Sunday, March 22, 2009
In the Shadow of God, the Tent of the Father
To oversee the craftsmanship of the Tabernacle, the Lord raised up two men of Israel, Bezalel and Oholiab, and filled them with His Holy Spirit. Bezalel and Oholiab have names with significant Tabernacle imagery. Betzalel means "in the shadow of God." Oholiav means "the father's tent." The Tabernacle was the Father's tent, overshadowed by the cloud of glory that provided a shade by day. But the names Bezalel and Oholiab also have messianic significance. In Psalm 91 the Messiah is called "He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High," and it says that He abides " in the shadow of the Almighty." Because Messiah has made the Lord His refuge and dwelling place, no evil comes near His tent, for His tent is His Father's tent. His body is the Father's tent. He is the shadow of God. At the time of his conception, the Holy Spirit overshadowed the virgin Miriam.
Building God's Sukkah
After coming down the mountain, Moses commanded the children of Israel to commence with the building of the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle may be considered the sukkah of God.
It is said in Pirkei Avot that one mitzvah leads to another mitzvah; that is, one good deed leads to another. For example, there is an old tradition to start building one's sukkah immediately after the Day of Atonement. The festival of Sukkot is five days after the Day of Atonement. It is necessary to have the sukkah ready before the festival of Sukkot begins. The prohibitions of the day prevent one from building the sukkah on the Day of Atonement, but after that day, one has only five days to build the sukkah. Many pious Jews take this very seriously and use the occasion of the Day of Atonement to propel them into the next mitzvah; that is, the commandment of the feast of Sukkot. Even before breaking their fast, some people go out immediately after sunset and the end of the Day of Atonement by driving the first nail of their sukkah. The idea is that the purity of the soul that results from having gone through Day of Atonement pushes us on to the mitzvah of the next appointed time, the joy of the feast of Booths.
So, too, when Messiah comes, He will build the Temple of God fresh from the High Holidays.
It is said in Pirkei Avot that one mitzvah leads to another mitzvah; that is, one good deed leads to another. For example, there is an old tradition to start building one's sukkah immediately after the Day of Atonement. The festival of Sukkot is five days after the Day of Atonement. It is necessary to have the sukkah ready before the festival of Sukkot begins. The prohibitions of the day prevent one from building the sukkah on the Day of Atonement, but after that day, one has only five days to build the sukkah. Many pious Jews take this very seriously and use the occasion of the Day of Atonement to propel them into the next mitzvah; that is, the commandment of the feast of Sukkot. Even before breaking their fast, some people go out immediately after sunset and the end of the Day of Atonement by driving the first nail of their sukkah. The idea is that the purity of the soul that results from having gone through Day of Atonement pushes us on to the mitzvah of the next appointed time, the joy of the feast of Booths.
So, too, when Messiah comes, He will build the Temple of God fresh from the High Holidays.
Names Change to Protect the Innocent
In eleventh grade, I took my only year of a foreign language in school, Spanish. I did this to fulfill the possible college entrance requirements of a foreign language. Thank goodness, Texas A&M would ultimately have no such requirement. In class, each student was required to select a Spanish name for use in class. While some names translate from English to Spanish, the name “Scott” has no such equivalent. I became Fernando. Whatever meaning the name Scott may have had to my parents (it means “from Scotland”, but I do not think that was the calling my parents gave me), the meaning was totally lost in the translation to Fernando.
The translation of names from the original language into English is just another subtle way the meaning conveyed in the original scripture has been lost. Whereas English names are selected for their sound or relationship, Jewish names are chosen to reflect the specific calling of GOD placed on the heart of the parents for the child. The English name “JESUS” has no specific meaning, while the original Hebrew name, “YESHUA”, means “the LORD is Salvation”. With this knowledge, the words of the angel to Joseph now make sense, “you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins" (Matt 1:21). In other words, “Salvation, will save his people from their sins”. When a Hebrew parent exhorts their child to “live up to your name”, they do not mean the family name, which is the common concept in America, but the specific name that defines the calling of the child. The Bible is full of examples where people succeeded or failed to live up to their name.
