1. Introduction

   Greetings saints of the Most High. Welcome to another installment of the Messianic Torah Observer. Rod Thomas coming to you on a gorgeous winter Preparation Day here in the DFW. Thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedules to fellowship with me. And as always beloved, it is my hope, trust, and prayer that this installment of TMTO finds you, your families, and your fellowships well and blessed.

As I am publishing this discussion, it is the 23rd day of the 10th biblical month of Yah’s sacred calendar year, which translates to January 24, 2025.

    Overview of the topic: Jesus’ prohibition against titles in Matthew 23:8-12.

This is “Unveiling the Truth: Yeshua’s Prohibition Against Titles in Matthew 23:8-12-Part 1.”

Consider this beloved: Yahoshua Messiah is the head of our Faith. He establishes the rules and standards for all who have answered the call to follow Him and be His disciple. And it is up to us, His taught and sent ones, to conform to those rules and standards. Right?

As members of the Messianic/Netsari/Nazarene Yisrael Faith, we are trained to keep Yah’s Torah — Yah’s instructions in righteousness — in Spirit and in Truth. Torah then, forms the very foundation or constitution of our Faith and it is the substance of our covenant relationship with the Creator of the Universe. So, our Torah-honoring lifestyle tends to be pretty much a given with variations on the manner in which we honor Yah’s instructions in righteousness.

But, when it comes to many of Yeshua’s instructions to His taught and sent ones, which by extension applies to those of us who have been redeemed by His atoning sacrifice and brought into that covenant relationship with His Father, Yehovah, we often find ourselves at odds with other members of our Faith Community.

Case in point is Matthew 23.8-12. In case this reference doesn’t ring a bell in your mind, it is the passage where Yeshua, amid responding to challenges waged against Him by a gaggle of Scribes and Pharisees on the Temple Mount, turns to His taught ones and instructs them to not permit anyone to call or refer to them as Rabbi, Father, or Teacher.

    Relevance of the topic for Messianic believers.

Now, the implications of this admonishment by Yeshua to His taught ones is certainly far reaching to say the least. Because we consider all of the instructions that Yeshua passed down to His followers as being applicable to us Netsarim/Messianics today. But the extent and manner to which instructions such as the one the Master leveled at His followers here in this passage apply to us today tends to be the stuff that often incites disagreements within our Greater Faith Community. And this passage is a glaring example of this because of major interpretative and practical differences among the members of the Community. And one could reasonably argue that because this is such a hot-potato subject I would be wise to leave it alone and focus on something more edifying and practical.

So, knowing the potential for controversy, why then are we discussing this issue now — today? Well, I’ll be honest with you. About a month ago, I was privileged to have attended a Shabbat service at a DFW area Messianic Jewish congregation. I’d been itching to hook-up with a Messianic Jewish congregation for quite some time and I was steered to this congregation by a local Messianic leader who I greatly respect.

To make a long story short even longer (hahaha), I thoroughly enjoyed the service. What I didn’t enjoy were some of the imposed restrictive traditions and rules that I was obliged to conform to if I wanted to attend the service. I’m talking about being prohibited from using or uttering Abba’s holy and righteous Name (as I understand it to be) and wearing tzitziyot. The other thing that didn’t set well with me at this Messianic Jewish congregation was that the congregation’s leader, a gifted orator and seemingly affable gentleman would add, went by the title “Rabbi.”

Now, this last thing about the congregation’s leader being referred to as Rabbi, was not at all surprising to me. But references to him as Rabbi reawakened a concern I’ve had for quite some time regarding Messianic Jewish leaders or Messianic non-Jewish leaders taking unto themselves, or having the title of Rabbi conferred upon them by members of their congregation. And of course my concern about this issue is prompted by Yeshua’s polemic against the Scribes and Pharisees, or the religious leaders of His day, that included what I believed to be a prohibition against His disciples or followers taking on titles such as Rabbi or Father or teacher.

