Who are the two witnesses in Rev. 11?

Q. Who are the two witnesses spoken about in Rev. 11?

A. There has been a long debate on who these individuals are. Many think that they will be Moses and Elijah, who will come back and others think that it will be Enoch and Elijah because they didn't die. Both of these theories are highly unlikely. First , let's look at Enoch and Elijah. Both died and here are the reasons why. Hebrews said that Enoch "did not see death" but that was in regard to the second death (Jn 8.51, 11.26). In Heb 11.13 it says that all the people previously mentioned "died in faith" so that means Enoch died. In Genesis 5.24 it says that Enoch "walked with God and was not." But, compare that phrase with Psa 37.36 where it says " Yet he passed away and , lo, he was not." Psa 39.13 basically says the same thing. Also check Gen 42.13, 44.20, Matt 2.18. So, this phrase can indicate a physical death. With Elijah, it says that Elijah was taken from Elisha and the people in the whirlwind and was taken somewhere else. The Bible does not mention where but he was taken further away than the fifty men searched (2K 2.17) but did not die at that time because Elijah wrote a letter to Jehoram 10 years after the events in 2 Kings 2.1-12, but eventually Elijah died. As far being taken into heaven we know that neither Enoch or Elijah were taken there because Yeshua said that "no man has ascended into heaven" (Jn 3.13). Moses and Elijah were "seen" at the transfiguration but remember that this was a vision and not reality. It was a "picture" but not a physical reality. The vision was not to be interpreted as literal. They were still in their graves. So, Elijah and Enoch aren't the two witnesses based on the fact that they didn't die because the Scriptures say they did. We know Moses died also. Now, God can do anything He wants and can certainly bring them back from the dead but the two witnesses are going to be killed so it is unlikely that Moses, Elijah or Enoch will be resting in their heavenly reward, be "reincarnated" into human bodies and die again.

So, just who are the two witnesses? God has said that everything should be established by 2 or three witnesses. The Law and the Prophets are the witnesses that we use to establish truth and many other biblical concepts including who the Messiah is. The Law and the Prophets are "personified" by Moses and Elijah, that's why they "appeared" in the vision at the Transfiguration. They were discussing prophecy. You will also notice that in Rev 11 they perform miracles very similar to Moses and Elijah by turning water to blood and calling fire down from heaven. The concept of two witnesses has been seen in the Scriptures before. For example, there has been Moses and Aaron, Ezra and Nehemiah, Joshua and Caleb, Yeshua and John the Baptist, plus many more. Zechariah 4.11-14 describes them as being two "olive trees" meaning that they are Jewish (olive) and human (trees). When the angel was asked by Zechariah about who they were the angel said in v 14 that they are the "two anointed ones" who are standing by the Lord of the whole earth." In Hebrew, "anointed ones" means "sons of fresh oil" meaning that the two witnesses will be empowered by the Holy Spirit. These individuals will not be Moses, Elijah or Enoch but two individuals who the Lord will raise up and they will come in the spirit and power of Moses and Elijah, who symbolize the Law and the Prophets. You see, the Torah and Prophets are the two witnesses and they are "personified" by Moses and Elijah. Prophecy says that the Lord is going to send Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord (Mal 4). When Yeshua came he raised up John as a witness who came in the spirit and power of Elijah ( Lk 1.17). Yeshua said that the kingdom was being offered and that if the people accepted the Kingdom, then John was Elijah, fulfilling Mal 4. Now, he wasn't saying that John was literally Elijah "reincarnated" because John himself denied he was Elijah in John 1, but he did come in the spirit and power of Elijah and even looked like him (camel hair/leather girdle). But, what this tells you is that a witness came in the spirit and power of Elijah, but it didn't have to literally be Elijah, and that is what is going to happen in the Tribulation. Also, these two witnesses allude to the two witnesses of a Jewish wedding. One witness was assigned to the bride and one to the groom. Moses was assigned to the bride in that he brought the people out to Sinai to receive the Torah and to "meet" the groom (Jer 2.2). Elijah was assigned to the groom and brought the groom to the bride. The Torah (Moses) prepares the bride to meet the groom and the Prophets (Elijah) reveals the groom to the bride. That's why John the Baptist ( Elijah) said that he was the friend of the bridegroom who stands at the door of the bed chamber and rejoices when he hears the voice of the groom saying that the marriage has been consummated.(John 3:29) He did his job and he was successful. So, in conclusion, the two witnesses will be two Jewish men that the Lord will empower with the Holy Spirit for the first half of the Tribulation. Their ministry will be to bring Israel back to the Lord and to His Anointed One ,Yeshua. They will be killed at the exact mid-point of the Tribulation, Nisan 10, by the false messiah and be resurrected at noon on Nisan 14, Passover. They will not be Moses, Elijah or Enoch but will come in the power and spirit of Moses and Elijah.