So I wondered, how faithful and consistent were the men who translated the original biblical names into English?
NAS Name/Original Hebrew/Inconsistent NT Translation
Old Testament: Abraham/Avraham Isaac/Yitzchak Jacob/Yaakov
Joseph/Yosef Judah/Yhudah Moses/Moshe Miriam/Miryam Joshua/Yhoshua
Saul/Shaul Jonathan/Yhonatan David/David Soloman/Shlomo
New Testament: Mary/Miryam/Miryam Joseph/Yosef/Joseph JESUS/Yeshua
Peter/Kefa James/Yaakov/Jacob John/Yochanan Simon/Shimon
Saul/Shaul/Saul Paul/Paul
The mother of JESUS became “Mary”, like Queen Mary, and not the correct translation of “Miriam”, identical to the sister of Moses. In a similar manner, “Yaakov” became “James”, coincidentally, the name of the king who authorized the major English translation, and not Jacob, as the name was translated in the Older Testament. Although Yochanan does not have an equivalent Older Testament name, the name is translated as Johanan, instead of John, by outside sources when referring to Rabbi Yochanan be Zakai (30BCE-90CE) who was a primary contributor to the Mishnah.
There is no way to know for certain, but an indictment can be delivered that English translators systematically and methodically removed the Hebrew aspects from the Newer Testament scripture to set the assembly apart as a separate entity from Israel. Even the names were changed to protect the innocent.
Scott
The translation of names from the original language into English is just another subtle way the meaning conveyed in the original scripture has been lost. Whereas English names are selected for their sound or relationship, Jewish names are chosen to reflect the specific calling of GOD placed on the heart of the parents for the child. The English name “JESUS” has no specific meaning, while the original Hebrew name, “YESHUA”, means “the LORD is Salvation”. With this knowledge, the words of the angel to Joseph now make sense, “you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins" (Matt 1:21). In other words, “Salvation, will save his people from their sins”. When a Hebrew parent exhorts their child to “live up to your name”, they do not mean the family name, which is the common concept in America, but the specific name that defines the calling of the child. The Bible is full of examples where people succeeded or failed to live up to their name.
So I wondered, how faithful and consistent were the men who translated the original biblical names into English?
NAS Name/Original Hebrew/Inconsistent NT Translation
Old Testament: Abraham/Avraham Isaac/Yitzchak Jacob/Yaakov
Joseph/Yosef Judah/Yhudah Moses/Moshe Miriam/Miryam Joshua/Yhoshua
Saul/Shaul Jonathan/Yhonatan David/David Soloman/Shlomo
New Testament: Mary/Miryam/Miryam Joseph/Yosef/Joseph JESUS/Yeshua
Peter/Kefa James/Yaakov/Jacob John/Yochanan Simon/Shimon
Saul/Shaul/Saul Paul/Paul
The mother of JESUS became “Mary”, like Queen Mary, and not the correct translation of “Miriam”, identical to the sister of Moses. In a similar manner, “Yaakov” became “James”, coincidentally, the name of the king who authorized the major English translation, and not Jacob, as the name was translated in the Older Testament. Although Yochanan does not have an equivalent Older Testament name, the name is translated as Johanan, instead of John, by outside sources when referring to Rabbi Yochanan be Zakai (30BCE-90CE) who was a primary contributor to the Mishnah.
There is no way to know for certain, but an indictment can be delivered that English translators systematically and methodically removed the Hebrew aspects from the Newer Testament scripture to set the assembly apart as a separate entity from Israel. Even the names were changed to protect the innocent.
Scott
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Dusty Differences Between Jew and Gentile
Should a Jew be as a Gentile and a Gentile as a Jew when both have accepted JESUS as CHRIST? For over 1800 years many Christians have held to a belief that Gentiles become spiritual Jews through CHRIST and to be Christians, Jews must leave behind the feasts and commandments contained in the Original Testament and conform their lifestyle to the typical Gentile. This belief takes some root in the words of Paul to the believers in Rome, "For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile…" (Rom 10:12). Standing alone this statement would seem to support the proposition that Gentiles and Jews in CHRIST should possess uniformity in beliefs and actions. However, this verse is proceeded by one that qualifies how Jew and Gentile are equal, each comes to a righteousness from GOD, "through faith in Jesus Christ" (Rom 10:11).
