Israel-The Birth of a Nation Through Tribulation-STAR-46

by | Aug 21, 2022 | Blog

This is Israel: The Birth of a Nation Through Tribulation. It is a study of the 46th Parshah of our 3-year Torah Reading Cycle.

This week’s reading is found in Exodus/Shemot 1:1-2:25.

Introduction to the Reading

The historical record transitions from that of a focus on the lives of the individual patriarchs, to that of the nation that descended directly from the patriarchs. Yisra’el. The Hebrew nation. Not a Jewish nation as modern Judaism loves to tout, mind you. A nation composed of the 12-tribes that descended from the loins of Ya’achov, who was renamed Yisra’el back in Genesis/Beresheit 32:28.

 

aThese are the names of the sons of Israel who came to Egypt with Jacob, each with his household:
2 Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah,
3 Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin,
4 Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher.
5 All the descendants of Jacob were aseventy persons; Joseph was already in Egypt. (Exo 1:1-5 ESV)

Bridging Genesis/Beresheit to Exodus/Shemot

The chasm that would otherwise exist between Genesis/Beresheit is effectively bridged by way of Moshe providing a detailed accounting of those Hebrews that immigrated to Egypt (aka Mitsrayim) from  the Land of Canaan (aka Kena’an), as well as a repeating of the fact that hyosef, the presumptive patrirarch of Isra’el (aka Yisra’el) after the death of his father Jacob (aka Ya’achov, had died. And thus, the birth of a nation-Yisra’el–commences in haste.

The Sons of Israel

The sons of Ya’achov, in Hebrew “bene Yisra’el, over the course of some 400-years will have grown into a true nation of peoples (reference Exodus 1:7).

In verse 1, Moshe writes: “And these are the names of the sons of Israel (i.e., bene Yisra’el) who came to Egypt with Jacob.” This is a direct continuation of the Genesis/Beresheit record that translators ended with Joseph’s (aka Yosef’s) death (1:1-5).

The Hebrew title for this Torah reading is “Shemot” which means “names.” When we talk about Torah Readings or Torah Portions, the first significant word is used by the rabbis as that reading’s title.

The Hebrew term “bene” (aka children or sons) as used in our text specifically denotes only the male descendants of Yisra’el that made up the count of the 70 souls that emmigrated to and took up residence in Mitsrayim along with their father Ya’achov (reference Beresheit 46).

The Biblical Relevance for the Number 70

The number “70” is used throughout the Tanach and rabbinic writings. Therefore, 70 as a number denoting the number of Yah’s people associated with a certain event or structure or regarding years on Yah’s historical calendar is believed to carry special meaning to Yah’s set-apart people. It is derived from the  number “7”, which represents natural order of things. That is, Yah completed His creation in 7-days. When we take the number 7 and multiply it be a factor of 10 (which is treated as a full number) we get 70. Thus, 70 will carry a meaning of “completeness” in scripture.

Numbers as expressed in Torah and throughout the Tanach are often “symbolic-approximations” (Rober Alter-The 5 Books of Moses). The numbers 7, 10, 40, are generally units of time and counts of individuals. 

Our text notes that 70-persons–specifically 70 male descendants of Ya’achov relocated to Mitsrayim with the patriarch Ya’achov. The text is specific that these 70 “sprung from the loins (aka “yarekh” or thigh of Ya’achov, representing a euphemism or metonymy for the male reproductive organ) of Ya’achov (Genesis/Beresheit 24:2). 

Thus, these 70-descendants or sons of Ya’achov represent in biblical parlance a complete grouping of Ya’achov’s descendants. These 70 formed the foundation of the nascent Hebrew nation. Yisra’el at this time had become “a grand family” and “the nucleus of a nation” (Robert Alter-The 5 Books of Moses). 

Robert Alter notes in his commentary on this passage that the number 70 as used here represents a “substantial clan” or “the nucleus” of a nation people. Alter asserts that such numbers are not to be understood as “arithmetically precise measures.” And to some extent, I would agree with Alter’s position on this. However, I believe if we are true “people of the Book” we must err on the side of taking what the Word says at face value supported by a “Spirit and Truth” appreciation of the content of that text.

J.H. Hertz (Torah-Haftarah) notes that if one were to add to these–that being add to Ya’achov’s direct-male descendants, wives and daughters and servants, the total, actual number that entered and took up residence in Goshen of Mitsrayim would have numbered in the several hundreds. Why is this information important to us today? It is important beloved, because it serves as an affirmation that the covenant promise and prophecy made by Yah to Avraham can be taken to the “spiritual bank” by us. I’m talking about the promise and prophecy that through Avraham, Yisra’el would become a great and mighty nation through which all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis/Beresheit 18:18; 22:18). In other words, the covenant promises would include all the nation peoples of the earth who would choose to enter into a covenant relationship with the Creator of the Universe. Praise Yah!

6 Then Joseph died, and all his brothers and all that generation. (Exo 1:6 ESV)

The Dying Out of a Generation

This verse denotes the dying out of a generation, according to J. H. Hertz (Torah Haftarah), that included both Yisra’elites and Mitsri. This is important to understand given that both sets of people’s existence will directly impact one another in the years ahead.

But the people of Israel were fruitful and increased greatly; they multiplied and grew exceedingly strong, so that the land was filled with them. (Exo 1:7 ESV)

Yisra’el Swarms Mitsrayim

Bene Yisra’el were fruitful and multiplied (or rather, Yisra’el swarmed) and filled Mitsrayim. These sons were the descendnats of Ya’achov and their families and servants and such to whom the name Yisra’el belonged or was attached. (Note: We, the redeemed of Yah, are to lay claim to the name Yisra’el as our heritage and culture.) Yisra’el! The descendants of Yisra’el became a manifestation of Yah’s instruction back in the Garden of Eden (aka Gan Eden) for His people to be “fruitful and multiply-swarm (Hebrew of “sharats”) the earth (Genesis/Beresheit 1:28). To be fruitful here means to increase abundantly; to multiply; to wax exceedingly mighty.

The 70 that entered Mitsrayim under Yosef’s oversight incorporated or included extensive households unto themselves (reference Genesis/Beresheit 27:12, 27).

J. H. Hertz (Torah Haftarah) asserts that Yisra’el’s growth spread its presence beyond Goshen, even to the terriroties beyond Mitsrayim’s territorial boundaries (1:12). 

 8 Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. (Exo 1:8 ESV)

A New Pharaoh Takes the Throne Over Mitsrayim

A New king arose over Mitsrayim. J. H. Hertz (Torah Haftarah) contends that a new “nationalistic” dynasty or monarch replaced the previously reigning Hyksos kings that were so accommodating to 70 Hebrews who entered Mitsrayim. 

It is presumed that the Hyksos were driven out of Mitsrayim by descendants of the native dynasty. This recocnstituted native dynastic monarch claimed to not have any knowledge of the Yisra’elites and their history in Mitsrayim prior to his ascension to the throne.

As with the passing of the last inner-core disciple turned apostle, Yochanan, with the passing of Yosef came a major falling away and shifting away from the true Hebrew Faith of Yisra’el (Joshua/Yahoshua 24:14). The succeeding generations of Yisra’elites adopted the Mitsri ways and their idolatrous, Babylonian-based worship (e.g., the Golden Calf worship).

None of this is to saay that there did not remain among the Yisra’elites a remnant who kept and walked in the True Faith of Yisra’el with the hope of a promised deliverance in their lifetime.

 9 And he said to his people, “Behold, athe people of Israel are too many and too mighty for us.
10 Come, blet us deal shrewdly with them, lest they multiply, and, if war breaks out, they join our enemies and fight against us and escape from the land.”
(Exo 1:9-10 ESV)

Mitsrayim Seeks to Address the Hebrew Problem

This new king/pharaoh saw the numbers of Yisra’elites in Mistrayim as potentially problematic for the Mitsri state. No doubt recalling the previous dynasty, the Hyksos, and how their presence in Mitrayim led to the loss of the natural dynasty’s leadership over the land. No doubt this new king’s/pharaoh’s nationalistic bend was the fuel that drove his insistence that something be done about the perceived Hebrew threat to Mistrayim’s existence.

I disagree with Midrashic thinking that the ensuing bondage of Yisra’el was wholly driven by a pervasive distain for Hebrew by the Mitsrim. Certainly hasatan’s distain for the sacred concerns of Yehovah, that being His people and the covenant that Yah had with Yisra’el that would lead to the coming of Mashiyach, would have been one of the influential factors that drove this Mitsri nationalistic king/pharaoh to see and treat Yisra’el as an enemy and existential threat to Mitsrayim.

This pharaoh, who I believe was an agent of hastan, leads a drawstic xenophobic action against bene Yisra’el. This agent of hasatan was more than capable of inciting his advisors to work with him to take decisive action against Yisra’el. The text records no dissenting concern among the cadre of counselors that this pharaoh no doubt consulted in formulating his plans to eliminate the Yisra’elite perceived threat. No doubt the people of Mitsrayim had established over the years, a close, abiding relationship with the Hebrews inhabiting their country. I believe there’d have to be a true and powerful charisma behind this pharaoh’s bold and decisive plans to strip the Hebrews of their citizenship and ultimately of their lives. Not just charisma mind you, but hasatan-inspired driven charisma and influence (verse 10).

Despite the pharaoh’s contrived, hasatan inspired xenophobia towards Yisra’el, he still saw undeniable value in Yisra’el’s presence in Mitsrayim. He states:

“…join themselves (i.e., Yisra’el) unto our enemies and fight aginst us, and get them up out of the land.”

For one could safely reason that the solution to the perceived Yisra’elite problem would be to either drive them out of Mitrayim entirely, or simply eradicate and destroy them altogether. But these weren’t the courses taken by this pharaoh. You see, Mitsrayim would need Yisra’el’s manual labor to help fortify Mitsrayim’s structural defenses from its outside enemies.

 11 Therefore they set taskmasters over them ato afflict them with heavy bburdens. They built for Pharaoh cstore cities, Pithom and Raamses. (Exo 1:11 ESV)

The Hebrew Solution of Enslavement

The solution as the record bears out was to enslave the Hebrews, which would serve to provide the state free labor in which to build the nation’s structural fortresses and infrastructure, and at the same time, break the will of the Hebrew in their nation.

12 But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and the more they spread abroad. And the Egyptians were in dread of the people of Israel.
13 So they ruthlessly made the people of Israel awork as slaves
14 and made their lives bitter with hard service, in mortar and brick, and in all kinds of work in the field. In all their work they ruthlessly made them work as slaves. (Exo 1:12-14 ESV)

The Miracle that Emerged in the Midst of National Tribulation

Despite the hasatan-derived plan that was no doubt  intended to destroy Yah’s covenant people in the end, the Hebrews under abject Mitsri oppression threived and their numbers continued to grow.

This antithetical situation served only to cause the Mitsri-overseers/taskmasters to loathe the Hebrews even more. It seemed that the more the Mitsri threw at the Hyisra’elites, the more their numbers and presence both within and outside Mitsrayim swelled/grew. 

This reality is rarely mentioned among scripture-philes, but this spreading, thriving, flourishing in the midsts of potential existential trials and tribulations is nothing short of a miracle. Whic is to say to us who are in Yah’s Will, regardless what the enemy throws at us, the more we must flourish and prevail. For Yah is in control and He will work on our behalf to stymie the plans and efforts of the enemy. 

This miracle should have given the Mitsri cause to pause. History bears out how Yah has protected and preserved His chosen ones against her enemies. This is beared out in the Genesis/Bereshit record, as well as in recent world history (i.e., Jewish persecutions).

But this miracle only incited the Mitsrim to double-down on the forced labor which the text describes as “breaking and rushing labor,” which was intended to utterly break the Hebrew’s spirit and ultimately destroy the Hebrew nation from the outside going inward.

The damning efforts of the Mitsrim overlords/taskmasters proved no match, however, for Yah’s miraculous propering of the Hebrew slave, even in the midst of their forced, crushing/break loabors. 

15 Then the king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, one of whom was named Shiphrah and the other Puah,
16 “When you serve as midwife to the Hebrew women and see them on the birthstool, if it is a son, you shall kill him, but if it is a daughter, she shall live.” (Exo 1:15-16 ESV)

The Hasatan Inspired War Against Children

So, the solution to the Hebrew problem that hasatan inspired Pharaoh to come up with was infanticide (i.e, thehe b murder of infants). The beauty of the miracle that infuriated the Mitsrim and their frustrated their plans to eliminate the Hebrew nation was Yisra’el’s fertility. The thinking behind this hasatan inspiried plan of infanticide was to destroy the product of the Hebrew’s miracle, which was her Yah-empowered fertility. Destroy the product of the miracle, destroy the people the thinking became.

