“….But and if that evil servant….”
Revealing the Unknown Reality of Rev. Moon’s Role in the Gospel and the Revelation: Part II
The Tribal Level of the 70 of Abram of Ur,
the Racial Level: the Stars of Isaac and the Dust of Ishmael
Abram of Ur… Abraham of Salem,
and Abrahm of India
The Third Sealed Thunder and
the Unsealed Voice of Woe;
The Third Failure of
The Providence of Salvation
From the Testimony of my Servant John:
Chapter 10 of the Revelation
…And I saw another ‘MIGHTY ANGEL‘ come down from Heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a Rainbow was upon His head, and His face was as it were the Sun, and His feet as Pillars of Fire: and He had in His hand a ‘LITTLE BOOK’ open: and He set His right foot on the SEA, and His left foot on the EARTH, and cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when He had cried ‘SEVEN THUNDERS‘ uttered their voices. And when the ‘SEVEN THUNDERS‘ had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from Heaven saying unto me,
“…. Seal up those things
which the seven thunders uttered,
and write them not …..”
1: And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire:
2: And he had in his hand a little book open : and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth,
3: And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth : and when he had cried , seven thunders uttered their voices.
4: And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write : and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me,
“….Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not…..”
And why was John not to be allowed to write down the 7 voices of the 7 thunders??? Because that was for someone else to reveal, namely; Reverend Sun Myung Moon, as his portion of responsibility in restoring the position of Elijah held by John the Baptist. Elijah was the Day Star ( seen as John: the Baptist ), of the Sun of Righteousness ( seen as Jesus: the Son of Man), seen as the two positions of Messenger and Messiah first shown by Malachi, and later restored by the Ascending Angel of Maitreya: Philip Sobul Love.
Philip came to this position after being given the Seal of Jehovah, and in which I initiated him into the Seal of the Living God about Mary and Jehovah, as the Holy Spirit of God seen by John in the form of the Dove at the Jordan, as that Sign he was given about the Messiah being the one on whom the Dove would STAY at the Baptism.
This Divine Celestial Male Dove as “Jah” was that same one which united with Mary when she was transformed into the form of a Dove as ‘Zion”. Thus Jah was later seen by John as he came down on my Father at the Jordan, in my Father’s Baptism unto his Death.
This was all revealed to me by the Angel in 1986 in the House of Ruth, my grandmother; the Owl of Athena known as Sophia; as concerning the restoring and reversing of the mistakes the Unification Church made following Rev. Moon, who also repeated the exact pattern of the fall of John the Baptist quite tragically, and thus being “cut asunder” even as John was.
The Mystery of God is thus how that holy thing the Lamb was created by God, to become the Son of the God; which Philip Love then restored after having tied on the Khata of World Renunciation and Eternal Chastity, then Ascending to finally reach his position of understanding as “…an Angel standing in the Sun…”, written of in Revelation 19:17, and even now inviting all humanity to partake of the Supper of the Great God.
“…a small one shall became a strong nation…”
….That nation which was South Korea…
Few in America or the World know that Rev. Moon came to America in 1965 as
St. John the Baptist reborn, carrying out the Third Advent of Elijah …..
The Third lord of Restoration: Abram
Rev. Moon and the Third Sealed Thunder:
The Missing Pigeon of the Altar
The Third Voice of Woe Unsealed: the Third Failure of the Providence of Restoration centering on Abram’s Family:
( Seen on pages 283-4 of the Divine Principle, concerning the providential understanding about Abraham’s failure. )
This Third Thunder can be found in the book ”Divine Principle” ,
on pages 261 to 283
Baek Kim Moon, who said he met my Father Jesus in 1946 on Gansan Mountain
….and was given the title of “Israel”
( DIVINE PRINCIPLE
PROVIDENTIAL AGE FOR THE FOUNDATION OF RESTORATION )
SECTION III –
THE PROVIDENCE OF RESTORATION CENTERING ON ABRAHAM’S FAMILY
SECTION III – THE PROVIDENCE OF RESTORATION CENTERING ON ABRAHAM’S FAMILY
Due to Ham’s fallen act, the providence of restoration centering on Noah’s family was not fulfilled. However, since God’s intention was to predestine absolutely and to fulfill the will to accomplish His purpose of creation, He called Abraham on the foundation of heart-and-zeal which Noah had established with his loyalty, and began again His providence of restoration, centering on Abraham’s family.
Therefore, Abraham should have restored the foundation to receive the Messiah, which Noah’s family had left unaccomplished, and should have actually received the Messiah on that foundation. Consequently, Abraham, too, should have restored through indemnity the foundation of faith, and, on it, he should have restored through indemnity the foundation of substance.
1. THE FOUNDATION OF FAITH
(1) The Central Figure to Restore the Foundation of Faith.
The central figure to restore the foundation of faith in the providence of restoration centering on Abraham’s family was Abraham himself. Therefore, Abraham was chosen as the central personage to succeed and fulfill God’s will. Therefore, if Abraham did not restore through indemnity all the conditions invaded by Satan due to Ham’s sinful act, he would fail in carrying out God’s will centering on Noah, whose course he had been chosen to fulfill.
