” ??
              and (in 7) “until the sons will have understood what says the scroll of God” ?
              (3)
              for us  —
              because of ‘the kingdom’ that ‘will be given’ : that is about Eden !
              this seems the most probable interpretation but will be very tricky to restore] 
    
        why no return in the Fall feasts : Trumpets , Atonement and Booths
        but with a disclaimer   —
        these are not the divine feasts but the ‘human’ ones , and though ‘Trumpets’ is 
        associated with His return (in corrupt verses) the meaning here is the start of the
        restoration of the Scroll as “answering God” as ‘blowing the trumpet’ in prophets
        [though a trump will sound the day that the sceptre & his star are restored]  ;
        also Atonement is ‘for man’ ,
        representing the remnant dying to themselves – and later Jacob in the tribulation ;
        where Booths is a bit tricky : perhaps ‘everyone saved rebuilding Eden’ ?
        [after desolate Eden hersélf was restored in order to can be rebuilt ?]    (yes)
 
        the disclaimer is ‘that we cannot know if something will happen this Weeks’ 
        in spite of the recent themes and the reasoning like in this page 
 
                                                 details of the day of Acceptance
 
        this must have been the original name of this appointed time ,
        right from the start in Gen.32-33 where for the first time the seven feasts plus 
        their góal were explained unto Jacob , where the lines (at the start of chapter 33)
        we now identified as describing this feast even shóws this word “acceptance” ! 
        [breakdown at end of page — see how well we’re going ?]  
 
        ofcourse the phrase “(day of-) Weeks” is very superficial not meaning anything ,
        as a typical cover-up of Esau that sought to prevent that Jacob would be asking
        whát then “was to be accepted” , and would not link it to ‘the declaring’ at the 
        day of Unleavened , tying in to the Horeb problem at the start of this page ;
        yet the same is true with ‘Pentecost’ ,
        which is exactly as superficial and for exactly the same reason [-while the real
        day however may be the 49th instead of the tampered ’50th’]  , 
        and where we saw that this day was not ‘the final fulfillment’ as Esau suggested 
        but ‘the second stage’ of a traject , the key-word here even confirms this latter ,
        because by Christ’s work God started to accept the many delivered souls !
        and this was the real miracle of ‘Pentecost’ ,
        NOT ‘the pouring out of the Spirit’ in the way churches today imagine that :
        surely the first generation christians were much closer — but many had to die ! —
        yet after that any “outpouring” in the sense of the word ceased , and what the 
        churches of today wait from that day will never happen for the simple fact that 
        their imagined “holyness of this ugly flesh ape” is an evil-KJV-inspired phantom ;
        though God receiving new souls who found Christ still remains the same true !
   
        next to “the feast of Weeks” with its vague description first showing in Lev. 23 
        the original literal phrase “day of acceptance” appears in Isaiah ,
        or in fact it wanted to show séveral times — but the book is so utterly corrupted 
        that for now we can only put the context together through all that we learned :
        in chapter 61 , 
        after “proclaiming liberty to the captives and the opening of the prison” which is
        about all the stolen eden-concepts (-see earlier) by mystery-Babylon including 
        our beautiful Originals imprisoned in her , it continues with ,
            (2)
           “To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance
            of our God; to comfort all that mourn ;”
            ofcourse also this line is faulty in metric & context ,
            first because the theme is not yet “vengeance” for it continues in next 3 ,
            so that it has read , 
            proclaiming – the day of – vengeance=acceptance
            b
            [=in]  the year of – the (final-) acceptable=Jubilee
            where here ,
            the proof of it “being in the final Jubilee year” shows in Lev.26 (see below) 
            which’ context is about ús returning to Eden if we will have found base 10 :
 
            the ‘acceptance’ : the word ‘belongs’ to God and is about base-10
            certain word-roots ‘belong to God’ and others ‘to man’ ,
            [where not only the old-Hebrew knows this but also Rg-veda for example]             
            and concerning this word ‘acceptance’ (rts / rtsn) ,
            apart from the many corruptions and the term occasionally used for ‘man’ ,
            per the context of sections 80% was in the form of “I (God) will accept” ;
            while the subject of that use consistently is “base-12 as the high-places” ,
            whereby His acceptance ór non-acceptance is about Eden’s base 10 ,
            rejecting those keeping the hated 12-month matrix-year .
            and accepting those that vow for His original 10-month year of Eden   — 
            where this “vow” also shows in the description of the feast like in Lev.23
            in the interesting breakdown following the next examples :
 