The monarch’s title shifts here in our text from that of “king” to “pharaoh.” But pharaoh instructs two-midwives to murder all new-born Hebrew males. The two-cited midwives would most likely have been two-prominent leaders of a contingent of Hebrew midwives, given the number of Hebrew pregnancies during this time. Two midwives could not have possibly serviced so many Hebrew births at that time. 

This would serve, in the mind of hasatan and Pharaoh, as a final solution to the Hebrew problem. But Yah always has a counter to the enemy’s devious moves. Yah is always the smartest Person in the room, contrary to conventional human thinking. 

17 But the midwives afeared God and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live.
18 So the king of Egypt called the midwives and said to them, “Why have you done this, and let the male children live?”
19 The midwives said to Pharaoh, “Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women, for they are vigorous and give birth before the midwife comes to them.”
20 So God dealt well with the midwives. And the people multiplied and grew very strong.
(Exo 1:17-20 ESV)

Yah’s Moral Laws Remain Even in the Midst of Tribulation and the Promise of Earthly Riches

Despite the general spiritual decline of the Hebrew nation from the True Faith of her Patriarchs, the midwives’ refusal to carry out Pharaoh’s infanticidal order is indicative that many of the Yisra’elites had at least retained some level of moral fortitude and presence. That not even hasatan could entice these moral, Yah fearing women, to violate Yah’s moral Torah code, even with the promise of earthly rewards. 

The midwives, instead of convicting themselves in front of Pharaoh, contrived the story that the Hebrew mothers were not in need of their midwife services because they were inherently “hardy,” and they delivered their babies on their own without them being present.

In a sense these midwives classified the Hebrew women before Pharaoh as animals of sorts who were not in need of midwives like the more civilized and dainty Mitsri women.

 21 And because the midwives feared God, ahe gave them families (Exo 1:21 ESV)

Yehovah’s Will Prevails Always

This text suggests that Yah rewarded, as opposed to Pharaoh’s promised reward, these obedient midwives with increased social standing in the Hebrew nation and with families of their own. Consequently, the beleagured Yisra’elites continued to multiply in Mitsrayim. You see, you can’t out nor circumnavigate Yah’s Plans and eternal, holy will. Yah’s will and plan will always prevail.

 22 Then Pharaoh commanded all his people, “Every son that is born to the Hebrews you shall cast into the Nile, but you shall let every daughter live.” (Exo 1:22 ESV)

A Seek and Destroy Solution to the Hebrew Problem in Mitsrayim

Since Pharaoh struck out with the use of the Hebrew midwives as a tool to destroy the Yisra’elite nation, he turned to the Mitsri-people to enact an enhanced scheme of eliminating all Hebrew newborn boys. Pharaoh puts forth the edict that every newborn Hebrew boy was to be flung into the Nile River. This was no longer a cheme to destroy the nation from the inside out (i.e., the use of Hebrew midwives, which failed miserably), but now it became a nation “search and destroy” operation (Rober Alter, The Five Books of Moses).

Now, betrayal, spying, informing, and pervasive acts of violence became the tools to enact a final solution against Yisra’el. 

Now a aman from the house of Levi went and took as his wife a Levite woman. (Exo 2:1 ESV)

The Birth of Moshe

We are quickly introduced to the liberator and law giver of our people–our heritage–Moshe, who goes unnamed for several verses. He is not named by his Hebrew parents, but rather, he is named by his adopted Mitsri mother. But as great a person and name as he will ultimately become, he is born of a humble Levite couple, into a savage world filled with tribulation and violence and injustice and hatred: The very things that he will confront and adress through the giving of Yah’s Torah many years hence.

 2 The woman conceived and bore a son, and awhen she saw that he was a fine child, she hid him three months.
3 When she could hide him no longer, she took for him a basket made of bulrushes1 and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the child in it and placed it among the areeds by the river bank.
(Exo 2:2-3 ESV)

Moshe a Type of Mashiyach

Moshe was the 3rd child born unto this Levite couple. Miriam (who would ultimately be known as a Prophetess and leader of the Hebrew nation) was the oldest sibling. Next was Aaron (aka Aharon, who would ultimately become the first high-priest of the Hebrew nation), and lastly was Moshe. 

Moshe came into this world with the threat of death hanging over his person. 

Moshe’s mother would not surrender her son to the Mitsrim for execution, but instead, she hid him for 3-months, until such time that it had become too dangerous to hide him any longer from the Mitsri executioners. 

So, Moshe’s mother (Yocheved) constructed a waterproof ark in which to sned her son off to safety, ironically to safety on the very waters that were supposed to be the medium for his death, which was the Nile River. 

The parallels that exists between the story of Moach and Moshe here cannot be denied. Noach and his family were protected from the Great Flood by means of an ark, which provided the family the only hope for survival and ultimately survival of the human race. 

Here, Moshe is protected from the ravages of the Great Nile River by the ark that was constructed by Yocheved his mother. Moshe would ultimately be the only hope for the survival of the human race as he would lead the Hebrew nation out of Mitsri abject bondage. Yah chose the Hebrew nation to be the nation people that would birth the Messiah (aka Mashiyach). The Messiah would be the Lamb of Yehovah that would take away the sin of the world (John/Yochanan 1:29).

In so many respects beloved, Moshe would become a type of Mashiyach.

 4 And his sister stood at a distance to know what would be done to him.
5 Now the daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe at the river, while her young women walked beside the river. She saw the basket among the reeds and sent her servant woman, and she took it.
6 When she opened it, she saw the child, and behold, the baby was crying. She took pity on him and said, “This is one of the Hebrews’ children.”
7 Then his sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter, “Shall I go and call you a nurse from the Hebrew women to nurse the child for you?”
8 And Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, “Go.” So the girl went and called the child’s mother.
9 And Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, “Take this child away and nurse him for me, and I will give you your wages.” So the woman took the child and nursed him.
10 When the child grew older, she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became aher son. She named him Moses, “Because,” she said, “I drew him out of the water.” (Exo 2:4-10 ESV)

Yah’s Salvation Enacted Through a Member of the Enemy’s Organization

Yocheved, Moshe’s mother, places Moshe into the ark and places the ark and Moshe into the waters of the Nile, amongst the reeds. Miriam, Moshe’s sister, stays nearby to see the outcome of this desperate act, serving as a guardian over her little brother.

Pharaoh’s daughter, who some extra-Biblical sources identify as Bathia (Jasher/Yasher) and Thurmuth (Jubilees/Yovehim), came down to bathe in the portion of the portion of the Nile where the ark rested. Seeing the ark, Pharaoh’s daughter instructs one of her attendants to fetch it and bring it to her. 

She opens the ark, sees the boy Moshe crying within it, and has immediate, motherly compassion for him. She realizes right away that this was a hebrew infant.

Miriam ameks herself known to Pharaoh’s daughter at this juncture of the story, and offers to find a suitable nurse to provide care for Moshe. 

Even though Pharaoh’s daughter was of the Mistri establishment, her compassion for Moshe and his situation, overrode her loyatlies to her father and his murderous edicts. This once again is Yah’s salvation and will at work. The iming and persons involved, brought Yah’s chosen one to saafety, despite the enemy’s plans to the contrary. 

Turns out that Moshe’s biological mother, Yocheved, was hired to nurse him until such time that Pharaoh’s daughter could properly adopt and rear him as her won son.

Pharaoh’s daughter names the boy Moshe, which is an abvious Mitsri name meaning to “draw one or something out” (such as out of the water in this sense). 

 11 One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people.
12 He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. (Exo 2:11-12 ESV)

Moshe Identifies with his People

Our text reveals that Moshee grew up to be a respected man. But nothing of his Mitsri upbringing is mentioned here. There are elusions of his Mitsri-upbringing in extra-biblical texts such as the Books of Yasher and Yovelim, but we will not give the details of those texts mention here.

Movies have depicted Moshe as being educated in the Mitsri-court in the areas of science, math, literature, architecture, and warfare. Some have gone so far as to brand Moshe a superior Mitsri-general who could claim many successful military campaigns. But the text does not bear any of this out. And to be fair, neither does the text exclude such notions. But religiosity has chosen to take flights of fantasy on this story and paint for themselves the image of a superman who was the most gifted leader on the planet at that time to lead Yisra’el out of Mitsri-bondage and on to the Promised Land (aka Canaan).

I say, we would be wise to stick with the text, adding nothing to, or taking anything away from it. Suffice to say, however, Yah chose Moshe to complete of the most important task in human history, and Yah was the One with Moshe every step of the Way to ensure His Will would be done at this juncture of His Great Plan of Redemption, Salvation, and Restoration. In other words, as great a man as Moshe was, Moshe did not accomplish this world changing task on his own: It was Yah Who made it all happen.

But sometime in his life as a member of Pharaoh’s family, he is drawn to see for himself the plight of his people. He was obviously aware that he was Hebrew, contrary to what the movies have protrayed: That somehow his heritage and biology were hidden from him by a doting Mitsri-royal princess. For his Hebrew heritage was known not only to him, but also by members of Pharaoh’s house, and many by many of his Hebrew kinsmen.

And it is during this fact-finding mission that Moshe witnesses an overserr/taskmaster physically abusing one of his kinsmen. Moshe intervenes, and in the process, he slays the abuser. So as to not be arrested and executed for the crime of murdering a Mitsri, Moshe buries the body of the abuser in the sand. He covered up his crime.

13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?”
14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.”
(Exo 2:13-14 ESV)

Moshe-A Social Justic Warrior

The next day, Moshe witnesses two Hebrew men engaged in a tussle or brawl. Moshe scolds the one who was in the wrong for inciting the tussle. The one charged by Moshe rebuts Moshe, demanding Moseh tell him who set him as “a prince and judge” over the Hebrew people. And the charged one throws in a statement, suggesting Moshe would kill him like he killed the Egypitan taskmaster the previous day. (Oh Snap!)

Moshe immediately recognizes that he’s been found out and that his secret was not at all a secret. But of course, it would not have been a secret. For word of the slaying quickly reached the ears of Pharaoh. 

It is interesting to see from these three events: (1) Moshe goes out to see the plight of his people; (2) Moshe intervenes in the assault of one his kinsmen; and (3) Moshe intervenes to stop a brawl between two of his kinsmen, that Moshe was in every sense a social justic warrior. Not in the politicized sense of the western SJW we hear and read about today. But rather, from the perspective of one who was morally upright and set himself against social injustices of any form that would arise among Yah’s set-apart people. 

15 When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian. And he sat down by a well. (Exo 2:15 ESV)

Moshe Becomes a Wanted Man

Interestingly, when word of Moshe’s deadly assault of the Mitsri taskmaster reached Pharaoh’s ears, the text gives no attention to any affection that one would expect the father of his adopted mother would have for him. One would think that Pharaoh would look upon Moshe as a adopted father would and have compassion on him and seek to figure out how to get Moshe out of the hole (no pun intended) he’d dug himself into. But rather, the text suggests that Pharaoh immediately presumed Moshe guilty of the crime he’d commited, and he seeks to have him executed. 

Hearing that he was a wanted man, Moshe flees Mitsrayim proper and settles down in Midian.

16 Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock.
17 The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and awatered their flock.
18 When they came home to their father Reuel, he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?”
19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and awatered the flock.”
20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may aeat bread.”
21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah. (Exo 2:16-21 ESV)

Moshe Takes up Residence in Midian

While resting near a well in Midian, 7-daughters of the Priest (aka Cohen) of Midian, Re’u’el (aka Jethro as revealed in later passages), came to water their flocks at this well. However, a band of bully shepherds set themselves to overtake and deny the Cohen’s daughters the opportunity to water their flocks. 

Moshe stands against the bully shepherds, restores the daughters of Re’u’el place at the well, and even waters the women’s flocks. 

Indeed, we see that social justice warrior mentality at work here in Moshe, as we saw demonstrated in Mistrayim. 

So, when the women returned home, this time earlier than normal–seems the conflict with those bullying shepherds was a regular occurence–Re’u’el is curious and inquires as to why they were home so early that day. The daughters tell their father the story of the events that transpired at the well. They feature in their telling of the story, their rescuer, Moshe, whom they describe as an Egyptian: no doubt by virtue of his speech and clothing.

A consummate host as many ANE were, Re’u’el takes his daughters to task for not inviting their champion to a meal. Thus he instructs his daughters to find the Egyptian–i.e., Moshe–and invite him to a meal. 