Lastly, and this is a personal concern, I needed to rationalize in my pea brain what I may or may not refer to myself as on this platform. Or for that matter, what others in our Faith Community may or may not refer to me as. I’m not concerned at all about calling myself or having others refer to me as “Rabbi” or “father.” I’m specifically concerned about the title or office of “teacher.” Master instructed that we not permit others to refer to ourselves as teacher, along with Rabbi or father. By the end of this session, I’ll share my final conclusions on this matter.

With that being said, let’s get into the meat and potatoes of our focus passage.

2. Context of Matthew 23:8-12

   Brief summary of the context in which Jesus spoke these words.

It is Matthew 23.8-12, which reads:

8 But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ because one is your teacher, and you are all brothers, 9 And do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your heavenly Father. 10 And do not be called teachers, because one is your teacher, the Christ (or rather, haMashiyach). 11 And the greatest among you will be your servant. 12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (W. Hall Harris III et al., eds., The Lexham English Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012), Mt 23:8–12)

   Explanation of the cultural and religious setting at the time.

In working through difficult passages of scripture such as Matthew 23.8-12, it is often helpful to gain an understanding of the cultural and religious setting of the time in which the passage in question is framed. So, let’s briefly talk about that.

The context in which Yeshua’s admonishments to his taught ones to not be called Rabbis, Teachers, and Fathers is embedded in His final series of teachings on the Temple Mount just days before His Passion — His crucifixion. This was an intense day of testing and inspection that was being conducted by the Jewish religious establishment that featured, in this case, Yerushalayim Scribes and the Pharisees. This testing and inspection of Yeshua (our Passover/Pesach — 1 Cor 5.7) by the Jewish religious establishment on that day coincided with the mandated period of inspection and testing that the nation would conduct on the selected lambs each family would ultimately slaughter and consume on Passover/Pesach two days hence/in two days (Exo 12.3-13). The spiritual blindness that overshadowed the Scribes and Pharisees on that day would not have permitted them to recognize that they were willing participants in the imminent execution of Yah’s plan of salvation, redemption, and restoration. And the final outcome of their inspection and testing of the Lamb of Yehovah: There was no fault to be found in Him. Halleluyah!

Now, this challenging interlude involving the Scribes’ and Pharisees’ testing and inspection of Yeshua there on the Temple Mount extends from the middle of the 21st  through the end of the 23rd chapter of Matthew. And despite this interlude being by nature the ultimate inspection and testing of our unblemished Pesach/Passover, it also served as the ultimate indictment against the corrupt Jewish religious establishment. Barney Kasdan smartly describes this interlude as: “It represents Yeshua’s final indictment against some of the dysfunctional and contrary attitudes of some Torah-teachers (aka Scribes) and P’rushim (aka Pharisees)” (Matthew Presents Yeshua, King Messiah-A Messianic Commentary).

Let’s dig a little deeper here. Master Yahoshua was not challenging the validity of the religious establishment as much as He was challenging the religious leaders’ corrupt and hypocritical persona. The Master boldly noted that these were privileged to sit in the “Kesay” (i.e. the Seat of Moshe) — of which Kasdan describes as the place of authority where “the rabbi would issue his authoritative teaching and halakhah/rulings concerning the Torah” (ibid.). Consider the text:

(1) Then spoke Yahoshua to the multitude and to His talmidim (aka His disciples or taught ones), (2) saying, “The Sophrim (aka the Scribes) and the Prushim (aka the Pharisees) sit themselves in Moshe’s kesay.” (Mat 23; RSTNE)

Here, the very descriptor of the “kesay,” the Seat of Moshe, asserts that the one who presumes to teach and judge the people while seated upon it was supposed to teach and render judgments based upon the written Torah of Yehovah, that is historically attributed to Moshe. Furthermore, you would [rightly] think that the ones who were entrusted with authority to routinely dispense/teach Torah-based halachah (aka how the people were to walk in Torah) and render righteous judgment from the kesay would naturally behave in strict accordance with the very halachic principles and right-rulings these religious leaders would dispense from the “kesay.” But these did not behave in such a righteous manner. What is that anecdote: “That which is good for the goose is good for the gander?”