Matthew 23:1-2 & Rabbinical Teachings

Q. There are some teachers who say that Matt 23.1-2 means that we should be following what the Orthodox Rabbi's teach when it comes to halakah. What is your opinion on this. I see many believers in Yeshua putting themselves under what these Rabbi's teach and they use this verse to prove it.

A. Let me try and give some insight into this verse and hopefully it will help you in seeing the true intent of this verse. In verse 1 He mentions the "scribes and the Pharisees" because they were the two main groups that came nearer to the truth than the Saduccees and some of the other groups. The Pharisees gave the literal and the traditional sense of the Scriptures and the others didn't. So, He addresses these groups because the majority of the people followed what they said. When it says that they have "seated themselves in the seat of Moses" it means that they interpreted Scripture. They read and explained the Torah to the people and this phrase is referring to teaching because that was done "sitting down" (Luke 4.16-20) and this is not saying that they had legislative power. This has to do with having the right to read and interpret Scripture. When it says in v 2 "all that they tell you, you do and observe" it doesn't mean we have to follow all their teachings and oral traditions. It simply means that when they give an interpretation be alert and obey what they are saying unless it disagrees with the Torah. The mistakes people make with this verse is they think that Yeshua is saying that the Rabbi's should be followed no matter what they say and it isn't true. The Rabbi's teach that you must obey them even if what they say isn't true. They think they have the authority based on Deut. 17.8-13 but there is a problem with that. First, Deut. 17.8-13 is talking about the courts, not interpretations. Second, when Deut. 17.9 was written they had a High Priest with the Urim and Thummim who could consult the Lord directly for a clarification so that is why you went and consulted him if there was a problem. Third, where it says to consult the judge (Deut 17.9) and these were appointed by the people (Deut.16.18). That's why if a person didn't listen to what the High Priest or the judge said they could be put to death. These verses do not apply to the Rabbi's today. Who says the Rabbi's of today are judges? Yeshua had some serious things to say about the Scribes and Pharisees of His day and he certainly didn't obey many of the oral traditions of the Rabbi's (the case of hand-washing for example). The teachings of the Scribes and Pharisees, in most cases, was seen as an enemy of the Faith. He said that their teachings were plants that would be rooted up (Mt 15.13). Also that their teachings were planted by the enemy (Mt 13.37-39). He said that these teachings affected the outer man but left the inner man untouched (Mt 23.25-28). He also said their teachings are leaven and if left unchallenged would leaven the whole (Mt 16 6-12). So, to follow the teachings of the Rabbi's today and to use Mt 23.1-2 to justify it is wrong and it doesn't give the meaning to what Yeshua was saying. He is talking about the teachers of His day who "sit" and teach and that if what they say is correct we should listen to them. If what they say contradicts the Scriptures we are never obligated to obey it, This applies to any teaching we hear, not just from the Rabbi's. If a Messianic or Christian minister is teaching things not in line with the Scriptures, then we are not obligated to obey it. The Rabbi's in Judaism today are not the spiritual leaders of a believer in Yeshua and it would be wrong to put yourself under their authority. I have known many who have and eventually get to the point of denying that Yeshua was God, or even the Messiah. What they will do is get you to doubt the New Testament Scriptures and once that happens it won't be long before you deny everything it teaches. On the other hand, that doesn't mean we can't get insight and information from rabbinical books and teachings because their is a wealth of information available to help with our understanding, but it is not a good thing to use the words of Yeshua, especially in this verse, to justify following these Rabbi's and putting ourselves under their authority.