The women do as their fagther instructed. Moshe graciously accepts the invitation to dine with the Cohen’s family. As a result of these events, Moshe decides to make Midian his home. In the interim, Re’u’el offers one of his daughter, Zipporah, to Moshe to wife.

 

22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom, for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land.” (Exo 2:22 ESV)

Well, Moshe and Zipporah marry. And from this union comes a son whom they name Gershom. Gershoom in Hebrew means “sojourner I have been;” a testimony of Moshe’s life up to this point.

23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God.
24 And aGod heard their groaning, and God bremembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.
25 God saw the people of Israel– and God knew.

(Exo 2:23-3:1 ESV)

Yah Remembered His Covenant With Abraham, With Yischaq, and with Ya’achov

In those ensuring years, according to rabbinic tradition, 40-years, the pharaoh that sought to kill Moshe and destroy the Hebrew nation, died. It was no doubt the hope of the Hebrew nation that the succeeding pharoah would reduce or outright remove the oppression that the nation had endured for all those many years. But it was not to be so. The oppression would continue unabated even under the successor. 

Nevertheless, the cry of the Hebrew nation reached the ears and heart of Yehovah. And the text declares that yah remembered the covenant He’d made with Avraham, Yischaq, and Ya’achov. Not that Yisra’el’s plight had escaped Yah’s mind. For Yah is incapable of forgetting or letting even the smallest events that take place in the human experience escape his attention.:

29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. 30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. (Mat 10:29-30 KJV)

Yah was very much in control of this whole situation, from start to finish. What is meant by Yah remembering the covenant He’d made with the patriarchs simply that the time had come for Yah to honor the covenant promises He’d made with Avraham, Yischaq, and Ya’achov.

As we walk out this covenant jorney in Yahoshua Messiah, we, like our ancient cousins, will have to endure from time-to-times many trials and tribulations. And if by chance, we’ve not already been tried and tribulated, if we make it in this life to the end times, we will most certainly have to endure tribulation. 

Many brethren are currently undergoing intense and seemingly unrelenting trials and tribulations. Some of you may also be in the midst of trials and tribulations. 

But the messages to be gained from our Torah Reading here is today is one of “trust” and “hope.” We are called to trust in the wisdom and righteous sovereignty of Yehovah, espeically when having to endure trials and tribulations. Furthermore, we are called to look to a blessed hope: A hope of being counted a citizen of Yah’s holy and eternal Kingdom when all these trials and tribulations come to an end.

Peter-Kefa-wrote:

12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
(1Pe 4:12-13 KJV)

As set-apart members of Yah’s family, our walk-in Messiah is set to be in alignment with Ancient Yisra’el’s story. Her story is one of trials, tribulations, testings, provings, corrections, salvation, redemption, covenant, and redemption.

Let us look upon their story, not just from a hertitage and cultural perspective, but from the perspective of “spiritual life lessons” that we are wise to take heed of, and walk out this Faith of ours in hear and trembling. 

Faithfully

Rod

Messianics—Modern Day Levites—Separated for Service to God—Thoughts and Reflections on Torah Portion Behaalosecha

by | Jun 21, 2019

This week’s Torah Portion-Behaalosecha-foreshadows a great many spiritual elements necessary for our service to the Kingdom of God. In a sense we are modern day Levites. We have been separated from all the nations people of the world unto God for His service. Are we up for the challenge? This is a wake-up call to the Body of Messiah to take immediate action.

read more

Israel: To Love or Hate Her—That is the Question—Part 2–A Biblical and Personal Perspective on the Significance of Physical Israel

by | Jun 14, 2019

In this 2nd Part to our Israel: To Love or Hate Series, we continue our analysis of some the most common reasons people reject physical Israel today. As well as we consider some of the miracles said to have resulted in Israel’s deliverance from certain destruction. And lastly we consider the problems associated with the nation state of Israel. Shalom and welcome.

read more

Death-the Grave-the Resurrection-Part 2

by | Aug 19, 2022 | Podcasts

by Rod Thomas--The Messianic Torah Observer | Sabbath Thoughts and Reflections (45)

 

Introduction

 

This is part 2 of our discussion on death, the grave, and the resurrection. And we will be picking up where we left off in part 1, which if you haven’t had the opportunity to either read or listen to that post on any of the platforms in which this program is hosted, I would humbly encourage you to do so.

 

But in part 1, we engaged ourselves in a rather broad overview on this subject. But today, this being part 2 of our discussion, we will focus on religiosity’s concept of the “immortal soul” and compare it with the scriptural reality and truth regarding the human soul and what really happens to the soul when a person dies.

 

 

The Origin of the Erroneous Concept of the Immortality of the Soul

 

The conventional wisdom of religiosity today is that humanity is composed of a temporal body and an immortal soul. And according to religiosity, the immortal soul is housed in its temporal body that is composed of flesh and blood. The body serves only as a temporary physical framework or vehicle for the soul. And so, at death, the immortal soul separates from its body. Beyond its physical body the immortal soul exists or dwells in some eternal-conscious ethereal place or location (e.g., purgatory; heaven; hell).

 

So, where did this erroneous understanding of the human soul originate? 

 

 

Well, it turns out  that a James Bonwick, in his book entitled “Egyptian Beliefs and Modern Thought (1956),” lays the blame at the feet of the Greek historian and geographer Herodotus (5th century BC), who in turn said that the concept of the “immortal soul” separating itself from the body at death and existing in some conscious state beyond its body, originated with the ancient Egyptians. Later, contends Herodotus, the Greeks adopted and promoted the “immortal soul paradigm” to the uttermost parts of the world.

 

Who were the primary Greek purveyors of this concept?

Well, it’s believed by some that the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (~470-399 BC) first picked up on and developed and taught this Egyptian concept during his time in Athens. And then his protégé Plato (~428-348 BC) continued his mentor’s work on the immortal soul paradigm by promoting and teaching it from his thought academy.

 

According to these two ancient Greek philosophers, the soul of man is immortal and indestructible. And so, at death, the immortal, indestructible soul separates and exists independently of its physical body.

 

Plato went even farther by stipulating that after death, all souls are judged according to the deeds done in that soul’s body.

 

The souls that are deemed righteous, I presume by the gods, would go on to heaven, while the souls that are deemed wicked go on to hell or hades (Plato’s “Phaedo,” aka “On the Soul”).

 

And so, the paradigm of the immortal soul spread throughout the known western and eastern world. Shockingly, it was adopted and syncretized into certain sects of the Jewish religion by way of Hellenist Jews. Consequently, the most notable promoter of the immortal soul paradigm that was consistent with the teachings of Socrates and Plato appears to have been the Hellenist Jewish Philosopher and Historian Philo Judaeus—aka Philo of Alexandria (~25 BC-45-50 AD).

 

How and why would a member of the Jewish religion promote such pagan-based foolishness? Well, it turns out that Philo loved and studied Greek philosophy. And this, of course, led to his allegorizing and syncretizing Torah with Greek philosophy. Consequently, Philo’s efforts to marry Hebrew understanding of the Tanach with Greek/Stoic philosophical principles paid off handsomely. His teachings about the immortal soul and the afterlife found a home, as we previously discussed, in various Talmudic/Midrashic writings (content found in the Talmud that is meant to provide textual interpretation, study, and exegesis that date back to the 3rd and 4th centuries AD).

 

It was the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-~100 A.D.) who said that Philo was influenced by the Alexandrian School. The Alexandrian School was a collective of literary, philosophical, medical, and science thought that originated out Alexandria Egypt/Mitsrayim) during the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

 

Conditional Resurrection Versus the Immortal Soul Paradigm

 

Now, as it relates to this Babylonian and Greek derived concept of the immortality of the soul, two perspectives dominated the so-called “inter-testament-years” (I.e., the 400 or so years between the time that the Book of Malachi—~420 BC—was written and the ministry of Yochanan the Immerser began:

 

  1. Judaism of that time, in general, held to the Tanakh-supported and established understanding of a “conditional resurrection” of the righteous. Conditional resurrection holds that eternal life is gifted to the Creator’s righteous ones. Consequently, the Hebraic concept of conditional resurrection is inconsistent with the pagan-based “immortal soul” paradigm. Why? Simply because it doesn’t make sense that the so-called immortal soul of a righteous one would be fluttering about in some temporal, purgatorial, ethereal place, then sent back and reunited with its temporal body in some future resurrection of the dead. Not to mention, the very term “resurrection” and the act of being resurrected, which is the raising of one from the dead, is contradictory to the concept of the immortal soul. For the concept of the immortal soul suggests that there really is no such thing as death. Because the soul—that indestructible element of humanity that makes a person a person—the soul never dies.

 

So, to bridge the chasm that existed between the concepts of a conditional resurrection and the Hellenistic-held belief in the immortal soul, the rabbis produced the idea that it is the soul’s immortality is “conditional.” In other words, the righteous soul is granted immortality at death.

 

Interestingly, some of the writings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls supported this very understanding of the “conditional immortal soul.”

 

  1. 2. The Greek-influenced Jews (aka Hellenistic Jews) began to teach and promote soul immortality as evinced in some of their liturgy and prayers for the dead (e.g., “El Malei Rachamim” or God, Full of Mercy”).

 

It was Judas Maccabeus, who headed the Jewish resistance against the Greeks in the 2nd-century AD, who is recorded to have prayed for the dead as recorded in 2 Maccabees 12:39-48. Consequently, such acts served as a profound refutation, if you will, of a future resurrection of the righteous dead.

 

The Pervasiveness of the Immortal Soul Paradigm

 

From this juncture in history, it is not hard to see how the immortal soul paradigm crept into so-called Roman Christianity. After the passing of the last inner-circle disciple turned apostle, John (aka Yochanan), the “true faith once delivered” began to be overrun by pagan-influenced intellectuals who promoted this Egyptian-Greek-based concept of the “immortal soul.” These thinkers and influencers have been referred to by some as the Patristic Church Fathers. Their writings influenced and shaped what we know today to be Roman-Christianity between the 2nd and 13th centuries AD. These Roman-Christian thinkers and their writings about the soul of man included the following:

 

  • Tertullian (~155-230 AD)—developed and promoted the concept of the “eternal torment of the wicked.” It was in fact Tertullian, who was one of the earliest Patristic Church Fathers, who promoted the concept of hell-fire punishment and torment of the wicked upon their death.

 

  • Augustine (354-430 AD)— who advanced the understanding that the immortal soul of man, depending on its judged moral standing when he walked the earth, would determine whether, after death, he would dwell in either “paradise” or “hell” (”The City of God”).

 

  • Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)— who promoted the “traditional catholic” position on the immortality of the soul, which is the idea that the soul constitutes the “form of the body.” In other words, the human soul makes a person a living thing. And so, according to Aquinas, the soul is independent of the physical body and is destined to exist in an afterlife upon death—not a resurrection mind you–but rather, a temporal, ethereal existence in either “heaven” or “hell.”

 

According to Aquinas, the soul yearns to be joined to its body, for the physical body and its immortal soul form a complete being. This constitutes the fundamental teaching of the Roman Catholic Church even to this day.

 

Fortunately, 1st-century Messianics held to and taught the Tanach-based, “holistic” concept of human nature, which as mentioned in part 1 of this discussion, involves the resurrection of the righteous dead. And this resurrection being a gift of Yah to those found to be righteous based upon their abiding Faith in the Person and Ministry of Yeshua Messiah. Those on the other hand who are judged as wicked will face ultimate and final destruction by the righteous judge of all humanity. And it is this paradigm that was taught, wrote about, and promoted by Yeshua and the “Apostolic Fathers.”

 

The Immortal Soul Paradigm Inextricably Linked to Purgatory and Indulgences

 

It was these and other such expressed perspectives on the soul’s immortality helped fuel the Roman Catholic doctrine of “purgatory.”

 

Just so we’re all on the same page, “purgatory,” according to Roman Catholic teaching, is an ethereal place where the souls of the dead are purified of their sins. It is generally viewed as a temporary abode for the dead before the soul ascends to “paradise.’

 

Now, over the course of time, the Catholic brand of purgatory made provision for the family members of the dearly departed to lessen their loved one’s time in purgatory by the giving of “indulgences” to the Church Triumphant.

 

Indulgences, if you didn’t already know, served, according to the Church Triumphant, as “a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and all of the saints” (Wikipedia-Indulgence).