Furthermore, the theology of these same religious leaders (i.e. the oral torah or the traditions of the sages and the elders) often challenged and conflicted with Yah’s holy and righteous Torah (Mat 15.1-20). In this sense, these religious leaders were steering the people away from the One True Faith towards their man-made, hierarchical-based religion of Judaism. And as much as many of us may attempt to rationalize and justify it, Judaism was and remains a “religion.” Judaism is not of the true faith once delivered. The true faith once delivered originated with Yehovah and the patriarchs: Avraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’achov. And our boss, Yahoshua came to show us how to walk in that Faith properly.

Let’s stop here and permit me to say that I am not in the least denouncing Judaism. Our Master ministered here on earth within the framework of the first-century Judaisms. Yes, He most certainly engaged in certain Judaistic traditions — that being those that did not nullify His Father’s Torah. But let’s not make the mistake that He was an advocate or promoter of the so-called “fence around Torah” that His religious counterparts feloniously enforced upon the people. In fact, our Master railed against those that placed such heavy burdens upon the orthodox Jewish people, but they themselves failed to care enough to help those whom they burdened with the load of halachic traditions, judgments, and rulings (Mat 23.4). As far as I am concerned, Judaism is what it is. It was and remains a man-made religion. And for what it’s worth, it has served and continues to serve a purpose in Yah’s eternal plan and purpose for His chosen people. But at the end of the day, beloved, Judaism is NOT the one true faith once delivered. The one true faith is unencumbered by the burdens of religion. Yeshua described the one true faith as the place where one may find rest for their soul. And that is attributed to Yeshua’s brand of the one true Faith being easy. The burden it places upon the disciple is light. It’s simply this: Follow Yah’s instructions in righteousness and walk out those instructions in the manner in which Yeshua — not the Jewish Rabbis, teachers, and fathers — taught and modeled (Mat 11.29-30).

Well, apparently the Scribes and Pharisees of our Master’s day were not behaving accordingly. For according to Yahoshua, the Scribes and Pharisees were guilty of the following:

• Conniving and disingenuous: these sought to trip Yeshua up by asking Him loaded questions (Mat 21.23-27; 22.15-22, 34-40).
• They refused to believe and to repent from their sinful ways (Mat 21.28-32).
• These possessed murderous and violent intentions towards Yah’s anointed and sent ones (Mat 21.33-46).
• They spoke harshly against Yah’s Sent One (i.e. Yeshua), leading many to ignore the Sent One’s teachings and example (Mat 22.1-14).
• The Scribes and Pharisees bound the people with “heavy burdens, which are grievous (i.e. ridiculous traditions that nullify Yah’s Torah), yet they will not lift a finger to help” those they’ve burdened (Mat 23.4).
• These are conceited in every conceivable manner: seeking the admiration of the people; enlarging their phylacteries and lengthening their tzitziyot in order to draw attention to themselves; seeking the places of honor on Feast Days and holy convocations; and to be noticed and applauded in public by the people (Mat 23.5-7).
• The Scribes and Pharisees, because of their authoritative influence upon Jewish society, coupled with their intentional nullification of Torah through their takanot and ma’aseh (i.e. their manmade religious traditions and rulings), “shut the gate to the Kingdom of Heaven in men’s faces” (Mat 23.13).
• These routinely took advantage of the meager financial wellbeing of Jewish widows (Mat 23.14).
• They were pretentious in conducting synagogal services (Mat 23.14). Everything they did was about them; drawing the eyes and ears of all in their presence onto them.
• The Scribes and Pharisees aggressively sought to make disciples for themselves; making them to be like themselves as opposed to leading them in the paths of righteousness for Yehovah’s Namesake (Mat 23.15).
• Despite the fact that these religious leaders possessed religious and judicial authority over the people, they were willfully ignorant of the ways and things of Yehovah. Their willful ignorance, coupled with their wielding of religious and judicial authority led many astray (Mat 23.16-22).
• Although meticulous in their keeping of Torah, the Scribes and Pharisees were selective in their keeping of Torah. As a result, they majored on the minors and minored on the majors: neglecting, as Yeshua described, “the weightier matters of Torah: judgment, mercy, and faith” (Mat 23.23-24).
• These religious leaders were as corrupt in their deportment as the day is long. The Jewish religious establishment needed major moral cleaning (Mat 23. 25-26).
• The Scribes and Pharisees were as fake as anyone could be. They were in every sense of the word, hypocrites. They appeared to the people to be holy and righteous, but inwardly, they were dead, filthy, hypocritical, and filled with iniquity/transgressions/sins (Mat 23.27-28).
• As spiritually and physically corrupt as they were, the Scribes and Pharisees refused to repent (Mat 23.29-33). These, like their forefathers, were guilty of murder, having been responsible for the death of Yochanan the Immerser’s father, Zecharyah (Mat 23.34-36; cf. Protoevangelion of James).

