AUTHENTIC CHRISTIANITY

But become makers of the message - and not just hearers misleading yourselves For if anyone is a hearer of the message and not a maker he is like a man assessing the face of his 'Genesis' in a mirror [Jm.1:22-23]

Please note: Strict implementation of HTML prohibits the display of 8-bit Greek characters from the 'Symbol' font, as still used on this site to display unaccented Greek characters. Users of Internet Explorer should expect no problems but users of Firefox 3.x may need to install the 'Web Page Fixer +' add-on available here or here before the Greek text will display as intended.

If you find this website to be of some interest then you may also like to read:   Why Call Me God? : The Gospel Seen with a Single Eye   published by Capabel Press in September 2009. The book explains the ancient 'mystery' concealed behind the text of the gospels at the time they were first composed. The riddles of Greek scripture are soon unravelled to expose the devastating plot which must have been familiar to the Gnostic authors. Analysis then shows that the deeply challenging message of the gospels is not what the Christian churches say. It is something very different… and now explained in this groundbreaking book. For details, please click here

ISBN: 978 0 9562057 0 4

Chapter 11 : The Witness of John the Baptist

Copyright Notice
As the basis for my work I have used the Nestlé-Aland 26th Edition Greek text. Copyright on this is reserved as follows :
..... Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestlé-Aland 26th edition (c)1979, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart;
..... The Greek New Testament, 3rd edition (c) 1975, United Bible Societies, London
This is the Greek text underlying most modern English translations since 1881, including the New American Standard and New International Versions. Certain words within the Nestlé text proper are enclosed in square brackets [ ] or double brackets [[ ]]. These reflect those places where the critical text editors consider the inclusion or omission of such text to be in question.
This text is only available for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

I have also used the CATSS LXX editions of the Septuagint Old Testament prepared by the TLG (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae) Project directed by T. Brunner at the University of California, Irvine and made available through the Center for Computer Analysis of Texts (CCAT) at the University of Pennsylvania 'for the use of students, teachers and scholars in study and education contexts'.
This text is only available for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

Unless otherwise noted, the remainder of what is presented in this document is my original work. Copyright on this is reserved as follows :
..... Authentic Christianity, 4th edition : (c) 2001 - 2004, Target Technical, York, UK
All rights are reserved - except that this text is made available without charge for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

11.1 Introduction
Taken as a whole, the four gospels have been constructed to 'give witness' to Jesus. But what witness do they give ? This is a key question - and I suggest it does not receive the attention it merits. For who would read a 'who-done-it' thriller and never expect to see the mystery solved ? The noun 'musthrion' (a mystery) appears 28 times in the GNT canon. The authors of scripture have configured this 'mystery' for the reader to solve. For this it will be helpful to read in the original language - which is Greek.

Then is it not amongst the greatest of tragedies that 1900 years after the closure of this great work of spiritual literature the solution remains known only to a few ? In writing this commentary it is my hope that the solution may become more widely known - for it is a fascinating study.

Within the stories of the 'New Testament' certain of the characters are conspicuous as personal witnesses. But the concept of 'yeudomarturia' (false witness) arises 8 times within the three synoptic gospels. The authors are well aware of its power to mislead an audience.

In certain respects these stories mirror real life. A witness may tell the truth - or may not. A person who does not know the truth of a matter will not transmit that truth. But a person deceived may in turn deceive others. And no teacher can teach what he/she has not yet understood. Much like an examination, scripture is a 'test' of interpretational logic - and a spiritual 'minefield'. Do not be dismayed. But remember one thing : you are not a god and never will be. And take care how you go.

Amongst the gospel witnesses, there is John 'the baptist' whose witness forms the principal subject of this chapter. Then there is Simon who is called 'stone'. And there is Martha whose name 'marqa' (Martha) perhaps indicates the rôle she is to play as 'martuV' (a witness). Her name is also a full anagram of 'qamar' (Thamar), the woman who goes with Judah at Gn.38:6 seq.  Much as he has done before to the woman at Jacob's well [Jn.4:26], Jesus goes some way towards identifying himself [Jn.11:25] by telling Martha :

egw eimi h anastasis kai h zwh ...

I AM the Resurrection and the Life ...

Not only does Jesus echo the phrase 'eimi egw' (AM I) first uttered by Cain at Gn.4:9 - but you may notice that within the word 'anastasis' (anastasis; resurrection) lies 'satanas' (satan; enemy). Yes, he lies there, concealing the truth within a trivial anagram. For "he was a man-killer from the beginning and ... he is a liar ..." [Jn.8:44].

Then (if you look) you will find that the first use in scripture of the verb 'anisthmi' (I raise up; I resurrect) refers again to Cain. It is at Gn.4:8 where we find Cain 'raised up' upon (and forthwith slaughtering) his brother Abel [see also 1Jn.3:12] :

01O 4 8 kai eipen kain pros abel ton adelfon autou dielqwmen eis to pedion kai egeneto en tw einai autous en tw pediw kai anesth kain epi abel ton adelfon autou kai apekteinen auton

01O 4 8 And Cain said to Abel, his brother, "Let us go into the plain". And it happened while they were in the plain - and Cain (was) raised up upon Abel, his brother, and he killed him

Notice the (gnostic) teaching on anagrammatic association at Lk.6:43 - 45 :

42N 6 43 ou gar estin dendron kalon poioun karpon sapron

oude palin dendron sapron poioun karpon kalon
42N 6 43 For there is not a good tree making corrupt fruit

- nor again a corrupt tree making good fruit

42N 6 44 ekaston gar dendron ek tou idiou karpou ginwsketai

ou gar ex akanqwn sullegousin suka

oude ek batou stafulhn trugwsin

42N 6 44 For each tree becomes known from its own fruit

For not from thorns do they do pick figs

- neither from a bramble bush do they gather a bunch of grapes.

42N 6 45 o agaqos anqrwpos ek tou agaqou qhsaurou ths kardias proferei to agaqon kai o ponhros ek tou ponhrou proferei to ponhron

... ek gar perisseumatos kardias lalei to stoma autou

42N 6 45 The good person, out of the good thesaurus of the heart, brings forth good - and the evil one, out of the evil, brings forth evil

... for out of the surplus of a heart, his mouth speaks

Did you follow the example set out in the third verse ?
By a simple process of anagrammatic re-ordering,

The mouth [ stoma ] "speaks" from within

... the surplus [ perisseumatos ] of the heart

According to this principle, 'stoma' is amongst the so-called "fruits" of 'perisseumatos'. And this particular 'corrupt tree' can easily spawn other fruit besides. Consider these simple examples :

'perisseumatos' => 'sapros' (corrupt) - being fruit of the very kind cited in the first verse above.

'perisseumatos' => 'o speiras' (the one sowing at Mt.13:39) - whose 'number value' = 666 (as defined at Rv.13:18). Now surely there is 'corrupt fruit' !

But who may be the 'good person' referred to in the third verse above ? In Greek 'qhsauros' means a 'store-house'. But it means also a 'thesaurus' - a conjugate lexicon, a book which lists associated words. And look, this is 'agaqos qhsauros' (a good thesaurus). Its words are 'good words' :

'qhsauros' => 'hsau' (Esau).

At Gn.25:27 Esau is :

... anqrwpos eidws kunhgein agroikos

... a person (who) knew how to hunt wild things

And perhaps you may be 'learning to know' how Esau's hunting was done
- and what the quarry was.

Luke :

42N 12 34 opou gar estin o qhsauros umwn ekei kai h kardia umwn estai

42N 12 34 For where your thesaurus is, there too your heart will be

See also Chapter 7 of this work, section 7.3.

Reverting to the English language, a 'fig' is clearly the fruit of a 'figtree'. Who can deny it ?

And (as British children surely know) a tree which spawns 'conkers' must be a 'conkertree'. But adults (with all their sophistication) know this tree to be a 'horsechestnut'. So a 'conker' must be some form of 'chestnut'). Is this not easy to grasp ? Indeed, who can deny it ?

Then is it not plain that in scriptural Greek 'satanas' (satan; enemy) is amongst the fruits of 'anastasis' (anastasis; resurrection) ? Indeed, who can deny it ?

And Martha has elicited a most significant self-identification from Jesus - to whom (in the story) she is speaking.

At Jn.11:27 we hear Martha's response :

43N 11 27 legei autw nai kurie egw pepisteuka oti su ei o cristos o uios tou qeou o eis ton kosmon ercoomenos

43N 11 27 She says to him "Yes, lord. I have believed that you are the Christ, the son of God, the one coming into the world"

But we may have some questions :

1. Was that 'kain' (Cain) concealed within her first two words ?
   
   
2. Then Martha says 'pepisteuka' (I have believed). Why does she not say 'pisteuw' (I believe) ? Within the gospel of John this verb in the perfect tense 'pepisteuka' is used six times - and no other word conceals (as it does) 'ippeus' (a horseman). It may evoke 'yuchn zwsan kata genos tetrapoda' (a living soul after a four-footed kind : Gn.1:24) as well as the horse of Sodom/Melchizedek, three times mentioned at Gn.14:11-21.
   
   
3. And was that 'cronos' (Chronos; Kronos) coming into the world ? The Greek deity Kronos was Roman Saturn, 'the sower', equipped with a sickle or scythe, god of the harvest, in medieval times represented as the 'grim reaper' (see www.mythology.com/cronus.html).

Who is 'the lord' addressed by Martha ?

Remember that 'perisseumatos' (the surplus) has a 'mouth'. What it speaks is of some importance :

'perisseumatos' => 'o speiras' (the one sowing)

But the 'ariqmos' (number value) of 'o speiras' = 666 [see Rv.13:18]

And at Mt.13:39 'o speiras' is equated explicitly with 'o ecqros' (the enemy) and with 'o diabolos' (the devil).

So, as you might expect after reading the story of Gn.3, trees and their respective fruits have a key role to play in the resolution of the gospel 'mystery'. And to solve a 'mystery' of this calibre we may need to address it with some considerable care.

11.2 Dualism
CS Lewis was a fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford - and subsequently Professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature in the University of Cambridge. Starting from an atheistic position, in 1929 he embraced Christianity. He is well known for his subsequent 'Screwtape Letters' - as for his children's story 'The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe' (with its several sequels). During the second world war he gave a series of talks broadcast on British radio [the BBC]. Afterwards these were set in print under the title 'Mere Christianity' [Ref.1]. There he tells how, in reading the 'New Testament', he noticed that Dualism had a good deal in common with (what has become) conventional Christianity. You may like to read his elegant summary. It may be found at what he titles Book 2 : Chapter 2 : "The Invasion".

In it Lewis has gone along with the personification of the good and the evil which we all experience in our lives. This is the method of the authors of Judaeo-Christian scripture - and it penetrates their stories. But I do not feel that Lewis has understood the mind of the scriptural authors aright : so in what now follows I shall try to summarise what I now understand to be their thesis, justifying my interpretation by reference to what they themselves wrote.

I invite you to evaluate the explanation for yourself. The process may be likened to working on a jigsaw puzle.

The place to start may be the first verse of the book of 'Genesis' : 'en arch ...' = 'In a beginning ...'.

The authors postulate first a 'prime God', 'creator of Heaven and Earth' [Gn.1:1]. This 'God' is himself wholly good - as is the 'Earth' he creates, 'invisible, unformed, existing in darkness' [Gn.1:2]. We may perhaps compare this primeval 'Earth' with the diffuse interstellar material known to astrophysicists in our age as 'dark matter', the predominant mass of the universe.

But next the authors invoke 'a spirit of a god' [Gn.1:2]. "Let light happen" (God allows it, but notice he does not make it, nor bring it into being) - and 'light happened' [Gn.1:3].

And we learn from the prologue to the 'fourth gospel' that 'the light is revealed within the darkness - but the darkness did not comprehend it' [Jn.1:5]. For, in the 'gnostic' scheme of things, this 'light' was evil. And (understandably enough) anything evil was simply incomprehensible to the prime God who himself was good. This 'God' has no notion of evil. He neither notices evil nor restrains it.

He may be confronted with 'the light'. But, uncomprehending, he pays it no attention [Gn.4:5]**.

Now you may be surprised at what I am explaining here - for perhaps no one has explained 'Genesis' to you quite like this before.

But if you will just follow the argument you may shortly hold in your own hand the 'key of knowledge' [Lk.11:52]. This 'key' fits all the Judaeo-Christian scriptures. Actually it could be better likened to a template - for it permits you to distinguish who and what is 'good' from who and what is 'evil' in all the subsequent texts of scripture. And (provided you read the primary texts in Greek) everything written should now make perfect sense.

Now - in this curiously arcane and disconcerting scheme which forms the basis of the scriptural 'syllabus' - this was next configured as our bad fortune : that this 'logos', this 'light', this 'one in all his glory', was to be 'creator of the cosmos' [Gn.1:3 -> 2:1], creator of the whole physical world of light, of order (this is where the genome-like 'logos' fits in), of photosynthesis, and of life [Jn.1:3-4], creator of the world in which we live "today" [Gn.4:14] ( for remember that at Gn.1:5 "God called the light 'day' ").

