Joel - Part 5
First posted: April 8, 2024
In this series of articles, we are meditating on the book of Joel and what God is shouting to today's deaf generation through Joel's prophecy.
Index
Forcible awakening
In Joel 1:5, the Spirit of God declares the following:
"Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine; for it is cut off from your mouth" (Joel 1:5)
The word "awake" was translated from the Hebrew verb qus, which, interestingly enough, is derived from an almost equivalent verb meaning "to clip off". Hence, qus has the connotation of someone whose state of slumber is abruptly cut off and not allowed to continue. The matriarchal Church has been in a state of matriarchal slumber for over 1900 years, with only occasional stirrings similar to one who begins to toss and turn in bed as if he is about to awaken, only to fall back into a deep slumber. In the verse above, the Spirit of God is prophesying that the day would come when God would say, "Enough!!!" and make a demand to awaken that can no longer be ignored, meaning that the snooze button on the alarm clock will no longer work.
The word "drunkards" was translated from the Hebrew word sukor, which, interestingly enough, makes its first 2 appearances in Scripture in the following passages of 1 Samuel, translated as "drunken" both times:
"Now Hannah, she spake in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard: therefore Eli thought she had been drunken" (1 Samuel 1:13)
"And Abigail came to Nabal; and, behold, he held a feast in his house, like the feast of a king; and Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he was very drunken: wherefore she told him nothing, less or more, until the morning light." (1 Samuel 25:36)
Notice that the first appearance of sukor, in 1 Samuel 1:13, is in the context of someone (Hannah) who appears drunken to the spiritually misguided (Eli) but who really was not and was actually endeavouring to give birth to God's vision (represented by the birth of Samuel, which is what Hannah was interceding for at the time). This points to how those who are spiritually awake are ironically judged as being in a "drunken stupor" by the very people who actually are.
Notice that the second appearance of sukor, in 1 Samuel 25:36, is in the context of a fool named Nabal who was truly drunk. The verses that follow describe what happened to Nabal then:
"37 But it came to pass in the morning, when the wine was gone out of Nabal, and his wife had told him these things, that his heart died within him, and he became as a stone. 38 And it came to pass about ten days after, that the LORD smote Nabal, that he died." (1 Samuel 25:37-38)
What literally gave Nabal a devastating heart attack was being told by Abigail that David (in a Jebusite rage) had been on the verge of killing him and every male in his household but chose not to because Abigail went to him and pleaded with David that he show mercy and not punish the entire household of Nabal for the stupidity of one man (in this case, Nabal). It is interesting to consider that Nabal did not die immediately and that 10 days went by from the heart attack until the Lord gave Nabal the final coup de grace that killed him off completely. This points to several things:
- It points to how certain things and people are, for all intents and purposes, already dead, even when the final "death certificate" has not yet been officially issued.
- It points to how a Smyrna-style, "10-day" prophetic sacrifice (Revelation 2:10) is sometimes needed to complete the death of things and people who have been standing with the help and enablement of the Girgashite spirit for a long time.
- It points to how David was forced to wait for God's full process so that the one person who had to died did so. This contrasts with David's original, Jebusite-inspired plan to kill many innocent bystanders who were actually supportive of him and not of Nabal. David's Jebusite plan was inspired by his desire to expedite the death of the man that he wanted soul-centred vengeance upon, with no regard for God's righteous purposes.
- Nabal's death prophesies what will happen to those who refuse to heed God's Joel 1:5 wake-up call. They will be struck a death blow at the core of their beings (i.e.- their hearts), and, after a brief period of appearing to still be alive, they will drop dead (literally and figuratively) and be erased from the face of the Earth.