 

In other words, beloved, the Church Triumphant produced a crazy, biblically unsupported scheme, to rob her members of their hard-earned moneys and fatten the Church’s coffers. Romanism already laid claim to the authority to pardon sin, although the church denies such a claim. But this scheme added to the authority of the Church to lessen a dearly departed one’s penance or time in purgatory. And so, if the family member of a deceased soul was willing to pay the Church some scratch, then the family member’s concerns for their deceased loved one’s state and time in purgatory could be lessened, or altogether erased. The use of indulgences, however, weren’t limited to lessening the length of time a deceased individual spent in purgatory. It also served to address the severity of penance one is required to endure for sins committed anytime during his or her life.

 

Interestingly, the Catholic Church firmly contends that indulgences do not forgive the “guilt of sin, nor does it provide a release from the eternal punishment associated with unrepentant mortal sins.” But rather, indulgences serve only to “relieve the…temporal punishment resulting from the effect of sin.”

 

The whole rigmarole about indulgences proved extremely problematic for several individuals, both within and outside of the Church Triumphant. For many, especially the Protestant Reformers, could see right through the “indulgences” scheme. And so, the doctrine of indulgences became one of the platforms by which the reformers set out to separate themselves and their followers from the Roman Catholic Church.

 

The power that the doctrine of indulgences had over many faithful Catholics was founded primarily upon their steadfast understanding and belief in the immortality of the human soul. For without a firm belief in the immortality of the soul, the practice of indulgences could not stand.

 

Nevertheless, the Protestant Reformers chose to retain and promote the concepts of “soul-consciousness” and the “immortality of the soul” and the erroneous idea that the soul, upon death of its body, took up residence either in heaven or in hell.

 

 

The Lie That Keeps on Giving

 

Beloved, I pray that you have been able to draw from all that we’ve been discussing here today and from part 1 of this discussion, that the immortal soul paradigm is a completely made-up sham—a lie of the enemy, if you will. And that billions of people throughout millennia have been duped into believing it. Some at the risk of losing their opportunity for resurrection and to receive the coming Kingdom of Elohim. And I would go so far as to say that the immortal soul paradigm is an outcropping of the lie that the nachash—what our English bibles translate as “serpent”—assured Chavah (aka Eve) in Gan Eden on that fateful day:

 

“You will not surely die” (Genesis/Beresheit 3:4).

 

The nachash of course knew the truth of this matter. But he had some important goods to sell Adam and Chavah that day. You see, he had to contradict the truths that Adam previously received from Yah regarding his human existence—that they consisted of a codependent body and soul that the Creator animated by breathing into them the breath of life that comes only from Him. And so, it stands to reason that the couple had received some understanding of what death meant for their person. And so, it makes sense that the couple would have had a concern that if they transgressed the Creator’s commandments, their soul and body would cease to function, and Yah’s animating “breath of life” would return to Yah who breathed it into their body and soul (Genesis/Beresheit 2:17; 3:3). There was no indication given by Yah to Adam and Chavah that if they transgressed His Torah that the consequences of their transgression would amount to anything other than the total end to their life. In other words, death meant death. Death did not mean that they would continue to exist in another state of being in another place and time.

 

In other words, Yehovah meant what He meant—You disobey my instructions, you will die. Unlike the nachash, Yah does not lie.

 

Torah is quite clear regarding Yah’s integrity:

 

aGod is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it? (Num 23:19 ESV)

 

The Tanach View of Human Nature

 

Torah reveals to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear and hearts to receive its truths, the reality of human existence on this planet. And that truth is that a human being is a living soul that is meant to exist on this earthly plain:

 

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (Hebrew-nephesh). (Gen 2:7 KJV)

 

Those who’ve supported and promoted the immortal soul lie over the centuries have, in many cases, confused Yah’s breathing into Adam the breath of life with a false understanding of Yah placing an immortal soul into the body of man. But the truth of the matter is that the text does not say any such thing. But rather, the text emphatically states that man—Hebrew of “adam”—BECAME A LIVING SOUL (I.e., “wai’hi ha’a’dam le’nephesh hhai’yah” or “the human existed for a living soul” when transliterated from the Hebrew).

 

Thus, contrary to religiosity conventional wisdom, according to scripture, the human body and soul cannot be viewed as two independent elements of a person’s being, such that the body is the mortal framework of a person’s soul, while the soul is an imputed, immortal, “will o’ the wisp” that operates independent of the physical body. But rather the body and soul of a person are two co-dependent elements or characteristics of the one person. The soul does not, nor cannot operate independently of its body.

 

Of this, Danish Old Testament scholar and Semitic philologist Johannes Pedersen (1883-1977) wrote:

 

“The body is the soul in its outward form” (”Israel: Its Life and Culture,” 1926).

 

British theologian Henry Wheeler Robinson (1872-1945) wrote:

 

“The Hebrew idea of personality is that of an animated body, not that of an incarnate soul” (”The Christian Doctrine of Man,” 1952).

 

The Tanach reveals that both humans and animals are “living/animated souls.” The difference between the two, however, is that humans—adam—was created in Yah’s image—His likeness. Animals on the other hand were not.

 

The Soul of a Person is Mortal—Even Needy–in Every Respect

 

Samuele Bacchiocchi, in his book entitled —“Popular Beliefs-Are They Biblical,” described the human soul as “needy,” which is to say that the body and soul of humanity is wholly dependent on its Creator for its existence. For its protection. For its deliverance from harm and danger.

 

The soul is also the seat of a person’s emotions and personality.

 

We find in Micah/Miykah 6:7 that the soul of a person is the source of a person’s sin:

 

aWill the LORD be pleased with1 thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? bShall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” (ESV)

 

We further find in Numbers/Bemidbar 15:30 that the soul that sins presumptuously—”ruwm” {room}—with lofty intent—will be “cut off from among his people” (I.e., ultimately killed by divine intervention or at hands of the community of Yisra’el).

 

Of this inextricable connection the human soul has to sin, it was the Prophet Ezekiel/Yecheza’el, through the inspiration of Yah’s Ruach HaKodesh who penned:

 

The soul that sinneth, it shall die.  (Eze 18:20 KJV)

 

Thus, we are forced to recognize the mortality of the human soul given these and so many more testimonies to this fact (cf. Joshua/Yahoshua 10:28-38).

 

When the body is destroyed and consumed so that its features are no longer recognizable, then the soul no longer exists, because the body is the soul in its outward form. On the other hand, when the body is laid to rest in the grave with the fathers, the soul is also at rest and lies undisturbed, awaiting its future resurrection (reference Genesis/Beresheit 15:15; 25:8; Judges 8:32; 1 Chronicles 29:28).

 

The Brit HaDashah’s View of the Human Soul

 

Our English term “soul” is “psuche” in the Greek. In the Brit HaDashah it is a synonym for “person.”

 

Psyche can be defined simply as “life.”

 

We find with the renewed covenant way of thinking that the Greek term “psuche” is expanded in many places to include that which is involved in being in a covenant relationship with Yehovah through a trusting faith in Yahoshua Messiah. This in great part is applied to the concept and understanding of salvation and the promise of eternal life.

 

In one of Master’s most poignant teachings regarding the soul of humankind, we read:

 

34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 35 For whosoever will save his life (I.e., “psuche”) shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life (”psuche”) for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it. 36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul (psuche)? 37 Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mar 8:34-38 KJV)

 

We can see here how the terms life and soul are used interchangeably by our Master. And in His interchanging of life and soul, He is effectively teaching and preaching about the “mortality” of the soul: The soul that must be resurrected by Yah after it dies.

 

Master spoke further on the subject of “soul mortality” when He cautioned His disciples:

 

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul (psuche): but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell (Gr. Gheh’-en-nah). (Mat 10:28 KJV)

 

Here, Master reveals that humans have the capability of destroying the human body but are incapable of destroying the human soul—that intangible element that makes one a person. However, Yehovah Elohim can destroy not just a person’s body, but also their soul-psuche. The soul is not tangible, but the soul also ceases to function when its physical body ceases to function. It is not indestructible, nor is it immortal.

 

The Tanach and Brit HaDashah Excludes an Afterlife

 

We have up to this point in our discussion, determined that the Brit HaDashah and the Tanach both reject an independent dualistic make-up of a person’s being—that a person’s being consists of a temporal, physical body that houses an independent, immortal, indestructible soul. And that upon a person’s death that immortal soul departs the body and takes up residence in some form of afterlife.

 

We’ve instead found that the opposite is true:

 

That there is no consciousness or awareness that a person has when they die. That his or her soul in no way goes off to an afterlife to interact and live with other departed souls. That Yah has no interaction with the soul of a deceased person after their death–Psalms 6:5; 30:9; 115:17; 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5.

 

 

But rather, scripture only supports this earthly plain as the abode/residence of humanity and of the resurrected righteous in the olam ha ba—the world tomorrow. Which means, beloved, that in the interim of time between death and resurrection, the souls of all humans “rest” or “sleep” in their graves (Genesis/Beresheit 28:11; Deuteronomy/Devarim 31:16; Job/Yob 7:21; 2 Samuel 7:12; 1 Kings 2:10; 2 Peter/Kefa 3:4). Recall from our Torah Reading passage in Part 1 of this discussion that Moshe describes both Ya’achov/Jacob and Yosef/Joseph as both being gathered unto their people when Yah’s breath of life left them (Genesis/Beresheit 49-50). Daniel wrote the following regarding the rest/sleep that humans experience when they die, leading up to their future resurrection:

 

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep (Heb. “Yashen”) in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.1 (Dan 12:1-3 KJV)

 

Job/Yob did not mince words when it came to the subject of death, the grave, and a future resurrection of the dead:

 

10 But man dieth, and wasteth away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?1 11 As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up: 12 So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep (Heb. “shenah”). 13 O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! 14 If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come. (Job 14:10-14 KJV)

 

So, throughout the Tanach, we see repeated references to death through the poetic expression of the soul resting or sleeping in its grave as it awaits its future resurrection. And there are at least three-Hebrew terms for our English term “sleep” that are used in this context:

 

  • “Shachav”
  • “Yashen”
  • “Shenah”

 

In the Brit HaDashah, our English verb “sleep” when used in context with death is “koimao”  which means a “sleep of death”:

 

52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept (Gr. “Koimao”) arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. (Mat 27:52-53 KJV)

 

Our friend Lazarus sleepeth (Gr. “Koimao”); but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep (Gr. “Exunipzo”—to awaken a person from their sleep). 12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. (Joh 11:11-14 KJV)

 

What Scripture Says About the Dwelling Place of the Dead

 

We all know that when a person dies, their remains are interred in a grave, tomb, or it is cremated. Regardless the state in which remains are ultimately rendered, scripture refers to any such state as the “grave,” “hell, “or ”pit:

 

(1) Grave—(Hebrew)–qeber/qebuwrah.

 

(2) Grave—(Hebrew)—sheol—Hebraically, the place where the dead are at “rest.” It is also referred to as the place of destruction, or “abaddon” (Psalms 88:12). A realm of darkness (Job 10:21) and silence (Psalms 94:17). Every soul goes to “sheol” when it does, whether that soul is good or evil (Ecclesiastes 9:2). In sheol, there is no work, thought; knowledge; nor wisdom.

 

(3) Grave—(Greek)—hades

 

(4) Hell—(Greek)—gehinnom/gehenna

 

(5) Pit (Greek)—shachath

 

These five-terms are referring to the exact same place—the grave.

 

Both Hebrew and ultimately Greek writers/transcribers understood the grave to be a temporary resting place for the remains of the dead, with the promise of resurrection in the future:

 

 10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (Heb. “Sheol”); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (Psa 16:10 KJV)

 

So, when we look back to our Torah Reading 45 where the text states that Ya’achov and Yosef, upon their respective deaths, were gathered unto their people, we can safely say that Moshe/Moses was referring to the concept or paradigm that the dead all join their loved ones and predecessors in “sheol”—grave–in a sleep and rest, and in an unconscious state. And in this poetic mentioning of one being gathered together unto his/her people, there is the unspoken, yet apparent, expectation of a future resurrection, that Job/Yob describes as the dead being roused from their sleep in sheol (14:12).

 

After His crucifixion, our Master Yahoshua was placed in a borrowed grave—hades—hell—tomb–gehinnom/gehenna (Matthew 27:60). But He was found to be victorious over death and the grave, for Yah raised Him—resurrected Him (Acts 2:27). Master’s remains rested 3-days and 3-nights in that borrowed tomb according to His own words. Consequently, His remains did not see corruption. The grave was defeated (1 Corinthians 15:55). Clearly His resurrection was a shadow of what we as the redeemed of Yah have to look forward to. Abba gave Master the keys to death and the grave!