Accordingly we are his 'subjects' - up until the moment we may succeed in 'recognising' him. Only then are we freed from his malign influence and may escape it. And, yes, this world is configured as the domain of 'satan' [Hebr: enemy] - the co-eternal enemy of 'God'. For he is 'deceiver of the whole world' [Rv.12:9], participant in, but deceiver of, the very world he has himself created [Jn.1:9-11]. And this is the core of his 'deception' - that he impersonates the prime 'God' [Is.44:1-8]. It is a wholesale deception - for he is not 'God' ... but only 'a god' (and that said, he is 'a god' now dismissed from the presence of 'God', 'thrown down into the earth' [Rv.12:9] ).

Exactly this is stated in the third clause at Jn.1:1 "kai qeos hn o logos" (and the 'logos' was a god). But because Latin provides no direct article, translations to Latin then fail to distinguish 'a god' from '(the) God'. As a result, few 'Latins' have been able to distinguish 'good' from 'evil' - and those who inherit the tradition from Rome tend to have the same problem. But I readily acknowledge that in their recent Bibles [Ref.2], the Jehovah's Witnesses have now got the translation to English correct at Jn.1:1 (and I congratulate them on this - though I fancy they have other things still to learn).

This is gnostic dualism - the basis of all we know as Judaeo-Christian 'scripture'. But if we look at history we see that what became established as the conventional 'Christian church' was the very 'tendency' which never understood these ideas correctly and, taking political power, extinguished them before the end of the fourth century CE. But although many of the gnostic writings appear to have been destroyed, the canon of scripture remained pretty much intact. It is blatantly gnostic from cover to cover. But, irony of ironies, the church still seeks to deny this. One of my former teachers (of European history), later to be a public school headmaster, recently averred for my benefit that "gnosticism has always been seen as a profound threat to the Revelation of Christ". I am confident that no one who understood what the gnostic tradition was could ever make such a claim.

Whether the personification of good and evil has any basis in reality is of course debatable. Myself I do not think so. But the point is that this dualism penetrates the stories of scripture - which then cannot be understood without entertaining the personification involved. Thus we have 'God' who is good - and then (in Hebrew) SaTaN), the 'enemy', the 'logos', the 'light', the 'fallen angel' - who is evil, a liar, and does not stop short of 'appearing in glory', representing that he himself is 'prime God' [2Th.2:3-4].

Jn. 3:19 :

43N 3 19 auth de estin h krisis oti to fws elhluqen eis ton kosmon kai hgaphsan oi anqrwpoi mallon to skotos h to fws hn gar autwn ponhra ta erga

43N 3 19 But this is the judgment, that the light came into the world. And people loved better the darkness than the light (for it was for them 'the wicked works').

Yes, the light was evil - and its 'works'.

As I hope I have shown, it is easy to trace the origins of this dualism in the early chapters of the book of 'Genesis' and in the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel. But it is an intentionally confusing world which is configured there. So when we look at the 'New Testament' scriptures we need to be very much on our guard - and it is my concern that many of us are 'innocents abroad' in this respect. Even CS Lewis does not appear to have understood scripture fully - for had he done so he must surely have rejected the doctrine of conventional Christianity. But then I myself was more than 54 years old before I understood it. And for at least 1700 years the established church has been denying this truth with a rigour which must be seen to be believed !

How amazing is that ? Truly this SaTaN goes hidden from your face [Gn.4:14] - actually assisted at every turn by the leaders and the people of his 'assembly', by "those who say they are Judaeans - and are not", the "synagogue of satan" [Rv.2:9; 3:9].

Understand, then, that these texts of scripture are not what at first sight they seem to be. In a spiritual sense they are dangerous and confusing territory. For such 'gods' as are manifested there to us are not mortal. If killed, they do not stay dead. And the scriptures are written to afford what we know as 'a level playing field', the bad god being provided with every facility to deceive the hasty or careless reader. It is significant, then, that Abel was "in the plain" when Cain killed him [Gn.4:8]. We may sense a re-run when we hear of Esau fighting with Jacob in the womb - and another when we hear of the foetus jump in the womb of Elizabeth at the visitation of Mary [Lk.1:44].

Jacob and his mother Rebecca are manifestly satanic figures - prefiguring what is later to be re-iterated in the texts of the 'New Testament' [NT]. They conspire together [Gn.27] to deceive Isaac. Jacob then lies (for his own advantage) to his father - even twice about his own identity (which is impersonation). The NT texts are composed thick with riddles - and it is only in solving these that the truth begins to emerge. This is the world of scripture. If we mistake its nature - taking the texts merely at face value - then we ourselves become the easy victims of this devastating deception which has been planned for us by the authors. For this is Cain's threat : 'If you banish me from the face of the earth, I will be hidden from your face'. And the 'New Testament' is (in Greek) 'h kainh diaqhkh' - "The Cainish Testament".

So take plenty of care ! And for the Latins amongst my readers : "Caveat Lector".

As noted above, Judaeo-Christian scripture is packed with riddles of diverse kinds. I hope it is clear that this is not a record of history - for conventional historians do not write in riddles such that a proportion of their readers will fail to understand what they read. Instead it is gnostic myth - but forged to retain a superficial resemblance to history. And (this is the real point) it carries a powerful spiritual message. The 'logos' of God is truly 'sharper than any double-mouthed dagger' [Heb.4:12] !

Then the method of composition employed by these authors is such that any reader paying only scant attention (or not reading in Greek) risks failing to penetrate the 'mysteries'. Such a person may then mistake the message, deceived by those superficial features which have been designed to achieve exactly this - the unwitting deception of the reader. For the core of the message is concealed, concealed within its riddles. To expose the misrepresentation incorporated at the superficial level, this core must be extracted using appropriate techniques of analysis. Here we may use the term 'puzzle solving techniques'. For the task overall may be likened to the completion of a jigsaw puzzle - with each piece fitting neatly into place to complete the whole.

At Gn.4:14 Cain threatens "I shall be hidden also from your face". Augustine of Hippo writes "the sacred writers ... have expressed themselves with a useful and wholesome obscurity" [ De Doctrina Christiana : 4:8:22 ]. But numerous readers of scripture overlook or even reject this opinion. In Oxford on 24 April 2001 the general editor of the English language 'New Jerusalem Bible' [Ref.3] to my face denied that anything could possibly have been concealed within the text of the gospels. As Augustine hinted [see Chapter 5 of this work, section 5.1], there is a risk that persons may be led astray. Of these some, taking the rôle of teacher, will lead yet others astray. For no one can teach what he does not know himself. And the blind may lead the blind [Mt.15:14; Lk.6:39].

But one may go further. Upon penetrating the obscurity of the riddles, it becomes rapidly clear that the superficial message (the face reading) is configured by the authors to be 'the works of satan'. There we find a selection from amongst those deceptively intriguing claims which present with a certain attractiveness to mankind - but for which there is no external evidence. Failing to recognise them for what they are, a reader may embrace these claims with joy. But does he risk being caught upon the 'hook' of his own pride ?

For Jesus offers to eliminate the consequence for sin [Mt.26:28; Jn.20:23]. Which sort of 'god' would offer this to human kind - and why ?

And Jesus announces that "Each one living and believing in me will not die - in eternity" [Jn.11:26]. Eternal life may be numbered amongst the benefits of being 'a god'. Which sort of 'god' would offer to extend this to human kind - and why ?

Perhaps you remember what [at Gn.3:4-5] the serpent suggested to the woman ? Why does Jesus make the same suggestion ? What, then, is temptation ? And what is sin ? Who was the serpent ? And who is this 'Christ' ?

Perhaps we should hear the author of the letter attributed to James. He writes [Jm.2:1] :

59N 2 1 adelfoi mou mh en proswpolhmyiais ecete thn pistin tou kuriou hmwn ihsou cristou ths doxhs

59N 2 1 My brothers, do not hold at face value belief in our lord Jesus Christ of glory

- and then he sets out why [see Chapter 9 of this text].

In the gospel stories 'John the Baptist' seems to be the one who tells the truth about Jesus. And in the book of the 'Apocalypse' - the further 'Revelation of Jesus Christ' attributed to John - we have this to consider about 'the war in heaven' :

66N 12 9 kai eblhqh o drakwn o megas o ofis o arcaios o kaloumenos diabolos kai o satanas o planwn thn oikoumenhn olhn eblhqh eis thn ghn kai oi aggeloi autou met autou eblhqhsan

66N 12 9 And he was thrown out (from heaven), the 'great dragon', the 'ancient serpent', the one called devil and 'satan', the deceiver of the whole world. He was thrown out into the earth - and his angels were thrown out with him.

For the writers of scripture, satan is 'the deceiver of the whole world' - assisted by other 'angels' within his 'household'. The requisite deception may be implemented (or perpetrated) by any means effective - extending to the message of scripture itself. And the concept of 'the deluded prophet' is amongst the compositional tools available to these writers. So one must take care. But those achieving a solution to the riddles learn to know (which in Greek is gnosis) the full message set down by the authors and, discounting the deceptions, to interpret it for what it is. And they may come to appreciate those limitations which apply to them (such as death), seeing that in fact they are only human kind.

Now there is a popular notion that the texts of scripture are essentially monotheistic. But examine them carefully and you may distinguish both good and evil - with the tricky complication that evil also masquerades as good. In reality these texts are manifestly dualistic - and devoted to recursive allegory. Allegory is "the narrative description of a subject under guise of another suggestively similar" [Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English; 5th Ed.].

Accordingly :

1. At Gn.4:1 Eve gives birth to Cain. She says "I have acquired a person by means of God". And she added the birth of his brother Abel. He became a 'herdsman of flocks' - but Cain was 'working the earth'.
   
   Cain appears as 'o prwtotokos' (the first-born), a privilege of which he is (in effect) deprived by his subsequent punishment for his resurrection upon - and killing of - Abel, his 'brother' [Gn.4:8]. Then in later scripture (and in subsequent alias incarnations) he is found attempting to restore his former priority - by any means, fair or foul.
   
   
   Notice that as a 'sacrifice for the lord' (sic), it is Cain who brings [Gn.4:3] :

   
   ... apo twn karpwn ths ghs

   ... from the fruits of the earth

   
   - and in doing so he recognises that the androgynous 'lord' [first titled at Gn.1:28] is indeed 'lord of the earth'. And his diet ?

   
   Yes, it is specified at Genesis 1:29:
   ... pan corton sporimon speiron sperma o estin epanw pashs ths ghs kai pan xulon o ecei en eautw karpon spermatos sporimou

   
   ... every grass spreading seed to propagate which is above all the earth - and every tree which has within itself fruit (having) seed to propagate [Gn.1:29].

   
   
   By contrast Abel brings 'gifts for God' (sic), these being [Gn.4:4] :

   
   ... kai autos apo twn prwtotokwn twn probatwn autou kai apo twn steatwn autwn

   ... also him from the first-born of his flock - and from their fat

   
   And if you were alert you may have seen both 'prwtotokos' (first-born => Cain) and 'nwe' (Noah) concealed there. And you will have seen the genitive plural ending 'wn' repeated 7 times.
   
   This digram 'wn' has been emphasised previously at Gn.1:26 (11 times) and at Gn.1:28 (13 times). The next time it occurs at least 7 times is at Gn.5:29 (in fact the count there is10). This is the verse in which Noah actually receives his name Noah - which in Greek is of course 'nwe'. And at Ex.3:14 'god' says to Moses : 'egw eimi o wn' (I AM THE BEING). Do you follow the pattern ?
   
   Were it not for these 'ainigmata gnwstika' (gnostic riddles), he might as well have said 'I AM CAIN' or 'I AM NOAH'. But that would have made it too easy ! In this connection, see also Chapter 7 of this work (section 7.4) - where I seek to identify the 'sign' of the 'Son of Man'. For the digram 'wn' has ariqmos (number value) = 850 - the same as that for 'o ofis' (the serpent).

   
   Anyway [Gn.4:4-5] :

   God looked upon Abel and upon his 'gifts' But to Cain and to his 'sacrifices' he did not pay attention

   
   In an immediate sense I suppose this is because of what they were - but it is also because of who these particular 'sacrifices' reveal Cain to be (ie. the sower). For God pays no attention to 'sacrifices' of 'fruits of the earth' - nor to minor deities such as 'Cain'.
    

   Make no mistake about it, bringing a sacrifice of 'fruits of the earth' is the trait of Cain, the 'worker of the earth', 'the sower'. In subsequent scripture we find that the production or consumption of 'fruits of the earth' (eg. bread and/or wine) marks out (amongst others) the following : Noah who at Gn.9:20 'began to be a farmer', establishes a vineyard, gets drunk - and is shortly instrumental in establishing the city of Sodom Melchizedek who at Gn.14:18 brings 'bread and wine', his name being merely an alias for the 'king of Sodom' (see Chapter 8 of this text, section 8.2) Jacob who at Gn.25:30-34 gives Esau 'bread and red lentil stew' Rebecca who at Gn.27:17 gets Jacob to present the food to Isaac The chief baker in the dream at Gn.40:16 Joseph at Gn.41:49 - and who at Gn.47:17 gives the Egyptians bread The 'son of man' in the 4 gospels - 'a sower' [Mt.13:37], equated again with Noah [Mt.24:37]. Yes, it is Jesus himself who offers bread and wine [Mt.11:19, 26:26; Mk.14:22; Lk.7:34, 22:17; 1Cor.11:23].

   But John (the Baptist) 'came neither eating bread nor drinking wine' [Lk.7:33]. This is the trait of Abel, the herdsman of flocks. And (apart from his being done no good by Jacob's ominous lentil stew) it is the trait of Esau, that 'hairy person (who) knew how to hunt wild things' [Gn.25:27].

