this explains alot, doesnt it?

Hi, stephenbooth,

I'm not really a New Testament person, but I can give you my thoughts...

When I read Hebrews 8:1-6, I see a common Jewish dichotomy between the things on the earth that are a representation of the things in heaven. So, for instance, in Jewish thought there is a Torah From Heaven or a Heavenly Torah and the Mosaic Torah is an earthly image or copy of the heavenly one. This appears to be the concept behind the Hebrews author's discussion. The author of Hebrews is reading the “pattern” of Exodus not as a blueprint or as some sort of direction or instruction given to Moses, but as a real, eternally existing reality that Moses attempted to mimic on earth. The earthly tent corresponds to the heavenly tent and the High Priest on earth is a representation of the High Priest in heaven (Yeshua).

The ark of the covenant was also part of the “pattern” in Exodus. The Hebrews letter also speaks about this.

Noah's ark has had many symbolic and theological connotations, but off-hand, I'm not aware of any scriptural passage that allows one to make the connection between a Heavenly Ark and Noah's like the Hebrews author does with the Temple and its system. The passages in Genesis mention Noah doing as YHWH “commanded” him, which seems a different sort of activity than making something based on a “pattern.”

----------------------------

The “image” verse from Genesis is certainly curious. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say it comes from an old piece of poetry that was incorporated into Genesis. It could have a number of meanings depending on a lot of criteria.

For instance... what does “image” mean?

In Mesopotamia “image of God” stood for a King's sovereign power. In Egypt, it meant the Pharaoh was an incarnation of the deity.

Does it refer back to something plural or something singular?

In the preceding verse, it was “our image.” The image was referring to a plurality (our). But in this verse, it is a singular referent (if it were plural, ‫ צלם‬ would have the plural construct form, but it doesn't, so it is being used in a singular sense here).

One could say the plurality of the image comes from the “angelic host,” “heavenly council,” or several other things - it could be a remnant of an ancient Israelite notion of YHWH as supreme God alongside other, lesser gods.

How does gender relate to it? And how do we understand the division between singular created (him) and plural created (them)?

--------------------------------

Again, I am not really a New Testament person, but I can give my thoughts on John 4:24.

When I read the passage there, I do not see Yeshua commenting on the Genesis passage. Rather, I see him speaking to a woman who “worships” neither in truth nor in spirit. She does not worship in truth because she worships at Samaria instead of Jerusalem. And she doesn't worship in spirit because she is living a sexually immoral lifestyle. Both of these show that she has no regard for the word and way of YHWH. True worshipers will. True worshipers will abandon the idolatrous sanctuary in Samaria and bring their gifts to the Temple. Those who worship in spirit will say no to taking multiple sex partners and copulating with the husbands or wives of others.

Jesus is basically re-iterating what the other prophets had already said – why do you bring your gifts to YHWH when your heart is far from YHWH? Why do you not care what you do or do not bring? Isn't a right heart important to YHWH? For all the laws are fulfilled in the one: Love the Lord your God. If you do not Love YHWH, how can you possibly worship him in spirit and in truth? The woman did not love YHWH. She did not even know YHWH. She was just doing what her ancestors did.