I think you would agree that these were some serious charges that our Master levied against His critics — these Scribes and Pharisees. And the Scribes and Pharisees took Yeshua’s accusations and criticisms of them quite seriously. So seriously, that they diligently sought means to silence and rid themselves of Him (Luk 22.2; Joh 5.18; 7.1).

One would think that with so many known and obvious crimes on their “spiritual rape sheets,” most of the religious leaders had, by default, disqualified themselves to  exercise the authority they’d taken upon themselves while being seated on the “kesay” or “Seat of Moshe.” And so, in light of this hypocritical outing of the Jewish religious leaders, Yeshua lays down a very important mitzvah/instruction for His disciples:

(2) The scribes and the Pharisees sit on the Seat of Moses. (3) Therefore, do and observe everything that they tell you, but do not do as they do, for they tell others to do something and do not do it themselves. (Mat 23; LEB).

Now, this rendering of Matthew 23.2-3 is a pretty standard rendering across all received text-based English Bible translations, with but one or two very rare exceptions. Yet denominationalism and several within the Messianic/Netsari/Nazarene Faith have for the most part ignored the wording and potential meaning of what this translation is saying. This standard rendering of Yeshua’s edict to His taught ones effectively puts Yahoshua in a position where He contradicts His own accusations against the religious leaders by instructing His taught ones to “do and observe everything THEY tell you…”

Now, think about this: If this English rendering is indeed an accurate translation of [extant-existing] ancient Koine Greek texts, Yeshua was instructing his disciples — and by extension us today — that they were required to do and observe/keep everything the corrupt religious establishment put forth to them to do out of respect for their position as holders of the Seat of Moshe. And that makes absolutely no sense, especially after discrediting the Scribes and Pharisees to such a brutal extent. Either we have an interpretation or manuscript problem, or Master Yahoshua speaks with “forked tongue.” And I believe with my whole heart that Master Yeshua never spoke with “forked tongue.” Which means, then, that somewhere in all of this, we have a serious manuscript and or interpretation problem.

Interestingly, most commentators and readers feel the translational wording that is found in most of our English bibles is accurate, which is to say that Yeshua, despite having told His taught one’s not to trust the Scribes and Pharisees because they are corrupt to their very core, that they are to do and observe everything they tell them to do…” Barney Kasdan explains: “Their (that is the Scribes and Pharisees) teaching is often correct and to be respected, but the apparent problem is their inconsistent lifestyle … The manner in which Yeshua addresses many of the traditional customs in the subsequent verses has led some interpreters to conclude that He is attacking Judaism itself. This cannot be accurate in light of His exhortation to do whatever the rabbis accurately teach” (Matthew Presents Yeshua King Messiah-A Messianic Commentary). Now, I agree that Master in His polemic against the corrupt Scribes and Pharisees in this passage was not attacking Judaism the religion, but rather, He was criticizing Judaism’s corrupt religious establishment. Judaism, a religious “spin-off” of the Hebrew Faith at that time was run by corrupt religious leaders who usurped authority unto themselves, beginning sometime after the Maccabees, around 167 BCE, and through the enforcement of their oral traditions/oral torah, led their Jewish brethren astray. Andrew Gabriel Roth (author of the Aramaic English New Testament) explained the Peshitta’s almost identical wording to that of the Greek-based English Translations of Matthew 23.2-3 as: “Peshitta and Greek texts agree that since the Pharisees sit in Moshe’s seat, they should teach Moshe, but, instead, they elevate their oral Torah above Torah. The fact of the matter is, if they would actually study Torah, they would know Y’shua is Mashiyach.” (AENT; p. 66) And I can only respond to that explanation with, “whatever that is supposed to mean.”