The first condition that Noah lost to Satan was the ten generations from Adam to Noah, plus the 40 days. Therefore, Abraham should have restored through indemnity that lost ten generations. Then he would have stood in the position of each of the ten, having restored the number “40” for the judgment. The calculation of 40 years for each generation to be restored through indemnity came about due to the failure of one generation (Noah’s) to be restored through a 40-day period. Later, in Moses’ course, the Israelites restored through indemnity the failure in the 40-day spying in Canaan by the 40-year period of wandering in the wilderness (Num. 14:34). God chose Abraham in place of Noah after the lapse of a 400-year period of indemnity through ten generations after Noah. In this way, by shortening the human life span after Noah, the age in which ten generations would be restored during a 1,600-year period was changed into an age in which ten generations could be restored during a 400-year period.
The second condition that Noah had to forfeit to Satan was the position of the father of faith plus the position of Ham, who was in the place of Abel.
( … This is wrong, unfortunately; Ham was in the position of Cain; spiritually, Japheth in the position of Abel; spiritually, and Shem in the position of Seth; spiritually: this is seen at Isaiah, where he says “….Egypt my people,” as Ham was the progenitor of the Hamitic Race, the father of Egypt and the first of nations, “…Assyria the work of my hands….( as when Assyria destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel when it fell to idolatry ).”, putting “Japheth the elder ( Genesis 10:21 )” squarely in the position of the second son, “…and Israel mine inheritance ..”, with Shem in the third place as the progenitor of the Semitic Race, the father of Israel.
That Ham was really the youngest son can be seen at Genesis 9:24, when it says
“…And Noah awoke from his wine, and saw what his youngest son had done to him…”
Rev. Moon never studied the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, but rather looked at the Masoretic text, which was far inferior in scholarship…..)
Therefore, Abraham could not stand in the position of Noah, unless he restored through indemnity the position of Ham and of the father of faith. In order for Abraham to stand in the position of the father of faith, replacing Noah, he should have offered a symbolic sacrifice with faith and loyalty, just as Noah did by building the ark.
As stated above, God also had to leave Ham in Satan’s hands; Ham was in place of Abel, whom God loved (both were second sons playing the central roles in the substantial offerings). Therefore, God in turn had to take those who were in the position of being most loved by Satan according to the principle of restoration through indemnity. That is why God called Abraham, the first son of Terah, who was an idol-maker (Josh. 24:2-3).
Abraham was the personage of the restored Adam, because he was the substitute for Noah and, naturally, for Adam himself. Accordingly, God blessed Abraham, saying that his descendants would be multiplied, that a great nation would come from him, and that he would be the source of blessedness, just as He had earlier blessed Adam and Noah (Gen. 12:2). After this blessing, Abraham, in obedience to God’s command, left his father’s house in Haran and entered Canaan with his wife Sarah, his nephew Lot and all the wealth and people he could take from his homeland (Gen. 12:4-5).
((… Unfortunately Rev. Moon is quite wrong here: this was Abram who God chose, not Abraham, because God had not given Abram the new name of Abraham until after he had restored his errors at the Altar, which means Abram represented the Tribal level whose fruit was Ishmael, and Abraham the Racial level, whose fruit was Isaac, in whom his seed was “called”…. ))
In this way, God set Abraham’s course as the typical course for Jacob and Moses in later days; that is, to restore Canaan by taking there his wife, children and wealth, all of whom he had removed from the Satanic world (Haran and Egypt) under difficult circumstances.
This course foreshadowed the course for Jesus in future days, namely, to restore to God’s world all men and things taken from the Satanic world (cf. Part II, Ch. 2, Sec. I, 2–287).
(2) The Conditional Objects to Restore the Foundation of Faith
(i) The Symbolic Offering of Abraham
God commanded Abraham to offer sacrifices of a dove, ram, and heifer, (( this is wrong of course, as Rev. Moon omitted the pigeon to make the animals fit his theory of the sacrifice being for setting up ‘formation, growth and perfection’…which was also completely wrong, as I show )); all these being conditional things to restore the foundation of faith (Gen. 15:9). Just as Noah established his faith before offering his symbolic sacrifice of the ark, so Abraham had to first establish his faith before offering his symbolic sacrifice. The Bible does not contain any precise record of how Noah did this. However, the Bible says that Noah was a righteous man (Gen. 6:9), and we can imagine that he must have set up certain conditions of faith before he was righteous enough in God’s sight to be given the divine commandment to build the ark. In fact, the providence of restoration is to be realized through faith; for faith, and he who through faith is righteous, is recognized by God (Rom. 1:17). Let us now investigate what kind of faith Abraham established before offering his symbolic sacrifice.
Abraham had to restore the position of Noah, the second human ancestor. He had to stand in the position of Adam, too. Therefore, he had first to set up the symbolic condition of indemnity for the restoration of the position of Adam’s family before he offered the symbolic sacrifice.
According to Biblical verses (Gen. 12:10), Abraham once went down to Egypt because of a famine. When the Pharaoh of Egypt wanted to take his wife Sarah, Abraham, as planned beforehand, told the Pharaoh that she was his sister, lest the King should kill him if he found out that they were husband and wife. In this way, Sarah was taken by the Pharaoh from the position of Abraham’s sister, and after God’s chastisement of the Pharaoh, Abraham took back his wife, and also his nephew Lot, as well as abundant wealth. Abraham went on this providential course, though unconsciously, to set up the symbolic condition to restore through indemnity the position of Adam’s family.
