...For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain [two] shall be one flesh? (Matt. 19:5)

Later Paul says this of the aforementioned passage: "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church." ( Eph. 5:32) So there does exist a union between the disparity (dyad, two). This union is the harmonious third (tryad)

Three (Tryad)

The principle purpose of the tryad is to bind together the disparity of the dyad. The Trinity, although never mentioned once in the bible, is an integral part of the Orthodox Christian theology. The Trinity concept, like the tryad, is three separate units comprising one harmonious whole.

The following is material on the symbolism of three. It is found at http://www.aaow.com/foliago/book/c11.html:

"One witness shall not rise up . . . at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three

witnesses, shall the matter be established" (Deut 19:15); "In the mouth of two or [or and] three witnesses shall every word be established" (2 Cor 13:1). As we explain the sense of this, we can say that bald declarations of the truth (i.e., one) of whatever it may be—which some false-prophets do not skimp on—is no proof in itself; confirmation based on wisdom and love is what is needed. It is very appropriate now to recall Paul in another context: "[If] I have prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing" (1 Cor 13:2).

"Where two or [or, and] three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Mt 18:20). Let us note that this might be translated "where two or else three. . ." as well. That is, he who has wisdom joined with love (and hope and faith) in the name of Christ, will discover the Word in himself. In numerical signs we obtain a mathematically absurd formula: 2 + 3 = 1, which nevertheless is one of the mysteries of the Kingdom.

Now let us turn to examples of the number 3 in its pure, solitary form:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind" (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 10:27). This love was to be testified by the sons of Israel thrice a year: "Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord GOD, the God of Israel" (Exod 34:23); "Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God . . . and they shall not appear before the LORD empty" (Deut 16:16).

Jesus three times poses one and the same question to Peter: "Lovest thou me?" (Jn 21:15–19). This same Peter has a vision and "there came a voice to him . . . What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common. This was done thrice" (Acts 10:11–16). The interpretation of the vision was given by Peter: "It is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (Acts10:28). Is this not a homily of love?

We should not miss the arithmological aspect of the symbol of three loaves from the Gospel of Luke (Lk 11:5), as well as the parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened" (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21). Indeed, how might an outer man reach the Kingdom of Heaven otherwise than by putting something slight into his faith, hope, and love, which is the greatest of these?

Finally let us look at the episode of the temptation of Christ in the wilderness. There were three temptations; and (following the chronology in Matthew) at first Jesus was tempted concerning the truth of His hope—"command that these stones be made bread" (Mt 4:3), then, regarding the truth of His faith—"cast thyself down . . . [that] thou [mayest not] dash thy foot against a stone" (Mt. 4:6); and finally, of His love—"if thou wilt fall down and worship [or bow to] me" (Mt 4:9).

Let us content ourselves with these examples of the symbolism of three, keeping some evidence in reserve.

Seven

Seven is often thought of as the number of perfection. But Foliago’s book,"Whereunto Shall I Liken This Generation" (http://www.aaow.com/foliago/book/c11.html), presents another view:

WHETHER WE HAVE ASSUAGED OR DISTURBED the reader by this, we proceed to the next number, which we met many times while interpreting six. And so: the number 7. The name of what is hidden behind this symbol is very short, but we must understand the word broadly, for seven is the number of law. Seven concerns the perfect law, when everything is subject to this law—be it in the world, or in Heaven, in motion, or at rest—and does not require any external interference. And no such interference is needed, even on the part of the Creator, for all things are made "for their uses" (Sir 39:21), everything has saving power (cf. Wis 1:14) and completed. "And on by the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made" (Gen 2:2–3). The motif of God’s not interfering with His established order is clearly visible in such words: "By measure hath he measured the times; and by number hath he numbered the times; and he doth not move nor stir them, until the said measure be fulfilled" (2 Esdr 4:37).

Seven is, if one may put it thus, the universal number of law, which is why it is too often confused with perfection itself—although the reader should understand that any subjection, even subjection to perfect law, is incompatible with freedom: ergo, it is incompatible with real perfection. Besides, "if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law" (Gala 3:21), but "the law made nothing perfect" (Heb 7:19).

And so, as a universal number, seven is used in the commandment on sacrifices to the Lord: "And seven days of the feast he shall prepare a burnt offering to the LORD, seven bullocks and seven rams without blemish daily the seven days" (Ezek 45:23; cf. Lev 23:18). This indicates unblemishedness or perfection (YLT), although that is not the main thing. The symbolism of the perfection of sacrifices is not in quantity only, but also in quality, e.g., "Take . . . the bullock of seven years old" (Judg 6:25). The reader should not forget that only clean animals can be used as sacrificial, for sacrifices are to be taken into the temple, and we hope the reader remembers what the temple symbolizes.

Considerations evoked by the question just raised can help us to understand why the Lord commanded Noah: "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens . . . and of beasts that [are] not clean by two . . . Of fowls also of the air by sevens" (Gen 7:2–3). The connecting link in our logic will be the calf in the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Lk 15:27–30), for that calf is killed for food. But this is just the rule according to which clean and unclean animals are distinguished: the former are suitable for food and the latter are not. What do we obtain as the result? The Lord commands Noah to take what is perfect, suitable for food (this is associated with seven), but He also commands him to take what is unclean and forbidden, for there is wisdom in this as well. Is this not strange? Not at all, for Jesus also said: "be ye . . . wise as serpents" (Mt 10:16). In other words, from the impure one should take what is associated with the number two—with wisdom.