 

 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. (Rev 1:18 KJV)

 

Two Troublesome Biblical Passages that Challenge the Mortal Soul Paradigm

 

The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus—The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is found in Luke 16. A well known parable that religiosity has attached a great deal of its understanding of death and the grave to. Lazarus, a beggar who subsisted by the crumbs that fell from a rich man’s table, died and was ushered into Avraham’s Bosom. The Rich Man, conversely, is said to have also died, but instead of finding himself in Avraham’s Bosom or Avraham’s side, the text records that “…in hell—hades—he lifted up his eyes, being in torments…” (Luke 16:23; KJV).

 

Hades, as found in this passage, is unique in its meaning when compared to its use in other Brit HaDashah passages. For its use here denotes a “place of punishment for the ungodly.” Hades as described in this parable by Master Yahoshua, is a place of fiery torment. Lazarus conversely is ushered into Avraham’s Bosom or Avraham’s Side which is only described as providing Lazarus comfort, but also being within view of the Rich Man and the host of hades. Also, Avraham’s Bosom or Side appears to be a gathering place of the righteous, in this case, Lazarus’ fathers.

 

Many believe that this parable is an accurate framework that in some way confirms and describes what happens to people when they die: The righteous go to paradise, while the wicked go straight to a fiery hell.

 

But we must recognize what we’re dealing with here. This is a parable. And a literal interpretation of parables is not always warranted unless it is contextually imperative to do so. The point of Yahoshua’s message is what must be grasped here, not the literal story. We’re talking about the would-be people of Yah heeding the collective messages of the Gospel that Yahoshua taught; Torah; and the Prophets for them to obtain mercy, justification, salvation, and admittance into the Kingdom of Elohim, as opposed to misery and eternal death to those who reject the messages of the Gospel, the Torah and the prophets.

 

Like His Father before Him, Master met people on ground that was familiar to them: culture; terminology; traditions; wives’ tales; and such. And both Abba, in particular Master, used that which was familiar to those whom He was teaching, in order to advance certain spiritual principles.

 

Shaul wrote to the Corinthian Messianic Assembly:

 

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. (1Co 15:46-49 KJV)

 

You see, in Yahoshua’s day, the “Bosom of Avraham” and fiery “hades” or “hell” had become an accepted belief among many unwitting Jews, who had apparently learned, adopted, and propagated these “old wives’ tales” from back in the days of Yisra’el’s Hellenization by the Greeks—back around the 2nd century B.C.

 

Despite the Bosom of Avraham and Hell—Hades being nothing more than folklore to certain first-century Palestinian Jews, Yahoshua recognized that He could teach the biblical principles of a future paradise abode for the righteous and a terrible destructive end for the wicked using the folktale of Avraham Bosom as a well-known and understood story.

 

The second potential challenge to our Biblically-based mortal soul paradigm is “The Thief on the Cross”—The story of the Thief on the Cross is found in Luke 23. It is a well-known story that again, religiosity has taken unto herself as proof-positive that the moment a saved one dies, their soul or spirit is ushered into heaven or paradise as the text describes:

 

 39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. 40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. 42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. (Luk 23:39-43 KJV)

 

Some Patristic Church Fathers identified “paradise” as used here as Gan Eden—The Garden of Eden—which no longer exists on this earth but is located or situated somewhere in the ether.

 

The problem that we face with this passage is verse 43, which records Yahoshua promising one of the repentant thieves that hung on a cross alongside Him, that he would be with Him in paradise when they both drew their last breath and died.

 

Here’s the fascinating thing about ancient Greek [scriptural] passages: They have no punctuation. So, as it relates to translators’ efforts to render an accurate interpretation of verse 43 to their readers, the would-be English translator is left to make guesses as to where he or she inserts commas or not insert them at all. In the case of the KJV and virtually every other English translation of this passage I could get my hands on, a comma was inserted into the verse after the word “thee” as opposed to inserting the comma after the word “today.” For the position of a single comma in this case changes the meaning of the whole verse:

 

“Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with Me in paradise…” versus “verily I say unto thee today, thou shalt be with Me in paradise.”

 

The first rendering is a definitive declaration from Yahoshua to the repentant thief that he would enter “paradise” along with Yahoshua on that very day. The second rendering, on the other hand, is also a definitive declaration from Yahoshua to the repentant thief that at that very moment in time—on that historic day in history—he would enter paradise—no doubt the Kingdom of Elohim—at some point in the future as a result of his profession of faith in Yahoshua. And so, with this second rendering, we get a profound declaration from our Master Yeshua of a future resurrection of the righteous dead and a refutation of an immortal human soul. And so, contextually speaking, the second rendering and understanding is the most likely accurate and truthful rendering for a few reasons:

 

  1. Yahoshua Himself prophesied that He would be in the grave for 3-days and 3-nights. Presuming that Yahoshua was truthful in his assertion—and we know that history did in fact bear Him out on this—then it would be impossible for Him to escort the repentant thief into paradise on the same day as His crucifixion.

 

  1. Scripture clearly teaches and promotes that of a future resurrection of the righteous dead, not some spiritual transition that the souls of the “saved” makes to some temporary, purgatorial, heavenly abode, to await its reunification with its body at its resurrection from the dead.

 

  1. Yahoshua never taught or promoted an immortal soul doctrine. He didn’t even lay claim to such a thing for Himself, noting that His soul would rest in a borrowed tomb for 3-days and 3-nights.

 

Beloved, I trust that I did not burst your bubble as it relates to the biblical understanding of death, the grave, and the resurrection. If I by chance did burst your bubble on this subject, I make no apologies for that. You see, as covenant-walking saints of the Most High, we are called to total transparency. And the truth of the matter is that if we dare expect to be numbered among the future resurrected saints that will lay claim to the coming Kingdom of Yehovah, we must be man or woman enough to accept the Truth of the Word, regardless how much it messes with our personal and spiritual fungswae.

 

So, as the Gospel preachers of old used to say: “Don’t get made…you better get glad.”

 

We who are redeemed of the Most High and who are in a covenant-relationship with the Creator of the Universe through the Person and Ministry of Yeshua Messiah, have a glorious future awaiting us in the coming Kingdom of Yehovah. And if by chance as we await our Master’s glorious return we die, we have a blessed hope that removes the sting of the grave from our passing. So, our bodies will peacefully rest in the earth awaiting His blessed return and His call for us to rise from our graves with incorruptible bodies. And we will live and reign with our Master in His Eternal Kingdom for 1,000-years, and then on to eternity on the new earth that follows.

 

The Apostle Shaul brilliantly wrote of this blessed assurance—and we’ll close out this discussion with this:

 

…Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. (1Co 2:9 KJV)

 

 

TMTO-20-Endure Sound Doctrine I Will Not

by | Mar 8, 2019

Many members of the Body of Messiah will not endure sound doctrine as they are being led astray by false teachers or they themselves are teaching false doctrine. We discuss this troubling situation and provide ways to overcome the deception. 

read more

Parashat Mishpatim Judgment-Murder-Abortions-Sanctuary

by | Jan 30, 2019

Timeliness of This Week's Torah Reading This week’s Torah Reading could not have been more timely. And I was compelled to respond in the wake of the news we’ve received over the last couple weeks regarding the legalization of late term abortions on demand. And just...

read more

To Call or Not Call on the Name of the LORD

by | Jan 25, 2019

What Does it Mean? What does it truly mean for a would-be disciple of Jesus Christ (ie., Yahoshua Messiah) to call on the Name of the L-rd? Is it simply an utterance whereby the would-be disciple utters or invokes the actual Name or Title of the Divine One? Or is it a...

read more

He Was Gathered unto His People-Death-The Grave-The Resurrection–Part-1–STAR-45

by | Aug 13, 2022 | Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer's Sabbath Thoughts & Reflections

Introduction

 

This is “He Was Gathered unto His People—Death-The Grave-The Resurrection—Part 1” This will be a discussion on the 45th Torah Reading of our 3-year Torah Reading Cycle. Our focus text is Genesis/Beresheit 49:27-50:26.

 

This passage concludes the book of Genesis/Beresheit. It entails a closing out of the lives of the patriarchs Jacob/Ya’achov and Joseph/Yosef.

 

Now, despite there being so much relevant and applicable content in this reading this Shabbat, I’ve been led to discuss, primarily, just one aspect of the text that I believe will be of great interest to us but will also provide us important information that we all should be equipped with as we walk out this Faith of ours.

 

And what is this relevant content and information I’m talking about? I’m wanting to focus on the aspect of our reading that deals with the issue of death, the grave, and the resurrection.

 

A Most Uncomfortable Subject Matter

 

Despite the blessed assurance we have as covenant-keepers with the Creator of the Universe, the topic of death, the grave, and the resurrection is a generally an uncomfortable subject matter. Especially for those of us identify ourselves as Messianics, Netzarim, Hebrew Rooters, and the like.

 

Why? Because death and dying in and of itself has been hardwired within humanity to be the most terrible thing that will happen to every living being. For the Bible points us to an understanding that humans were never meant to die in the first place. And this understanding for the most part is a pervasive one. So then, rational humans are hardwired to pursue and hold to life—to live life—to yearn for life and to reject death. For the Elohim that created humanity, in whose image Adam was created, is an Elohim of life as opposed to death. Unfortunately, when Adam transgressed the Creator’s Torah—he sinned—every human (with maybe the exception of Enoch and Elijah)—every other human that would subsequently be born of a woman on this earth would experience death. And Yah has informed us that death is the result of sin—sin being the transgression of Yah’s set-apart ways—transgression of Yah’s Torah:

 

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so, death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:1 (Rom 5:12 KJV)

 

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1Jo 3:4 KJV)

 

And so, how did sin—the transgression of Yah’s laws—become directly linked to death? Well, we know that Yah warned Adam and Eve (aka Chavah) the following if they transgressed His commandment:

 

…for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.1 (Gen 2:17 KJV)

 

Adam and Eve transgressed the Creator’s commandments. And sure enough, after Adam’s transgression/sin was found out, Yah put forth the following judgment that would profoundly and directly affect all of Adam’s posterity—his descendants, including him:

 

Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;1 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen 3:17-19 KJV)

 

The Pervasiveness and Inevitability of Death That is Due to Sin

 

And so, because of Adam’s sin—that one trespass—all humanity is condemned to both die—both physically and spiritually (Romans 5:16). In addition, every human who has ever lived is a sinner who has, consequently, fallen short of Yah’s glorious standards (Romans 3:23). Thus, because of the pervasiveness of sin, death is inevitable and inescapable. And it is because of this reality that the writer of Hebrews penned:

 

27 And just as ait is appointed for man to die once, and bafter that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once ato bear the sins of bmany, will appear ca second time, dnot to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly ewaiting for him. (Heb 9:27-28 ESV)

 

 

Because of the profound inevitability and harsh reality of death, it is expected and proper for humans to mourn when death enters their world. Because death is contrary—it is counterintuitive to Yah’s nature and to the purpose for which humans were created.

 

But for those who belong to Mashiyach/Messiah and who are in a covenant relationship with the Creator of the Universe, Yahoshua’s atoning sacrifice brings about the promise of a glorious resurrection and eternal life. And so, it is this promise of a resurrection through Yahoshua Messiah that effectively strips away the power that death has over humanity by removing deaths painful reality:

 

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?1 (1Co 15:51-55 KJV; cf. Hosea 13:14)

 

So Where Are We Heading with This?

 

I’m probably not telling you anything new or that you didn’t already know as it relates to the overall pervasiveness of death and the blessed hope for the coming resurrection of Yah’s set-apart ones. But having acknowledged all that we’ve mentioned thus far about death and the blessed hope, we still haven’t answered the trillion-dollar questions that rests in every rational human mind—or addressed the set of elephants in the room: What really happens to us when we die? What does the grave hold for us after we die? And how does the resurrection of Yah’s set-apart ones really work? Well, using the backdrop of this week’s Torah Reading, we aim to begin the process of answering these critical questions.

 

I will say at the outset of this discussion that this will not be an exhaustive examination of the topic of death, the grave, and the resurrection. I’m certain you would agree with me in acknowledging that this is one of the most far-reaching spiritual topics and issues that we will ever come across in our walk in Messiah. It is so because these are topics and issues that directly affect each and every person on the planet. So, every individual on the planet has a personal stake on these things whether they choose to acknowledge it or not.

 

But I will also say that before we part company in part-2 of our discussion—yes, I elected to break this discussion into two-parts to make the discussion less taxing and long—that by the time we leave this discussion, we will all have a biblically-sound—a biblically-based understanding of what happens to us and to everyone else when we die.

 

So, let’s get into our reading and see where it takes us on these issues.