In a like manner, Paul told the Galatians, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal 3:28). Does this statement of Paul mandate equality of belief and action among Jew and Gentile? Certainly, not! For the statement itself contains examples that we know in the physical realm are not equal. Slave is not the equal of free and man is not the same as woman. For equality does not mean uniformity. For example, GOD is a unity, yet the three persons of Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct in position and function. The Jew and Greek, slave and free, and man and woman are equal only in the aspects of "faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:26).
Therefore, is a Jew required to act as a Gentile or a Gentile as a Jew? Only if a slave can act as one who is free and a man can become a woman (Gal 3:26) would a Jew be obligated to act as a Gentile. For "each one should remain in the situation which he was in when GOD called him. Were you a slave when you were called?" (1 Cor 7:20-24). And why remain as called, because "the body is not made up of one part, but of many…(whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free)" (1 Cor 12:13-14). GOD needs witnesses for CHRIST everywhere in the world among Jews, Greeks, slaves, free, men, and women.
Contrary to popular belief, Paul remained a Jew in word and deed. Upon his arrival in Rome before the Jewish leaders, Paul testified, "I have done nothing against our people or against the customs of our ancestors" (Acts 28:17). The word "customs" even goes so far as to imply that Paul followed aspects of the Oral Law, in addition to the written law. Although Paul "became like a Jew, to win the Jews…like one under the law to win those under the law…to those not having the law to win those not having the law…weak to win the weak…all things to all men so that by all possible means I might win some" (1 Cor 9:20-22), the passage does not say, what I thought I remembered in scripture, "I became a Greek to the Greeks". Unless, I am missing the verse in my search, please help me if I am, Paul never claimed to become a Greek.
We remember that Gentile believers became known as "Christians" at Antioch (Acts 11:26), but what escapes our notice is that Hebrew Christians were separately called "Nazarenes" (Acts 24:5) because they maintained an attitude "zealous for the law" (Acts 21:20). Am I saying that a Gentile cannot participate in the celebration of the Jewish Feasts or be as the man who "delights in the law of the LORD" (Psa 1:2)? Certainly not, the Gentile can participate in what is "holy, righteous, and good" (Rom 7:12). Gentiles have the freedom to participate in matters of the law, but not the obligation. I can ride the "Judge Roy Scream," but that does not obligate me, despite my children’s position, to ride "Mr. Freeze". But some day I might ride "Mr. Freeze".
The same freedom which allows the Gentile to participate or not, cannot prohibit the Jew from participating in that which identifies the Jew with the unique promises given to the Jewish people by GOD. How did Gentiles ever conceive that a Jew, who accepted JESUS as Messiah, was mandated to give up the unique nature in which GOD created him? Or as Tina said in the past, "Spanish, celebrate Cinco de Mayo and other Mexican festivals, and eat cultural foods without getting grief from anyone. Jewish believers, however, are expected to give up all of their festivals and kosher foods if they want to be "one of us." My brothers, this should not be."
Scott
In a like manner, Paul told the Galatians, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal 3:28). Does this statement of Paul mandate equality of belief and action among Jew and Gentile? Certainly, not! For the statement itself contains examples that we know in the physical realm are not equal. Slave is not the equal of free and man is not the same as woman. For equality does not mean uniformity. For example, GOD is a unity, yet the three persons of Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct in position and function. The Jew and Greek, slave and free, and man and woman are equal only in the aspects of "faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:26).