Two House Theory

This week I want to go over a belief among many believers called the Ephraimite or "two house" theory that says that in European and American Christianity there are some Christians who claim to be Jews with a "bloodline" from Ephraim, a son of Joseph, with a genealogical link. These "Ephraimites" who claim a blood link use a theological premise rooted in replacement theology. They believe in the 10 lost tribes of Israel. But, the these tribes were never really lost and many remained in Israel after the Assyrian dispersion and Scripture says they were still in the land.

In the New Testament Anna was from Asher and the book of James was written to the 12 tribes of Israel. Those individuals who have adopted this label have opened their hearts to the Holy Spirit and have adopted a Torah observant lifestyle which, to them, proves they are of Jewish descent. However, having the Torah written on their hearts is evidence of true repentance but this does not change their DNA. They believe themselves to be a Jewish "remnant" found among the nations. This "theory" never appears in Scripture and there are four major flaws in this thinking. First, as mentioned above, it presumes that the Northern tribes lost their identity but the Scriptures prove otherwise. In 2 Chr 30. 1-18 it says that many from the northern tribes participated in Hezekiah's re institution of Passover. Secondly, it presumes that all or most believers in Yeshua are descendants of these 10 "lost" tribes but God's plan of salvation is for "all nations" not just the 12 tribes of Israel. Third, it presumes that only when one "realizes" that they are one of the descendants of Ephraim can the prophecies of the union between Judah and Israel be realized. However, this union comes as an event distinct from the salvation of the nations. And last, how can one prove they are a descendant of one of the lost tribes anyway. There are no genealogies. This theory seems to be popular among those who think their salvation is lacking in some way unless they can show that they are Jewish. The Lord said that the Holy Spirit would move among the Gentiles and that the Torah would be written upon their hearts. This does not prove that they are of Jewish descent but shows true repentance. Many Messianic Bible teachers today are deceiving many into thinking that they are of Jewish descent and who knows what their true motivations are. Maybe it is to develop a following that fills their pockets and supports their ministries, but it is not based on Scripture and it is an error. Rather than judge their motivations, a deeper study into the flaws of this theology will help you avoid the pitfalls of such a belief and help you obtain a balanced view of the prophecies and the role of the Gentiles in the Body of Messiah. God doesn't care about your genealogy when it comes to salvation. His call goes out to Jew and Gentile alike and He does care about changing the hearts of those He calls with no respect to a persons genealogy.

If the Apostle Paul was Torah observant as you say, why do his writings say otherwise? Part 3

During the last several weeks we have looked at the Apostle Paul and what he taught and there is no doubt that he taught the Torah and was Torah observant himself. This week we will look at some passages in light of Paul's Torah observant lifestyle to help free them from many preconceived assumptions taught by many today. Once we look at these passages through Paul's Torah observant life, the evidence for otherwise turns out to be faulty. So, lets look at a few of the passages that some use to "prove" that Paul was not Torah observant nor did he teach others to be.
1. "If you are led by the Spirit then you are not under law ." But being led of the Spirit is closely linked to to obedience to God's Law (Ezek 36.26-27). The term "under Law" in Greek simply means that you don't rely on the Law for righteousness.
2. "Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, new moon or Sabbath" (Col 2.16-17). Those causing the trouble here were those teaching "deceptive philosophies, human tradition, idle notions and human commands in contrast to the Sabbath, feasts and dietary laws given by God, not man (Col 2.20-23).
3. "Man of Lawlessness"- Now, the word "lawless" is the word "anomos" in Greek and it means "without Torah, no Torah or without the Law". If the false messiah is called the "man of lawlessness" how can people think that they are to be without the Law?
4. " If you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ is of no value to you" (Gal 5.2). This relates to ritual circumcision as a Jewish convert, which was a rabbinical command but not from God. Some came to Galatia and told the believers there that they needed to be circumcised to be saved and Paul was telling them that they did not have to. But if they believed their faith was incomplete and they had to "do something else" then Messiah was of no value to them. This ritual circumcision was an issue in the first century. It crops up in Acts 15.1 and also in Galatia but it is not to be confused with Abrahamic circumcision. This is biblical and to be done to a descendant of Abraham. Paul said that this circumcision is of great value (Rom 3.1-2) and Paul personally circumcised Timothy because he was a descendant of Abraham in the flesh and this was according to the commandment.
5. "Christ is the end of the Law" ( Rom 10.4). The word "end" means goal or target in Greek This would make sense in the context of what Paul was teaching in Rom 10 and would agree with the Old Testament. Psalm 40, Luke 24 and John 5 say that the Scriptures point and teach and testify about Yeshua.
Paul himself believed everything that agreed with the Law and the prophets (Acts 24.1) Translators chose to translate "telos" as end which gives the impression that the Torah is no longer a reliable guide. That idea agrees with the religious traditions of the translators but it disagrees with numerous passages in the Torah and Prophets. By choosing "end" the translators have not only made Paul contradict what he said he believed. Also, they have led people think that the Law has been done away with, even though Yeshua said otherwise in Matt 5.17-19. Peter warned that in his day Paul's writings were being misinterpreted (2 Pet 3.16). Since people have been misinterpreting Paul's writings, how can we interpret them correctly. We are to use the same test that He has set forth in the Scriptures. Isaiah 8.20 and Acts 17.10-11 says that we are to test everything by the Scriptures. Paul's teachings will agree with the Old Testament Scriptures. The problem is people have not been taught the truth nor do they pursue it themselves. They want to be told what to believe without knowing the Scriptures themselves. Anybody can quote the Scriptures to you but not everybody can tell you what it means accurately. The New Testament must be seen through the eyes of the writers and who they were and they all were Torah observant Jews and to interpret their writings to be anti-Torah is a gross miscalculation.