            [proof that the core theme is base-10 , but now it gets a bit messy :] 
Ez.20
(40)  ‘will I accept’ , (41) ‘I will accept you’ 
direct context : brought to Eden                                                [compare Lev.26 ‘in a jubilee’ & see below] 
                                    as opposed to the first half of chapter :
(28-29) ‘high places & idols & bamah’ [base-12 theme]  ;
others : ‘not walk in my statutes’ , ‘be like the heathens’ , ‘wrath’                           [base-12 keywords] 
Jer.14                                                                                                            [but terribly corrupted & core is missing] 
(10-12) ‘I will not accept them’                                                                                 [< those that keep base-12 !] 
(6) ‘dragons’ (-thnim) [Behemoth & Leviathan] 
(21) ‘covenant’ 
Lev.26
(30) ‘high places & image’ [base-12] 
        and ‘not enter a land’ because of that , read : Eden ;                                                      [Jubilee chapter] 
(42) ‘[I remember]  the covenant’ 
 
            now please ,
            there are several other chapters supporting these but looking over them you
            will notice how all (!) of them are so systematically deviously-corrupted that it 
            feels nauseous knowing Esau knew exáctly where to look for and disarm it ,
            and a number of chapters is so bad that we could never restore them   — 
            so that we must be satisfied with understanding all the components in them ,          [definition :] 
            because the pattern consistently desires to tell the same thing which is the                          I
            turning away from the high-places (12-month year) and find the 10 Eden months                I
            so that the year of the (final) Jubilee will happen in which the day of Acceptance                  I
            will bring the liberty of the prisoners ánd that of the tired Remnant , so that Eden               I
            will be restored and again will rule the two halves of heaven and cleanse them ,                    I
            and saved Jacob be restored in the pretty Originals and dwell in her forever ,                         I
            as the full content of the meaning of God’s eternal covenant ; including the                             I
            understanding of the themes ‘sceptre, his star, 7 Torches, the Floor, and wheat’ ;                   I
            
            please , writing down the above definition is not overdone ,
            for we know very well that we could never derive our Legal Right if it depended
            upon the “flawless restoration” of these many important but corrupted chapters ,
            while — hopefully — our God merely spoke so many chapters becáuse He knew
            that they would be disarmed , but that from all the remained fragments we would 
            be able “to stitch back together” the overall theme ,
            so that “by a definition (as above) we gained all our Legal Right” 
            which we give to God (“have given at this Unleavened”) ,
            waiting what He will say at the day of Acceptance (-hopefully the next week one)
 
                                                     okay , back to this specific theme :
 
                at this day : offering an ear of wheat , an animal-sacrifice , and a vow
 
            the truth is that we’re still studying what exactly was required at this day ,
            and it seems to be ‘1’ animal-sacrifice — not 2, 7, 4 or whatever Esau made up ,                  [#1] 
            which in that time before Christ represented the personal sin (‘the body’) ,
            then the waving of a sheaf of cereal — and it looks like “of 10 stalks” because                       [#2] 
            of the connection with the “base 10 theme” ,
            linked to ‘making a vow’ as most likely ‘to keep base 10’ ;                                                                    [#3] 
 