The archangel took Eve while Adam and Eve were still in the position of brother and sister in their immaturity, thus forcing all created things, as well as their own children, to be under his dominion. In order for Abraham to set up the condition to restore through indemnity the above mentioned situation, he was deprived by Pharaoh, who symbolized Satan, of his wife Sarah, who was in the position of Abraham’s sister. Then he had to take back Sarah, in the position of his wife, together with Lot, symbolizing the whole of mankind, and his wealth, symbolizing the world of creation (Gen. 14:16). Abraham’s course thus was the course for Jesus to walk in later days. It was only after Abraham had set up such a condition of indemnity that he could offer the symbolic sacrifice with the dove, the ram and heifer.
What, then, does Abraham’s symbolic sacrifice mean? In order for Abraham to become the father of faith, he had to restore through indemnity the position of Noah whom God intended to set up as the father of faith, and of his family. Naturally, he had to stand also in the position of Adam and his family. So, he had to offer a conditional object as a symbol enabling him to restore through indemnity all the things which were supposed to be restored in Adam’s family, centering on the offerings of Cain and Abel. Further, he had to offer, as acceptable sacrifices before God, certain symbolic things to restore through indemnity all the things intended to be restored centering on the ark of Noah’s family. Abraham’s symbolic offerings were of such a nature.
My Servant John and his Elucidation on the Errors of Rev. Moon
The Missing Pigeon
on the Altar of Abraham
in Rev. Moon’s Explanation
This was to be done as the way to reverse the nature of the Fall; in which the Order of Creation was reversed by which God was to rule Adam; Adam to rule Eve; and Eve to rule the Serpent. Rev. Moon in his exposition of the Nature of the Fall in his book illustrates this quite clearly; and correctly as self-consistent with the Providence itself up to one point.
This point is that the Fall included the position of the Archangel who God left in charge of the Creation while He rested on the 7th Day; which was unknown to Rev. Moon as he wrote that the Fall took place on the 6th day; which is wrong.
( Continuance of the Third Thunder )
What then, did Abraham’s symbolic sacrifices, namely, the dove, ram and heifer, symbolize? These three symbolic offerings symbolized the whole universe which was created to be perfected through three stages of growth. First, the dove symbolized the formation stage. Jesus came as the perfection of the providence in the formation stage, which was represented by the doves. Therefore, when he was baptized by John the Baptist in the River Jordan, the Spirit of God descended like a dove, alighting on him (Matt. 3:16). On the other hand, Jesus came to restore Abraham’s failure in the offering. Naturally, he had to stand in the position to have restored the dove which was invaded by Satan at that time. Therefore, God showed by the dove that Jesus came as the perfection of the Old Testament providence in the formation stage.
In the next place, the goat or ram symbolizes the growth stage. Jesus came to restore Abraham’s failure in the offering. On the foundation of the Old Testament providence, having restored all things symbolized by the dove, he had also to restore all the things symbolized by the goat or ram, as the one who was to begin the New Testament providence in the growth stage. One day after John the Baptist had witnessed that Jesus was the perfection of the providence in the formation stage symbolized by the dove, he again gave witness to Jesus as the one who was to begin his mission in the growth stage. When he saw Jesus coming toward him, he said, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29).
The heifer symbolized perfection. We read in Judges 14:18 that, when Samson put a riddle to the Philistines, they could only answer it by having Samson’s wife tempt him and press him hard for the answer. Then Samson said to them, “If you had not ploughed with my heifer, you would not have found out my riddle.”. In this way, Samson metaphorically called his wife a heifer. Since Jesus came as the bridegroom to all mankind, all the saints until the time of the Second Advent each become a “bride” to Jesus, the bridegroom to come. However, after the wedding feast of the Lamb, when all the saints, as the bride, are united into perfect oneness with the Lord, then all will live in the Heavenly Kingdom of God with Christ as a husband, each not merely as a bride but as a wife. Therefore, we must know that the Completed Testament Age after the Second Advent of the Lord is the age of a heifer–the age of a wife. The heifer thus symbolizes perfection. This is why many spiritually attuned people receive the revelation that today is the age of a cow or heifer.
What, then, do the three kinds of offerings restore through indemnity? Abraham, through his symbolic offerings, had to set up the symbolic condition of indemnity enabling him to restore through indemnity all the things previously left in Satan’s hand, due to the failures of the restoration through indemnity by the symbolic sacrifices and the substantial offerings of Adam’s and Noah’s families. Therefore, the symbolic offering of Abraham was to restore at once, horizontally, through the three kinds of offerings, the symbolic condition of indemnity of the vertical providence through the three generations of Adam, Noah and Abraham.
Abraham offered sacrifices with the dove, ram and heifer on the altar, symbolizing the three stages of formation, growth and perfection, in order to fulfill at once, in horizontal terms, the vertical providence which God intended to restore through indemnity through the three generations (seen from the viewpoint of His will): Adam symbolizing formation, Noah symbolizing growth, and Abraham symbolizing perfection. Therefore, this offering symbolically represented God’s will to fulfill the whole providence of restoration at once by restoring through indemnity all the conditions represented by the number “three”, which had been invaded by Satan.