Weeping that changes nothing
The word "weep" in Joel 1:5 was translated from the Hebrew verb baqa, which, interestingly enough, appears for the first time in verse 16 of the following passage, translated as "wept":
"12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. 13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. 14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. 16 And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation." (Genesis 21:12-18)
Notice how baqa is used for the first time in Scripture in the context of a woman who was crying because of an inevitable death, at least as things stood from her side. In other words, she was not weeping in intercession, asking God to save her child. Instead, she was weeping as she asked the Lord not to let her see her child die, whom she left under a shrub some distance away from her because she could not bear the torture of watching him die. In a sense, it is almost as if she had accepted what she perceived as God's death decree against her child, and she had decided not to appeal the verdict. This is certified by the fact that God said to her that He had "heard the voice of the lad" (v17), not her voice. In other words, God spared the child, not because of her weeping but because there was something in the child that merited a second chance. God heard that "something" in him and allowed him to survive miraculously, prophesying that He would "make him a great nation" (v18). Given that the Arabs emerged from that child (Ishmael), the passage above declares a powerful reality about the Arabs' prophetic future, but that reality falls outside the direct scope of this posting. Suffice it to say that we have said a few things regarding that reality in a posting from many years ago, but this writer must admit to finding the fullness of that reality quite "hazy" and difficult to grasp at the present time.
The second appearance of baqa in Scripture is in Genesis 23:2, translated as "weep":
"And Sarah died in Kirjatharba; the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan: and Abraham came to mourn for Sarah, and to weep for her" (Genesis 23:2)
Notice how baqa is used in the context of Abraham expressing emotional pain over a loss that he could not change. This correlates with how Hagar baqa-ed out of deep emotional pain over what she perceived to be the inevitable death of her son. The third time that baqa is used is in the following verse, again translated as "wept":
"And Esau said unto his father, Hast thou but one blessing, my father? bless me, even me also, O my father. And Esau lifted up his voice, and wept." (Genesis 27:38)
Notice how baqa is used above in the context of Esau experiencing emotional pain over the loss of the blessing from his father Isaac, which, as we know, he was never able to recover. This yet again shows how baqa is related to the expressing of emotional pain over something that cannot be changed. In other words, baqa does not seem to be used (at least in its first appearances) to denote the outpouring of tears that will be sown into the ground and reap a future change. Hence, we can conclude that baqa is predominantly a pastoral manifestation of emotions, as opposed to a prophetic manifestation that acts as a sacrificial seed to effect change in the future. Thus, when the Spirit of God tells the drunkards to baqa (i.e.- to weep) in Joel 1:5, He is declaring emotional sorrow over their pastoral/Canaanite souls over the inevitable loss that God is decreeing over them.
Howling in empty hopelessness
The word "howl" in Joel 1:5 was translated from the Hebrew verb yalal, which, interestingly enough, is only used in the following books: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Micah, Zephaniah, and Zechariah. Notice that all these books are prophetic books. In fact, "howl" is used in 3 of the 4 "major prophet" books, with the only exception being Daniel, and in 6 of the 12 "minor prophet" books. This clearly indicates that yalal "howling" is an effect of applying the prophetic endowment on the enemies of God to destroy them. Whereas baqa is an effect of inflicting pain on God's enemies through apostolic judgements, yalal is an effect of applying the prophetic endowment on God's enemies to make them experience the profound emptiness and futility of their existence (given that the prophetic endowment is the one most directly related to the impartation of purpose and the fulfilment of one's destiny). The fact that yalal results from an "application of the prophetic" can be seen, for example, in the first and last appearances of yalal in the book of Isaiah, where it is also translated as "howl":
"Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty" (Isaiah 13:6)
"Behold, my servants shall sing for joy of heart, but ye shall cry for sorrow of heart, and shall howl for vexation of spirit" (Isaiah 65:14)
Notice how Isaiah 13:6 above speaks of yalal howling in the context of anticipating a devastating destruction that will come in the future. This emphasises yalal's connection to the prophetic endowment, since that is the endowment most directly related to anticipating things in the future. Notice also how Isaiah 65:14 above associates yalal howling with a "vexation of spirit". The word "vexation" in that verse was mistranslated from the Hebrew noun sheber, which actually means "breaking, fracture, crush". Hence, Isaiah 65:14 speaks of a crushing or shattering of spirit. This therefore speaks of an internal devastation of the soul where all hope of any future well-being is destroyed. The reason why Isaiah 65:14 says "vexation of spirit" instead of "vexation of soul" is twofold. For one, it points to how this crushing comes through the work of the prophetic spirit on the soul being crushed. Second, it points to the devastation of the evil spirit that gives sustenance to the soul that is being crushed. In a matriarchal person, the soul reigns "supreme" and the spirit lays dormant and inert. Because man is not designed to be controlled by his soul, the effective "absence" of his spirit creates a void that is eventually filled by evil spirits. And, the more rebellious and matriarchal a soul becomes, the stronger those evil spirits become in the person's life. Thus, in an ironic way, those who want their souls to be in charge and who refuse to be ruled by their own spirit (as it becomes joined with the Spirit of God) end up being controlled and manipulated by evil spirits that provide them with the "spiritual substance" that they need to achieve their ends. These spirits provide that "substance" in exchange for ultimate control of the person's soul and to have temporary "kingship" over events on Earth. However, when we prophetically release yalal howling over God's enemies as per Joel 1:5, we shatter the evil spirits strengthening the enemies' matriarchal souls, leaving them with an overwhelming void that is inexplicable to them as they awaken to how truly hopeless and devoid of a future they have become.