 

 

Our Torah Reading

 

We find in our Torah Reading record of the events surrounding Jacob’s/Ya’achov’s death in Goshen of Egypt/Mitsrayim. Surrounded by his 12-sons and two grandsons, the last of the 3-covenant-bearing patriarchs instructs his sons to deliver his remains to Canaan—the Land of Promise—and bury him in the Cave of Machpelah, which his grandfather Avraham originally purchased from a Hittite for purposes of burying Sarah (Genesis/Beresheit 23).

 

Our Reading of this event is as follows:

 

 29 Then he commanded them and said to them, “I am to be agathered to my people; bbury me with my fathers cin the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, 30 in the cave that is in the field at Machpelah, to the east of Mamre, in the land of Canaan, awhich Abraham bought with the field from Ephron the Hittite to possess as a burying place. 31 aThere they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife. There bthey buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife, and there I buried Leah– 32 the field and the cave that is in it were bought from the Hittites.” 33 When Jacob finished commanding his sons, he drew up his feet into the bed and breathed his last and awas gathered to his people. (Gen 49:29-33 ESV)

 

Why was it so important for Ya’achov to have assurances from his sons that his remains would be transported back to Canaan and buried on the property that belonged to his family and that held the remains of his grandparents and parents and one of his wives? Clearly Ya’achov/Jacob had a profound understanding of what he was about to experience in death. Seems as though Ya’achov recognized or believed that, as part of the covenant that he had with Yah, it was important that his remains be interred in the Land of Promise. For there was no question in this patriarch’s mind and heart that his soul needed to rest in the place that held the remains of his parents. Is it then possible that Ya’achov had some degree of trust and hope that Yehovah would resurrect him and his loved ones—his people—his kinsmen–sometime in the future? Seems as though Ya’achov/Jacob possessed no thought of his soul separating from his body when he died and abiding in some ethereal realm that had no connection whatsoever with the Land of Promise. Because if this was the case, which it wasn’t, why would it matter to him where his remains would be put to rest? It shouldn’t matter, right?

 

Scriptural Basis for the Body and Soul of Humanity

 

Scripture teaches that humans consist of two essential, co-dependent elements: (1) a physical body, and (2) a soul (Psalms/Tehilliym 31:9; Proverbs 16:24; Yesha’Yahu/Isaiah 10:18; Micah 6:7; Matthew 10:28; 1 Thessalonians 5:23).

 

The human body is easily understood to be the frame or physical aspect of our person. The human soul, on the other hand, is a slightly more complex idea or concept to grasp. Now, our English term “soul” in the Hebrew is “nephesh.”  The soul or nephesh is that which defines a person: the self-the mind-the passions, appetites, and emotions of the person.

 

It must be understood at the outset here that the human body and soul are not exclusive of one another. But rather, the body and the soul are inclusive of one another. In other words, one cannot exist without the other. These two-elements are essentially indistinguishable from one another.

 

Interestingly, the Hebrew term “nephesh” is used interchangeably for both “soul” and “body” in the Tanach, which lends to these two-essential, co-dependent elements of a person being wholly dependent one upon the other.

 

From a Hebraic, biblical standpoint, both humans and animals possess souls. But the thing that distinguishes humans and animals in Yah’s sight is that humans were made in Yehovah’s image. And that reality makes humans unique and set-apart from the rest of creation.

 

Now, when we get to the Brit-Hadashah, we find that the English terms body and soul have distinct Greek-terms attached to them. The term “body” in the Greek is “soma.” It is defined quite simply as body. There is a pretty cool definition of soma that fits most appropriately here, such that the soma is that which casts a shadow but is something that is distinguished from the shadow.

 

Then we have the English term “soul” in the Greek as “psuche.” And “psuche” is defined as simply “soul” or “life.”

 

The distinctions that exist between these two-Greek terms, I believe, to some degree, aids in the promotion of the denominationalists’ concepts and teachings on the independence and immortality of the human soul.

 

The added element of the human “spirit”—that being “ruach” in the Hebrew and “pneuma” in the Greek—seems less to do with the actual make-up of a person or human, but more to that animating element that came from the Creator that causes the soul and body to function.

 

The Apostle Paul/Shaul included the term “spirit” or “pneuma” as sort of an added element to describe the definitive wholeness of human:

 

Now may athe God of peace himself bsanctify you completely, and may your cwhole dspirit and soul and body be kept blameless at ethe coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1Th 5:23 ESV)

 

Here the apostle is bestowing upon his Thessalonian readers a “blessing” of sorts, that would ideally bring them as individuals to a sanctified state of existence before Yehovah through the Person and Ministry of Yahoshua Messiah. And contrary to denominationalists’ conventional wisdom, the spirit that Shaul is referring specifically to here in this verse is that living element—Yah’s breath of life—that animates each Thessalonian’s body and soul. Seems the apostle in making such a grand pronouncement to his readers did not want to leave anything related to his reader’s existence out in terms of his blessing and hopeful wishes for their salvation.

 

The spirit of man—that animating element—the breath of life—upon a person’s death returns to the Creator of the Universe (Ecclesiastes 12:7). In and of itself, the spirit of man—that breath of life—has no inherent consciousness.

 

Religion’s Take on the Concepts of the Human Soul and Body

 

Armed with this understanding that humans consist of a body and a soul, both of which is animated by Yah’s “breath of life,” we can now make some important criticisms of religion’s take on these essential concepts. For we know that denominationalism, catholicism, isalm, and most eastern religions teach that the body is the temporal framework or vehicle for its immortal soul and or spirit. And at death, the temporal body ceases to function as a suitable framework or vehicle. So, it ultimately deteriorates and returns to the earth from which it was originally made.

 

The soul on the other hand is the immortal, eternal element of the person that separates from the body at death and goes off to some ethereal destination (e.g., paradise, heaven, purgatory, animals, plants, etc.) that each religion has determined is appropriate for that conscious soul.

 

Are the denominationalists’, catholics’, islamists’, and easterner religions’ claims consistent with scripture as it relates to the question of death and dying? Did Ya’achov and Yosef possess this same understanding of death and dying and the grave? Or did Ya’achov and his son Yosef understand that their death would entail something entirely different, with a hope of “good things to come”—I.e., a future resurrection? If these believed that their souls were immortal, why was it so important for them to have their remains removed from Egypt/Mitsrayim to the Land of Promise—Canaan—where it would await—rest—sleep—in anticipation of a future resurrection? If this scenario was in fact understood by them, why would they care where there were interred/buried? Clearly, there was something important to their being buried alongside their loved ones in the true Faith, in the Land of Promise. For our focus passage records that Ya’achov states to his sons that he was going to be “gathered to my people” (49:29) and then when Ya’achov passed, Moshe writes that Ya’achov breathed his last—I.e., Ya’achov died—and “was gathered to his people” (49:33). Clearly, Ya’achov’s, followed later by Yosef’s deathbed professions, were not just mere last will and testaments, but more so, they were profound professions of their deeply abiding Faith in Yehovah. These were clearly placing their souls in the eternal hands of Yehovah Elohayka, whom they no doubt trusted would resurrect them in the world tomorrow—the “olam ha ba.” These no doubt saw their impending deaths as temporal—some have described it as “sleep,” in anticipation of a resurrection and residence in the Kingdom of Elohim—Gan Eden. In the parlance of death being a time that the soul and body sleep in their graves, there is always associated with that sleep, an implicit insinuation of a future resurrection.

 

Gathered to My People

 

In his giving specific instructions over the disposition of his remains to his sons, Ya’achov makes a mysterious statement that he expresses to his sons as an apparent fact: “I am to be gathered to my people.”

 

What could this possibly mean?

 

When this phrase “I am to be gathered to my people” is read and understood as it is written, Ya’achov believes that when he dies, some part of his being is going to be reunited with his kinsmen who have gone on before him. And the question that must be asked, and hopefully answered, is: Where is this place? Paradise? Heaven? Abraham’s Bosom? Purgatory? Or somewhere else less obvious to our Western, Judeo-Christian, Babylonian influenced sensibilities and worldview?

 

Consequently, the same denominationalists, catholics, islamists, and easterners suggest the understanding that this statement supports their belief in the human soul being immortal and God’s people, upon their death, going to a special place of reward and eternal bliss. But we will find as we explore this issue of death, the grave, and the resurrection from a Messianic/Biblical perspective, that much of what these groups believe and teach is not consistent with that which Scripture reveals on this critical subject.

 

Contextually, we know that Ya’achov as recorded in our reading is dying and he knows he’s dying. And so, in preparation for what is coming, he tells his sons that I’m about to be gathered to my people. In other words, I’m about to go the way of all those who I hold dear. I’m about to die. But die with the covenant promises still intact and with a blessed hope of resurrection in Yah’s good time. That being said, take my body back home and bury me in the family plot as part of my covenant heritage so that I may rest in peaceful anticipation of a restored paradise.

 

 

Defining the Term Gathered

 

Our English term “gathered” in the Hebrew is “’acaph” {aw-saf}. It is a term that is used 199 times in the Tanach.

 

Anciently, the term means an “assembling [together] of people” in a single place. And as it would relate to the content of our reading and our subject matter, we’re talking about Ya’achov’s, and Yosef’s remains being assembled with the remains of their parents and kinsmen. So, clearly there is this sense of reverence and respect and concern Yah’s set-apart people had, not just for their own remains when their time came, but also for the remains of their loved ones that passed before them, regardless the amount of time that may have passed since their deaths. Thus, there remained embedded within every one of them this abiding memory and knowledge that they were made in the image of Yah and that death, and the grave did not change or alter that reality.

 

Thus, “acaph” is used in the tanach to denote one’s death and the disposition of his or her remains (cf., Genesis/Beresheit 25:8, 17; Deuteronomy/Devarim 32:50; 2 Kings Melekiym 22:20).

 

Now, some contend this is a reference to the patriarchs’ life after death experience or some form of afterlife, whereby after their respective deaths, some part of their being—presumably their soul—finds itself in some ethereal location along with the souls of their loved ones that had previously died and gone on before them. This is popularly referred to as the “afterlife,” purgatory, gan eden, Avraham’s Bosom (Luke 16:22), gehinnom, hades, sheol, even heaven.

 

But if we take this term and the phrase in which it is framed contextually, this is an ancient euphemism used to describe the patriarchs’ overall death experience. It adds a poetic flavor to the otherwise ominously sad experience of death, that lovingly and reverentially links one’s passing to the passing of those died before.

 

No doubt those who advocate that this phrase is descriptive of an afterlife that is experienced by our ancient Hebrew cousins will submit the obvious contention that Moshe did not use the word “muwth” {mooth} (I.e., and he died) to describe what was happening to Ya’achov at this point in our reading. And I will contend that this is a valid point.

 

Consequently, some so-called rabbinic sages have insinuated that Ya’achov never died. According to at least one rabbinic source (I.e., Rabbi Schneur Zlaman of Liadi), the life of a “tzaddik” (I.e., a righteous person) is spiritual and their life consists of “faith, awe, and love of Elohim.” So, while the “tzaddik” exists in their earthly, physical body, these 3-attributes are contained therein. Their utterances and thoughts are deemed as holy, which like the rays of the sun, their disciples receive a reflection of these attributes. And once the tzaddik passes, the ones who were close to him receive these 3-attributes. Thus, his positive influence upon others keeps him alive for an indeterminate amount of time after his physical death.

 

In some cases, still according to these fringe sages, the tzaddik is more alive than before their physical death, since there is no physical limitations of time and space (Tanya, Igeret HaKodesh 27). Thus, Torah regards Ya’achov as alive even though our Torah Reading says otherwise.

 

Now, it should not be misconstrued that every so-called rabbinic sage held to such understandings of Ya’achov and other righteous ones living on esoterically after their physical presence passes. A seeming majority of rabbinic sages understood this phrase “and he was gathered to his people” to mean simply that Ya’achov died (Rabbi Yitzchak Rav Nachman). Which is to say that the phrase is a poetic euphemism that carries a sense of reverence with it, which I personally believe to be the case.