Therefore, is a Jew required to act as a Gentile or a Gentile as a Jew? Only if a slave can act as one who is free and a man can become a woman (Gal 3:26) would a Jew be obligated to act as a Gentile. For "each one should remain in the situation which he was in when GOD called him. Were you a slave when you were called?" (1 Cor 7:20-24). And why remain as called, because "the body is not made up of one part, but of many…(whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free)" (1 Cor 12:13-14). GOD needs witnesses for CHRIST everywhere in the world among Jews, Greeks, slaves, free, men, and women.
Contrary to popular belief, Paul remained a Jew in word and deed. Upon his arrival in Rome before the Jewish leaders, Paul testified, "I have done nothing against our people or against the customs of our ancestors" (Acts 28:17). The word "customs" even goes so far as to imply that Paul followed aspects of the Oral Law, in addition to the written law. Although Paul "became like a Jew, to win the Jews…like one under the law to win those under the law…to those not having the law to win those not having the law…weak to win the weak…all things to all men so that by all possible means I might win some" (1 Cor 9:20-22), the passage does not say, what I thought I remembered in scripture, "I became a Greek to the Greeks". Unless, I am missing the verse in my search, please help me if I am, Paul never claimed to become a Greek.
We remember that Gentile believers became known as "Christians" at Antioch (Acts 11:26), but what escapes our notice is that Hebrew Christians were separately called "Nazarenes" (Acts 24:5) because they maintained an attitude "zealous for the law" (Acts 21:20). Am I saying that a Gentile cannot participate in the celebration of the Jewish Feasts or be as the man who "delights in the law of the LORD" (Psa 1:2)? Certainly not, the Gentile can participate in what is "holy, righteous, and good" (Rom 7:12). Gentiles have the freedom to participate in matters of the law, but not the obligation. I can ride the "Judge Roy Scream," but that does not obligate me, despite my children’s position, to ride "Mr. Freeze". But some day I might ride "Mr. Freeze".
The same freedom which allows the Gentile to participate or not, cannot prohibit the Jew from participating in that which identifies the Jew with the unique promises given to the Jewish people by GOD. How did Gentiles ever conceive that a Jew, who accepted JESUS as Messiah, was mandated to give up the unique nature in which GOD created him? Or as Tina said in the past, "Spanish, celebrate Cinco de Mayo and other Mexican festivals, and eat cultural foods without getting grief from anyone. Jewish believers, however, are expected to give up all of their festivals and kosher foods if they want to be "one of us." My brothers, this should not be."
Scott
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
But That Is Not What It Means To Me
When confronted with the truth about the pagan origins of christmas and easter, and even Sunday worship, most Christians respond "but that is not what it means to me, G-d looks at the heart" or "what difference does it make". It really doesn't matter what is means to us, what matters is what it means to G-d.
Let us consider Exodus 32, the story of the golden calf. The scripture says,"The people saw that Moses was delayed in descending the mountain". They believed Moses was dead and asked Aaron to" make gods that would go before us". So, Aaron threw a lump of gold into the fire and out came a calf, fashioned by Egyptian sorcerers. This calf represented an Egyptian god related to easter. Aaron declared a "Festival to Hashem" and the people brought offerings and ate and drank. Did this matter to G-d? Yes! "Let My anger flare up against them and I shall annihilate them;" Moses commanded the Levites to kill the guilty, which was three thousand.
But what did the the calf mean to them? Was it to replace their mediator Moses? Was it a way to worship G-d? Did they celebrate a pagan festival and declare it to G-d? It seems so. Did it matter to G-d. It seems so.
One more thing, Exodus 32 is in the Torah Portion the week.
Let us consider Exodus 32, the story of the golden calf. The scripture says,"The people saw that Moses was delayed in descending the mountain". They believed Moses was dead and asked Aaron to" make gods that would go before us". So, Aaron threw a lump of gold into the fire and out came a calf, fashioned by Egyptian sorcerers. This calf represented an Egyptian god related to easter. Aaron declared a "Festival to Hashem" and the people brought offerings and ate and drank. Did this matter to G-d? Yes! "Let My anger flare up against them and I shall annihilate them;" Moses commanded the Levites to kill the guilty, which was three thousand.