To continue the theme of seven, let us note a parable which is absurd from the viewpoint of "common sense" and literalistic perception: "the barren hath born seven" (1 Sam 2:5) or "even the barren beareth seven" (1 Sam 2:5 DBY). In order to understand this bit of wisdom we should refer to the images of the husband and the wife, the wedding feast. Now it is clear that the outer man, the wife, who did not find the way to her real husband who is within, the wife who turned away from her inner man, cannot be other than barren; still she also wishes to bear some fruit. This fruit is the law of the "commandments of men" which in this case too, is symbolized by seven; and here the perfection of seven is hopelessly lost. And what do we see? "She that hath borne seven languisheth: she hath given up the ghost; her sun is gone down while [it was] yet day: she hath been ashamed and confounded: and the residue of them will I deliver to the sword before their enemies, saith the LORD" (Jer 15:9). Here seven is linked with shame and confusion. And wives—whether understanding this or not—catch at the same, senselessly forgetting that Jesus Christ abolished the law of commandment by His doctrine (Eph 2:15, see our discussion in ch. III.4,): "And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, [—] take away our reproach" (Is 4:1).

In adducing these considerations we do not intend to paint seven black, for its true meaning is still valid up till now: for example, in the symbolism of the messages for the seven churches and in the mystery of seven stars in the Revelation of St. John (Rev 1:16, 20; 2:1–3:22), for there exist laws not written by men, laws which nobody is allowed to circumvent.

The reader should not be confused by the fact that in some cases we speak of the perfection of the law, in others of the law’s having made nothing perfect, and in still others of the law’s particular imperfection. It is all a question of how you perceive it. Indeed, is man able to comprehend perfection of the law? Only if he is perfect himself. But once a man is especially imperfect, then in his consciousness he distorts even what is perfect. "God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good" (Gen 1:31), but is it everything that the man considers "very good?" As for the works of man himself, it is inappropriate to speak of their perfection.

Acted Symbolism

Beside there being symbols of objects, there are symbols of acts in the bible. These can be the most powerful of symbols, as seen by the cruxifiction of Christ.

The following was taken from http://matteus.ths.se/~ake/abstract:

This analysis deals with Old Testament law in the form of legal symbolic acts. Such an act is defined as a non-verbal act which fulfils a legal function when it is performed under the proper circumstances and when the legal function is different from the physical result of the act. A theoretical basis is laid out in order to achieve a reliable interpretation. Legal symbolic acts belong to customary law. Since the customary law of ancient Israel is not as well known as the codified law, these acts provide important information regarding the customary law of ancient Israel. Another important theoretical stand-point that is emphasized is the distinction between the use of a legal symbolic act, as it is described in its Old Testament context, and the history of its formation. Legal symbolic acts are also conventional, i.e., they are not so much dependant upon their performance for their meaning as upon the general agreement attached to the acts by those who form the

surrounding socio-cultural context. This invites a contextual approach to the texts in which the acts are described. Such a contextual approach also restricts the use of comparative material to an illustrative function. Only when the literary context cannot be used to conclude whether it is a case of a legal symbolic act or not, will the comparative material be used in a further, explanatory sense. The analysis of each act is structured in three parts, namely performance, legal function and historical explanation. The main emphasis is upon the legal function whereas the historical explanation is of a more tentative nature.

The analysis includes the following acts; raising the hand, shaking the hand, putting the hand under the thigh, walking through a divided animal, sharing a meal, piercing the ear of the slave, anointing the head with oil, grasping the horns of the altar, transferring the mantle, covering a woman with the mantle, removing the sandal, and putting a child on the knees.

SYMBOLIC ACTS IN EZEKIEL

Symbolic Acts and Allegories of Disaster (12-24)

Ezekiel took symbolic actions and drew numerous word pictures in an

attempt to convince his compatriots that Jerusalem would fall, and that

they should not hold out for an early return from exile.

To symbolize the imminent fall of Jerusalem, Ezekiel packed his bags

and in the middle of the night dug through a wall and hurried away as if

to escape (chapter 12). In another image Jerusalem is compared to a vine

which is no longer productive, and its branches can then serve only as

fuel for a fire (chapter 15).[1] Chapter 16 contains an extended allegory

of the history of Jerusalem. The main figure in the allegory is Jerusalem

in the guise of a female who turns out to be an unfaithful wife to

Yahweh.[2] The allegory is developed in great detail. Jerusalem is first

described as the daughter of an Amorite father and a Hittite mother.

Abandoned by her parents she was adopted by Yahweh who cared for

her.and made her beautiful. But then she used her God-given advantages

to entice and seduce foreigners. God in turn used those foreigners to

punish his wife. But ultimately he did not disown her, restoring her

instead to full status as wife in covenant with God. The allegory of

Oholah and Oholibah in chapter 23 likewise describes the unfaithfulness

of Israel and Judah in terms of women wed to Yahweh.

Ezekiel used extended images of eagles, trees, and again vines, to depict

the uprooting of Judah and its kings in chapter 17. In chapter 18 Ezekiel

addressed the issue of responsibility and blame. It seems Judeans were

seeking to disown responsibility for the current state of affairs. They

blamed their troubles with the Babylonians and the weakness of Judah on

the sins of their fathers. The following proverb was widely quoted by the

people to justify this analysis: [3]

2 "The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth

are set on edge."(18:2)