 

Suggestions of a Jewish Afterlife

 

Carrying this Jewish understanding of the righteous living beyond their death, we find that several commentators contend that although this statement appears to be an idiom—a euphemism—it seems to reflect a common belief among the ancients that upon their passing, they would be somehow—someway—reunited with loved ones and acquaintances in an afterlife of some type:

 

  • The dead go down to “sheol”, with sheol meaning “the underworld”, the grave, hell, or the pit (Numbers/Bemidbar 16:33; Psalms/Tehilliym 6:6; Isaiah/Yesha’yahu 38:18). Which reminds me of a series of teachings that was given by a prominent Hebrew Roots teacher several years ago, that went to great lengths to promote the existence of this afterlife that the patriarchs experienced when they died. And this very well-read teacher left little room for refutation of his claims, citing dozens of obscure references he claimed supported his teaching. He believed that Yahoshua Messiah, when His remains were placed in that borrowed tomb, descended to this underworld-paradise-the pit-what have you, and preached to the souls that inhabited this realm, ultimately leading them out in the process (I.e., a veiled reference to Ephesians 4:7). We can certainly talk about his thinking in some future discussion. But suffice for now, scripture does not support the existence of an afterlife. For scripture makes it explicitly clear that there is no consciousness or awareness of the soul in “sheol” or rather, the grave (Psalms 6:5—”For in death there is no remembrance of you, in Sheol who will give you praise?”; Psalms 30:9—”What profit is there in my blood, when I go down to the pit? Shall the dust praise thee? Shall it declare thy truth?” Psalms 88:10—”Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee? Isaiah/Yesha’yahu38:18—”For the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit (I.e., sheol) cannot hope for thy truth.” Ecclesiastes 9:5—”For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten.”

t

  • Enoch was not…(Genesis/Beresheit 5:24; Hebrews 11:5). Indeed, some ancient sources contend that Enoch was transported from this earthly plain to the illusive Garden (Gan) Eden where he served as sort of this quasi-operative for the Kingdom of God. Indeed, he details of what happened to these two men is a mystery that scripture is silent.

 

  • The Witch of Endor and the summoning of the spirit of Samuel (1 Samuel 28).

 

  • The Talmud— 90b-91a.

 

Hellenist Jewish Historian, Philo of Alexandria, contended that the soul, which is imprisoned by the body here on earth, returns, if it is the soul of a righteous one, to God; while the wicked suffer eternal death (H.A. Wolfson, Philo, 2 vols.).

 

From the Talmud and Midrash: The soul remains in a purgatorial period for 12-months (Ah…so the Catholics were not the first to postulate the belief in “purgatory”). Therefore, according to certain fringe Jewish Sages, Samuel was able to be raised from the dead within a year after his death (we’ll describe a little more about where this idea originated in part-2 of our discussion). Continuing: But after this purgatorial period, the righteous soul goes to paradise, otherwise known as Gan Eden. The wicked on the other hand go to hell or “gehinnom” (Shab. 152b-1553a; Tanh. Va-Yikra 8).

 

Often when we get into any Rabbinic Jewish discussions of an afterlife, there is mention of the Garden of Eden, or Gan Eden.

 

In the Aggadah, Gan Eden appears as a contradistinction—or alternative–to hell (BT Sotah 22a). According to such rabbinic sources, there are 2-Edens—2 Gan Edens: (1) the earthly Eden which Adam and Eve/Chavah were expelled from, that was beautifully filled with vegetation; and (2) the habitation or abode of the righteous.

 

Still other Hebrew thinkers contended that the souls of the righteous are “hidden under the Throne of Glory” (Shab. 152b).

 

Interestingly, this same thinking is linked to the Hebrew understanding of the Messianic Age. According to certain Jewish sages, when a righteous one is resurrected in the Messianic Age, that soul that had formerly gone to God and had been hidden under the Throne of Glory, that soul reunites with its former physical body and the person is reconstituted—or better, is resurrected.

 

Now, whether this happens to just the righteous or it will include also the wicked is not made clear by these rabbinic thinkers. But it is believed that at some point in history, the wicked will be judged and destroyed. And the ashes of the wicked souls will be scattered upon the ground to be trampled underfoot by Yah’s righteous ones.

 

But despite the lack of biblical support for such rabbinic claims, these rabbis did not buy into the concept of an “immortal soul.” Even these recognized that the Creator of the Universe will ultimately destroy the souls of the wicked, which is a contradiction to the belief/doctrine of the wicked soul burning and suffering in hell’s fire for all eternity. For it was our Master who, in preparing his chosen ones for their missionary work, taught them the following critical spiritual reality:

 

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Mat 10:28 KJV)

 

 

The Contradiction

 

Despite this forklorish thinking by certain so-called ancients of an “afterlife,” Scripture suggests that our ancient Hebrew cousins were focused on the here and now, not in a life after death. So much so that Levitical Priests were strictly prohibited from coming into contact with dead bodies:

 

And the LORD said unto Moses, Speak unto the priests the sons of Aaron, and say unto them, There shall none be defiled for the dead among his people: 2 But for his kin, that is near unto him, that is, for his mother, and for his father, and for his son, and for his daughter, and for his brother, 3 And for his sister a virgin, that is nigh unto him, which hath had no husband; for her may he be defiled. 4 But he shall not defile himself, being a chief man among his people, to profane himself.1 (Lev 21:1-4 KJV)

 

And consistent with this focus on the here and now—serving Yah in this world—keeping covenant with the Creator of the Universe–that most Hebrews had, especially in Tanach days, held to a “full-dead consciousness” when one dies—that is, when one dies, their soul and body cease to function and these rest in the grave (Ex. R. 52:3; Tanh. Ki Tissa 33; Ket. 77h, 104a; Ber. 18b-19ab). Some went so far as to write:

 

“The only difference between the living and the dead is the power of speech” (PR 12:46; Ber. 18b). Which is simply to say: when one dies, their whole being is dead; silenced. There is no immortal soul that leaves the body and wanders off to some other place and interacts with others who’ve gone on before them.

 

The Jewish Hope of a Resurrection

 

The Talmud discusses and supports the resurrection of the dead in the world to come as being a cornerstone of rabbinic eschatology. There is then a clear distinction between the Pharisaic from the Sadducean (reference: Matthew 22:23—”The same day came to Him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection…”). You see, the Sadducee denied any resurrection of the dead. And that was why they were “sad, you see.”

 

So sharp was the disagreement over the issue of a resurrection between these two sects of Judaism, that the Talmud—which laid claim to victory over this divisive issue—states that Torah:

 

“…excludes those who deny the resurrection doctrine from any portion of the world to come” (Sanh. 10:1; 90b-91a; Jos., Wars, 2:162ff).

 

In other words, any who denies or rejects that the righteous dead will be resurrected in the olam ha ba—the world to come—will be excluded or not admitted into the Kingdom of Elohim.

 

The Talmud and Mishnah describe the coming Messianic Kingdom as being a “political and physical utopia” (Ber. 34b; Shab. 63a).

 

This is a reference to the “olam ha ba.” In the “olam ha ba” the righteous will exist in glory and enjoy the bliss of the Divine Presence in a fully spiritual world (Ber. 17a).

 

Beyond such mentions, the rabbis generally do not speculate too much upon the “olam ha ba.” To these, the olam ha ba—the Messianic Kingdom—is an undeniable reality and unshakable future reality for the religious Jew.

 

Ya’achov’s Last Will and Testimony

 

Now, I’ve thrown a lot of information at you regarding various rabbinic thoughts regarding death, the grave, and the resurrection. And in so doing, I’ve only scratched the surface.

 

But for now, let’s finish looking at our reading and then in part 2, we’ll look at the origin of some of these rabbinic thoughts regarding the soul and death in comparison with what scripture has to say about these elements of the human experience.

 

Returning to our passage—picking up at 49:29, we find that Ya’achov instructs his sons to ensure that his remains be interred in the plot/cave that his grandfather Avraham had purchased from Ephron the Hittite (reference Genesis/Beresheit 25):

 

Then he commanded them and said to them, “I am to be agathered to my people; bbury me with my fathers cin the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, (Gen 49:29 ESV)

 

Clearly the heart of Ya’achov, and even Yosef in chapter 50, was to be found in the Land of Canaan, not Egypt/Mitsrayim. And Ya’achov’s last will and testament attests to the reality that Yisra’el’s covenant-backed home is Canaan and Mitsrayim (aka Egypt) was but a temporary abode or sojourn.

 

This death-bed discussion was an administrative—business directive if you will—explicit—without ambiguity. Yisra’el, although not having fully possessed the Land of Promise at that time, had legally acquired a piece of property there that would ultimately be the foundation upon which Yah would tender His covenant promise of giving the whole land to Avraham’s descendants. The last of the original patriarchs, Ya’achov, his remains would rest in the Cave at Machpelah as a memorial—even a testimony of Yehovah’s covenant with Avraham and Yitschaq.

 

In 49:33 we find Ya’achov ending his charging of his sons, laying down upon his bed, and as the text articulates, being “gathered unto his people”:

 

When Jacob finished commanding his sons, he drew up his feet into the bed and breathed his last and awas gathered to his people. (Gen 49:33 ESV)

 

J.H. Hertz, in his Torah and Haftarah commentary, states that the sense here of the phrase “and was gathered unto his people” is that of Ya’achov’s soul departing his physical body and it going to join the souls of those who had gone on before him.”

 

Clearly J.H.Hertz had drank the Kool-Aide of the teachings and beliefs of those rabbis who bought into the concept of the “immortal soul” and the “afterlife.”

 

But again, is this thinking and belief of an immortal soul that departs the body upon death biblically supported? As we’ve been discussing, it is not biblical. But rather, it is fringe rabbinic gibberish that must be taken within known historic perspective. And we’ll get into the historical perspective of this gibberish in part-2 of this discussion.

 

But suffice to say at this juncture of our discussion, Scripture is very succinct, that is, it is to the point, in its treatment of the subject of death and what happens to every human they die: The body and soul returns to the ground from which it originates, and the breath of life—the ruach—the person’s unconscious spirit–returns to the Elohim that gave it (Ecclesiastes/Qoheleth 12:7; cf. 3:19; Genesis/Beresheit 2:7; 6:17; 7:22). Thus, the soul of man awaits a future resurrection in the grave or wherever his remains are placed. In the interim between death and resurrection, scripture simply does not support any temporal way point—or temporary abode for the dead. Oh, we do run into passages that when read and taken at face value, strongly suggest the existence—or at least a previous existence—of such temporary abodes as purgatory, paradise, the Bosom of Avraham, or heaven to name just a few. But when these passages are examined within known historical, cultural, and biblical context, we find that such thinking was more folklore and tradition than biblical truth. And by the time we get to the end of part-2 of this discussion, we will prove this to be true and we will be on firm footing to be able to understand the realities associated with death, the grave, and the future resurrection. We need not be spiritual slaves to the pagan-based understanding of death and the grave that yesterday’s and today’s organized religion adopted from the Greeks and Egypt.

 

Religion Drank the Immortal Soul Kool-Aide Too

 

Unfortunately, denominationalists have to some greater or lesser degree adopted this same concept of the immortal soul that departs the body upon a person’s death and goes on to heaven or paradise. But religiosity’s spin on this theme is that the righteous or saved individual, upon his or her death, is immediately whisked away to heaven where he or she is afforded the divine opportunity to walk the streets of gold; sing in the Halleluyah Choir; hang out with the patriarchs of our Faith; and gaze into the glorious face of Jesus Christ for all eternity. At least until the rapture, when their souls or spirits as some might have it, rejoins their bodies in the grave, and they are translated into glorious beings who once again re-enter heaven and do what they once did before the rapture.

 

And what happens, pray-tell, to the souls of the wicked. Well according to the denominationalists they are ushered to hell where they will exist in a fiery torment until the Great White Throne judgment in which case their souls will leave hell, stand before Jesus Christ, receive their condemnation, and be once again ushered back to hell to exist in a fiery torment for the rest of eternity.

 

All of this has always sounded confusing to me, and to some extent, this line of thinking is impossible to truly rectify in the light of scripture.

 

 

We find in the apocryphal book of Jubilees/Yoveliym in regard to Ya’achov’s passing:

 

“And he (he being Ya’achov) slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the double-cave in the land of Kena’an, near Avraham his father, in the grave which he dug for himself in the double-cave in the land of Chevron/Hebron” (45:15; Cepher).

 

So, with this thinking of Ya’achov being gathered to his people in his death, Jubilee/Yoveliym introduces to the reader this nuance of death being a form or type of “sleep.” The writer describes Ya’achov here, not as being gathered to his people as described in the authorized versions of our Torah Reading, but rather, of Ya’achov “sleeping” with his fathers in the grave.

 

And although Jubilees/Yoveliym is not considered to be canon, its content does to some degree reflect certain Hebraic perspectives and thoughts on a great many things. In this case, this concept of “sleep” as it relates to death is introduced into our discussion and it is a very important concept that we will discuss further in part 2. And once we grasp the importance of this analogy—death being analogous to sleeping or resting—we will get a better understanding of what happens when we die. It will dispel this erroneous notion that the soul departs its body upon one’s death and goes off someplace to dwell for an indeterminate amount of time.