   
   His 'sacrifices' overlooked, 'Cain was extremely annoyed - and his face fell' [Gn.4:5]. A recent notice outside a local Methodist chapel links 'ANGER' with 'DANGER' - an inadvertently gnostic observation if ever there was one. For in his resentment at being ignored by God, Cain is filled with anger. Then we are the ones in danger.
   
   But subsequently Cain is 'resurrected' upon Abel, his brother - and he killed him [Gn.4:8]. And God said to Cain, "Where is Abel, your brother?". He said, "I do not know. AM I [ eimi egw ] my brother`s keeper?". God said "What did you do ? The voice of the blood of your brother shouts to me from the earth. And now you are cursed from the earth, which opened its mouth wide to receive the blood of your brother from your hand".
   
   Accordingly the wine is coloured red to this day - as is the lentil stew offered by Jacob to Esau at Gn.25:34. For these are 'fruits of the earth'.
   
   Cain is cursed - but he threatens trouble. He says "My accusation is too great to acquit me. If you throw me out today from the face of the earth, I will also be hidden from your face. I shall be 'stenwn kai tremwn' (contracting [alt: sighing] and shivering) upon the earth and it shall be that each one finding me will kill me"

   
   To avoid falling into sin ourselves, we will be wise to watch out for things which go 'sighing, contracting and shivering upon the earth'. I hope it is clear that this must include 'ofis' ( the serpent of Gn.3 ) - who now goes hidden from your face. So we really do need to keep a sharp look out. This means we need to read in Greek - and to read anagrammatically, for :

   
   ekeinos estin en tois ofqalmois hmwn

   He is within our eyes

   
   - just as is taught from Gn.3:6 to the riddle at Is.6:9-10
   - the latter being repeated verbatim at several points in the 4 gospels and Acts

   
   And remember Gn.4:14 ? Cain says : "I shall be 'stenwn kai tremwn' (contracting [alt: sighing] and shivering) upon the earth and it shall be that each one finding me will kill me".

   
   Mark :
   41N 8 12 kai anastenaxas tw pneumati autou legei ti h genea auth zhtei shmeion amhn legw umin ei doqhsetai th genea tauth shmeion

   41N 8 12 And sighing deeply in his spirit, he said "Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly I am telling you if a sign will be given to this generation".

   
   The serpent [ ofis ] pervades all scripture. Most of the time he goes "hidden from your face" [Gn.4:14]. But to assist you further in recognising him, you may encounter him going on his chest and on his abdomen - and (as with a worm) he eats earth (or the fruits thereof) [Gn.3:14].

   
   He may be found naked [Gn.9:21; 27:16; Heb.4:13], sometimes helical [Lk.2:52; Jn.3:5] and invariably his neck (or his track) is smooth [Gn.27:11, 27:16; Is.40:4; Lk.3:5; Heb.4:13]. He may be spotted when a stone [Gn.28:18; Lk.24:2] is moved away - or when crossing the torrent [Gn.32:24; Ps.110; Jn.18:1] on the road. His raised head [Gn.3:15, 11:4, 28:11-12, 40:16, 49:26; Mt.21:42; Mk.12:10; Rv.14:14] may give him away - as may his eyes [Gn.3:6, 13:14, 18:2, 22:4, 22:13, et al; Is.6:5, 6:10, 44:18; Mt.13:15, 21:42; Mk.12:11; Jn.12:40; Ac.28:27; Heb.4:13; 1Jn.1:1] and his tongue [Ac.2:3] - which is a fire [Jm.3:5-6]. Indeed his tongue is a restless evil, full of death-dealing poison [Jm.3:8].

   
   Hebrews :
   58N 4 13 kai ouk estin ktisis afanhs enwpion autou panta de gumna kai tetrachlismena tois ofqalmois autou pros on hmin o logos

   58N 4 13 And it is not a creature invisible in its countenance - but all things (are) naked and have had (their) neck twisted (round) to the eyes of that which (is) for us 'the logos'

   
   When you take his food [bread at Ac.27:35] 'not one of you will lose a hair from the head' [Ac.27:34]. And why ? Because in eating his food you become like him - and a serpent, being smooth like Jacob [Gn.27:11], has not a hair to lose in the first place [see also Lk.21:18].

   
   And remember that "God called the light day" [Gn.1:5]. So today we have another link to the light which appears at Gn.1:3. But do not let it dazzle you. Remember James and the 'gold ringed' man coming into your assembly' [Jm.2:2].

   
   For in the story of 'Acts' even Saul, blinded for 3 days upon Eliezer's road to Damascus [Gn.15:2; Ac.9:3], failed to recognise what kind of light this was. At Is.6 it almost seems that Isaiah knows the identity of the figure before him in the vision - but notwithstanding this he succumbs and is recruited into service of satan. Saul suffers a similar experience - but in this part of the story he fails to grasp the true identity of the one whom he sees and hears. Accordingly Paul is added to the long list of those known to be :

   
   ... 'deluded prophets' [ yeudoprofhtai ].

   
   eg. Matthew :
   40N 24 11 kai polloi yeudoprofhtai egerqhsontai kai planhsousin pollous
   40N 24 11 And many false prophets will arise - and they will deceive many.

   
   
2. At Gn.14:20 Abram encounters Melchizedek - and yields to him 'one tenth of all'. Melchizedek is the 'tax collector' - and this the scriptural origin of the 'tithe'. For a more detailed consideration see Chapter 8 of this text.
   
   
3. At Gn.25:24-26, Rebecca gives birth to non-identical twins - first to Esau (who knew how to hunt wild things), then to Jacob (who stays at home).
   
   Before the birth, the children 'struggled within her' [Gn.25:22]. The one will be stronger than the other : the elder will serve the younger. At the birth Jacob's hand is seen grasping Esau's heel [Gn.25:26]. This is in line with the 'heel over head' curse at Gn.3:15. Accordingly Jacob is the 'seed of the serpent' (so a man-god), Esau 'the seed of the woman' (so a man ?). We hear that "Isaac was sixty [ x  ] years old when she bore them".

   
   Subsequently Jacob (smooth like the serpent) displaces his older brother Esau (red & hairy like the bloodied herdsman Abel) - and he usurps Esau to regain for himself the rôle of :

   
   'prwtotokos' (FIRST-BORN) [Gn.4:1; Gn.25-27]

   
   For Jacob [ iakwb ] is clearly as Cain [ kain ]. At the suggestion of his own mother Rebecca, he lies three times to his father Isaac [Gn.27:19-24], twice about his own identity. For impersonation - sustained by lies - is the means for his satanic deceit.
   
   This should be a warning to us when we address the gospel stories. For they form a part of what we know to this day as 'h kainh diaqhkh' (The New [Cain] Testament).
   [see Lk.22:20; 1Cor.11:25; 2Cor.3:6; Heb.8:8; Heb.9:15]

   
   
4. At Gn.38:27-30, Thamar, daughter-in-law of Judah, gives birth (once again) to twins - albeit from an irregular relationship [Gn.38:13-27; Jn.7:53-8:11].
   
   This time it is Zerah + Pharez. Strictly the first-born is Zerah - whose hand appears briefly and is bound with scarlet (evoking the blood of Abel - and the red hair of Esau). Then Pharez comes to be FIRST [see Jn.1:15; 1:30; 8:7]. Like Jacob before him, he usurps the place of his brother - but this time he achieves it even before the birth is complete.

When we come to the 'gospels', the pattern manifested is strikingly similar :

1. The priest Zacharias receives an angelic vision in the temple. This is 'aggelos kuriou' (an angel of a lord) and he is 'estws ek dexiwn tou qusiasthriou tou qumiamatos' (standing on the right of the altar of incense) [Lk.1:11].
   
   Now perhaps you glimpsed 'aima' (blood) concealed within 'tou qumiamatos' (the incense). And recall that the first to bring 'qusian' (a sacrifice) is Cain [Gn.4:3] - and Cain is subsequently told that the earth [Gn.4:11] :

   
   ... ecanen to stoma auths dexasqai to aima tou adelfou sou ek ths ceiros sou

   ... opened its mouth to receive the blood of your brother from your hand

   
   So you may understand why it was that [Lk.1:12] :

   
   ... etaracqh zacarias idwn kai fobos epepesen ep auton

   ... Zacharias was disturbed seeing (him) - and fear fell upon him

   
   For the earth was about to receive his blood - just as it had received the blood of Abel [Gn.4:11; Mt.23:35; Lk.11:51; Apocryphal 'Protevangelium of James'].
   
   But the angel said to him "Do not fear, Zacharias ... your wife Elizabeth will bring forth a child for you : and you shall call his name John" [Lk.1:13].
   
   
2. Finally the angel identifies himself, disclosing that 'egw eimi gabrihl ... ' (I AM Gabriel ...) [Lk.1:19]. The Hebrew root of the name implies that he is a 'strong one'. Recall that the phrase 'eimi egw' (AM I) is first used by Cain [Gn.4:9].
   
   
3. A son is conceived to Elizabeth & Zacharias [Lk.1:24]. Two human parents are identified here. Ergo, this child is to be a man ?
   
   
4. A 'virgin named Mary' is the 'kinswoman of Elizabeth'. She too receives an angelic vision. Once again it is 'o aggelos gabrihl' (the angel Gabriel) [Lk.1:26]. "You will conceive in your belly and give birth to a son and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, he will be called the son of the 'most high' and the 'lord god' will give him the throne of his father, David. He will be king over the household of Jacob for eternity - and of his reign there will not be an end". [Lk.1:31-33]
   
   
5. A son is conceived to Mary & (mysteriously) 'a holy spirit' (sic). This is the 'shadow of the power of the most high' [Lk.1:35]. Only one human parent is identified. Ergo, this child is to be a titan - some kind of man-god [see Gn.6:1-4] ?
   
   
6. Mary visits Elizabeth. She enters the house of Zacharias - in a city of Judah. At her greeting, the foetus 'leaps' in Elizabeth's womb. As predicted [Lk.1:15], Elizabeth too is 'filled with a holy spirit' [Lk.1:41] (but notice, not before this point of proximity to Mary). The two children are now together in the mothers' womb(s). But the child of Elizabeth is 6 months advanced [Lk.1:36].

   
   For this John and Jesus

   - are as Esau and Jacob

   
   
7. After 3 months Mary returns to her household [Lk.1:56] - and Elizabeth gives birth to a child [Lk.1:57]. This child (John) is the 'first born'.
   
   
8. On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child [Lk.1:59] - and they would have called him after the name of his father Zacharias And his mother, answering, said "No, but he will be called John". They said that "There is no one amongst your relatives who is called by this name".
   
   But his father, still struck dumb, writes upon a writing plate [ pinakidion ], saying : "John is his name" [Lk.1:63]. But perhaps you saw kain (Cain) concealed there ? In due course [Mt.14:11; Mk.6:28] you will see him again when John is finally eliminated - and his head is brought upon a plate [ epi pinaki ].
   
   Now Cain is not John's name - for his name should have been 'zacarias' (Zacharias), perhaps evoking 'koraka' (the raven at Gn.8:7). But Cain is perhaps the name of the one in the 'angelic vision' at Lk.1:13 responsible for his being named 'John' - as also for his subsequent elimination by decapitation. For in Hebrew 'Jonah' means a pigeon (or a dove). And it appears that in Greek the name 'iwannhs' (John) may be derived as follows :
   
   

   Hebrew Script	Hebrew		Greek	English
   	I.V.N.H	Translated ->	peristera	pigeon = dove
   	I.V.N.H	Transliterated ->	= iwna	= Jonah
   	N.CH.SH	Translated ->	ofis	serpent
   	I.V.N.H N.CH.SH	Transliterated ->	iwnanhs*	pigeon_serpent
   			iwannhs*	John
   		Incidental ...	aiwna	aeon; eternity

   
   
   And the story of Luke's gospel continues like this :

   
   FEAR came upon all those living around them - and in the whole hill country of Judaea all these sayings were discussed. And all those hearing placed (them) in their hearts, saying "What then will this child be?". For also the HAND of the LORD was with him [Lk.1:65-66].

   
   In the world of antiquity, the 'heart' was the location for deep thinking - even for the solution of riddles such as those we have just heard.
   
   
9. Zacharias announces the rôle for John [Lk.1:76-79] :

   
   42N 1 76 kai su de paidion profhths uyistou klhqhsh proporeush gar enwpion kuriou etoimasai odous autou

   42N 1 76 And you, child, will be called a prophet of (the) most high - for you will go before a lord to prepare his ways

   
   42N 1 77 tou dounai gnwsin swthrias tw law autou en afesei amartiwn autwn

   42N 1 77 For giving knowledge of salvation to his people within the release of their sins

   
   42N 1 78 dia splagcna eleous qeou hmwn en ois episkeyetai hmas anatolh ex uyous

   42N 1 78 On account of the entrails of compassion of our god - in whom a dawn from on high will visit us

   
   42N 1 79 epifanai tois en skotei kai kia qanatou kaqhmenois tou kateuqunai tous podas hmwn eis odon eirhnhs

   42N 1 79 To shine for those sitting in darkness and a shadow of death - to guide our feet in the way of peace

   
   And in the third verse there you may have glimpsed 'satan' (satan) - concealed within the (eastern) 'dawn which will visit us'. You may notice him again at 2P.1:19 where we hear that 'fwsforos anateilh en tais kardiais umwn' (Lucifer dawns in our hearts). This 'dawn' which will 'visit us and shine' is of course the one whom John announces, ie. Jesus.
   