            from [the day of-]  Firstfruits to ‘waving of the sheaf’ at this day
            as usual we “first need a proper concept” before going to the corrupted text   —
            the day after Passover about a sheaf of firstfruits (either being waved or held up) 
            sounds okay as representing all the souls that Christ delivered ,
            but that a similar thing seems to happen here where the core theme is base-10 
            suggests that the remnant is involved ; and since the remnant (of TEN tribes)
            did not manifest ‘at that day of Firstfruits’ likely the remnant manifests now ,
            symbolized in ears that were lifted up unto God , right ;
            in this case ,
            that each soul could hold up the sheaf (or the priest did it for them) means that
            potentially ány soul could be part of the remnant — which is true — but then as 
            a foreshadowing of the situation at the end of time ;
            but “was there also a certain númber of ears” ? or is that not important ?
            because ‘the factor 10’ was included in the vow ?   
 
            b) text : the waving of the sheaf , and the vow
            that vow :
            in part I we posed that “at this day still 1 declaration had to be presented” which
            however is a bit confusing because that was all done at the day of Unleavened ,
            yet perhaps this is about “a re-confirmation after the 40 day trial time”                                   <<<
            which isn’t an excuse-reason here but probably even very realistic :
            since the 40 days may also be viewed as ‘the past 2000 years’ (40 Jubilees)
            in which indeed many (everyone — and we included !) fell in that trial ,
            so that their re-confirmation was in fact also “speaking for our situation” , right ?
            and seen in this light ,
            the “act of vowing” can only belong to this feast — not to any other one !
            because the ‘declaring’ (at Unleavened) with its opposite ‘accepting’ is already
            taken so that the somewhat curious concept ‘vowing’ does fit this day ,
            and please see other examples , below ;
            but let’s see what shows :
               (Lev.23:16)
          “Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty (?) days;
           and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.”
               it has ‘bring near – a gift – new’ : what gift ? what means “a new gift” ?
               while the word ‘new’ (-chdsh) can also be ‘moon’ or ‘month’ !
               [Num.28:26 doesn’t say ‘a new grain offering’ but has the same “gift – new”]  ;
               what if it was , 
               a ‘your gift [concerning-]  the new=months (chdsh=chdsh)” ?                                                    [sic !] 
               because here ,
               it may not make much sense to others but it DOES , to us !
               because all of the day of Acceptance IS about base 10 !
               next ,
               (17)
             “Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals:
              they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven;
              [they are]  the firstfruits unto the LORD.”
               why now suddenly “leavened (!) breads” ? and why ‘two’ ?
               and why – later – the priest has to wave (!) the breads (don’t make sense) ?
               now ,
               it needs to follow the ‘months’ theme but this line is very tricky 
               and needs to introduce the sheaf for next – but moved – line 20 :
               ‘you will bring – out of your habitations                                                         [‘to the priest’ ? , see 20] 
               b
               two bread=wheat (lchm=chti) [+sheaves]  for waving (‘wave offering’)    +
               c
               [of]  ten two=ears (‘stalks’) , flour=each (having-) leaven=five (chmts=chmsh) ,

d                bakes=representing – the firstfruits – to IEUE’ ,                is that remotely possible .. ?                that after opening as “months” He now links to ‘the 10 tribes’                which indeed themselves represent the ten months of  Eden                and even distinguishes here the “houses Ishral and Judah”                 by having “2 sets of each 5 stalks” ?                [we don’t go into now ‘how the houses were distributed’]                 but it is clearly ‘to counter the dual realm’ ;

 
               next ,
               we need the by Esau moved line 20 to continue the proper subject :
             