It is worth noting that, after using yalal in Isaiah 65:14 above, the Spirit of God goes on to say the following:
"15 And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for the Lord GOD shall slay thee, and call his servants by another name: 16 That he who blesseth himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth; and he that sweareth in the earth shall swear by the God of truth; because the former troubles are forgotten, and because they are hid from mine eyes." (Isaiah 65:15-16)
Notice how these verses speak of a total removal of the howling matriarchals' spiritual legacy, to the point that they will have to leave their spiritual name behind to the remnant, meaning that they will not be able to carry any influence or power from that name on into the future. Their matriarchal name will then go from being revered (as it is now) to being so reviled that it will be treated like a curse to anyone who beholds it and to anyone who so much as considers "reviving" it somehow. From then on, people who seek a blessing will seek it "in the God of truth", meaning that they will not be seeking matriarchal blessings devoid of truth-forging judgements. And those who "swear", i.e.- make binding commitments, will do so "by the God of truth", meaning that they will only bind themselves to the truth and not rely on foundations devoid of truth. The "former troubles" (v16) of the matriarchal days will then be forgotten as the howling matriarchals fade into nothingness and eternal irrelevance. That shall be their eternal destiny, for which reason they will howl as they are made aware of that fate.
The vindicating new wine
In Joel 1:5, the Spirit of God tells the "drinkers of wine" to weep (baqa) and howl (yalal) because of the "new wine", for "it is cut off" from their mouths. The word "wine" in the phrase "drinkers of wine" was translated from the Hebrew word yayin, which is the word normally used throughout Scripture to refer to wine. The phrase "new wine", however, was translated from the single word asis, which is only used 5 times in Scripture. Joel 1:5 is the 3rd appearance (i.e.- the "middle" appearance) of asis, and these are the other 4:
"I would lead thee, and bring thee into my mother's house, who would instruct me: I would cause thee to drink of spiced wine of the juice of my pomegranate" (Song of songs 8:2)
[The word "juice" was translated from asis]
"And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob" (Isaiah 49:26)
[The phrase "sweet wine" was translated from asis]
"And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of Shittim" (Joel 3:18)
[The phrase "new wine" was translated from asis]
"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt" (Amos 9:13)
[The phrase "sweet wine" was translated from asis]
As shown above, the first appearance of asis is in Song of songs 8:2. However, due to the fact that the spiritual meaning of Song of songs 8:2 requires more nuanced meditation and becomes easier to understand if one already has a strong sense of asis's meaning, we shall leave it for last.
The 2nd appearance of asis, in Isaiah 49:26 above, points to God's vindicating vengeance against the oppressors of God's people who have tried to maintain their matriarchal, Old-Covenant tyranny over the remnant and all the people of God, as confirmed by the verses that precede Isaiah 49:26:
"22 Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. 23 And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me. 24 Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive delivered? 25 But thus saith the LORD, Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that contendeth with thee, and I will save thy children." (Isaiah 49:22-25)
Notice how the Spirit of God declares in Isaiah 49:26 that He will force the Old-Covenant oppressors to eat their own flesh and drink their own blood as if it was "new wine". This is because the Lord will end the time where these oppressors feed off of the Spirit potential in others, forcing them to self-destruct as an involuntary sacrifice where they will remove themselves from between God and His people. They are the spiritual hindrance that prevents the free and abundant flow of God's asis wine amongst His people. This is why, when they drink their own blood, it will be as New-Covenant wine that "poisons" them to death and allows that asis to finally flow amongst God's people.