   When you can 'see' satan like this it is surely no accident - for in scripture there is 'no good tree making corrupt fruit' [Lk.6:43]. And 'Lucifer' has been long known as an alias for 'satan', the fallen angel.

   
   
10. Now comes the birth of Jesus. The location for this is 'en tw katalumati' (in the lodging) - in Judaea, at the 'city of David' called Bethlehem. The place name is linked to Hebrew 'BethEl' => 'house of god' [see Gn.28:17]. This 'lodging' may not be any kind of auspicious establishment. For the meaning of the Greek preposition 'kata' is 'down' - and 'lumata' is 'sewage'.
    

    
    Luke :

    40N 15 17 ou noeite oti pan to eisporeuomenon eis to stoma eis thn koilian cwrei kai eis afedrwna ekballetai

    40N 15 17 Do you not realise that all going into the mouth advances into the womb [alt: belly] and is expelled into a latrine ?

    
    Abel was 'poimhn' (a herdsman) [Gn.4:2]. Now the herdsmen who appear at this point in the story (Abel; Esau; John ?; perhaps you as the reader) are told by 'an angel of a lord' to look out for 'to shmeion' (the sign).
    
    At Lk.2:12 we have this 'sign' :

    
    ... eurhsete brefos esparganwmenon kai keimenon en fatnh

    ... you will find a Foetus wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying within a Feed-trough

    
    How interesting that each of the words for Foetus and for Feed-trough includes the letter 'f' in Greek - and the corresponding letter 'F' in translation to English. There is extensive evidence within Greek scripture itself that the letter 'f' is used in a special way associated with 'o ofis' (the serpent) [eg. Gn.3:1; 3:6; Is.6:9]. So I am confident the author(s) knew what they were placing within the Greek text here. By contrast, in translation to English this can be sustained only by chance - for the English language had yet to come into being at the time when this 'sign' was configured in Greek.
    
    

    The Egyptian hieroglyph corresponding to Greek letter 'f' (or 'F') is : ofis (a serpent) (see Chapter 2 : Section 2.5)

    Horned Asp

    ---

    What do you observe "keimenon en fatnh" (lying within a feed-trough) ?

    Is it not clear ?

    And if you are surprised at this conclusion, here the foetus and the serpent are further associated [Jn.3:14; 2Tm.3:15; Mk.10:6] :

    
    43N 3 14 kai kaqws mwushs uywsen ton ofin en th erhmw outws uywqhnai dei ton uion tou anqrwpou

    43N 3 14 And just as Moses raised up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the 'son of man' be raised up

    ...
    55N 3 15 kai oti apo brefous [ta] iera grammata oidas ta dunamena se sofisai eis swthrian dia pistews ths en cristw ihsou

    55N 3 15 And because from a foetus you know [the] sacred writings which are able to make you wise about 'salvation' through a faith which (is) within Christ Jesus.

    ...
    41N 10 6 apo de archs ktisews arsen kai qhlu epoihsen autous

    41N 10 6 But, from (the) beginning of creation, 'male and female' he made them [see Gn.1:27 : worms are hermaphrodite]
    
    

    ---

    Perhaps it is also worth pointing out that the only complete anagram of this word 'fatnh' (feed-trough) which occurs in the GNT texts is 'tafhn' (burial) [Mt.27:7]. This may account (at least in part) for the description of the foetus as 'esparganwmenon' ( wrapped in swaddling clothes ). For this description evokes also the appearance of a corpse prepared for burial.

    If (in the story) such a corpse were to come back to life (ie. anastasis; resurrection) then, given the compositional techniques practiced by these authors, it may be reasonable to expect that it will be found 'esparganwmenon kai keimenon en fatnh' (wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying within a feed-trough). For the feed-trough itself may resemble the coffin from which the corpse is to rise. Probably I do not need to point out that the corpse of Jesus is later said to be placed in a 'new' tomb [Mt.27:59-60] - which of course takes us right back to where we started :

    
    40N 27 59 kai labwn to swma o iwshf enetulixen auto [en] sindoni kaqara

    40N 27 59 And taking the body, Joseph wrapped it up [within] a clean sheet

    
    40N 27 60 kai eqhken auto en tw kainw autou mnhmeiw o elatomhsen en th petra kai proskulisas liqon megan th qura tou mnhmeiou aphlqen

    40N 27 60 And placed it within his new tomb which he quarried in the stone - and rolling a large stone to the door of the tomb, he departed.
    
    

    And once again I expect you noticed 'kain' (Cain) concealed within each verse.
    
    

    This interpretation then suggests that the infant Jesus is a person with a 'previous history' in the world - awaking now to a new life. Are we seeing 'anastasis [<-] in action' ?. Then (we may ask) who was he ? This, of course, is the key question which reverberates through all the gospels when we hear Jesus ask [Mk.8:29] :

    
    ... tina me legete einai ;

    ... who do you say me to be ?
    
    

    Writer's comment [December 2002]: Perhaps (at this juncture) I may say that I myself would never - even in my wildest dreams - have thought to compose a set of 'gnostic' texts of this kind and to leave them lying about in the world. I would never have wished - nor dared - to do such a thing. But this is fact. In our age we have inherited the Judaeo-Christian scriptures as a 'fait accompli', the creation of another culture, frozen for the past 1900 years. Over the intervening years these have been interpreted by many whose learning appears to have been less than that of the authors. The task which I have embraced is to analyse them, to understand them, to explain them by writing this text. This I shall do to the best of my ability. My ability is itself limited. There is always more to learn. But my pursuit is the pursuit of truth. If you wish to know whether I myself have been surprised by all that I have learned to know, then my answer is 'YES'. I was surprised to find what was concealed within the message of scripture. But it is not too difficult to unravel - and so the greater part of my surprise was occasioned by the realisation of how few others had any idea of it. If you share what was my surprise, please do not suppose that I am unaware of how you may feel. I have been through it before you. But can there be any good in this world without truth ? I think not. For (in scripture anyway) deception is the tool of the devil - who is satan (the enemy), 'the one deceiving the whole world' [Rv.12:9]. Revelation : 66N 5 4 kai eklaion polu oti oudeis axios eureqh anoixai to biblion oute blepein auto 66N 5 4 And I was weeping much because no one was found worthy - (neither) to open up the book nor to see it And did you notice the mirror reversal (anagram) demonstrated there ?

    
    
11. "And when eight days were completed for his circumcision, his name was called Jesus - as called by the angel before his conception in the womb" [Lk.2:21].
    
    
12. "And when the days of their purification were completed according to the Law of Moses, they brought him to Jerusalem to present (him) to the lord (just as it has been written in a law of a lord that every male opening a womb shall be called holy to the lord). And to give a sacrifice according to the aforesaid in the law of a lord - a brace of turtle-doves or two pigeon chicks" [Gn.15:9; Lk.2:22-24].
    
    
13. The two children grow up apart [Lk.1:80 / 2:40] :

    
    John (in the desert) :
    42N 1 80 to de paidion huxanen kai ekrataiouto pneumati kai hn en tais erhmois ews hmeras anadeixews autou pros ton israhl
    42N 1 80 The child grew and strengthened in spirit. And he was in the desert until the day of his appearance to Israel

    
    Jesus (at 'Nazareth' in Galilee) :
    42N 2 40 to de paidion huxanen kai ekrataiouto plhroumenon sofia kai caris qeou hn ep auto
    42N 2 40 The child grew and strengthened, filling with wisdom. And a grace of god was upon him

    
    Remember that 'Israel' is Jacob - and this title may refer also to Jesus. If so, John remains "in the desert until the day of his appearance to Jesus".
    
    And you may notice that Jesus, as he grew and strengthened, was both :

    
    'plhroumenon sofia' (filling with wisdom) - which barely concealed 'ofis' (a serpent)

    
    and upon him was :

    
    'caris qeou' (a grace of god) - which barely concealed 'cristos' (Christ).

Now the scene is set for the encounter betwen John and Jesus:

1. John's function : he came baptizing in the wilderness - and preaching the baptism of 'change of mind' on remission of sins [Mt.3:1; Mk.1:4].
   
   
2. John's appearance : he is dressed in clothing of camel hair - with a leather belt [Mt./Mk.].
   

   40N 3 4 autos de o iwannhs eicen to enduma autou apo tricwn kamhlou kai zwnhn dermatinhn peri thn osfun autou h de trofh hn autou akrides kai meli agrion

   40N 3 4 But John himself had his clothing (made) of camel hair - and a leather belt around his waist. And his food (was) locusts and wild honey

   .....
   41N 1 6 kai hn o iwannhs endedumenos tricas kamhlou kai zwnhn dermatinhn peri thn osfun autou kai esqiwn akridas kai meli agrion

   41N 1 6 And John was clothed (in) camel hair - and a leather belt around his waist. And (he was) devouring locusts and wild honey

   
   We have heard from the angel Gabriel [Lk.1:17] that John "will go before him in (the) spirit and power of Elijah". So we are not surprised to hear that John wears clothing of hair and a leather belt - for at 2K.1:8 Elijah is :

   
   ... anhr dasus kai zwnhn dermatinhn periezwsmenos thn osfun autou

   ... a hairy man - and a leather belt encircling his waist

   
   But notice that this also evokes Esau - for at Gn.25:25 we hear that :

   
   exhlqen de o uios o prwtotokos purrakhs olos wsei dora dasus

   the first-born son came out reddish all over - like a hairy skin

   
   
3. John's food : it is locusts and wild honey [Mt.3:4; Mk.1:6].
   
   Moreover he comes not eating bread, not drinking wine [Lk.1:15; 7:33]. For bread and wine fall into the category 'fruits of the earth' - and this is not John's food.

   
   But there is more that may be said about these locusts. At Jg.6:3-5 we hear that :

   
   amalhk kai oi uioi anatolwn ... pareginonto ws akris eis plhqos kai autois kai tais kamhlois autwn ouk hn ariqmos

   Amalek and the sons of those in the east ... came up like locusts in a swarm - and there was no numbering them and their camels

   
   This is repeated with only minor variation at Jg.7:12.

   
   A person wearing clothes of camel hair may be one who has herded camels (Abel) or hunted camels (Esau) - and if he also eats locusts this casts him as one who opposes 'Amalek and the sons of those in the east'. And remember that Esau 'knew how to hunt wild things' [Gn.25:27] - which should include both 'locusts' and 'wild honey'.

   
   So John appears to have attributes of Abel, of Esau and of Elijah.

   
   Then it is worth noting that 'akrides' (locusts) are a pest [see also Rv.9:3; 9:7] - and they fall into the category of 'meat/wild things' (as distinct from 'fruits of the earth').

   
   The locusts eat the sower's crops : John then eats the locusts.

   
   The bees collect from the sower's crops : John then eats their honey.

   
   By contrast Jesus eats the sower's crops himself. In this he may be likened to Cain, to Noah, to Melchizedek, to Jacob, to Joseph, to the locusts - and to the many who have been persuaded by that shallow interpretation of scripture for so long predominant within the Christian church and which has given us what is known as 'the eucharistic liturgy'.

   
   But we see that, in their preference for food, John and Jesus are as opposites - a conclusion simple but significant - and surely difficult to dispute.

   
   
   
4. John's evidence : he gives witness to Jesus - ultimately (and reluctantly) baptises him in water. But (amongst numerous coded warnings) he says "This is the one who was behind me, coming now in front of me, because he was my FIRST". In this way he anticipates his rôle being usurped by Jesus. The evidence which John gives is the subject of Section 11.3 which follows.
   
   
5. Subsequently Jesus does indeed displace John - who shortly meets with a premature end.
   
   
6. For John is imprisoned [Mt.14:3; Mk.6:17; Lk.3:20; Jn.3:24].
   
   
7. John is then beheaded in prison [Mt.14:10; Mk.6:27]. His head is brought 'epi pinaki' (upon a platter) [Mt.14:11; Mk.6:28]. And you will have seen 'kain' (Cain) concealed there. Presumably Cain is somehow responsible for this, the demise of John.

11.3 The Evidence of John

In the gospel attributed to John we find Jesus speaking as follows :
43N 5 31 ean egw marturw peri emautou h marturia mou ouk estin alhqhs
43N 5 31 "If I give witness about myself my witness is not true

43N 5 32 allos estin o marturwn peri emou kai oida oti alhqhs estin h marturia hn marturei peri emou
43N 5 32 Another is the one giving witness about me. And I know that the witness which he witnesses about me is true

43N 5 33 umeis apestalkate pros iwannhn kai memarturhken th alhqeia
43N 5 33 You have sent away to John - and he has given witness to the truth"

and then we have :
43N 10 41 kai polloi hlqon pros auton kai elegon oti iwannhs men shmeion epoihsen ouden panta de osa eipen iwannhs peri toutou alhqh hn
43N 10 41 Many came to him. And they said that John did not make a single sign - but all that John said about this (person) was true.

Jesus declares that, were he to give evidence about himself, it 'is not true'. But he states that the witness of another is true - this one being John.

And in the following sections I deal with what John the Baptist himself is heard to say - in the gospel attributed to John.