We must know in what manner Abraham offered the symbolic sacrifice. We read (Gen. 15:10-13) that Abraham cut the offerings in two and laid each half over against the other, but he did not cut the doves in two. Birds of prey came down upon the carcasses and Abraham drove them away. God appeared to Abraham that evening at sunset and said to him:
Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years… (Gen. 15:13)
The birds of prey came down upon the carcasses because Abraham did not cut the doves in two. This caused the Israelites to suffer 400 years of slavery in Egypt.
Why was it such a sin not to cut the dove? This question has remained unsolved until today, and can be elucidated only through the Principle. Let us first study the reason for cutting the sacrifices. The purpose of the providence of salvation is to restore the sovereignty of goodness by separating good and evil, by destroying evil and exalting goodness. Therefore, when God required sacrifices to be offered after having separated Adam into Cain and Abel; and when He smote the evil to exalt the good through the flood judgment in Noah’s days, His purpose was, without exception, to restore the sovereignty of goodness. Consequently, God intended to carry out the symbolic performances of separating good and evil, which He failed to fulfill through Adam and Noah, by having Abraham offer the sacrifices cut in two. The act of cutting the sacrifices in two was, first, to restore the separated position of Cain and Abel in Adam’s family, in order to separate Adam, the origin of good and evil, into two parts representing good and evil, respectively. Second, it was to restore the position of Noah, having separated good and evil through the 40-day flood. Third, it was to set up the symbolic condition to separate the world of good sovereignty from the world under the dominion of Satan. Fourth, it was to set up the condition of consecration by draining away the blood of death that had come through the illicit blood relationship.
Why, then, was it such a sin not to cut the sacrifice in two?
First, it was analogous to not separating Cain and Abel; so, as a result, there was no Abel-type object for God to take. Therefore, the sacrifice was unacceptable to God, and the failure in the sacrifice of Cain and Abel was not restored.
Second, it represented not having separated good and evil at the time of the flood judgment in the providence of restoration centering on Noah; as a result, there was no object of goodness which God could take and upon which He could work His providence. Therefore, it resulted in having taken the position of failure, just as the flood judgment failed.
Third, it failed to set up the symbolic condition of separating the world of good sovereignty from the world under the dominion of Satan in order for God to take it.
In the fourth place, the sacrifice was not consecrated because the blood of death was not drained, and it could not be a sacred thing for God to take and work His providence upon. In this manner, Abraham’s offering the sacrifices without having cut the dove in two resulted in offering Satan’s possession, as it were, and so the offering ended in the assertion that the offering was Satan’s possession.
Thus, the dove, which was the offering symbolizing the formation stage, remained in Satan’s possession. The ram and heifer, symbolizing growth and perfection, which were to be established on the foundation of formation, were then invaded by Satan. Consequently, the whole symbolic offering ended up under Satan, and the act of not having cut the dove in two became a sin.
Let us next inquire into the meaning of the birds of prey alighting on the symbolic offering (Gen. 15:11). Since the fall of the first human ancestors, Satan has always been pursuing those who advocate the will of God. When Cain and Abel offered sacrifices, Satan crouched at the door (Gen. 4:7); also, in Noah’s days, the raven symbolized Satan, who was looking for the opportunity to invade his family right after the judgment (Gen. 8:7). Similarly, at the time of Abraham’s symbolic offering, Satan, who had been looking for the opportunity to invade the offering, saw that the dove was not cut in two and profaned it. The Bible symbolically represented this fact by describing the birds of prey alighting on the offering. What result was brought about by this failure in the symbolic offering? Abraham’s failure in the symbolic offering caused the annulment of all the conditions that were supposed to be restored through indemnity by the symbolic offering. As a result, the descendants of Abraham were put into slavery for 400 years in Egypt, the land of Pharaoh. Let us now study the reason for this.
God set up a 400-year period for the separation of Satan in order to restore through indemnity the judgment number “40” as well as the ten generations that had been invaded by Satan because of Ham’s mistake, and on this basis He called Abraham and had him offer the symbolic sacrifices. Abraham’s failure enabled Satan to claim the offering; therefore, the 400-year period after Noah, the period of indemnity to establish Abraham as the father of faith through the symbolic offering, was also invaded by Satan. In order to restore through indemnity both the position of Abraham before his failure in the symbolic offering and the position of Noah when he was called for the construction of the ark, God had to again set up a period of 400 years for the separation of Satan. The 400-year period of the Israelites’ slavery in Egypt existed in order to put Moses on the foundation of having restored through indemnity on the national level the position of either Noah or Abraham at the time they were about to start as the father of faith. This period of slavery was the period of punishment, due to Abraham’s failure in the offering, as well as the period to lay the foundation for separation from Satan for the sake of God’s new providence.
It has been stated that God intended to fulfill, at the same time, the whole providence represented by formation, growth and perfection, by having Abraham offer a successful symbolic sacrifice of three kinds on one altar. When Abraham failed, God’s providence was extended through him to Isaac and Jacob, three generations.