But what did the the calf mean to them? Was it to replace their mediator Moses? Was it a way to worship G-d? Did they celebrate a pagan festival and declare it to G-d? It seems so. Did it matter to G-d. It seems so.
One more thing, Exodus 32 is in the Torah Portion the week.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Only if the Sun, Stars, and Moon are Remove
The answer to Bryan’s question, "Did GOD divorce Israel since HE gave her a certificate of divorce and sent her away? (Jer 3:8)" begins with a story.
There once was a king of Judah, a descendant of David named Josiah, who had a son. His name was "Jehoiakim," and he had a son named "Jehoiachin", also referred to in the Encyclopaedia Judiaca as "Jeconiah, Jechoniah, and Coniah", meaning "The LORD will establish" (2 Chron 36:8). Jehoiachin reigned for three months and 10 days and "did evil in the eyes of the LORD" (2 Chrn 36:9). This evil must have been far greater from other kings because the LORD chose to carry Jehoiachin off to Babylon (Est 2:6) and pronounced a curse on him...
"Is this man Jehoiachin a despised, broken pot, an object no one wants? Why will he and his children be hurled out, cast into a land they do not know? O land, land, land, hear the word of the LORD! This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." (Jer 22:28-30)
Jehoiachin was of the royal line of kings, but the curse did not permit a descendant of Jehoiachin to "sit on the throne of David." Yet, the scriptures tell us that LORD swore with an oath (Ps 132:11), "David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel" (Jer 33:17)? So did the curse on Jehoiachin negate the previous promise to David?
Two genealogies are given in the Newer Testament for JESUS. The first is in Matthew (Matt 1:1-17) and the second in Luke (Luke 3:23-38). Because the names beyond David vary significantly, it has generally been accepted that the genealogy given by Matthew is for Joseph, while Luke’s account is for Mary. Women are generally not listed in Jewish genealogies since the "seed" comes from man. The genealogy of a woman was generally given by referencing the husband, such as JESUS "was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph" (Luke 3:24). All other references in Luke’s genealogy say "son of…" to distinguish from the reference to Joseph. Luke is telling us that JESUS was the son of Mary and a son of David.
Matthew’s genealogy contains all the great kings you would expect in the genealogy of JESUS and one you would not expect. Along with Solomon, Hezekiah, and Josiah is Jeconiah, also known as "Jehoiachin", the same king whom the LORD had cursed by saying, "none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." Did Matthew get the genealogy wrong or did the LORD change HIS mind? Neither.
For all my life I thought the genealogy in Matthew was to demonstrate that JESUS was a descendant of David because I did not know the Older Testament. That is not the purpose of Mathew’s genealogy at all. Matthew gave the genealogy to demonstrate that Joseph could not be the father of JESUS the MESSIAH since Joseph descended from Jeconiah. Immediately after the genealogy, Matthew begins to explain the virgin birth… "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about…" (Matt 1:18).
The genealogy of JESUS now takes on a different light that will take some time for me to consider in the future. Solomon and all the kings of Israel after David are no longer in the lineage of JESUS, but the Gentile woman before David remain. The Messianic promise to the line of Solomon had only been conditional… "if your sons keep my covenant and the statutes I teach them, then their sons will sit on your throne for ever and ever." (Ps 132:11-12). But Solomon did many detestable things, "So the LORD said to Solomon, "Since this is your attitude and you have not kept my covenant and my decrees, which I commanded you, I will most certainly tear the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your subordinates." (1 Kings 11:11).
Solomon’s sin had been sufficient in history to divide the kingdom of Israel and it appears it was sufficient to disqualify him from the line of the MESSIAH. The account in Luke now places the lineage of JESUS through David’s son Nathan (2 Sam 5:14), meaning "GOD has given." I can find little spoken of Nathan in the Bible and nothing of his descendants after until we get to Luke. This may have been what caused the Hebrew writer to compare JESUS to Melchizedek, "Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever" (Heb 7:3). The lineage of JESUS now becomes one of a relatively unknown and humble nature.