11.3.1 He was My First

43N 1 15 iwannhs marturei peri autou kai kekragen legwn outos hn on eipon o opisw mou ercomenos emprosqen mou gegonen oti prwtos mou hn
43N 1 15 John gives witness about him and he has cried out, saying "This was the one (of) whom I said 'The one coming behind me, has come (now) in front of me - for he was my FIRST' "
...
43N 1 30 outos estin uper ou egw eipon opisw mou ercetai anhr os emprosqen mou gegonen oti prwtos mou hn
43N 1 30 "This is (the one) about whom I said 'Behind me comes a man who has come in front of me - for he was my FIRST' "

The statement is repeated within a few verses - so we may suppose that the author wishes to draw attention to it. Let us examine it carefully.

First, we notice that the ariqmos (number value) of 'prwtos' (first) = 1550. But this is also the ariqmos of 'o cristos' (the Christ). Here we have another example of the use of arithmetic translation (isopsephia). And we realise that this one who is 'my FIRST' may be also 'THE CHRIST'.

And notice that this has its equivalent in Hebrew - where arithmetic translation connects the 'MESSIAH' through the ariqmos = 358 to the 'SERPENT'. But the Hebrew 'MESSIAH' is in Greek 'THE CHRIST' [see Jn.1:21; 4:25].

		Grk. Numerical [L>R]	Greek	English
		70+600+100+10 +200+300+70+200 = 1550	o cristos	the Christ
		80+100+800 +300+70+200 = 1550	prwtos	first
Hebrew Script	Hebrew	Hebr. Numerical [R>L]	Greek	English
	M.SH.I.CH	40+300+10+8 = 358	messiaV	Messiah
	N.CH.SH	50+8+300 = 358	ofiV	serpent

So is the SERPENT THE CHRIST ? Look again at Heb.4:12-13 :

58N 4 12 zwn gar o logos tou qeou kai energhs kai tomwteros uper pasan macairan distomon kai diiknoumenos acri merismou yuchs kai pneumatos armwn te kai muelwn kai kritikos enqumhsewn kai ennoiwn kardias
58N 4 12 For 'the logos' of god is alive - and active, and sharper than every two-mouthed dagger - and penetrating even to the dividing of soul and spirit, both of joints and marrow, and critical to recalling and to understanding of (the) heart
58N 4 13 kai ouk estin ktisis afanhs enwpion autou panta de gumna kai tetrachlismena tois ofqalmois autou pros on hmin o logos
58N 4 13 And it is not a creature invisible in its countenance - but all things (are) naked and have had (their) neck twisted (round) to the eyes of that which (is) for us 'the logos'

Second, we notice that 'prwtos' means also a 'prime number'. And we realise that the ariqmos (number value) of the inarticulate 'logos' ( logos ) = 373, itself a prime number. Moreover the ariqmos of the articulate 'o logos' (the logos) = 443 is also a prime number. Here the mathematical skills of the writer are in evidence (you may like to check it out for yourself). And we realise that this one who is 'my FIRST' may be also 'the LOGOS'. And you may like to note that 'israhl' (Israel, alias Jacob) = 349 and 'dauid' (David) = 419 and 'o liqos' (the stone) = 389. All these are prime numbers.

Third, we realise that the one who is 'my FIRST' is indeed Cain [ kain ] - alias Jacob [ iakwb ] . For in the story at Gn.4 Cain has the position/title 'o prwtotokos' (the first-born). But 'he was resurrected upon Abel, his brother, and he killed him' [Gn.4:8]. And Cain is 'the Christ' - for he is 'anointed' with the blood of Abel, his brother [Gn.4:11]. Accordingly he is punished - but this is not the end of the matter for he threatens retaliation [Gn.4:14].

Now Jacob (who in Greek shares three letters of his name with Cain ) may be characterised as follows. He is 'the Christ' because he 'anoints' the stone near which he laid his head, having declared that 'this place is none other than 'oikos qeou' (Hebr: 'Bich-Al', 'Bethel', house of a god) [Gn.28:17,19]. The stone near which he lays his head is perhaps a token of his own head [Gn.28:11]. He then anoints (or christens) it [Gn.28:18]. We notice that the head [ kefalh ] of the ladder [ klimax ] reaches right up to heaven [Gn.28:12]. And then we remember the curse upon the serpent at Gn.3:15 : "The seed of the woman" ... "will watch you (for) a head - and you will watch him (for) a heel". So this head is the head of the serpent - who is Cain, alias Jacob.

And perhaps you are familiar with the children's game 'Snakes and Ladders'. It is believed to originate in India (Moksha-Patamu). The five squares of virtue [ladder bases] in the original game are Faith (12), Reliability (51), Generosity (57), Knowledge (76), Asceticism (78). The twelve squares of evil [snake heads] are Disobedience (41), Vanity (44), Vulgarity (49), Theft (52), Lying (58), Drunkenness (62), Debt (69), Rage (84), Greed (92), Pride (95), Murder (73) and Lust (99). The game became popular in England at the end of the 19th century. Both the heads of the ladders and the heads of the serpents are directed upwards.

Jacob is an impostor, a deceiver - for he lies three times to his father Isaac - twice about his own identity [Gn.27:19-24]. This defines him as fundamentally evil. Finally he usurps the position of his brother Esau. By this manoeuvre he restores his situation to that of his alias, Cain - becoming once again 'o prwtotokos' (the first-born). For he considers this to be his right and will recover it by any means, fair or foul.

And he takes (or is given) the name 'israhl' (Israel) [Gn.32:29; 35:10]. The name appears to be derived anagrammatically from the Hebrew words for a god and for a head :

Hebrew Script	Hebrew	Greek	English
	I.R.A	eiden	he saw
	R.A.SH	kefalh	head
	A.L	qeos	deity
	I.SH.R.A.L	israhl	= Israel

Presumably this 'head' [Gn.3:15] is once again the head of the deity which appears in the guise of a serpent [the god-head ?]. But then, in the story of Gn.27, Rebecca disguises him further - this time by 'placing the skins of goats upon his arms and upon the nakedness of his neck'. But do not miss the nuance. For the means chosen by Rebecca to make him seem hairy is to wrap him in goat skins - and in scripture the goat is also a token of evil [Lv.16:21] .

Now all this is only confirmed in the impressive tirade against idolatry at Isaiah Ch.44.

First, idolatry is defined:
23O 44 1 nun de akouson pais mou iakwb kai israhl on exelexamhn
23O 44 1 But now hear, my servant Jacob - and Israel whom I have singled out

23O 44 2 outws legei kurios o qeos o poihsas se kai o plasas se ek koilias eti bohqhqhsh mh fobou pais mou iakwb kai o hgaphmenos israhl on exelexamhn
23O 44 2 Thus says the lord god who made you and who formed you from (the) womb. You will be helped still further. Do not be afraid, my servant Jacob - and the beloved Israel whom I have singled out

23O 44 3 oti egw dwsw udwr en diyei tois poreuomenois en anudrw epiqhsw to pneuma mou epi to sperma sou kai tas eulogias mou epi ta tekna sou
23O 44 3 For I will give water to drink to those going in dry places. I will put my breath upon your seed - and my blessings upon your children

23O 44 4 kai anatelousin wsei cortos ana meson udatos kai ws itea epi pararreon udwr
23O 44 4 and they shall grow up like grass in the midst of water - and like a willow by flowing water

23O 44 5 outos erei tou qeou eimi kai outos bohsetai epi tw onomati iakwb kai eteros epigrayei tou qeou eimi epi tw onomati israhl
23O 44 5 This one will say "I am of God" - and this one will call loudly upon the name 'Jacob'. And another will inscribe "I am of God" upon the name 'Israel'.

23O 44 6 outws legei o qeos o basileus tou israhl o rusamenos auton qeos sabawq egw prwtos kai egw meta tauta plhn emou ouk estin qeos
23O 44 6 Thus says the god, the king of Israel, his redeemer, god Sabaoth : "I (am) FIRST - and I (am) AFTER THIS. Apart from me there is no god.

23O 44 7 tis wsper egw sthtw kalesatw kai etoimasatw moi af' ou epoihsa anqrwpon eis ton aiwna kai ta epercomena pro tou elqein anaggeilatwsan umin
23O 44 7 Who, as I shall remain, shall call - and shall prepare for me ? From whom did I make a person in antiquity ? And the coming things which are to come, let them be announced to you

23O 44 8 mh parakaluptesqe ouk ap' archs hnwtisasqe kai aphggeila umin martures umeis este ei estin qeos plhn emou kai ouk hsan tote
23O 44 8 Do not ignore (this). Did I not declare (it) to you from the beginning and announce (it) to you ? You are witnesses whether there is (any) god besides me. Then there was not. [There is no rock : I know of none.]"


Next, it is condemned as folly :
23O 44 9 oi plassontes kai glufontes pantes mataioi oi poiountes ta kataqumia autwn a ouk wfelhsei autous alla aiscunqhsontai
23O 44 9 Those fashioning and carving (are) all vanity, those making what is in their mind - which will not reward them. But they will be put to shame

23O 44 10 pantes oi plassontes qeon kai glufontes anwfelh
23O 44 10 All those fashioning a god and carving go unrewarded

23O 44 11 kai pantes oqen egenonto exhranqhsan kai kwfoi apo anqrwpwn sunacqhtwsan pantes kai sthtwsan ama entraphtwsan kai aiscunqhtwsan ama
23O 44 11 All arising from that withered up. And (the) deaf amongst persons, let them all be gathered together - and let them stand up. As soon as they pay reverence then let them be put to shame

23O 44 12 oti wxunen tektwn sidhron skeparnw eirgasato auto kai en teretrw etrhsen auto eirgasato auto en tw bracioni ths iscuos autou kai peinasei kai asqenhsei kai ou mh pih udwr eklexamenos
23O 44 12 For the workman sharpened iron, he worked it with an adze and bored it with a gimlet. He worked it with the arm of his strength. But you will be hungry and you will be weak - and you will certainly not drink water which has been 'singled out'

23O 44 13 tektwn xulon esthsen auto en metrw kai en kollh erruqmisen auto epoihsen auto ws morfhn andros kai ws wraiothta anqrwpou sthsai auto en oikw
23O 44 13 The workman stood up the wood, with a ruler and with glue he brought it into proportion. He made it like the shape of a man and like the beauty of a person. He will stand it in a house.

23O 44 14 o ekoyen xulon ek tou drumou o efuteusen kurios kai uetos emhkunen
23O 44 14 He cuts down wood from the forest. So he plants a 'lord' - and a downpour makes (it) grow

23O 44 15 ina h anqrwpois eis kausin kai labwn ap' autou eqermanqh kai kausantes epeyan artous ep' autwn to de loipon eirgasanto eis qeous kai proskunousin autous
23O 44 15 so that it may be for persons to burn. And taking some of it, he keeps warm. Kindling it, they bake bread upon it. But the remainder they worked into gods - and worshipped them

23O 44 16 ou to hmisu autou katekausan en puri kai kausantes epeyan artous ep' autwn kai ep' autou kreas opthsas efagen kai eneplhsqh kai qermanqeis eipen hdu moi oti eqermanqhn kai eidon pur
23O 44 16 Half of it they burn in (the) fire and, kindling, they bake bread upon it - and upon it he ate roast meat and was filled. And keeping warm, he says "Let me rejoice that I was kept warm and that I saw a fire".

23O 44 17 to de loipon epoihsen eis qeon glupton kai proskunei autw kai proseucetai legwn exelou me oti qeos mou ei su
23O 44 17 The remainder of it he makes into a carved god and worships to it - and he prays, saying "Set me free - for you are my god".

23O 44 18 ouk egnwsan fronhsai oti aphmaurwqhsan tou blepein tois ofqalmois autwn kai tou nohsai th kardia autwn
23O 44 18 They do not know how to think. For they have been darkened for seeing with the eyes and for understanding with their heart
Note: You may have been able to make out concealed within those eyes, 'ofis' (a serpent) [see Ex.4:3; 7:15; then Rv.12:9; 20:2]
- and reversed within their heart, 'drakwn' (a dragon) [see Ex.7:9-10; then again Rv.12:9; 20:2].
This one is 'diabolos kai o satanas' (a devil and satan) [Rv.12:9; 20:2].
See also Is.6:9-10; Mt.13:15; Jn.12:40; Ac.28:27.

23O 44 19 kai ouk elogisato th kardia autou oude anelogisato en th yuch autou oude egnw th fronhsei oti to hmisu autou katekausen en puri kai epeyen epi twn anqrakwn autou artous kai opthsas kreas efagen kai to loipon autou eis bdelugma epoihsen kai proskunousin autw
23O 44 19 And he did not reason with his heart - nor figure in his soul - nor did he know with his thinking. Because half of it he burned in a fire - and he baked bread upon its coals - and he ate roast meat. And the remainder of it he made into an abomination and worshipped to it !
Note: Remember Jn.21:9 ? "So when they went from (the boat) onto the earth they saw coals laid - and fish laid upon (them) - and bread".
Then these are the fiery coals of hell - as identified at Is.6:6 ? And the remainder of it they made into an abomination - and worshipped to it !