(ii) Abraham’s Offering of Isaac
After Abraham’s failure in the symbolic offering God ordered him to offer his only son Isaac as a burnt offering (Gen. 22:2), by which God commenced a new providence to restore through indemnity the failure of Abraham’s symbolic offering. According to the theory of predestination in the Principle, God does not use for a second time a person who is called for a certain mission and fails to carry out his own portion of responsibility. How, then, could God work His providence through the offering of Isaac to restore Abraham’s failure in his symbolic offering when his failure in the symbolic offering annulled the will which was to be set up through the offering?
First, concerning God’s providence to restore the foundation to receive the Messiah, the providence centering on Adam’s family was the first one, while the providence centering on Noah’s family was the second, and that centering on Abraham’s family was the third. The number “three” is the number of perfection (cf. Part II, Ch. 3, Sec. II, 4–381), and since the providence through Abraham was the third time for the providence of restoring the foundation to receive the Messiah, there was a condition in the Principle for the fulfillment of this providence. Therefore, Abraham could restore all the objects or conditions lost symbolically, due to the failure in the symbolic offering, by offering his own son as a substantial offering, thus setting up a condition of indemnity far greater in value than the previous condition.
Second, as already noted, the position of Abraham in offering the sacrifices was that of Adam. At that time Satan invaded two generations in succession by profaning Adam and his son Cain. Naturally, according to the principle of restoration through indemnity, the providence of taking back the two generations of Abraham and his son was possible on the Heavenly side.
Third, Adam could not offer the sacrifices directly before God, but Noah, standing on the foundation of Abel’s heart, which enabled the success in the symbolic offering of the formation stage while he was in the position of Adam, could directly offer the symbolic offering of the ark. In this way, Abraham was called both on the foundation of Abel, who had been successful in the symbolic offering of the formation stage, and of Noah, who had succeeded in the symbolic offering of the growth stage. On that level, he offered the symbolic offering of the perfection stage. Therefore, although Abraham failed in the symbolic offering, God could have him offer the sacrifice again on the condition of the historical foundation of heart-and-zeal, since Abel and Noah had succeeded in the symbolic offering.
At the time of offering Isaac as the sacrifice, Abraham had set up the condition of faith for the offering of Isaac by establishing the symbolic condition of indemnity to restore Adam’s family, just as he had done at the time of his symbolic offering. Therefore, Abraham planned with his wife, Sarah, to pretend to be in the position of brother and sister. After having been deprived of his wife by Abimelech, King of Gerar, he took his wife back again from the king. This time Abraham took both his wife and slaves, symbolizing mankind, and wealth, symbolizing all things (Gen. 20:1-16).
How, then, did Abraham offer Isaac as the sacrifice? When, in obedience to God’s command with an absolute faith, Abraham was about to sacrifice his only son Isaac, whom he had received as a blessing, as a burnt offering, God commanded him not to lay his hand on the lad and said, “…now I know that you fear God…” (Gen. 22:12). Abraham’s heart-and-zeal toward God’s will and his resolution to slay his son arising from his absolute faith, obedience and loyalty, caused him to stand in a position equal to having killed Isaac; therefore, he could separate Satan from Isaac. Accordingly, God commanded Abraham not to kill the child, because Isaac, being separated from Satan, already stood on the side of heaven. We must know that when God said, “now I know”, He emphasized the mixture of His reproach for Abraham’s mistake in the symbolic offering, and His joy over his success in the offering of Isaac.
In this manner, God’s providence of restoration centering on Abraham’s family was to be fulfilled through Isaac by Abraham’s success in the offering of Isaac. It took a three-day period for Abraham to offer his son as a burnt sacrifice on Mt. Moriah so that he might start a new providential course by separating Isaac from Satan to the Heavenly side. This three-day period continued as a period necessary for the separation of Satan before starting a new providential course. Jacob, too, had a three-day period of separation from Satan before he started the course of restoration of Canaan on the family level by taking his family out of Haran (Gen. 31:20-22). Moses also had a three-day period of separation from Satan before he started the course of the restoration of Canaan on the national level by taking the Israelite nation out of Egypt (Ex. 8:27-29). Jesus, too, had a three-day period of separation from Satan in the tomb, before starting the course of the restoration of Canaan on the worldwide level spiritually. It is also to be noted that when the Israelites returned to Canaan, centering on Joshua, the ark of the covenant, which went before the main troops, journeyed a three-day course of separation from Satan (Num. 10:33).
(iii) The Position of Isaac from the Standpoint of the Will, and His Symbolic Offering
It has previously been discussed in the detail that, despite Abraham’s failure in his symbolic offering, there still remained a condition in the Principle enabling the foundation to receive the Messiah to be laid, centering on Abraham. As clarified in the chapter on “Predestination”, however, the situation was such that God could not repeat His providence centering on Abraham, who had failed in carrying out his own portion of responsibility. In consequence, God had to regard Abraham in the position of not having failed, though he did fail in his symbolic offering. He had to regard the providence of restoration, prolonged after Abraham, in the position of not having been prolonged. For this purpose, God commanded Abraham to offer Isaac as a burnt offering.