The 4th appearance of asis, in Joel 3:18 above, very clearly points to God's restoration of His people and the vindication of His remnant, which is why the verses that follow Joel 3:18 say the following:
"19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land. 20 But Judah shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation. 21 For I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed: for the LORD dwelleth in Zion." (Joel 3:19-21)
The new wine of David's tabernacle
The 5th appearance of asis, in Amos 9:13 above, points to the tabernacle of David, as is clearly shown by the verses preceding Amos 9:13:
"11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: 12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this." (Amos 9:11-12)
The "tabernacle of David" refers to the tent that David pitched when the Ark of the Covenant was recovered and returned to Jerusalem:
"16 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart. 17 And they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it: and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD. 18 And as soon as David had made an end of offering burnt offerings and peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of hosts." (2 Samuel 6:16-18)
Notice how the tabernacle of David effectively became the "Holy of Holies" because the Ark of the Covenant was placed there just as it would normally be placed in the Holy of Holies, where the Presence of God is the most intense. Notice also that David entered the tabernacle to offer sacrifices, even as the Ark of the Covenant was in it. This points to the New Covenant where you no longer have to be a literal Aaronic high priest to enter the Holy of Holies at a very specific time of the year and offer sacrifices unto the Lord. Some might have thought that this tabernacle of David was a mere emergency "placeholder" until a "proper temple" was built for the Ark. However, as is clearly implied in Amos 9:11 above, God did not see this tabernacle of David as a one-off placeholder or as a "glitch" that became necessary due to historical circumstances. Instead, it was a prophetic sign of what God always wanted amongst His people. This is why God declares in Amos 9:11 that He intends to "raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen", as opposed to folding up the tabernacle and stashing it away in the "warehouse of historical oddities". The fact that He speaks of it being "fallen" and with "breaches" in need of closing means that the tabernacle has been up, but it has been damaged by the matriarchal oppressors of God's people, whose interest it is that the tabernacle remain fallen and with breaches. The "tabernacle of David" has been up and readily available to humanity since Yeshua's death and resurrection, but it was quickly damaged by the pastoral matriarchy as the "Primitive Church" became contaminated with the matriarchal spirit of Babylon.
Hence, we can say that the asis "new wine" of Joel 3:18 refers to the resurrection life and victory that will flow in the atmosphere as the remnant are vindicated and the Spirit (and not the soul) begins to rule. This means that asis points to the life and victory of the New Covenant, which will flow from the mountains (as opposed to the Old-Covenant oppression that flows from the Amorite mountains when the soul is in charge). In Amos 9:13 (quoted above), where the word asis is used by the Spirit for the 5th and last time in Scripture, the "mountains" refer to the believers who will grow into spiritual giants but who will not use their "giantness" to domineer over their brethren, using it instead to enable their brethren to operate in New-Covenant freedom and grow like them. The fact that Amos 9:13 speaks of the "hills" melting refers to the end of the demigod "ministers" that rise slightly above the rest of the brethren to domineer over them, placing themselves somewhere between God and the "unwashed layman". The matriarchal Church's landscape is littered with these hills that act as a persistent "reminder" to the Church that, though the stature of God is supposedly "unattainable" to all of humanity, some get "closer" to it than others and are therefore to be revered. God will melt these hills, "levelling the field" to reaffirm that there are no castes in the Body of Christ. No one can declare that the tabernacle of David has been restored as long as these cursed hills remain standing.
