It was suggested here that 'kissing the calf' may be a play on words for 'burning the calf'. Is there other support in scripture where the use of 'kiss' and 'burn' has interpretive significance?
closed as off-topic by Dan♦ Jun 19 at 22:30
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
There are three passages when considered literally do not appear to be related, but when kiss and burn are considered allegorically as being related, confirm a NT teaching.
Though the following events took place in the wilderness, at first glance they do not appear to be related:
Israel desired to sacrifice in the wilderness(Ex 3:18)
Aaron met Moses in the wilderness and kissed him (Ex 4:27)
Satan met Jesus in the wilderness and tempted him (Mt 4:1)
'Burn' is used in sensus plenior to indicate the total devotion of the Son to the Father, even unto death as represented by the burnt offering. In the burnt offering, the priests do not eat of it, but it is totally consumed by the fire, such that it represents a relationship between Father and Son at which we can only marvel.
Using the pun relationship between nasak and nashak 'kiss' also takes on the meaning of 'burn'.
Israel, called the Son of God (Ex 4:23), desired to go to the wilderness to burn a sacrifice. Though zabach 'kill' is used, not nasak, there is no killed sacrifice that isn't burned.
From the following verse, Moses takes on the allegorical representation of God and Aaron represents Jesus, his mouthpiece and Son:
When Aaron meets Moses in the wilderness rather than 'kiss' he now 'burns' a sacrifice.
We have two cases now where we see pictures of Christ meeting God in the wilderness and giving his total devotion, Israel in the desert, and Aaron with Moses. The third is troublesome, since Jesus met Satan there.
The purpose of the linking pun is made clear:
In the wilderness where Jesus met Satan, he offered "a better sacrifice" in his obedience. All the burnt offering were but a "shadow of the good things coming". Heb 10.1