If the Apostle Paul was Torah observant as you say, why do his writings say otherwise? Part 2

This week we are going to continue with the teaching that the Apostle Paul taught the Torah and not some new theology. Remember that the only Scriptures Paul and all the writers of the New Testament used was the Tanak. Paul affirmed the whole Law in 1 Tim1.8; Rom 2.13; Rom 3.29-31, 7.12-22; 1 Cor 7.19. There never was a distinction between the Moral and Ceremonial Law as some say. It is never used in all of the Bible. The whole Torah was considered as one set of instructions that applied to Jews and Gentiles. The Torah was used by Paul as a textbook for teaching all believers (Acts 17. 2-4, 17.11; 1 Tim 4.13; 2 Tim 3.15; Rom 15.4). There was no New Testament Scriptures for Paul to use, in fact the term "new" testament for the Gospels and epistles is not even a biblical name for them. The epistles were Torah commentaries for the life of a believer in Yeshua. Paul never taught that any part of the Torah was irrelevant ( 2 Tim 3.16-17, Acts 26.22-23). The New Testament contains examples where Paul taught the Gentiles to follow certain laws found in the Torah (Acts 16.4) and to follow the elders in Jerusalem who were all Torah observant Jews (Acts 15.29). The "yoke" Peter was talking about in Acts 15 was not the Torah because it was never considered "unbearable" (Deut 30.11-14). This yoke was the layers and layers of oral tradition and religious practice accumulated over the centuries of Rabbinic theology. Yeshua's yoke was easy (Mt 11.29-30) and we know He was Torah observant and wanted believers to follow Him. The Torah was considered a delight (Psa 119). It maintained unity in the congregations, which is the reason why there are so many Christian denominations today. They don't follow the Torah and do whatever seems right in their own eyes. We know the Corinthians celebrated Passover with Paul because he used he used the concepts of Passover to teach life lessons (1 Cor 5.6-8). 2 Cor 6.16 through 7.1 infers that they had to have learned about what contaminates the body and spirit and how to purify themselves. In Eph. 2.11-22, 3.6 and Col 3.11-12 Paul teaches that Gentiles are united with Jewish believers as fellow citizens of Israel. He also uses Jer. 11.16 as a metaphor of the olive tree to explain that the Gentiles were grafted in (Rom 11.17-18,24). People who believe that the Torah is only for Jews have failed to realize that Paul said that believers cannot separate from the Jews without pruning themselves from the olive tree ( Rom 10.11; Gal 3.28-29). When writing to the Thessalonians Paul told them to imitate the "ekklesia" or congregations in Judea and we know they were set up like synagogues otherwise they would not have been permitted to exist. The concept of the New Covenant is not a new teaching beginning with Yeshua and the apostles but found in Jer 31.31-34. In this New Covenant, God said that He will write the Torah on the heart. The circumcision of the heart is found in the Tanak (Deut 10.16, 30.6; Jer 4.4, 9.26; Ezek 44.7-9) and it is where the term "born again" derives. To have a circumcised heart means to live or be born again. Yeshua taught that the Law would not be changed until heaven and earth passed away (Mt 5.17-19). He also did not give his disciples a separate "curriculum" for Gentiles (Mt 28.19-20). Paul taught the Gentiles to observe and obey the Parts of the Torah that applied to them. There is not one verse in the New Testament that says that God expects believers to NOT follow the Torah. So, instead of having a clear "Thus saith the Lord" that the Lord has changed His mind, many teachers just assume that God's guidelines (Torah) were old and have used that assumption as the foundation for interpreting New Testament passages, thus developing a "replacement theology" over the centuries. What people need to do is to lay aside all preconceived assumptions and study the New Testament in the context of Paul being a Torah observant Jew. Once you see it from that point of view you will find that the passages used to say otherwise will be faulty. Next week we will continue with this all important teaching and give some examples of those passages that people use to support their view that the Law has been done away with and show you that when you understand what Paul taught you will see how flimsy those interpretations are.