The LORD puts one more twist on the story. Joseph, who knew his heritage, understood that he descended from the "cursed" line and would never be associated with the MESSIAH. Mary, likewise, understood that she would not be the mother of the MESSIAH on the day she was pleged to be married to Joseph. Yet, GOD permitted he who descended from the curse and his wife to participate in the greatest story ever told because "Joseph…was a righteous man" (Matt 1:19) and "Mary…found favor with God" (Luke 1:30-31).
Now the sin of Solomon had been sufficiently great to divide the Kingdom of Israel, a division that continued until both the northern and southern kingdoms were conquered. Yet there was a time coming prophesized by Ezekiel, when the LORD would join the stick "in Ephraim's hand — and of the Israelite tribes associated with him, and join it to Judah's stick, making them a single stick of wood, and they will become one in my hand…I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. There will be one king over all of them and they will never again be two nations or be divided into two kingdoms." (Ezek 37:18-23). The promise is made to restore both halves of Israel into one, which includes both Israel (Ephraim) and Judah together. Midrashing a bit now, these two sticks can possibly be seen as the joining of the two aspects of the Rabbinic Messiah, bar Joseph (Ephraim), the suffering Messiah and bar David (Judah), the kingly Messiah.
I am typing too much so I need to wrap this up. The possible divorce of Israel (Jer 3:8) may have disqualified that generation of Jeremiah, but it did not disqualify future generations of the northern kingdom, just as the sin of Israel in the wilderness did not disqualify the children from entering the promise land and the sin of Jeconiah did not negate the promises given to David. The same prophet who spoke about the "certificate of divorce" would later write.
"This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar — the LORD Almighty is his name: 36 "Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,"declares the LORD,"will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me." 37 This is what the LORD says: "Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares the LORD." (Jer 31:35-37)
Shema, Scott
There once was a king of Judah, a descendant of David named Josiah, who had a son. His name was "Jehoiakim," and he had a son named "Jehoiachin", also referred to in the Encyclopaedia Judiaca as "Jeconiah, Jechoniah, and Coniah", meaning "The LORD will establish" (2 Chron 36:8). Jehoiachin reigned for three months and 10 days and "did evil in the eyes of the LORD" (2 Chrn 36:9). This evil must have been far greater from other kings because the LORD chose to carry Jehoiachin off to Babylon (Est 2:6) and pronounced a curse on him...
"Is this man Jehoiachin a despised, broken pot, an object no one wants? Why will he and his children be hurled out, cast into a land they do not know? O land, land, land, hear the word of the LORD! This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." (Jer 22:28-30)
Jehoiachin was of the royal line of kings, but the curse did not permit a descendant of Jehoiachin to "sit on the throne of David." Yet, the scriptures tell us that LORD swore with an oath (Ps 132:11), "David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel" (Jer 33:17)? So did the curse on Jehoiachin negate the previous promise to David?
Two genealogies are given in the Newer Testament for JESUS. The first is in Matthew (Matt 1:1-17) and the second in Luke (Luke 3:23-38). Because the names beyond David vary significantly, it has generally been accepted that the genealogy given by Matthew is for Joseph, while Luke’s account is for Mary. Women are generally not listed in Jewish genealogies since the "seed" comes from man. The genealogy of a woman was generally given by referencing the husband, such as JESUS "was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph" (Luke 3:24). All other references in Luke’s genealogy say "son of…" to distinguish from the reference to Joseph. Luke is telling us that JESUS was the son of Mary and a son of David.
Matthew’s genealogy contains all the great kings you would expect in the genealogy of JESUS and one you would not expect. Along with Solomon, Hezekiah, and Josiah is Jeconiah, also known as "Jehoiachin", the same king whom the LORD had cursed by saying, "none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." Did Matthew get the genealogy wrong or did the LORD change HIS mind? Neither.
For all my life I thought the genealogy in Matthew was to demonstrate that JESUS was a descendant of David because I did not know the Older Testament. That is not the purpose of Mathew’s genealogy at all. Matthew gave the genealogy to demonstrate that Joseph could not be the father of JESUS the MESSIAH since Joseph descended from Jeconiah. Immediately after the genealogy, Matthew begins to explain the virgin birth… "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about…" (Matt 1:18).