The new wine across the River Jordan
This writer is saddened by the fact that many preachers preach on Amos 9:11-15, using it as a tool to bring fleeting "revival" to their congregations. Even though a few of these preachers come somewhat close to preaching the true message behind this passage, they always fall short of it because they are never willing or able to reject the Old-Covenant caste system that their ministerial paradigms are so dependent on. They always behold "revival" as some great Moses-style leader rising up and stirring the otherwise-clueless masses to a frenzy of emotional upheaval and devotion to all things related to "God" and the Church. The "revival" is then maintained by consistently applying the same "techniques" that started the revival, all whilst diligently organising all the new "human resources" that are brought into the Church by the revival. Because these "revivals" are always top-down movements that remain top-down throughout their entire lifecycle, they usually fizzle out because they do not have God's permanent blessing, for God will never give eternal status to something centred in the soul and not the Spirit. Once and again, God accounts for the believers' original ignorance, fuelling the revival as He gives them time to understand that His goal is not "exciting services" but the manifestation of the New Covenant and the tabernacle of David amongst His people. Unfortunately, as these revival's leaders get close to the Promised Land and realise that there is an unavoidable River Jordan "in the way", they always turn around and go in the other direction, for they know that the "Moses"es leading the revival cannot cross the River Jordan the same way that the Reed Sea can be crossed. Their "Moses" cannot stand in front of the River Jordan, raise a rod, and cause the river to part so that the people can walk across it.
"1 Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass, that the LORD spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying, 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel." (Joshua 1:1-2)
[Notice that the Lord starts His conversation with Joshua by emphasising that Moses is dead. He then says, "therefore, arise, go over the Jordan, thou and all this people". In other words, because Old-Covenant Moses is dead, the people of God could now attempt to cross the Jordan. Notice also how the Lord says "all this people", and not just Joshua, in verse 2, making it clear to Joshua that He is giving the land to all the people, not just to Joshua.]
"5 And Joshua said unto the people, Sanctify yourselves: for to morrow the LORD will do wonders among you. 6 And Joshua spake unto the priests, saying, Take up the ark of the covenant, and pass over before the people. And they took up the ark of the covenant, and went before the people. 7 And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day will I begin to magnify thee in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that, as I was with Moses, so I will be with thee. 8 And thou shalt command the priests that bear the ark of the covenant, saying, When ye are come to the brink of the water of Jordan, ye shall stand still in Jordan." (Joshua 3:5-8)
Notice that the priests were to carry the Ark of the Covenant across the River, meaning that they were to lead the way as servants instead of masters, carrying the Ark for the rest of the people like a slave carrying his master's luggage. Consider also that, as the priests walked with the Ark into the River, they would have gotten "shorter" and "shorter" and more "invisible" as they descended into the river, which contrasts with how the Israelites crossed the Reed Sea, where Moses remained standing on a high place (visible to all) as he held up the rod and the Reed Sea was parted.
Notice also that, in Joshua 3:5 above, Joshua told the people to "sanctify" themselves. The word "sanctify" was translated from the Hebrew verb kadash, which interestingly enough, is used in verse 2 of Exodus 13, which speaks of what happened with the people of Israel shortly before the crossing of the Reed Sea:
"1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine." (Exodus 13:1-2)
Notice that the call to sanctification is given indirectly by God through Moses in the verses above, whereas, in Joshua 3:5, the Spirit of God simply says that Joshua told the people to sanctify themselves. Even though it can be said that it was God speaking through Joshua, the fact that the Spirit of God does not bother to portray Joshua as a "spokesman" or a "message relayer" reveals the directness of communication with the people at the River Jordan when compared to the Reed Sea. It is worth noting that, after Exodus 13:2, the verb kadash is not used by the Spirit of God in Exodus until Exodus 19:10, when the people of Israel were by Mount Sinai waiting for Moses, which happened some time after the Reed Sea crossing (described in Exodus 14). This means that the call to sanctification of Exodus 13:2 is the last (and only) one given before the Reed Sea crossing.