Q. If the Apostle Paul was Torah observant as you say, why do his writings say otherwise?

A. One of the things that I have been constantly confronted with is the fact that many people believe that the Apostle Paul was not a Torah observant Jew and that his writings prove it. They then quote Galatians or Romans to show that they are correct. The truth is, Paul was not only Torah observant but he taught others to do so as well. People who believe that Paul was not Torah observant and believe that his writings also reflect that, have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Scriptures. That misunderstanding will reflect back on how they interpret the Bible and this false premise is very hard to point out unless the person is open to studying and investigating the real Saul of Tarsus. So, over the next several weeks I am going to show you that the Apostle Paul not only was Torah observant but he taught it to other believers.
First of all, Torah observance was never for salvation or righteousness. The Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation are very clear about that. Righteousness is a gift from God and it is by faith that we receive it. But the Lord wants us to be obedient to His commands and that is where the Torah comes in. Torah is Hebrew for "teaching, instruction, guidance" and it is an archery term for "hitting the mark." The term for sin in Hebrew is "Chata'at" and it is also an archery term for "missing the mark." What Paul did not teach was the man-made laws of the Rabbi's of his day. He did not teach people to offer animal sacrifices outside of the Temple, in fact, he offered animal sacrifices himself at the Temple 30 years after Yeshua (Acts 21.17-26). He did not teach people to punish people by stoning. That could only be done by properly appointed judges. Most of Paul's teaching was not recorded because it was done verbally, face to face. His instructions for new believers was not included in his letters. In several synagogues he remained for over a year teaching from the Torah (1 Thes 4.2; 2 Thes 2.15, 3.6; 2 Tim 1.13; 2.2). According to Paul, all his teachings agreed with his own lifestyle ( 1 Cor 4.16-17). Other Jewish believers remained Torah observant after their conversion and so did Paul (Acts 22.12; Acts 21.20). When one investigates the lifestyle of first century believers according to historical records we find that Torah observance was normal and not done when only in the presence of other Jews. That would have been hypocritical and Paul did not approve of that sort of behavior. 1 Cor 9.20 is interpreted by many to say just that, but what he means there is that he accommodated Gentile customs that were not in direct violation of the Torah. Paul rebuked Peter for this type of behavior in Gal 2.11-14 and so so say that Paul acted like a Jew with Jews and a Gentile with Gentiles is not only a bad interpretation but down right hypocritical. In Acts 21.24 Paul is coming out of a Nazarite vow and not only offered his own sacrifices but paid for the offerings of four other messianic believers to show he was Torah observant, contrary to some of the rumors going around about him. He came to Jerusalem to keep a festival and offer sacrifices according to the Torah instruction about coming out of a Nazarite vow (Num 6; Acts 24.17). When on trial, Acts 23.6 says that Paul was a Pharisee (present tense) and said he was in "good conscience" in doing so (Acts 23.1). Some try to refute this but there was enough evidence to show that Paul's claim was valid because other Pharisee's stood and said that they found nothing wrong with him(Acts 23.9). In Acts 24.14 he says that he serves the Lord, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law (Torah) and the Prophets. In Acts 26, Paul is still on trial and is brought before King Agrippa. He says in verse 5 that his enemies have known about him for a long time and if they are willing to testify (which they didn't) that he lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion. Notice he says "our" religion, not "their" religion!. Paul's words and deeds led people to believe that he was living according to the Torah (Acts 28.17). Paul also taught the Gentiles to follow his lifestyle ( 1 Cor 11.1-2; Phil 3.17, 4.9; ! Cor 4.16-17; 1 Thes 1.5-7; 2 Thes 3.6-9). He wanted them to follow him as he followed the Messiah and wanted others to be like him ( Acts 26.28). So far, we have seen that Paul's own lifestyle and teachings show that he wanted others to follow the Torah. Next week we will continue with this all important premise that will help you interpret the Scriptures correctly. You have to see the writers of the New Testament for who they were. In other words, they were Torah observant believers in Yeshua saved by grace and so their writings could not have reflected anything otherwise. They weren't doing one thing and writing another. They were consistent in what they did and what they wrote. The confusion came in later when people who were anti-Torah began to take their built-in biases and make the New Testament fit into their own preconceived theological misconceptions.