The genealogy of JESUS now takes on a different light that will take some time for me to consider in the future. Solomon and all the kings of Israel after David are no longer in the lineage of JESUS, but the Gentile woman before David remain. The Messianic promise to the line of Solomon had only been conditional… "if your sons keep my covenant and the statutes I teach them, then their sons will sit on your throne for ever and ever." (Ps 132:11-12). But Solomon did many detestable things, "So the LORD said to Solomon, "Since this is your attitude and you have not kept my covenant and my decrees, which I commanded you, I will most certainly tear the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your subordinates." (1 Kings 11:11).
Solomon’s sin had been sufficient in history to divide the kingdom of Israel and it appears it was sufficient to disqualify him from the line of the MESSIAH. The account in Luke now places the lineage of JESUS through David’s son Nathan (2 Sam 5:14), meaning "GOD has given." I can find little spoken of Nathan in the Bible and nothing of his descendants after until we get to Luke. This may have been what caused the Hebrew writer to compare JESUS to Melchizedek, "Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever" (Heb 7:3). The lineage of JESUS now becomes one of a relatively unknown and humble nature.
The LORD puts one more twist on the story. Joseph, who knew his heritage, understood that he descended from the "cursed" line and would never be associated with the MESSIAH. Mary, likewise, understood that she would not be the mother of the MESSIAH on the day she was pleged to be married to Joseph. Yet, GOD permitted he who descended from the curse and his wife to participate in the greatest story ever told because "Joseph…was a righteous man" (Matt 1:19) and "Mary…found favor with God" (Luke 1:30-31).
Now the sin of Solomon had been sufficiently great to divide the Kingdom of Israel, a division that continued until both the northern and southern kingdoms were conquered. Yet there was a time coming prophesized by Ezekiel, when the LORD would join the stick "in Ephraim's hand — and of the Israelite tribes associated with him, and join it to Judah's stick, making them a single stick of wood, and they will become one in my hand…I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. There will be one king over all of them and they will never again be two nations or be divided into two kingdoms." (Ezek 37:18-23). The promise is made to restore both halves of Israel into one, which includes both Israel (Ephraim) and Judah together. Midrashing a bit now, these two sticks can possibly be seen as the joining of the two aspects of the Rabbinic Messiah, bar Joseph (Ephraim), the suffering Messiah and bar David (Judah), the kingly Messiah.
I am typing too much so I need to wrap this up. The possible divorce of Israel (Jer 3:8) may have disqualified that generation of Jeremiah, but it did not disqualify future generations of the northern kingdom, just as the sin of Israel in the wilderness did not disqualify the children from entering the promise land and the sin of Jeconiah did not negate the promises given to David. The same prophet who spoke about the "certificate of divorce" would later write.
"This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar — the LORD Almighty is his name: 36 "Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,"declares the LORD,"will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me." 37 This is what the LORD says: "Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares the LORD." (Jer 31:35-37)
Shema, Scott
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Israel's Future Redemption
"On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all." (Acts 19:5-7)
The book of Acts records four separate outpourings of the SPIRIT on distinct people groups. Taken individually, they record the signs that accompanied the receiving of the SPIRIT by believers. However, Rabbi Thomson has a different take. The primary reason for recording these events was not to document the signs of the SPIRIT, but who the SPIRIT came upon. Taken collectively, these events document the chronological spread of the gospel throughout the world as unique people groups were added into the greater body of believers in JESUS CHRIST. First the SPIRIT was poured out on the Jews (Acts 2:4), then on the Samaritans (Acts 8:17), who had a Jewish heritage, and finally on the Gentiles (Acts 10:45). The three groups would appear to encompass the known world.