Notice also that the direct call to sanctification in Joshua 3:5 is directed at all the people, whereas the indirect call to sanctification in Exodus 13:2 is directed only at the firstborn. Amongst other things, this reveals that God's parting of the Reed Sea was motivated by the "birthright" that God had given to the people of Israel, just as a firstborn would receive the right to inherit by mere virtue of being born, without having yet done anything "noteworthy". By contrast, the sanctification of Joshua 3:5 is directed at people who survived the 40 years of "wilderness filtering" and had been found faithful enough to be sent into the Promised Land to conquer it. Whereas a firstborn inherits without doing a thing, the people with Joshua were to take the inheritance through forceful action against the enemy. In other words, the people of Israel at the Reed Sea were like dependent children to whom things were given by "decree", whilst the people of Israel at the River Jordan were like adults who had to act proactively to receive what was being given to them. The reason why the people of God by the River Jordan could not be treated like those by the Reed Sea is because what was given to each group was different. The people by the Reed Sea were being given the title of "God's nation amongst the nations", along with the irrevocable promise that they could conquer the Promised Land if they were willing to believe God and act on that belief. The people by the River Jordan, on the other hand, were given the opportunity to act on the promise and bring it to pass. This is why basic and oft-quoted passages such as John 3:16 are so misunderstood by believers:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16)
Because the matriarchal Church is stuck in "Reed Sea mode", they think that the passage above is declaring that believing Yeshua enough to be born again at one point in your life is an absolute guarantee of "everlasting life" from God. However, the only thing that the Lord "guarantees" in John 3:16 is that "believing" will enable "everlasting life" and that this enabling happened when God gave His only begotten Son. No amount of believing would have enabled the opportunity for "everlasting life" had Yeshua not come. But God, in His great mercy, did send Yeshua and the opportunity is there for us, if we are willing to press towards it. In the same way, the people who crossed the Reed Sea were given the opportunity to conquer the Promised Land because they had believed God enough to get them out of Egypt. Yet, despite the opportunity laid before them, most of them did not believe God enough to follow through and seize the opportunity to conquer the Promised Land. They believed enough to be out of Egypt and on the path to the Promised Land, but they did not believe enough to complete the journey. In the context of John 3:16, our "Promised Land" is "everlasting life", but that Promised Land can only be conquered as we walk in faith (i.e.- in "believing") and complete the journey. As we have shared before, this does not mean that a believer "goes to hell" if he or she does not complete the journey of believing. Why? Because it is not an "either-or" choice between "hell" and "eternal life", just like it was not an either-or choice between "Egypt" and the "Promised Land" for the Israelites. The vast majority of those who came out of Egypt died somewhere in between, having escaped Egypt and having received the promises, but without the willingness to act on those promises and achieve them in faith. In the same way, most believers will have escaped "hell" and still not enter into eternal life. As we have also shared before, 1 Timothy 6:16 declares that there can be no "immortality" apart from God, meaning that the only way we can have "eternal life" is to be One with Him (Romans 2:7). In other words, He is, at the end of the day, the "Promised Land" we have been given the opportunity to "conquer". If we can act in His Nature enough to drive out all the enemies and obstacles in the Land, then we shall be granted the opportunity to act in His Nature for all of eternity as we become permanently One with Him. This is the meaning of the "everlasting life" that Yeshua speaks of in John 3:16. If you are a "Reed Sea" believer, you will be sitting around in the wilderness, waiting for that "everlasting life" of John 3:16 to be handed to you on a silver platter by "automatic, divine decree", and you will eventually turn into one of the many sitting corpses littering the wilderness landscape.