God promised Abraham to call His chosen nation through Isaac, saying:
‘…your own son shall be your heir!’ And He brought him outside and said, ‘Look toward heaven and number the stars, if you are able to number them.’ Then He said to him, ‘So shall your descendants be.’. (Gen. 15:4-5)
In consequence, Abraham’s loyalty, demonstrated by his being ready to slay his son of promise upon God’s command, established the same condition as if he had killed himself, invaded by Satan due to the failure in his symbolic offering. Accordingly, the fact that God had Isaac survive means that Abraham himself was resurrected from his situation of having died, by separating himself from Satan, together with Isaac. Therefore, Abraham could separate himself from Satan, who had invaded him due to the failure in his symbolic offering, by succeeding in his offering of Isaac. Further, he could stand in a position of complete oneness with Isaac, centered on the will of God.
In this way, Abraham and Isaac, who survived death, though they were two individuals, were one body centered on the will of God. If Isaac should succeed in the providence, though the providence through Abraham failed and was prolonged to Isaac, Isaac’s success could equally be the success of Abraham himself, who was one body with Isaac. Accordingly, despite the fact that the providence was prolonged from Abraham to Isaac, due to Abraham’s failure in his symbolic offering, it became, seen from the viewpoint of the will, as though Abraham did not fail and the providence was not prolonged.
Nobody is sure of Isaac’s age at the time of the offering. But, from the fact that he could carry the wood to be used for the burnt offering (Gen. 22:6) and that he asked his father where the lamb for the burnt offering was (Gen. 22:7), Isaac apparently was old enough to understand the significance of the incident. We can again well imagine that Isaac had obeyed and cooperated with his father at the time of the burnt offering.
If Isaac, who was old enough to understand the situation, had resisted his father’s willingness to kill him for the burnt offering, God would not have accepted the offering of Isaac by any means. Abraham’s loyalty, combined with that of Isaac, which was not any less, caused the success of the offering of Isaac, thus enabling the separation from Satan to occur.
Consequently, centering on the offering, Abraham and Isaac both survived. First, Abraham could restore through indemnity his position before his failure in the offering, by separating himself from Satan, who invaded him because of his failure in the symbolic offering. From this position, he was able to pass on his providential mission to Isaac. Second, Isaac, who inherited the divine mission from his father Abraham, by obeying him in complete surrender to the will, thus was enabled to set up the condition of faith for offering the symbolic sacrifice later.
In this way, the divine will was transmitted from Abraham to Isaac, and Abraham offered a ram for the burnt offering in place of Isaac, as it was written:
Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns; and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. (Gen. 22:13)
This became, as it was, the symbolic offering set up in order to restore the foundation of faith centering on Isaac. From the fact that Isaac carried the bundle of wood for the burnt offering, it can be concluded that he cooperated with Abraham when he offered the ram as the burnt offering. Accordingly, even though Abraham offered the ram as the symbolic offering, the result, seen from the viewpoint of God’s will, was that Isaac himself offered the sacrifice because he succeeded his father’s mission by becoming one body with him. In this manner, Isaac restored through indemnity the foundation of faith by being successful in the symbolic offering, from the position of substituting for Abraham, after inheriting his mission.
2. THE FOUNDATION OF SUBSTANCE
As the central figure to restore the foundation of faith in place of Abraham, Isaac offered an acceptable symbolic sacrifice with the ram. Isaac was thus able to lay the foundation of faith. In order to establish the foundation to receive the Messiah centering on Isaac, there had to be the foundation of substance fulfilled on the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature. This was to be achieved by offering a substantial sacrifice with his children Esau and Jacob in the positions of Cain and Abel.
If Abraham had not failed in the symbolic offering, Isaac and his half-brother Ishmael, in place of Abel and Cain, should have set up the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature, which had been left unaccomplished by Cain and Abel. Because of Abraham’s failure, God, by setting up Isaac in Abraham’s position, and Esau and Jacob in place of Ishmael and Isaac, worked the providence to have them set up the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature. Therefore, Esau and Jacob, centering on Isaac, are in the position of Cain and Abel centering on Adam, and, at the same time, in the position of Shem and Ham centering on Noah.
Isaac’s eldest son, Esau, and the second son, Jacob, were symbols respectively, of Abraham’s first symbolic offering, which was invaded by Satan, and his second offering of Isaac, separated from Satan; they represented evil and good, having to offer substantial sacrifices in the positions, respectively, of Cain and Abel. Esau and Jacob fought, even in their mother’s womb (Gen. 25:22-23) because they were in the conflicting situations of Cain and Abel, who had been separated as the representations, respectively, of evil and good. Also, God loved Jacob and hated Esau while they were still in their mother’s womb (Rom. 9:11-13), because they represented good and evil respectively. In order for Esau and Jacob to set up the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature through substantial offerings, Jacob first had to set up the condition to restore through indemnity the position of Abel, who was the central figure for the substantial offering.
First, Jacob had to set up a condition of victory in his struggle to restore the birthright on the individual level. Satan had occupied God’s world of creation in the position of the elder son. God, from the position of the younger son, had worked His providence to take the birthright of the elder. This is why God “hated” the elder and loved the younger (Mal. 1:2-3). Meanwhile, Jacob, who had been called even in his mother’s womb with the mission to restore the elder’s birthright, wisely took the birthright from his elder brother Esau, with some bread and a pottage of lentils (Gen. 25:34). God had Isaac bless Jacob because he tried to restore the birthright, knowing its value (Gen. 27:27), while He did not bless Esau because he, on the contrary, thought so little of the birthright that he sold it for a pottage of lentils.