Now here’s my Midrash to the story. One final outpouring of the SPIRIT occurs on twelve men in the nineteenth chapter of Acts. The story seems insignificant against the backdrop of the "extraordinary miracles" (Acts 19:11) performed by Paul at Ephesus. If each of the previous three accounts is given to communicate the spread of the SPIRIT throughout the entire world, what people yet remains to be included?
Upon a detailed examination of the four passages, only this last account specifically says the number of people who initially received the SPIRIT, "about twelve men in all". Why did Luke tell us this number, while no mention of quantity is given in the earlier accounts? As we have often stated, numbers in scripture are understood first symbolically and then quantitatively. Often quantities are even qualified by the word "about" (Ex 32:28, Act 2:41, Acts 10:3, Luke 3:23, Luke 8:42), which indicates that the exact number is not as important as what the number represents. In other words, Luke told us the number because it represented the group of people mentioned and not just the number of people in the group.
We know from scripture that the number twelve is almost exclusively associated with the twelve tribes of Israel. Althought twelve is also the number of Apostles, these men are clearly Jews since they had received "John’s baptism" (Acts 19:3). Further, the twelve had "not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit" (Acts 19:2), which is consistent with Jewish belief that sees a "SPIRIT" as contrary to the belief that "the LORD is one" (Deut 6:4). Finally, the twelve have a repentant heart, consistent with "John’s baptism," a necessary condition that will open the door for the acceptance of JESUS as the MESSIAH of the Jews. Although the picture is left open to interpretation and I cannot be dogmatic about it, when viewed in the context of the previous three recorded outpourings of the SPIRIT, the fourth outpouring of the SPIRIT recorded in Acts appears to foreshadow the future redemption of the Jewish people and the land of Israel.
Shalom, Scott
The book of Acts records four separate outpourings of the SPIRIT on distinct people groups. Taken individually, they record the signs that accompanied the receiving of the SPIRIT by believers. However, Rabbi Thomson has a different take. The primary reason for recording these events was not to document the signs of the SPIRIT, but who the SPIRIT came upon. Taken collectively, these events document the chronological spread of the gospel throughout the world as unique people groups were added into the greater body of believers in JESUS CHRIST. First the SPIRIT was poured out on the Jews (Acts 2:4), then on the Samaritans (Acts 8:17), who had a Jewish heritage, and finally on the Gentiles (Acts 10:45). The three groups would appear to encompass the known world.
Now here’s my Midrash to the story. One final outpouring of the SPIRIT occurs on twelve men in the nineteenth chapter of Acts. The story seems insignificant against the backdrop of the "extraordinary miracles" (Acts 19:11) performed by Paul at Ephesus. If each of the previous three accounts is given to communicate the spread of the SPIRIT throughout the entire world, what people yet remains to be included?
Upon a detailed examination of the four passages, only this last account specifically says the number of people who initially received the SPIRIT, "about twelve men in all". Why did Luke tell us this number, while no mention of quantity is given in the earlier accounts? As we have often stated, numbers in scripture are understood first symbolically and then quantitatively. Often quantities are even qualified by the word "about" (Ex 32:28, Act 2:41, Acts 10:3, Luke 3:23, Luke 8:42), which indicates that the exact number is not as important as what the number represents. In other words, Luke told us the number because it represented the group of people mentioned and not just the number of people in the group.
We know from scripture that the number twelve is almost exclusively associated with the twelve tribes of Israel. Althought twelve is also the number of Apostles, these men are clearly Jews since they had received "John’s baptism" (Acts 19:3). Further, the twelve had "not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit" (Acts 19:2), which is consistent with Jewish belief that sees a "SPIRIT" as contrary to the belief that "the LORD is one" (Deut 6:4). Finally, the twelve have a repentant heart, consistent with "John’s baptism," a necessary condition that will open the door for the acceptance of JESUS as the MESSIAH of the Jews. Although the picture is left open to interpretation and I cannot be dogmatic about it, when viewed in the context of the previous three recorded outpourings of the SPIRIT, the fourth outpouring of the SPIRIT recorded in Acts appears to foreshadow the future redemption of the Jewish people and the land of Israel.
Shalom, Scott
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)