The anti-treacherous-kiss firewall
As we shared earlier, the first appearance of asis in Scripture is in Song of songs 8:2, which we had left for last, so we shall meditate on it now. To get a better sense of the verse's spiritual meaning, we must first consider the surrounding verses:
"1 O that thou wert as my brother, that sucked the breasts of my mother! when I should find thee without, I would kiss thee; yea, I should not be despised. 2 I would lead thee, and bring thee into my mother's house, who would instruct me: I would cause thee to drink of spiced wine of the juice of my pomegranate. 3 His left hand should be under my head, and his right hand should embrace me. 4 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, that ye stir not up, nor awake my love, until he please." (Song of songs 8:1-4)
Even though most believers would probably state that these are words from the Shulamite to her beloved, this writer believes that the passage only makes sense when one takes them to be directed at Solomon, who is not the beloved, as is (subtly) established in other parts of the book (e.g.- Song of songs 3:6-11). Regardless of whether you believe that Solomon is the beloved or not, it becomes clear upon close review that the words in the passage above could not possibly be directed at the beloved. Otherwise, why would the woman wish not to be "despised" (v1)? Clearly, verse 1 hints that the woman would not be despised if the man had been raised by the same "mother", which, had it happened, would have made the man more "spiritually compatible" with her, which would have, in turn, made the man more likely to recognise her worth. Also, she wishes that the man she is speaking to would drink of the "spiced wine of the asis ("juice") of her pomegranate. As we have seen so far, asis points to the New Covenant and to the Tabernacle of David. Hence, it is evident from verse 2 that the man being spoken to still does not have an understanding of the New Covenant and the Tabernacle of David and does not operate in them. Verses 1 and 2, therefore, hint that, had the man in question been raised and taught by the same mother, he would have learnt of the New Covenant and would relate with her better. The question then becomes, who is the "mother" referred to in verse 1? The answer can be found in the following passage:
"22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband." (Galatians 4:22-27)
Notice that "the mother of us all" is the Jerusalem from above, the spiritual Jerusalem of the New Covenant of freedom. Therefore, it is safe to say that the man being spoken to in Song of songs 8:1-4 is still caught up in the Old Covenant of enslaving hierarchies, which is why the woman felt "despised" by him and averse to "kissing him" (v1). To understand this further, we must consider the following verse:
"Greet all the brethren with an holy kiss." (1 Thessalonians 5:26)
As can be seen above, "kissing" in Scripture, and in the Middle Eastern culture, has a connotation that is not exclusive to "romantic love". In the ancient Middle Eastern culture (and maybe even today), men would greet each other with a kiss as a sign of brotherly love and affection. Therefore, "kissing" in Scripture actually refers to the wider concept of soul communion. This is why Judas betrayed Yeshua with a "kiss", which shows how those who are focused on soul-centric communion will always betray those who are Spirit-centric. Because of this, those who are Spirit-centric must always put a "firewall" of judgements around them to "burn" anything (and anyone) that tries to infiltrate their realm through unrighteous soul communion, for the things that come through unrighteous soul communion will force us to either make ourselves compatible with that unrighteousness or attempt to kill us for not fully embracing it. This is why, when Judas kissed Yeshua, He did not reciprocate the kiss and respond with something like, "What's up, Judes? What's happenin'? How are the kids? You know I love you -- right? -- no matter what you do; you'll never get anything but love and forgiveness from my end, bro, 'cause I am all about looove and turning the other cheek!!". Instead, He immediately confronted him with a judgement by saying "Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?" (Luke 22:48), i.e.- He judged him as a traitor and declared to all listening that the spirit of treachery against God that Judas had embraced operated through soul communion (i.e.- a "kiss").
From the above, we can conclude that the woman of Song of songs 8:1-4 would only have "kissed" the man if he had been compatible with the New Covenant prophetic teaching of the New Jerusalem. This is because she had a firewall around her that prevented her having soul communion with anyone of an Old-Covenant mindset. Had he been open to God's New-Covenant message, she would have given him the New Covenant asis that would have allowed him to grow in the Spirit as a New-Covenant being.
The levitating pomegranate
The soul-hated wink of an eye
The fact that the woman would have offered asis from her pomegranate also has spiritual significance. The word "pomegranate" at the end of Song of songs 8:2 was translated from the Hebrew word rimmon, which is derived from the verb ramam meaning "to be lifted up, exalted" and is used in Scripture for the first time in verse 45 of the following passage, translated as "get [you] up":
"41 But on the morrow all the congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron, saying, Ye have killed the people of the LORD. 42 And it came to pass, when the congregation was gathered against Moses and against Aaron, that they looked toward the tabernacle of the congregation: and, behold, the cloud covered it, and the glory of the LORD appeared. 43 And Moses and Aaron came before the tabernacle of the congregation. 44 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 45 Get you up from among this congregation, that I may consume them as in a moment. And they fell upon their faces." (Numbers 16:41-45)
Notice how the Spirit of God uses ramam to speak to someone who must rise from amongst an unrighteous congregation so that they may receive the prompt judgement that must be delivered against them. This once again points to aiming for communion up in the Spirit realm that avoids the contamination of soul communion that remains in the Canaanite lowlands. Notice also that God wanted Moses and Aaron to separate themselves from the congregation so that He could "consume them as in a moment" (v45). The word "moment" was translated from the Hebrew word rega, which literally means "wink (of an eye)", and the word "consume" was mistranslated from the Hebrew verb kala, a verb that actually means "to complete, finish", so much so that its first appearance in Scripture is in Genesis 2:1, which speaks of God "finishing" the (re-)creation of the heavens and the Earth. In other words, the Lord was telling Moses and Aaron to step aside and allow Him to complete the work that needed to be done on the Israelites so that they could acquire the final, desired shape in a wink of an eye. This is what the Spirit refers to by the phrase in the "twinkling of an eye" in 1 Corinthians 15:52. Said another way, it will take a people who are not constantly using the pastoral shield to deflect God's judgements in order for the words of 1 Corinthians 15 to come to pass. Let him who has ears hear what the Spirit of God is saying.