Second, Jacob went to Haran and there triumphed in his struggle to restore the birthright of the elder, centering on his family and the wealth, during the 21 years of drudgery, and then returned to Canaan.
Third, Jacob restored domination substantially over the angel by winning in the struggle with him at the ford of Jabbok, on his way back from Haran to Canaan, the land promised by God.
Jacob at last became the central figure for the substantial offering by restoring through indemnity the position of Abel.
In this way, Esau and Jacob established the positions of Cain and Abel at the time God accepted Abel’s offering. Therefore, in order for them to set up the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature, Esau had to love Jacob, set him up as the mediator, and obey him in the position of being dominated by him, thus standing in the position to multiply goodness by inheriting the good from Jacob who had received the blessing from God. Meanwhile, Esau, in fact, loved and welcomed Jacob when he returned to Canaan with his Heavenly family and the wealth after having finished the drudgery of 21 years in Haran (Gen. 33:4); thus, they could establish the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature. In this manner, they could restore through indemnity what Cain and Abel of Adam’s family and Shem and Ham of Noah’s family had failed to achieve in the substantial offering.
Thus, through the success in the substantial offering by Esau and Jacob, the vertical course of history, which from Adam’s family had aimed to restore through indemnity the foundation of substance, was, for the first time, restored through indemnity on the horizontal basis in Isaac’s family in the providential course of restoration centering on Abraham.
The Biblical record says (Rom. 9:11-13) that God hated Esau while he was still in his mother’s womb. However, he could stand in the position of a restored Cain, because he fulfilled his own portion of responsibility by surrendering to Jacob, and at last he received God’s love. We must understand that God hated Esau merely because he was in the position of Cain, who had been on the side of Satan in the providential course of setting up conditions of indemnity.
3. THE FOUNDATION TO RECEIVE THE MESSIAH
The foundation to receive the Messiah, which was to be set up in Adam’s family, was prolonged through three generations as far as Abraham because the central figures in charge of the providence of restoration failed to fulfill their portions of responsibility. However, God’s will was prolonged to Isaac, on account of the failure in the symbolic offering of Abraham, who was supposed to accomplish the will. The foundation of faith and the foundation of substance were established centering on Isaac’s family, and for the first time, the foundation to receive the Messiah was established. Accordingly, the Messiah was to come at that time.
When viewing things centering on the foundation to receive the Messiah, we must first know the social background necessary for the foundation to receive the Messiah. Fallen men must first set up the foundation to receive the Messiah in order to provide the basis to restore the world, established centered on Satan, into the kingdom centered on the Messiah.
In the providence of restoration centering on Adam’s family and Noah’s family, there were no other families who could possibly invade the family of divine will. Therefore, the Messiah was supposed to come on the foundation on the family level to receive the Messiah, if this had been established at that time. However, at the time of Abraham, there already was a nation formed by fallen men, centering on Satan, contending with Abraham’s family. The Messiah could not have come directly on the foundation on the family level to receive the Messiah though it might have been established. They could receive the Messiah only after having established the foundation on the domain of the national level which could cope with the Satanic world.
Therefore, even if Abraham had been successful, both in the symbolic offering and the substantial offering, making possible at that time the establishment of the foundation on the family level to receive the Messiah, the Messiah could not have come, unless, on the established foundation, Abraham’s descendants had multiplied in the land of Canaan, thus forming the foundation on the national level to receive the Messiah.
However, Abraham failed in the symbolic offering. As punishment for this, the descendants of Isaac, though they had established the foundation on the family level to receive the Messiah, had to leave their homeland and go into a foreign nation. They were supposed to establish the foundation on the national level to receive the Messiah only after 400 years of drudgery, and after again returning to Canaan.
Who had to begin the course of indemnity left for Abraham’s descendants because of his failure in the symbolic offering? It was Jacob, and not Isaac. This was because, as shown, the central figure to go through the courses of indemnity was to be of the Abel-type, being the center of the substantial offering. Therefore, Abel in Adam’s family, Ham in Noah’s family, Isaac in Abraham’s family and Jacob in Isaac’s family had to go through a course of indemnity representing their respective families.
Jacob especially had to go through the traditional course of separation from Satan, as the pattern for Jesus to walk later, because he was the Abel-type person standing on the foundation to receive the Messiah (cf. Part II, Ch. 2, Sec. I–286). Jacob’s family was supposed to start this course of indemnity in the position of Isaac’s family, because they had to fulfill the purpose of the providence of restoration centering on Abraham. To do this, Jacob’s family had to bear Abraham’s sin through a 400-year course of indemnity. In Isaac’s family, Jacob, in the position of Abel, had taken this course of indemnity; therefore in Jacob’s family, Joseph, son of Rachel (Jacob’s wife on God’s side), had to establish Abel’s position by going into Egypt first and there following the course of indemnity.