23O 44 20 gnwte oti spodos h kardia autwn kai planwntai kai oudeis dunatai exelesqai thn yuchn autou idete ouk ereite oti yeudos en th dexia mou
23O 44 20 Know that their heart (is) ashes and they are deceived - and not one is able to liberate his soul. Look !  Will you not say that (there is) a ' lie ' within my ' right hand ' ?
Note: "And from now on it will be the 'son of man' seated at the right hand of the power of god" [Lk.22:69].

11.3.2 The Strap of his Sandal

Here is the source text in the gospel attributed to John :

43N 1 26 apekriqh autois o iwannhs legwn egw baptizw en udati mesos umwn esthken on umeis ouk oidate
43N 1 26 John answered them saying "I baptize in water. In your midst has stood (one) whom you do not know

43N 1 27 o opisw mou ercomenos ou ouk eimi [egw] axios ina lusw autou ton imanta tou upodhmatos
43N 1 27 - the one coming behind me, of whom I AM [  I ] not worthy that I should loose the strap of his sandal"

43N 1 28 tauta en bhqania egeneto peran tou iordanou opou hn o iwannhs baptizwn
43N 1 28 These things within Bethany, it happened beyond the Jordan - where John was baptizing

Now for some observations :

1. The word 'legwn' (saying) appears three times within the first chapter of this gospel - at Jn.1:15, here at 1:26 and finally at 1:32. The ariqmos (number value) of this word = 888, the same as that for the name 'ihsous' (Jesus). Moreover the noun 'logos' (logos) is derived from the same verb 'legw' (I say). So with 'John answered them saying ...', the author at once evokes both the 'logos' and the name 'Jesus' itself.
   
   
2. "In your midst has stood one whom you do not know". This is a manifest riddle. It suggests he has been stood there all along - but even so "you do not know him". You see him - but in unfamiliar guise you do not recognise him.
   
   Now look at the phrase 'o opisw mou ercomenos' (the one coming behind me). Let us begin to take it apart - for in this way it may be possible to expose further the identity of this mysterious figure.

   
   First, the word 'ercomenos' is an anagram source for 'cronos' (Chronos; Kronos). Scripture is filled with enigmatic references to the parameters of the deity Kronos :

   • 'cronos' (Time) : see the digram 'cr' for 'cristos' (Christ)
   • 'kairwn' (of Seasons) : hear the letters 'c ... r' for 'cristos' (Christ)
   • 'wra' (Hour) : see 'rw' (reversed) for 'cr'
   • 'hmera' (Day) : which is the name assigned to 'The Light' [defined at Gn.1:5 - and at Jn.1:4-5 linked to the 'logos']
     - and is linked to Cain [Gn.4:3; 4:14].

   
   Next, opisw (behind) has the ariqmos (number value) = 1160. But this is also the ariqmos for 'o cronos' (Chronos; Kronos). The technique used here is 'arithmetic translation' (isopsephia).
   
   This particular example seems to originate in LXX Genesis. For at Gn.8:8 Noah - having sent off the raven - then 'apesteilen thn peristeran opisw autou' (sent off the pigeon behind it). And from this it would appear that the pigeon is the bird associated with the Greek deity Kronos - who was Roman Saturn, 'the sower', equipped with a sickle or scythe, god of the harvest, in medieval times represented as the 'grim reaper'.
   
   To understand this better, take a look at www.mythology.com/cronus.html where the attributes of Kronos are set out. The information given there clearly overlaps with the early chapters of Genesis, beginning with 'heaven and earth' [Gn.1:1] as being the 'parents' of Kronos. And Kronos as a Titan [see Gn.6:4] was held to be the father of Zeus and his siblings. The link with 'kourouna' (the crow; rook) is perhaps confused. But it would appear from Chapter 8 of 'Genesis' - as well as from the gospels - that (at least in scripture) it is 'peristera' (the pigeon), eating cereal crops as food, which is associated with KRONOS (the sower) - then with NOAH - and ultimately with 'JESUS the Nazarene'.
   
   The link is the (sometimes excessive) production and/or consumption of 'fruits of the earth', of cereals, of bread, of grapes and of wine. At Gn.1:29-30 it is defined which creatures shall eat these foods. Then at Gn.4:3 CAIN is the one who brings food of this kind - as his 'sacrifice'. From which it should be clear that he is the 'male and female' person 'made in the image and in the likeness of God' at Gn.1:27 - who will 'fill the earth and LORD over it' [Gn.1:28].
   
   And of course 'peristeras' (pigeons) is itself an anagram source for 'o speiras' (the sower).
   
   Whilst 'alektwr' (the cockerel) which announces 'wra' (the hour) - and which crows at Peter's 'denial' - is another bird with a cereal diet and the attributes of a clock. It is mentioned 12 (or 13) times within the four gospels, so clearly of some importance. Its anagram source is 'spekoulatwr' (a scout; a spy) - whose spelling is also linked to that of 'o speiras' (the sower). This is the one commanded to bring back the head of John the Baptist : indeed he is the executioner [Mk.6:27].
   
   But 'o speiras' is defined at Mt.13:39 to be 'the enemy' (ie. satan) and 'the devil'. And then 'o speiras' has ariqmos = 666 - and this is defined at Rv.13:18 to be 'ton ariqmon tou qhriou' (the number of the beast). This scheme is certainly as clever as it is comprehensive. Have I summarised it adequately ?
   
   

3. Now for the 'strap of his sandal'. This reference to sandals also arises in all three synoptic gospels - with some variation.

   
   At Mk.1:7 and Lk.3:16 we have :
   ... ou ouk eimi ikanos [kuyas] lusai ton imanta twn upodhmatwn autou

   ... of whom I am not competent [stooping] to loose the strap of his sandals

   
   but in John we get :

   ... ou ouk eimi [egw] axios ina lusw autou ton imanta tou upodhmatos

   ... of whom [  I ] AM not worthy that I should loose the strap of his sandal

   
   In 'John', in place of 'ikanos' (competent), we have 'axios' (worthy) - with an 'x' which has the ariqmos (number value) = 60 .

   
   Avoiding any suggestion of incompetence, the author of the fourth gospel perhaps implies that indeed he is competent to unravel what has been knotted up here. So instead he assesses himself 'not worthy'.

   
   For look who is here! In the synoptics is 'kain' (Cain) concealed within the word 'ikanos' (competent) [Mt.3:11; Mk1:7; Lk3:16]. Then the one with the sandals must be Cain ?

   
   And will John now 'stoop' to him ? This is the question. At Mt.4:9 the devil says :

   
   ... tauta soi panta dwsw ean peswn proskunhshs moi

   ... I will give you all these things if, falling (down), you will worship me

   
   Then we notice that in the fourth gospel there is a textual variant '[ egw ]' ( I ) which provides for us to hear the phrase 'eimi egw' ( AM I ) . This is first used in scripture by Cain when he declares [Gn.4:9] :

   
   ... ou ginwskw mh fulax tou adelfou mou eimi egw

   ... I do not know : AM I my brother's keeper ?

   
   It echoes repeatedly through the gospels, the trade-mark phrase of Cain.

   
   But allegory in this encounter takes us directly from the gospels to Gn.14:22-23 - where Abram encounters one identified explicitly as 'basilea sodomwn' (king of Sodom). There Abram hesitates to take anything from him 'from a string up to (the) thong of a sandal'. It is there apparent that 'melcisedek' (Melchizedek) is merely an alias for the 'king of Sodom' (see Chapter 8 of this text, Section 8.2). The 'king of Sodom' appears to be also Noah [Gn.9:20-24].
   
   So, in his professed incompetence - or unworthiness - to loose the strap of Jesus' sandal, John identifies Jesus with the 'king of Sodom', with Noah, with Melchizedek himself.

   
   
   
4. Now looking at the third verse, we see that the ariqmos of the non-existent place name 'bhqania' (Bethany) is 81 - and that it is 'beyond the Jordan'. But 81 (being the fourth power of three) is also the ariqmos for 'kain' (Cain). Here is yet another instance of isopsephia - and in addition 'bhqania' contains also three of the four letters in the name 'kain' itself.

   
   Finally, the reference to 'beyond the Jordan' hints at something 'from the east'. And in scripture what goes to - or comes from - the 'east' is likely to be undesirable eg. in what 'god' says to Abram at Gn.13:14 :

   
   anableyas tois ofqalmois sou ide apo tou topou ou nun su ei
   pros borran kai liba kai anatolas kai qalassan

   Looking up with your eyes : look from the place, at which you now are,
   to the north (wind), to the south (wind), to the east and to the sea

   
   And (looking up) there you see :

   
   - Within the 'eyes', 'ofis' (a serpent)

   - Within the 'east', 'satana' (Gk. spelling : satan)

   - Within the 'sea' 'saqan' (Hebr. spelling : sathan)

   
   This treatment is echoed at LXX Ezk.8:5 .

11.3.3 His 'Spitter' in his Hand

Here is the source text from Luke (Mt.3:12 is similar) :

42N 3 16 apekrinato legwn pasin o iwannhs egw men udati baptizw umas ercetai de o iscuroteros mou ou ouk eimi ikanos lusai ton imanta twn upodhmatwn autou autos umas baptisei en pneumati agiw kai puri
42N 3 16 John answered, saying to (them) all "I baptise you with water. But one is coming who is mightier than I - of whom I am not competent to loose the strap of his sandals. He will baptise you within a holy spirit and with fire

42N 3 17 ou to ptuon en th ceiri autou diakaqarai thn alwna autou kai sunagagein ton siton eis thn apoqhkhn autou to de acuron katakausei puri asbestw
42N 3 17 - whose 'spitter' [alt: winnower] (is) in his hand. He may clean up his threshing floor - even to gather the wheat into his store. But he will burn down the chaff with unquenchable fire

1. Now the word 'ptuon' is a neuter participle of the verb 'ptuw' (I spit). It evokes also the verb 'ptow' (I terrify) [see Lk.21:9]. So the literal meaning is 'a spitter' - but there may be a suggestion also of fear. A derived meaning of 'ptuon' is a technical term, the 'winnower' used to separate the grain from the chaff. In our age this is a component of a combine harvester - and it is clear from the context that this is one of the ideas that the author has in mind here. But what else is he getting at ?
   
   Notice that the text may equally be read "He will baptise you with a holy spirit and with fire - for which the spitter (is) in his hand". So can this 'fire' make use of a 'spitter' ? Well, yes. If a 'spitter' can be used to 'blow' the chaff from the grain then it can be used to 'blow up' the fire for the 'baptism'. Do you follow ?
   
   So this may be a real 'baptism of fire'. And within the context of scripture the 'fire' in question is likely to be from the 'fires of hell' - as for example 'anqraka' (a live coal) which in Isaiah the seraph holds 'en th ceiri' (in his hand) [Is.6:6]. Indeed the exact phrase 'en th ceiri' is repeated in the verse we are considering here [Lk.3:17].

   
   Equally this 'fire' may be that from the tongue of the serpent - as in James :

   
   59N 3 6 kai h glwssa pur o kosmos ths adikias h glwssa kaqistatai en tois melesin hmwn h spilousa olon to swma kai flogizousa ton trocon ths genesews kai flogizomenh upo ths geennhs
   59N 3 6 And the tongue (is a) fire. The tongue proves to be the world of iniquity among our members. It stains the whole body and, setting fire to the course of 'Genesis', it is also set on fire by Gehenna [ie: by hell]
   
   Note: The participle 'flogizousa' (setting fire) is a single word anagram source not only for 'o ofis' (the serpent) [Gn.3:1] but also for 'logos' ( 'logos' ) [Jn.1:1] and for 'ozias' (Ozias the king) [Is.6:1].

   
   
   
2. The word 'ptuon' incorporates the digram 'pt' which first appears at Gn.1:21 in the tongue-twister 'pan peteinon pterwton' (every winged bird). It then occurs at Gn.1:23 in 'hmera pempth' (the fifth day) - and at Gn.4:15; 4:24 (in connection with the curses upon Cain and upon Lamech) as 'epta' (seven) and as 'eptakis' (sevenfold). For in Greek the two numbers in the range 1-10 which make use of the letters 'p .. t' are the numbers 5 and 7.
   
   And you will perhaps remember the number of pieces of bread in the stories of 'the bread and the fish' (see Chapters 3 & 6).

   
   And notice that the ariqmos (number value) of :

   'pentakis' (fivefold) = 666

   whereas that of :

   'eptakis' (sevenfold) is = 616

   
   At Rv.13:18 'ton ariqmon tou qhriou' (the number of the beast) is given as 'exakosioi exhkonta ex' = 666, this being the ariqmos (number value) of 'o speiras' (the one sowing) at Mt.13:39. But the number 666 (and its textual variant 616) yield also the numerical adverbs 'fivefold' and 'sevenfold'.

   
   

   Now you may begin to see why it was that at Lk.4:20 :

   ... pantwn oi ofqalmoi en th sunagwgh hsan atenizontes autw

   ... the eyes of all in the synagogue were staring at him

   
   They may have been a little disconcerted - for Jesus (after reading from 'Isaiah') had :

   ... ptuxas to biblion

   ... folded the book

   
   The digram 'pt' also features in the 'heel over head' curse upon the serpent at Gn.3:15 :

   ... autos sou thrhsei kefalhn kai su thrhseis autou pternan

   ... he will watch you for a head - and you will watch him for a heel

   
   And of course it features in the verb 'baptizw' (I baptise) which occurs twice in the first of the two verses we are considering here [Lk.3:16].