It must be noted that, in the verses that follow the above passage (i.e.- Numbers 16:46-50), the Spirit of God describes how Moses and Aaron actually ran into the midst of the congregation, burning incense with a censer to "make atonement for the people". In other words, instead of getting up (ramam) from the midst of the congregation, Moses and Aaron did the exact opposite, injecting themselves in the middle of that evil congregation, almost acting as a human shield to protect the congregation from the fullness of God's judgements. Matriarchal believers may be quick to see this as an act of "bravery" and "selfless sacrifice", but, as we have explained before, God was not happy about Moses' insistence on shielding God's people from His purifying judgements, which is why Moses and Aaron did not enter the Promised Land. Aware that God is reading these words, this writer would dare to say that, just as they did not physically enter the Promised Land, Moses and Aaron did not enter into Eternal Life. Moses may be allowed to abide in the spiritual Jerusalem, within relative proximity of the Shekinah presence of God, but he will not be allowed to permanently abide in Zion, for every time that he was forced to choose between God's perfect wishes and the wishes of the people, he always sided with the people, and whosoever does that on a consistent basis cannot withstand being in the Fire of God's presence (Hebrews 12:27-29).
It must also be noted that God's warning to Moses and Aaron in Numbers 16:45 to separate themselves from the congregation in order that they be kala-ed ("completed/finished") in a rega ("wink") was actually the second time He issued that warning to Moses and Aaron, the first time being in Numbers 16:21, where the Spirit of God used the same Hebrew words. This means that Moses and Aaron ignored God's warning twice in a short span of time, which exposes their recalcitrant unwillingness to shed their matriarchal ways. What makes it worse is that God used the same two Hebrew words in Exodus 33:5 when He told the Israelites through Moses that He would come in the midst of them and consume them in a moment because they were a stiff-necked people, which prompted Moses to intercede yet again for the Israelites. This happened shortly after God had asked Moses to let Him kala the Israelites in His wrath so that He could birth a great nation out of Moses (Exodus 32:10), to which Moses responded by raising his hand at God and telling Him not to release His judgements. As we have explained in detail before, this led to a 38-year delay in the Israelites' conquest of the Promised Land and to Moses dying in the wilderness without fulfilling the fullness of what God had intended for him.
Prophetic antidote to matriarchal thinking
The fact that pomegranates have a large number of seeds in them points to its strong connection to the prophetic anointing, given that, as we have shared before, the prophetic endowment is the one most directly connected to sowing. Therefore, we can say that the connection between the Hebrew word for pomegranate, rimmon, and the word ramam meaning "to be lifted up", points to how the prophetic endowment enables us to rise high like eagles to escape the limitations of the natural, visible realm. Considering this, we can say that the Lord's usage of ramam in Numbers 16:45 means that, in certain circumstances, such as the one described in Numbers 16, a ready willingness to hear God's prophetic voice is required to detect and rise above certain "communal" contaminations that are not obvious to the natural eye. In other words, aside from operating in apostolic judgements, which will make you quick to separate yourself from such contaminations, you will also need to operate in the prophetic and be sensitive to God's invisible voice in order to detect when you must fly up and away from that contamination.
God willing, in the next posting, we will continue meditating on Joel chapter 1.