Therefore, Joseph was sold by his brothers and brought into Egypt. After having become the prime minister of Egypt at the age of 30, what he had been taught from heaven in his dream as a child became true (Gen. 37:5-11) when Joseph’s half-brothers, other sons of Jacob on the Satanic side, surrendered to him. Thus they followed the course of first entering Egypt on the part of the children, and later, his parents were led through the same course. In this way, Jacob’s family started the course of indemnity to later receive the Messiah on the national level.
In this manner, the providence centering on Isaac was prolonged to the providential course centering on Jacob. Jacob, who shouldered Abraham’s sin, started the course of indemnity to fulfill Isaac’s will on the national level. Therefore, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all one body, though they differed as individuals, just as Abraham and Isaac were one body seen from the significance of the will. Accordingly, Jacob’s success meant Isaac’s success, and Isaac’s success meant Abraham’s success. Therefore, the providence of restoration centering on Abraham, though it was prolonged to Isaac and then to Jacob, is the same as if it were fulfilled in one generation without any prolongation, when it is seen from the significance of the divine will. The Biblical passage in which God said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” (Ex. 3:6) tells us that those three, though three different generations, are just the same as if they were one generation seen from the significance of the divine will, since they are all our ancestors who fulfilled one divine purpose by joint efforts.
In fact, God intended to accomplish the providence of restoration by first having Jacob’s family suffer 400 years slavery in Egypt. the Satanic world, then choosing them as the elected nation and bringing them back into Canaan as He promised in His blessing to Abraham. Then God intended to have them lay the foundation on the national level to receive the Messiah, and finally He would send the Messiah on that foundation.
Therefore, the foundation to receive the Messiah, established centering on Isaac’s family, became the basis to start the course of indemnity for the establishment of the foundation on the national level to receive the Messiah. Accordingly, the 2,000-year period from Adam to Abraham was that during which they established the basis to start the establishment of the foundation on the national level to receive the Messiah in the next age.
Jacob, who took charge of the course of indemnity which resulted from Abraham’s failure in the symbolic offering, succeeded in the struggle on the individual level by taking the birthright from Esau, using his wisdom for the sake of the heavenly will; and he again succeeded in the 21 years of struggle to take the birthright on the family level from his mother’s brother, Laban, in Haran, the Satanic world. On his way back form Haran to Canaan Jacob won in the fight with the angel and earned the name “Israel” by setting up the condition of indemnity to restore the dominion over the angel for the first time, as a fallen man, since the fall of the first human ancestors. Thus he could build the basis for the formation of the chosen nation.
Jacob returned to Canaan through such a course, and after that set up the condition of indemnity to remove the fallen nature. Therefore, Jacob successfully set the pattern for the subjugation of Satan. Moses, and Jesus, too, had to go through this typical course, and the Israelites, as a whole, also had to go through it. Therefore, the history of the Israelite nation is the historical account of this typical course, in which they subjugated Satan on the national level. This is the reason the history of the Israelite nation is the central focus of the providential history of restoration.
My Servant John and the Providence of Restoration in it’s Correct Light
My servant John said;
This is the correct interpretation of the Altar of Abraham.
John said: “First of all the she-goat being separated represented the separate left half as the fall of Eve with the Serpent or discarnate Shadow of the Archangel and the separate right half as the fall of Eve with Adam. At the first fall with the Serpent we have Eve in the position of “the satanic virgin”; virgin physically but not spiritually. At the second fall we have “the satanic bride”; having tempted Adam Eve was the satanic bride because she had come to Adam in the position of the Serpent or the angel of the devil; thus she came to Adam as the angel of Death.
The heifer being separated represented the separate left half as the conception of Cain with Adam by Eve and the separate right half as the conception of Abel with Adam by Eve.
Separating the heifer meant separating the conception of Cain from the conception of Abel; thus on the basis of the she-goat being separated this meant that the mother was no longer “satanic”; as the satanic wife had been separated from the satanic bride by separating Eve into two women: Hagar and Sarah.
The Third Voice of the Third Thunder:
the Voice of the Third Woe
4. LESSONS LEARNED FROM ABRAHAM’S COURSE ( This is actually Abram’s Course )
“…..The providence of restoration centering on Abraham shows us first what God’s predestination of His will was like. The providence of restoration cannot be fulfilled by God’s power alone, but it is to be fulfilled by man’s joint action with God. Accordingly, God could not fulfill His will through Abraham, although He called Abraham to accomplish the purpose of the providence of restoration, because Abraham failed to fulfill his own portion of responsibility.
Second, it shows us what God’s predestination for man was like. God predestined Abraham to be the father of faith, but, when he failed to accomplish his own portion of responsibility, his mission was transferred to Isaac and then Jacob.
Third, it shows us that the providence of restoration must necessarily be prolonged when man fails to accomplish his own portion of responsibility, and, at the same time, a greater condition of indemnity must be set up in order to restore the failure. In Abraham’s case, the will was to be fulfilled by offering animal sacrifices; but, due to his mistake, it was to be fulfilled only by offering his loving son Isaac as a sacrifice.
Fourth, it shows us, through the cutting of the sacrifices, that we too must divide ourselves as a sacrifice, representing good and evil. A religious life is that in which one places himself in the position of a sacrifice and offers himself as an acceptable sacrifice to God by dividing himself in two, representing the separation of good and evil. Therefore, unless we thus separate good from evil in ourselves centered on God’s will, a condition for Satan to invade is created….”