Last week we were dealing with the question of effectual prayer and gave the example of how the Tabernacle was set up and how this teaches us about how to approach God for effectual prayer. The Tabernacle is called the Mishkan in Hebrew. It means the "dwelling" and it was were the Shekinah, Kivod and the Ruach Ha Kodesh manifested. You can see the root for "shki'nah" (shekinah as most say it, but it's "shki'nah") in the word "Mishkan" (tabernacle). It was called the House of Prayer, as was the succeeding Temples. In Exodus 25.8 God showed Moses the "tavnit" or pattern of the Mishkan and that was where He would dwell. He goes on and gives Moses the pattern for everything connected with the Mishkan and its construction. Then in Exodus 40 He tells Moses to set up the Mishkan, and then tells him how to do it. In a way, that is how the Lord see's us. If He is in the Holy of Holies looking out, that is how it was set up, from the inside out. That is how He sets up His "mishkan" in us, from the inside first, working outward. But, when we approach the Lord in prayer it is just the opposite. Coming into his presence (shki'nah), the first thing you encounter is the veil at the door and an anointed priest (Yeshua) and then we come to the Altar (cross). Then we come to the Laver that held water (the Word of God). Moving past that Laver we enter the Mishkan and on the north side ( north speaks of intellect) we have the Table of Bread ( which speaks of provision not only spiritually but physically). On the south side (south is the direction of faith) we have the Menorah (speaks of bearing the light). In the middle, before the veil we have the Altar of Incense (speaking of prayer) . Then we have the veil (speaks of a barrier of space or understanding) and then the Ark of the Covenant (God's commandments await you). All of these speak of the Messiah also and this is not the time to go into all the pictures we have of these articles but there is something being said here. This is how we come to the Lord, not only in salvation but daily. Most believers have no problem coming in, encountering the priest and the Altar. They have no problem with the Laver which symbolizes the Word. They have no problem moving on with the idea of God's provision of "bread" (altar of Bread) or understanding, the"light" of the Menorah or even prayer (altar of incense) but many stop right there. They have a problem with that "servant" business. They say "All I need is Jesus" (the priest) or "All I need is back out there on the Altar." They will say "I want the mercy (mercy seat on the Ark) but I don't want what's down there in that box!" But in the New Covenant, the Torah will be written on our heart's (Ark) as God builds us into His Mishkan. For effectual prayer, we must ask "Are we following the pattern He gave us to "approach" Him? Will you follow the pattern given to Moses? Many believers say that following the pattern given to Moses is "legalism" but Moses had effectual prayers. Yeshua followed Moses and His prayers were effectual. The apostles followed Moses and they had effectual prayer. What some call legalism, God calls obedience. So, for effectual prayer ask yourself "How is my Tabernacle set up?" When things don't go right we need to make sure things are "set up" according to the pattern. That is, in order and everything in the right place, nothing missing. Ask yourself, "Have I got water (word of God) in the Laver?" "Have I got bread on the table?" "Have I got the commandments in the Ark (my heart)?" For effectual prayer, start looking at these things and see if you are approaching the Lord according to the pattern He has set up. If everything is in order, then wait and the Lord promised that He would speak to you "between the wings of the Cherubim" of the Ark of the Covenant. I hope this helps you with your question about effectual prayer.