My disagreement with Kasdan and Roth aside, I will, however, agree with them that Master Yahoshua did not condemn every Scribe and Pharisee on the Sanhedrin’s payroll, so to speak. We know that there were Pharisees, like Nicodemus for instance, who were upright in their deportment and spiritual convictions. Many of the Jewish religious establishment considered Yahoshua to be a Rabbi who was “a teacher come from Yah” (Joh 3.2). And yes, as Kasdan states, there are “good adherents as well as bad adherents” in every religious group.  But the Master’s criticisms against the Scribes and Pharisees should not be a marginalized referendum on the part of our Messiah that only slapped the corrupt wrists of just a handful of these religious leaders. With the exception of a few precious Pharisees and Scribes like Nicodemus, the Yerushalayim religious establishment was terribly corrupted and compromised. And one cannot but consider why the Sons of Zadok — the Jewish faith leaders — parted company with their Orthodox counterparts because of the corrupt nature of the religious establishment in Yerushalayim.

But fear not beloved, all is not lost. There are existing ancient manuscripts that clean up this passage to such a degree that when translated into English makes this passage consistent with all that Yeshua is recorded to have said in the verses that precede and proceed it. The manuscript I’m referring to is not of the extant recognized Koine Greek type, but of the Cochin India collection of ancient Hebrew texts, in addition to Shem Tov’s Hebrew  Matthew.

Now, I am acutely aware that the vast majority of folks in our Faith Community strongly adhere to the doctrine of Greek manuscript supremacy when it comes to the source of the 27-Renewed Covenant/New Testament books. I’m not in the frame of mind to go to war today with the Greek supremacists as it relates to the validity of the Cochin and Shem Tov Hebrew Manuscripts. Abba willing, I hope to do so in the future. However, in my mind, I do believe these Hebrew texts are valid. Since my coming to Faith, Greek supremacy as the sole basis of the New Testament/Apostolic writings, has never set well with me. It seems pretty evident and sensible to me that Jews, with the exception of Luke maybe, penned the New Testament/Renewed Covenant books of the bible. The chances of these authors, some of them simple fishermen and craftsmen, being so versed in Koine Greek — at least enough to write their accounts in the Greek language — seems quite doubtful to me. We know that first century Judaean Orthodox Jews spoke Hebrew. It’s part of every Orthodox Jew’s upbringing. And such practices haven’t changed since that time. Then there’s the likelihood that the first century Judaean Jews also spoke Aramaic. Now, we do have some extant Aramaean New Testament/Renewed Covenant texts such as found in the various Peshita family texts. Roth’s Aramaic English New Testament reawakened interests in the Aramaic texts of the Renewed Covenant Books of the bible. But for some reason or another, there has been little to no interest in our Faith community in the Aramaic texts. I’ve been frustrated over the years with Andrew Gabriel Roth’s Aramaic English New Testament rendering of the renewed covenant scriptures because it seems to be in “lock-step” (i.e. very little variation) with every questionable Greek-based text: as it is with Matthew 23.2-3. The Aramaic English New Testament simply reiterates, almost verbatim, the Greek-based English texts.