   
   
   
3. The second verse here is clearly a 'sower' text. As such it very likely refers to those who produce or consume 'fruits of the earth' ie. Cain, Noah, Melchizedek - and (from the context) Jesus.
   
   Notice that 'alwna' (a threshing floor) evokes 'o kurios tou ampelwnos (the lord of the vineyard) [=> Noah at Gn.9:20; also Mt.20:8, 21:40; Mk.12:9; Lk.20:13, 20:15].
   
   And it evokes 'o telwnhs' (the tax collector) [=> Melchizedek at Gn.14:18-24 - who is Noah, the 'king of Sodom'].
   
   And 'siton' (wheat) has surely a suggestion about it of 'satanas' (satan) himself ?

11.3.4 A Pigeon from Heaven

Here is the witness of John :

John :
43N 1 32 kai emarturhsen iwannhs legwn oti teqeamai to pneuma katabainon ws peristeran ex ouranou kai emeinen ep auton
43N 1 32 And John testified, saying that "I have made out the spirit going down like a pigeon out of heaven - and it remained upon him

43N 1 33 kagw ouk hdein auton all o pemyas me baptizein en udati ekeinos moi eipen ef on an idhs to pneuma katabainon kai menon ep auton outos estin o baptizwn en pneumati agiw
43N 1 33 And I did not know him, but he who sent me to baptise in water, that one said to me `On whoever you will see the spirit going down - and remaining upon him - this is he who baptises in a holy spirit`.

43N 1 34 kagw ewraka kai memarturhka oti outos estin o uios tou qeou
43N 1 34 And I have seen - and I have testified that this is the son of God".

1. At the start of this text appears the name of the witness. It is 'iwannhs' (John). The very next word is 'legwn' (saying). The ariqmos (number value) of 'legwn' is 888. This is also the ariqmos of the name 'ihsous' (Jesus) [contrast 888 here with 666 discussed in the previous section].
   
   And this is no accident. For the noun 'logos' (speech; what is to be said) itself corresponds with the verb 'legw' (I say). And (as we realise from Jn.1:1 & Jn.1:14) the writer has already configured Jesus as 'o logos' (the 'logos'). The author(s) of a script such as this were practised in the art of 'filling their prose with meaning'.
   
   Indeed this is the third time this riddle has been implemented in this gospel - for the participle 'legwn' has been 'exercised' twice already - at Jn.1:15 and at Jn.1:26 (see section 11.3.2 above). And if you look there you will see that in each case John speaks of Jesus. But by Jn.4:10 the writer has Jesus himself using the word 'legwn' in reference to his own identity, a pattern sustained to the end of the gospel.
   
   
2. In Hebrew - and in Greek - the same word is used for a 'dove' as for a 'pigeon'. No distinction is drawn. The Greek equivalent for the Hebrew word is 'iwna' (Jonah) - and the Greek is 'peristera'. Here I shall translate it as 'pigeon'.
   
   
3. Now why was this particular spirit :

   ... katabainon ws peristeran ex ouranou

   ... going down like a pigeon out of heaven ?

   
   If you are a keen bird watcher you may have spotted there the preposition 'ex'. Its meaning is 'out of' - but it is also the number 6. And perhaps you made out 'kain' (Cain) concealed within the word 'katabainon' (going down).

   
   For Cain goes down to 'work the earth' [Gn.4:12]. And, as with Noah's pigeon at its second return [Gn.8:11], he brings (as a sacrifice for 'the lord') 'fruits of the earth' [Gn.4:3].

   
   But Noah's pigeon brought back something fairly interesting. For in

   ... fullon elaias karfos

   ... a fragment of olive leaf

   
   you may identify 'ofis' (a serpent).

   
   And in 'karfos' (the fragment) this serpent does seem to have become mixed up (but backwards) with 'koraka' (the raven) which was sent out before the pigeon [Gn.8:7].

   
   Then by this 'egnw nwe' (Noah knew) "that the water has abated from the earth" [Gn.8:11]. For the pigeon (which was sent out behind) appeared now to have overtaken the raven.

   
   And the third time the pigeon was sent out [Gn.8:12] :

   ... ou proseqeto tou epistreyai pros auton eti

   ... it did not add returning to him any more

   
   This verb 'prostiqhmi' (I add) was last used in connection with the birth of Abel [Gn.4:2]. Abel was a 'herdsman of flocks'.

   
   Early in the Elohistic creation sequence at Gn.1:6 we hear the 'logos' :

   genhqhtw sterewma en mesw tou udatos kai estw diacwrizon ana meson udatos kai udatos

   "Let a space happen in the midst of the water, and let it be a divider amidst water and water"

   
   'sterewma' is the Greek word used for the 'space' which is configured in the midst of the water. Then we find that the 'pigeon' which Noah releases during the flood is 'peristera' - so perhaps this is the space in which the pigeon flies ?

   
   
4. Next we notice that concealed within the Hebrew name 'iwna' is the digram 'wn' - which appears to be the 'sign of the son of man' (see Chapter 7, section 7.4, #8). And 'to shmeion iwna' (the sign of Jonah) is cited at Mt.12:39, 16:4; Lk.11:29-30. The latter goes like this :

   
   42N 11 30 kaqws gar egeneto iwnas tois nineuitais shmeion outws estai kai o uios tou anqrwpou th genea tauth

   42N 11 30 For just as Jonah became a sign to the Ninevites, so will be also the son of man to this generation

   
   This makes a further explicit link between 'iwna' (the pigeon) and the 'son of man' (who is evidently Jesus).

   
   
5. And we remember that 'peristeras' (pigeons) is an anagram source for 'speiras' (one sowing) [as at Mt.13:39].
   
   So the 'pigeon' seems to be the bird associated with 'the sower'. Then there is a further sense in which this would be appropriate - for such birds are in reality adapted to a cereal diet. But other indications suggest that Jesus is 'the sower'. Thus far the pieces of this puzzle fit quite remarkably well.
   
   
6. Now we are told :

   ... kai emeinen ep auton

   ... and it remained upon him

   
   Perhaps this is only what we should expect - for if this was Noah's pigeon on its third trip then it never did return to the ark. And do we now see why this was ? For perhaps it was the very one which John saw 'going down upon Jesus and remaining upon him'.

   
   The word 'emeina' (I remained; I wished for; I was dumbfounded) has significant use in the gospel of John. Then it appears three times at Is.5:2-7 in connection with the production of grapes from the 'vineyard' belonging to 'o kurios sabawq' (the lord sabaoth) [Is.5:7]. This can be the vineyard of Noah [see Gn.9:20] - perhaps evoked in the NT texts by the use of the word 'emeinen'.

   
   
   
7. And what is the link between 'peristera' (a pigeon) and the 'sterea' (solid) food which is mentioned at Heb.5:14 ? Is this food for the pigeon itself ?

   
   58N 5 13 pas gar o metecwn galaktos apeiros logou dikaiosunhs nhpios gar estin

   58N 5 13 For each one who partakes of milk (is) inexperienced in the 'logos' of righteousness - for he is an infant

   
   58N 5 14 teleiwn de estin h sterea trofh twn dia thn exin ta aisqhthria gegumnasmena econtwn pros diakrisin kalou te kai kakou

   58N 5 14 But 'completing' is the solid food for those (who) through habit have the senses exercised towards the discernment both of good - and of evil

   
   Can you discern 'kalou' (good) from 'kakou' (evil) - when all that differs is a single letter ?
   
   Now surely that was the serpent exercising 'gumnos' (naked) ? And perhaps you discerned 'kain' (Cain) there too ?
   
   And what of 'sterea trofh' (solid food) ? Did I glimpse once more 'ofis' (a serpent) ? And was it somehow connected with 'peristera' (a pigeon) ?

   
   
   
8. At Jn.1:34 we hear John the Baptist say :

   
   43N 1 34 kagw ewraka kai memarturhka oti outos estin o uios tou qeou

   43N 1 34 "And I have seen - and I have testified that this is the son of God"

   
   The word 'ewraka' (I have seen) is perhaps reminiscent of 'koraka' (the raven) which Noah first sends at Gn.8:7. Then John himself may be that 'raven' - and Jesus the 'pigeon'.

   
   
   

In conclusion, we may consider the riddles at Mt.10:16 :

40N 10 16 idou egw apostellw umas ws probata en mesw lukwn ginesqe oun fronimoi ws oi ofeis kai akeraioi ws ai peristerai

40N 10 16 Look, I send you away like a flock in the midst of wolves. Then become virtuous like the serpents - and guileless like the pigeons.

There once again is the connection drawn between the serpent and the pigeon. And we may sense a measure of irony here - with a strong anagram component in the respective adjectives applied to these creatures [ see also Gn.3:1 for the attributes of the serpent ].

11.3.5 The Lamb of God

In the fourth gospel, John the Baptist makes two references to Jesus as 'the lamb of God' :

43N 1 29 th epaurion blepei ton ihsoun ercomenon pros auton kai legei ide o amnos tou qeou o airwn thn amartian tou kosmou

43N 1 29 On the next day he saw Jesus coming towards him and said "Look, the lamb of God, the one raising the sin of the world"

.....
43N 1 35 th epaurion palin eisthkei o iwannhs kai ek twn maqhtwn autou duo

43N 1 35 On the next day, again John was standing - and two from his learners

43N 1 36 kai embleyas tw ihsou peripatounti legei ide o amnos tou qeou

43N 1 36 and, staring at Jesus' walking about, he said "Look, the lamb of God"

Here are some attributes of 'amnos' (a lamb) :

1. The number value of 'amnos' = 361 = 19².
   Then compare 'kain' (Cain) = 81 = 9².
   
   
2. Some other words in the Greek NT with the same number value (isopsephia) are :

   • 'sarx' (flesh) - used to betoken that of 'satanas' (satan) with which it shares the first two letters [see Chapters 3 & 6]
   • 'andreas' (Andrew)

   
   

And here are some attributes of 'o amnos' (the lamb) :

1. The number value of 'o amnos' = 431.
   This is (another) prime number [ 'oti prwtos mou hn' : see Jn.1:15; 1:30 ].
   
   
2. Some other GNT words with the same number value (isopsephia) are :

   • 'planos' (a deceiver) [Mt.27:63; 2Jn.1:7]
   • 'markos' (Mark) [Col.4:10; 1P.5:13]
   • 'anomos' (lawless one) [1Cor.9:21; 2Th.2:8]

   
   
3. 'anomos' (lawless one) is a full anagram of 'o amnos' (the lamb). As this does not escape my notice, I would not expect it to have escaped that of the authors.

   
   2 Thessalonians :
   53N 2 8 kai tote apokalufqhsetai o anomos on o kurios [ihsous] anelei tw pneumati tou stomatos autou kai katarghsei th epifaneia ths parousias autou

   53N 2 8 And then he will be revealed, the lawless one whom the lord [Jesus] will raise up [alt: carry off; kill] through the breath [alt: the spirit] of his (own) mouth - and will make redundant through the manifestation of his (own) presence

   53N 2 9 ou estin h parousia kat energeian tou satana en pash dunamei kai shmeiois kai terasin yeudous

   53N 2 9 Of whom the presence is according to the working of satan in all power and signs - and freak phenomena of falsehood

   
   Note :

   • Prima facie : 'ofis' (a serpent) revealed within 'apokalufqhsetai' (he will be revealed).
   • Associated : 'o amnos' (the lamb) concealed within 'anomos' (lawless one).
   • Associated : The manifestation ... of the presence ... of the lord Jesus
   • Associated : 'satanas' (satan) ... and the works thereof (which at baptism/confirmation some have promised to reject)

   
   'o anomos' (the lawless one) is presumably a reference to 'o ofis' (the serpent) [Gn.3:1] and/or to 'kain' (Cain) [Gn.4:8].

   
   Arithmetic is always interesting. Look :

   • 'kain' [ 81 ] + 'sp' [ 280 ] = 'amnos' [ 361 ].
   • 'sp' is the start of the title 'o speiras' [ 666 ] (the one sowing)
     [see Mt.13:39; Rv.13:18].

   
   
   

Here are some other places where we can find 'amnos' (a lamb) concealed :

1 Timothy :
54N 1 20 wn estin umenaios kai alexandros ous paredwka tw satana ina paideuqwsin mh blasfhmein

54N 1 20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander - whom I handed over to satan, that they might be taught not to blaspheme

Note :

• Prima facie : 'amnos' (a lamb) concealed within 'umenaios' (Hymenaeus)
• Prima facie : 'sarx' (flesh) concealed within 'alexandros' (Alexander)
• Associated : 'satana' (satan) - explicit

2 Timothy :
55N 2 17 kai o logos autwn ws gaggraina nomhn exei wn estin umenaios kai filhtos

55N 2 17 And their 'logos' will have pasture [ Law: usufruct ] like gangrene, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus

Note :

• Prima facie : 'o logos' ( the 'logos' ) explicit [see Jn.1:1 seq.]
• Associated : 'amnos' (a lamb) concealed within 'umenaios' (Hymenaeus)
• Associated : 'ofis' (a serpent) concealed within 'filhtos' (Philetus)

Hebrews :
58N 9 4 crusoun ecousa qumiathrion kai thn kibwton ths diaqhkhs perikekalummenhn pantoqen crusiw en h stamnos crush ecousa to manna kai h rabdos aarwn h blasthsasa kai ai plakes ths diaqhkhs

58N 9 4 Having a golden thurible and the ark of the covenant covered all over with gold, in which was a golden pot holding the manna, and the rod of Aaron which budded - and the tablets of the covenant

Note :

• 'man' or 'manna' (manna) is anagrammatically linked with 'o stamnos' (the pot) in which it is kept
• 'amnos' (a lamb) is evident WITHIN 'o stamnos' (the pot) - which is just where we expect to find the 'manna'.