 
                                                                 and finally ,
 
    [Gen.33]  : not ‘Jacob meets Esau’ but ‘two halves of heaven’ [-at Weeks] 
    we partly did Gen.32-33 ,
    and did see that it was the first explanation – ever – of the feasts 
    [and that the réal ‘meeting with Esau’ only came in a later chapter !]  ;
    here , suspicious is “jacob divided Rachel & Leah in two groups” in line 1 ,
    that can only be ‘leah=Leviathan & Behemoth as the two the·maids (!) heavens’ ,
    so that here must have been explained how Eden will be restored :
    (1)
    the ‘dividing – the·children’ as “(God) will divide – the·children=the (2) heavens” ,
    and ‘four – hundred’ was the “10 – months” ;
    (2)
    ‘he placed the maids and children first’ was “restore Eden in the middle”,
    (3) ‘seven [times] ‘ , can be anything ;
    now ,
    it’s all terribly corrupted but since “the feasts are explained” it could also tell how 
    the sons of Ishral in the endtime find back the base 10 — where úntil that time the
    offspring of Jacob will worship the 12 month year , as he is shown :
    (6)
   “Then the handmaidens came near, they and their children, and they bowed themselves.”
    here ,
    probably ‘‘[the tribe-]  Ishral would go worship [-the foreign year] ‘ since all the tribes
    would come forth from himsélf , and
    (7)
   “And Leah also with her children came near, and bowed themselves: and after came Joseph
    near and Rachel, and they bowed themselves.”
    so that here ‘also [the tribe-]  Judah will worship it , and both their offspring’ ;
    and after Jacob to his astonishment has seen all his offspring worshipping the 12-months ,
    (8)
   “And he said, What [meanest]  thou by all this drove which I met?
    And he said, [These are]  to find grace in the sight of my lord.”
    as ‘what [means]  all this [=offspring]  that I encountered ?
    and he heard ‘[+they]  will to=not find [‘keep’?]  the grace=months (chn=chdsh)
                                   of the in=year of the eyes=house of mylord=Eden (adni=odn)‘ ;
    next 10 has the same phrase ,
    and in context now it can only be the sons – no ? :
    (10)
   “And Jacob said, Nay, I pray thee, if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my
    present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God,
    and thou wast pleased with me [‘accepting me’]  .”
    as the sons
    that ‘will find (!) [-back]  the grace=months of the in=house (b=bth) of eyes=Eden (oini=odn)‘
    and ‘[=he]  (God) will receive – [=their]  gift – from [=their]  hand (‘own doing’)‘ ,
    moreover ‘and you=he will accept me=them’ !
    and here shows that literal root “to accept” (-rts) as at the start of this part II ;                         <<<<    
    now ,
    the nature and timing of this feast – ‘Weeks’ – is erased by Esau
    but because our case has become so solid it should be Weeks !

                                                                * * * * * * * * * * *
 

annex
 
[personal] 
these past two days writing this page ,
and pondering how to make ‘a summary of proofs’ about the dual-realm :
the egyptian tombs (page) , Rgveda with the 10-fold figure ‘Purasha’ 
and “the 10 (eden-) hands / maids (page) , and Mithra of the Avesta (still unposted) , etc ,
a memory came back that in it’s own way may support it , as well ;
around 1994 I was at the brink of suicide
and one night , in a solitary place closed off from the outside world ,
I started to hear demons and recognized they were the colour of the depression ;
they came up through the throat and started to state their names
then by an invisible force were pulled out and left 
only of one I remember its name , “filthy Jesus” ,
and it vomited such blasphemous things that I cried ‘let it stop !’
– and immediately I wasn’t able to hear those things no more
this went on till the morning ,
but then came “the princes” ,
yet this was a different .. type of session :
I heard the voice (also internally) which I knew was of Christ ,
and He was the one leading the judgment ,
with authority telling it : “what is your name ?”
[the thing answered , unwillingly , through my throat] 
“who am I ?”
[the thing answered] 
“who is he ?”
[the thing said my name] 
and then a statement which I forgot now
then , and this was the point ,
came two princes related to eachother :
the same line of interrogation happened , by both of them ,
but I didn’t understand their names that sounded like something old-Gothic
and they belonged together because their names were like an alliteration 
exactly like (Esau’) ‘Gog & Magog’
or his other versions ‘Mahlon & Chilion’ or his quran ‘Yajuj & Majuj’ 
[and after one more prince , their leader , wearing a red long cape , it was over]  ;
now please ,
ofcourse this is no proof — hence this in the annex — 
but it can be possible how certain constructs got represented by demon-princes ..