But the Hebrew-based English text of Matthew 23.2-3 reads as follows:

(1) Then spoke Yahoshua to the multitude and to His talmidim, (2) saying, “The Sophrim (i.e. the Scribes) and the Prushim (i.e. the Pharisees) sit themselves in Moshe’s kesay. (3) All therefore that he — [Moshe] — will invite you to observe, that observe and do. But do not do after their Miqsat Maaseh Ha-Torah. For they talk Torah and do not what Moshe said. (RSTNE 8th Edition) The authors and editors of the RSTNE 8th Edition claim they based their interpretation of the Apostolic Writings on the Cochin India Hebrew texts.

The authors of the RSTNE take quite a bit of liberties with much of the biblical text with this Matthaean passage being no exception. They insert quite a bit of clarifying, leading verbiage and embellishments in various passages of the apostolic writings to get their points across. But the gist remains: “All therefore that Moshe will invite you to observe, that observe and do.” I hope to do a critical review of the RSTNE, Abba willing, in a future installment of TMTO.

Now, Michael Rood quotes, also with some clarifying leading verbiage and embellishments, the Shem Tov rendering of this passage as such:

(1) Yeshua addressed the multitude and all of His disciples (2) saying, “The sages and the Prushim sit in Moshe’s seat. (3) Therefore, whatever he (Moshe) commands you to observe, that observe and do — but do not follow the takanot and ma’asim of the Prushim —  for they say but they do not do.” (English rendering of Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew that is contained in Rood’s Chronology).

Now, this is not the gist of our main discussion here today. It’s uber easy to go down Rabbi-holes when discussing the content of surrounding verses such as Matthew 23.2-3 — that being the issue surrounding the kesay/the Seat of Moshe. But that’s not the issue we’re discussing here today. We’re addressing the issue of whether Messianics/Netsarim are bound to abide by or behave according to a literal interpretation or understanding of Matthew 23.8-12 which when read in a literal sense, seems to prohibit Yeshua’s disciples being called, or taking unto themselves the titles of Rabbi, Father, and Teacher.

However, if we are to arrive at a competent understanding of Yeshua’s instructions to His taught ones to call no one Rabbi, teacher, or father, it is imperative that we examine this passage in context — which we just did — but also examine key concepts and terms contained within our focus passage. Because here’s the deal beloved: What’s at stake here is more than just referring to somebody by the given titles of rabbi, teacher, and spiritual father, or spiritual teacher, or what have you. What’s truly at stake here amounts to more than the conferring of titles and the expression of titles upon individuals, but how we view those titles and the people that possess them. How we treat those religious or faith leaders within the confines of those conferred titles. That’s what’s most important, is how we view, how we treat those individuals that have been given the titles of rabbi, father, and teacher.  Now, please hear me on this. It’s vitally important that when deliberating this issue of whether to call or treat our faith leaders according to titles such as Rabbi, Teacher, and Father, that we compare and contrast the definitions and use of the terms in today’s parlance, versus what those same terms meant back in Yahoshua’s day.

3. Examination of Key Terms

Definition and significance of the terms “rabbi,” “father,” and “teacher” in Jewish tradition.

Our focus passage reads — and this is Yahoshua speaking to His taught ones and a group of followers who had assembled to hear his teachings on the Temple Mount amid the Scribes and Pharisees  who had engaged in an inspection and testing of the Master:

(8) Don’t allow anyone to call you Rabbi — because you all have just One Rabbi — Mashiyach — and you all are brothers. (9) Do not call any many your Father upon the earth. Only one is your Father, and He is in heaven. (10) Do not allow anyone to call you the Teacher, for there is only one who is the Teacher — Mashiyach. (11) He that is greatest among you shall be your servant. (12) He who exalts himself shall be abased. But he who humbles himself in service to others shall be exalted. (Rood’s Chronology; Mat 23)