So is 'the lamb' to be identified with 'the manna' ?

Dt.8:3 :
... kai eywmisen se to manna o ouk eidhsan oi pateres sou'
... and he fed you (pieces of) the manna - the one your fathers did not recognise

Now we may guess that there is a link of some kind between this 'lamb of God' and the ram which Abraham finds - caught by its horns in a bush.

First the question posed [Gn.22:7] :

... pou estin to probaton to eis olokarpwsin

... Where is the sheep [alt: the goat] - the one for the whole-fruit (offering) ?

And do you see 'ka_in' (Cain) - hidden within the whole-fruit ?

And then we get this [Gn.22:13] :

... kai anableyas abraam tois ofqalmois autou eiden

... and Abraham, looking up with his eyes, saw ...

And now, looking up with your own eyes, do you see 'of_is' (a serpent) concealed there ?

... kai idou krios eis katecomenos en futw sabek twn keratwn

... and look ! One ram held down within a sabek plant by the horns

'krios' (a ram) shares three of its letters with 'ofis' (a serpent) - whilst the remaining letter 'f' (which itself has 'two horns') may be found 'held down' within 'futw' (a plant) ?

And could 'krios ... en futw sab...' (this ram ... in a sabek plant) be one with 'kurios sabawq' (the lord sabaoth) [as referred to in the book of Isaiah] ? Abraham then brought it as a whole-fruit (offering) in exchange for Isaac, his son.

Picture Credit : University Museum, Philadelphia

And no sooner is this last question asked than it is answered in the very next verse [Gn.22:14] :

... kai ekalesen abraam to onoma tou topou ekeinou kurios eiden

... and Abraham called the name of that place "I recognised a lord"

And 'krios' (a ram) has ariqmos (number value) = 400
... the same as both 'oinos' (wine) and 'oxos' (vinegar).

Luke :
42N 23 36 enepaixan de autw kai oi stratiwtai prosercomenoi oxos prosferontes autw
42N 23 36 And they made fun of him - even the soldiers, coming up, bringing vinegar for him

Now where were we ? Yes, the lamb ...

At Jn.1:36 we have :

43N 1 36 kai embleyas tw ihsou peripatounti legei ide o amnos tou qeou

43N 1 36 and staring at Jesus' walking about, he said "Look, the lamb of God"

But what could he have been staring at ? It was just 'tw ihsou peripatounti' (Jesus' walking about). What could have attracted the attention of John ?

Well, it is usual for a lamb to walk about on four legs - which (in this context) is of considerable consequence :

For at Gn.1:24-28 we have :

01O 1 24 kai eipen o qeos exagagetw h gh yuchn zwsan kata genos tetrapoda kai erpeta kai qhria ths ghs kata genos kai egeneto outws

01O 1 24 And God said "Let the earth bring forth a living soul after a four-footed kind - and creeping things and wild beasts of the earth after (their) kind" : and it happened like this

01O 1 25 kai epoihsen o qeos ta qhria ths ghs kata genos kai ta kthnh kata genos kai panta ta erpeta ths ghs kata genos autwn kai eiden o qeos oti kala

01O 1 25 And (firstly) God made the wild beasts of the earth after (their) kind, and the pastoral beasts after (their) kind, and all the creeping things of the earth after their kind. And God saw them as good

01O 1 26 kai eipen o qeos poihswmen anqrwpon kat' eikona hmeteran kai kaq' omoiwsin kai arcetwsan twn icquwn ths qalasshs kai twn peteinwn tou ouranou kai twn kthnwn kai pashs ths ghs kai pantwn twn erpetwn twn erpontwn epi ths ghs

01O 1 26 And (next) God said, "Let us make a person in our image and in (our) likenesses : and let them rule over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over the pastoral beasts, and over all the earth - and over all the creeping things which creep upon the earth"

01O 1 27 kai epoihsen o qeos ton anqrwpon kat' eikona qeou epoihsen auton arsen kai qhlu epoihsen autous

01O 1 27 And God made the person. In the image of God he made him. Male and female (ie. androgynous) he made them.

01O 1 28 kai huloghsen autous o qeos legwn auxanesqe kai plhqunesqe kai plhrwsate thn ghn kai katakurieusate auths kai arcete twn icquwn ths qalasshs kai twn peteinwn tou ouranou kai pantwn twn kthnwn kai pashs ths ghs kai pantwn twn erpetwn twn erpontwn epi ths ghs

01O 1 28 And God blessed them, saying "Grow and multiply, fill the earth and lord over it. Rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky - and over all the pastoral beasts and over all the earth - and over all the creeping things which creep upon the earth"

11.3.6 Jesus Baptised

Matthew :

40N 3 13 tote paraginetai o ihsous apo ths galilaias epi ton iordanhn pros ton iwannhn tou baptisqhnai up autou

40N 3 13 Then Jesus went too far from Galilee - over the Jordan to John, to be baptized under him

40N 3 14 o de iwannhs diekwluen auton legwn egw creian ecw upo sou baptisqhnai kai su erch pros me

40N 3 14 But John was preventing him, saying "I have a need to be baptized under you - and (yet) you come to me"

40N 3 15 apokriqeis de o ihsous eipen pros auton afes arti outws gar prepon estin hmin plhrwsai pasan dikaiosunhn tote afihsin auton

40N 3 15 But Jesus, answering, said to him "Permit it just now. For like this it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness". Then he permitted him.

I shall not comment upon this other than to say that in the light of the foregoing you may appreciate the reason for the reluctance of John.

11.3.7 Jesus speaks of John

This is what Jesus says about John :

1. Matthew [similar at Lk.7:24] :

   40N 11 7 toutwn de poreuomenwn hrxato o ihsous legein tois oclois peri iwannou ti exhlqate eis thn erhmon qeasasqai kalamon upo anemou saleuomenon

   40N 11 7 But as these were going, Jesus began to say to the crowds concerning John "What did you go out into the desert to see ? A reed stirred with a wind ?

   
   Note : Did you see the anagrams there ?

   • The last 5 letters of 'anemou' (wind) are mirrored within 'saleuomenon' (stirred)
     
     
   • Can we find 'amnos' (a lamb) in 'saleuomenon' (stirred) ?
     
     
   • 'kalamon' (a reed; a cane; a pen) is almost an anagram of 'kamhlon' (a camel) - which one might reasonably expect to see 'in the desert'
     
     

   These things (lamb; camel; cane; pen) are associated with Jesus; Jacob; Judah - not, I think, with John.

   
   
2. Matthew [similar at Lk.7:28] :

   40N 11 11 amhn legw umin ouk eghgertai en gennhtois gunaikwn meizwn iwannou tou baptistou o de mikroteros en th basileia twn ouranwn meizwn autou estin

   40N 11 11 Truly I say to you, there has not arisen within those born of women one greater than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he

   
   40N 11 12 apo de twn hmerwn iwannou tou baptistou ews arti h basileia twn ouranwn biazetai kai biastai arpazousin authn

   40N 11 12 But from the days of John the Baptist until just now, the kingdom of the heavens acts with force - and the violent ones carry it off

   
   40N 11 13 pantes gar oi profhtai kai o nomos ews iwannou eprofhteusan

   40N 11 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John
   .....
   40N 11 18 hlqen gar iwannhs mhte esqiwn mhte pinwn kai legousin daimonion ecei

   40N 11 18 For John came neither eating nor drinking - and they say he has a demon.

   
   Note: See also Lk.1:15; 7:33 - where it becomes entirely clear that it is primary (vegetable) foods - such as bread and intoxicating wine - that John does not consume. His preference for secondary foods (locusts, honey at Mt.3:4; Mk.1:6) marks him out as the polar opposite of Jesus. And, keeping in mind the dietary preferences set out in Genesis Chapters 1-4 and 25-27, we are left to assess which of these two characters, John and Jesus, is genuinely 'good' - and which, perhaps, is not.

   
   Shortly John's role as a prophet will be brought to an abrupt close. This development mirrors the fate of Abel (whose diet as a 'pastor of flocks' presumably matched his offering at Gn.4:4 ie. meat, a 'secondary' food). Abel is killed at the hand of his brother Cain (Gn.4:8; and see Hb.11:4; 1Jn.3:12). It may remind us too of the 'hairy' Esau, the 'hunter of wild beasts', so swiftly displaced by his wild brother, Jacob.

   
   Jacob gives Esau 'bread' and 'lentil stew'. Primary foods are clearly his preference[Gn.25:34]. And, like the serpent, Jacob is 'smooth' [Gn.27:11].

   
   In stark contrast to his 'hairy' relation John, in the gospels it is Jesus who makes available primary foods (bread and wine). By this the gospel authors link him to a long list of Genesis' wrong-doers - such as Cain, Noah, Melchizedek, Jacob. Do you see the pattern ? And what does it suggest ? Jacob is portrayed as a liar who resorts to impersonation to deceive even his own father - with the explicit object of usurping the rightful inheritance of his brother Esau.

   
   Now it is not long before we hear :
   40N 14 10 kai pemyas apekefalisen [ton] iwannhn en th fulakh

   40N 14 10 And, sending, he (Herod the Tetrarch) beheaded John in the prison

   
   Note: There ! The dreadful pattern first set in Genesis is being repeated in the gospel story. Indeed at Jn.1:15 & 1:30 John is heard to predict that Jesus will take precedence over him. This is surely a reference to Abel - and to Esau ? Now it has happened ! The 'kingdom of the heavens' has 'acted with force' - and 'the violent ones' have 'carried it off' - once again.

   
   With John removed from the scene, Jesus is now at liberty to operate (in the story) with no further risk that his full identity may be exposed. For any reader who is able may identify Jesus through solving the numerous riddles which John presents.

   
   40N 23 35 opws elqh ef umas pan aima dikaion ekcunnomenon epi ths ghs apo tou aimatos abel tou dikaiou ews tou aimatos zacariou uiou baraciou on efoneusate metaxu tou naou kai tou qusiasthriou

   40N 23 35 As upon you may come all righteous blood poured out upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous [Gn.4:8] to the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the sacrificial altar

   
   Remember that - before the angel intervened [Lk.1:13] - "they would have called John the Baptist after the name of his father", the priest Zacharias [Lk.1:5; 1:59].

   
   Thus John the Baptist is explicitly linked with Abel - whom Cain killed [1Jn.3:12].

11.4 The Pattern Revealed
Then in summary this seems to be the pattern:

In the following verses from 'Genesis' we see such polarisation overtly declared. Notice that the phrase about the conception and birth is echoed in the announcement to Mary [Mt.1:23; Lk.1:31] :

01O 16 11 kai eipen auth o aggelos kuriou idou su en gastri eceis kai texh uion kai kaleseis to onoma autou ismahl oti ephkousen kurios th tapeinwsei sou

01O 16 11 And the angel of (the) lord said to her "Look, you have within your belly and will give birth to a son. And you shall call his name Ishmael because (the) lord has listened to your affliction.

01O 16 12 outos estai agroikos anqrwpos ai ceires autou epi pantas kai ai ceires pantwn ep' auton kai kata proswpon pantwn twn adelfwn autou katoikhsei

01O 16 12 He will be a boorish person. His hands will be against all - and the hands of all against him. And he will dwell against the face of all his brothers"

...
01O 17 20 peri de ismahl idou ephkousa sou idou euloghsa auton kai auxanw auton kai plhqunw auton sfodra dwdeka eqnh gennhsei kai dwsw auton eis eqnos mega

01O 17 20 But as for Ishmael : Look I have heard you. Look, I have blessed him and I will increase him and fulfill him exceedingly. He will beget twelve peoples - and I will establish him into a great people

This adversarial announcement is addressed to Hagar, the Egyptian handmaid of Abraham's wife Sara. Her son is here named Ishmael. Subsequently (and significantly) it is Jacob who is named as Ishrael [Gn.32:29] - and becomes the father of twelve peoples.
Notice that (arithmetically) 'ismahl' + 'x' => 'israhl'.

And from the details given in the texts we can make this further classification:

John, before he meets his end, tells us what we need to know. He gives his 'reference' on Jesus. But his evidence is cryptic. If we can penetrate his 'code' then we may learn something more about the identity of the one he introduces, Jesus the Nazarene.

11.5 In the Beginning ...

Notice how 'Genesis' begins [LXX] ...

Then this is the first chapter of what is known as 'the fourth gospel' - attributed to John. It is clear that from the very beginning it parallels the book of 'Genesis'.

11.6 PostScript
This site is still 'under construction'. So please forgive its shortcomings ! There is always more which might be done.

If you would like to make any comments (favourable or otherwise) or have any corrections to offer, then I would be delighted to hear from you - and please accept my thanks in advance. Please use this e-mail address :

11.7 References
[1] Lewis CS, 'Mere Christianity', first published 1952 : Fount Paperbacks, 1977
[2] Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York Inc, 'New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures', Revised 1984
[3] 'New Jerusalem Bible' : Darton, Longman and Todd : edition in English; ISBN 0 232 51650 2