• Teacher/masters/instructors/directors/kathegetes
  • Kathegetes (kath-ayg-ay-tace) is used 2 of 65 times in scriptures.
  • Contextually, kathegetes as used in our focus passage applies to scribes who often debated the Master in nuances of Torah and Jewish Law. These often sought to trip the Master up.
  • Also applied to false teachers.
  • Nicodemus, a high-ranking member of the Yerushalayim Sanhedrin, revealed to Master Yahoshua, that He — Yeshua — was widely regarded by members of the Sanhedrin as a Rabbi and a holy teacher (Joh 3.2).
  • Luke records that the Antioch Kehila/Assembly/congregation had teachers among its members (Act 13.1).
  • Shaul informed his Corinthian readers that Yah installed apostles, prophets, and teachers, among other giftings, into the Body of Mashiyach (1 Cor 12.29-30).
  • Shaul referred to himself as a teacher (1 Tim 2.7; 2 Tim 1.11).
  • The writer of Hebrews criticized his readers for failing to mature to the level of teacher in the Body of Mashiyach (Heb 5.12). The Scribes held expertise and authority on Jewish Law and Torah:
  • Yeshua condemned these as false teachers (Mat 23.1-33; 15.14).
  • Yeshua warned us to avoid them (Mat 16.6, 12).

• Father/pater = this title exists today and has been used since time immemorial across all cultures and nations. It is used in three distinct scenarios: (1) the generator or male ancestor (in a biological sense); father (in a metaphorical sense such as spiritual father or for someone to treat another as if they were their biological father); and Father as directly referring to our Creator. Yeshua impressed upon His taught ones and those who had gathered to hear His teachings that there is but One Father Who is in heaven (9). Yehovah as Father means that:
  • Yah is sovereign and owns the world (Psa 24.1-2; cf. Deu 10.14; Psa 89.11; 47.9; Eze 18.4; Job 41.11).
  • Yehovah owns His people as He is their Creator (Deu 32.6; Isa 43.6-7, 15; 1 Cor 8.6).
  • Yah owns His people as He is their Redeemer (1 Cor 6.19-20; cf. Rom 14.8; Isa 43.1; Lev 25.55; Exo 20.2-3).
  • Yah shows love and compassion (Hos 11.1; cf. Psa 103.13; Jer 3.19; 2 Cor 1.3).
  • Yehovah exercises providential care of His own (Psa 68.5; cf. Mat 6. 26, 31-33; 7.11).
  • Yah disciplines and corrects those who are His (Deu 8.5; cf. Pro 3.11-12; Heb 12.5-6).
  • Yehovah is Yeshua’s Father (Mat 3.17; cf. Mat 11.27; Luk 2.49; Joh 5.17-18; 17.11; 20.17; Rom 15.6; Eph 1.3; Pet 1.3; 1 Joh 1.3).
  • Yah is Israel’s Father (Jer 31.9; cf. Deu 32.6, 18; Exo 4.22; Deu 14.1; Isa 63.16; Mal 2.10).

• Rabbi/Rhabbi = meaning “Great One” or “My Great One” is unique to Judaism. It specifically denotes an ordained teacher, spiritual leader, and authority on Jewish Law and tradition. It’s an exceptional title of honor to say the least. While other religions and cultures have their own titles for religious leaders (such as priests, imams, pastors, and so on), “Rabbi” is distinct to Judaism. Nicodemus and other members of the Sanhedrin referred to Yahoshua as a “Rabbi” (Joh 3.2). And of course the Pharisees awarded themselves and the people lavished upon them the title of The Pharisees/Rabbis were the Jewish religious party that demanded of the people strict adherence to Jewish Law and the traditions of the elders/sages:
  • Yeshua condemned these as false teachers (Mat 23.1-33; 15.14).
  • Yeshua warned us to avoid them (Mat 16.6, 12).

____________________________________________________________________________________

And beloved, this is where we’ll end this installment. We’ll pick it up from here next installment where we’ll rationalize whether Yeshua’s admonishments to His taught and sent ones were indeed literal prohibitions; determine a biblically sound interpretation and application for Matthew 23.8-12; consider the various theological viewpoints on this passage; and I’ll give you my position on this passage and its application for us today who are the chosen of Yah.

I pray you were blessed and edified by this post and I look forward to fellowshiping with you in our next opportunity to do so. Until then, may you be most blessed, fellow saints in training. Shabbat Shalom … Shavuatov … Take care.