 

Joseph/Yosef Repeats His Father Jacob’s/Ya’achov’s Example in his Death

 

Continuing with our reading in 50:1-13, we find recorded therein that Joseph/Yosef saw to it that his father Ya’achov’s remains were attended to according to ancient Egyptian embalming practices. Scripture notes that the ancient Egyptian embalming that Ya’achov’s remains underwent was part of a 40-day ritualistic process, while the mourning period was 70-days. Now, whether the embalming process and the mourning period ran concurrently or not, is not clear here. But suffice to say, a great amount of attention was given to the disposition of the patriarch’s remains. The passage records that the whole of Egypt/Mitsrayim mourned the death of Ya’achov along with Yosef and Yosef’s family. This is evidence of divine favor in action beloved.

 

So, after these processes were completed, Yosef petitions Pharaoh to permit him to transport Ya’achov’s remains back to Canaan where it would be interred in the family’s burial cave at Machpelah, in Canaan. Again, this hearkens back to Avraham’s purchase of this property from Ephron the Hittite for purposes of burying the matriarch Sarah, which was recorded in detail in Genesis/Beresheit 25. (We covered this event in our Sabbath Thoughts and Reflections 23 Post entitled “How Do We Know if We’ve Been Chosen of God.” I would humbly encourage you to read or listen to that discussion if you’ve not already done so and if you are so led).

 

Continuing: We see yet another example of the divine favor that Yosef enjoyed among the Egyptian people, as Pharaoh graciously consented to Yosef’s request.

 

Now, if we drop down to 50:24-26 of our reading, we find that Yosef had effectively assumed the role of patriarch over the House of Yisra’el after Ya’achov’s passing and burial. And this of course falls right in line with the dream that Yosef had and revealed to his family prior him being sold into Egyptian servitude/slavery by his brethren (Genesis/Beresheit 37:5-10). Recall that Yosef’s dreams, through the natural elements of creation as depicted therein, foretold of his brethren bowing before him and paying him homage and accepting his patriarchal leadership in the process. And recall that it was the revealing of these dreams back then that led to Yosef’s brethren, incited by profound jealousy, selling him into Egyptian slavery. Indeed, this is quite a story when viewed in its component pieces and as a whole.

 

And so, we find in this latter portion of our reading, Yosef, upon his death bed—the parallels between the deaths of Ya’achov and Yosef are indeed striking—but upon his death bed, Yosef prophesies about the future of the Hebrew nation. Yosef declares to his brethren as he was dying that Yah would come to them as a nation and take them out of Egypt/Mitsrayim and lead them to the Land of Promise—Canaan—the Land that was promised to Avraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’achov.

 

Again, we see this inextricable link between the Land of Promise and the Nation. So important was the Land to its covenant-people, that the patriarch insisted on having his remains buried there as well, despite his many years of prominence and greatness in Egypt/Mitsrayim. Not only are Yah’s people emotionally and spiritually linked to the Land, but Yah also too has an affinity for the Land as revealed by Moshe:

 

 12 A land which the LORD thy God careth for: the eyes of the LORD thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.1 (Deu 11:12 KJV)

 

Yah’s true, set-apart people know that His Kingdom will originate and operate from this Land, and it is there where the hope of the resurrection of the righteous will unfold (Revelation 3:12; 21:2, 10). Clearly the patriarch had some degree of understanding that the Land was somehow linked to their resurrection, which would explain in part why Ya’achov and Yosef were so adamant about having their remains returned and interred in Canaan.

 

Indeed, we could spend several discussion periods discussing the relevance of the land to Yah’s elect and to the patriarchs of old. But to do so would only take us off track in terms of our focus. Nevertheless, we can surmise that in terms of Ya’achov’s and Yosef’s passing, the location where their remains would be laid to rest was important to them, the nation of Yisra’el, and most importantly, to Yehovah our Elohim.

 

And finally in our text, we find that in the process of delivering his prophesy to Yisra’el, Yosef instructs his family to have his remains accompany the nation when she departed Egypt/Mitsrayim in the future and inter his remains on the family’s property—the same Cave at Machpelah where his parents were interred.

 

We will pick-up this discussion in part 2.

TMTO-20-Endure Sound Doctrine I Will Not

by | Mar 8, 2019

Many members of the Body of Messiah will not endure sound doctrine as they are being led astray by false teachers or they themselves are teaching false doctrine. We discuss this troubling situation and provide ways to overcome the deception. 

read more

Parashat Mishpatim Judgment-Murder-Abortions-Sanctuary

by | Jan 30, 2019

Timeliness of This Week's Torah Reading This week’s Torah Reading could not have been more timely. And I was compelled to respond in the wake of the news we’ve received over the last couple weeks regarding the legalization of late term abortions on demand. And just...

read more

To Call or Not Call on the Name of the LORD

by | Jan 25, 2019

What Does it Mean? What does it truly mean for a would-be disciple of Jesus Christ (ie., Yahoshua Messiah) to call on the Name of the L-rd? Is it simply an utterance whereby the would-be disciple utters or invokes the actual Name or Title of the Divine One? Or is it a...

read more

The 9th of Av–You Are Called by Name–STAR-44

by | Aug 6, 2022 | Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer's Sabbath Thoughts & Reflections

Tisha B’Av–The 9th of Av–“The Saddest Day of the Jewish Calendar Year.”

 

According to Hillel’s Calendar, which I frequently refer to as the Jewish Calculated Calendar, as I am recording and posting this installment of TMTO Sabbath Thoughts and Reflections—8/6/2022, it is the 9th of Av or Tisha B’Av according to their calendar’s reckoning.

 

However, because the 9th of Av has fallen on a weekly Sabbath this year—again, according to their calendar reckoning, the rabbis have determined that this Memorial Day cannot be observed until tomorrow, which of course will be the first day of the week—the 10th of Av, or 8/7/2022.

 

I guess it really doesn’t matter since the 9th of Av is a rabbinically invented holiday. It is NOT a mandated feast of Yehovah.

 

No doubt, however, many within and outside our faith will observe this day in accordance with the very comprehensive traditions associated with keeping this day. And we’ll briefly get into what some of those comprehensive traditions are in just a second.

 

But today being, supposedly, the Shabbat before the 9th of Av, it is treated as special according to rabbinic tradition. This Shabbat is formally referred to as “Shabbat Chazon” which means “Shabbat of Vision.”

 

Now, the so-called rabbinic sages contend that on this Shabbat, Shabbat Chazon, Yah’s people are granted a vision of the 3rd Temple. Why are these sages referring to a vision of the 3rd Temple on this Shabbat? Well, they refer to the devoted having a vision of the 3rd Temple because in great part, the 9th of Av memorializes the destruction of not just Solomon’s Temple, but also the destruction of Herod’s Temple, or the 2nd Temple. And because of this, the sages, through their creation of this special Shabbat, encourage their devoted ones to not just commemorate the destruction and passing of Solomon’s and Herod’s Temples, but to look ahead with hope for the 3rd Temple that will be the centerpiece of the coming Kingdom of Elohim.

 

The sages of course realized that it is impossible for one to physically see this illusive 3rd Temple of the future. So, their emphasis is seeing a vision of the 3rd Temple is more of an esoteric viewing of it. To these rabbis, the vision of the 3rd Temple is seen by one’s soul. And in seeing this temple via one’s soul, he or she receives the empowerment to break free from their present state of being in some degree of physical exile. For even though one may be residing in Yisra’el proper, without the presence of the Temple, he or she is still in a state of exile. However, if one reaches out with their soul to embrace this 3rd Temple, they will effectively bring about their redemption and the eventual building of this 3rd Temple.

 

Sounds to me like some pretty Kabbalistic stuff, doesn’t it.

 

But I get it. The Jew’s focus has always been the Temple. For the Temple represented the heart and soul of Judaism. So, even today, with the Temple having been long destroyed, the heart of the Jewish people is still looking back to the glorious years when the Temple stood and operated as the central element of their religion.

 

I don’t know about you, but this level of devotion to the Temple sort of borders on worship of the Temple, which we know was part and parcel of 1st-century Palestinian Judaism. And let me just say: I am in no way denigrating or downplaying the central role the Temple played in our sacred history. But we must understand which side our spiritual bread is buttered in this respect. Yah clearly sanctioned the destruction of both Temples for some obvious, and for some not so obvious reasons.

 

The Prophet Ezekiel, in chilling detail, describes Yah’s presence leaving Solomon’s Temple (chapter 10) because Judah brazenly syncretized pagan idolatry worship with worship of the One True Elohim of Avraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’achov. Yah’s vacating of the Temple left Yerushalayim and Judah vulnerable to enemy attack and destruction, which we know did occurred sometime around 587/586 BCE.

 

Yah warned our ancient Jewish cousins:

 

“I am Yehovah! That is My Name. And My glory will I not give to another. Neither My praise to graven images” (Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 42:8; KJV).

 

And then Herod’s Temple, otherwise known and often referred to as Zerubbabel’s Temple, named accordingly because it was Herod the Great who bankrolled the vast improvements to Zerubbabel’s Temple, which was dedicated around 515 BCE, was destroyed by the Romans between 68-70 C.E.

 

Now, there are many reasons offered as to why Yah sanctioned the destruction of Herod’s Temple. Some postulate it was because the Jews of Palestine were responsible for our Master’s crucifixion. Others take a more practical perspective and view that it was the result of political and religious unrest among the 1st century Jews living in Yerushalayim, leading to revolt against Rome.

 

And still others, such as I, believe that Yah sanctioned the destruction of Zerubbabel’s Temple for purposes of scattering His chosen ones, who had become quite content to flourish and walk out their Messianic Faith in Yerushalayim. Herod’s Temple remained for those Messianic Jews, a focal point of their day-to-day walk with Messiah. And many surmise that if Yah did not remove the Temple from their sight—physically and spiritually—the spread of the Gospel Message would have been stunted and inhibited.

 

Consequently, it is the destruction of these two Temples, along with a few other tragic incidents in Yisra’el history, that is memorialized by Tisha B’Av or the 9th of Av. Pious Jews around the world recognize Tisha B’Av/the 9th of Av as “the saddest day” of the sacred calendar year.

 

Tisha B’Av is observed by religious Jews with a full fast and prayers throughout the day at their local synagogues. A full fast being no drink or food for the duration of the 24-hour day.

 

The following events are all believed to have taken place on the 9th of Av:

 

  • Our ancient Hebrew cousins were condemned to wander the wilderness for 40-years for refusing to enter the Promised Land when told to do so by Yah.

 

  • Both Solomon’s and Zerubbabel’s/Herod’s Temples were destroyed.

 

  • The Bar Kochba Revolt against Rome in c. 133 C.E. resulted in the extensive depopulation of all Jewish communities in Palestine, especially in Yerushalayim. Some place the number of dead from this revolt at around 600,000 Jews.

 

  • All Jews were expelled from England in 1290 A.D.

 

  • All Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492 A.D.

 

And just to show you how comprehensive the rules and traditions are surrounding this Memorial Day:

 

  • As previously mentioned, religious Jews observe a complete, 24 hours fast.
  • No leather footwear is to be worn.
  • No one is permitted to be immersed in a mikveh—which by the way, will be one of our next discussion topics in our Paul and Hebrew Series, coming up, Abba willing, next week. Looking forward to that discussion and teaching. You won’t want to miss these teachings.
  • No creams or ointments are allowed to be applied to one’s body.
  • Marital relations are prohibited.
  • Torah readings are prohibited.
  • Gift giving is prohibited.
  • No pleasure travel is permitted.
  • Festive or fine attire is not to be worn.
  • The religious are expected to attend synagogue services.
  • Work is permitted, but it is highly encouraged that one begins work, if they must, after noon.
  • One’s focus during this 24-hour period is on mourning and repentance.
  • One is expected to contribute extra to charities.

 

Now, I wanted to make you aware of this Jewish holiday and all its trappings because I understand that a great many folks in our faith community will be keeping this day in one form or another.

 

I have no feelings one way or another about true Messianics choosing to observe this rabbinic made Memorial Day. My only concern is the focus and perspective one should have regarding such extra-biblical holidays.

 

As redeemed of Yah, through the Person and Ministries of Yahoshua Messiah, we’ve been called to walk in covenant relationship with the Creator of the Universe. And in that calling, our Master instructed us to (1) seek first and foremost the Kingdom of Yah—live—walk in Kingdom and (2) seek Abba’s righteousness—walk in righteousness. Whatever mourning there is to do, it should be turned to joy, for our redemption draws ever so close each passing day.

 

Our joy should be in the things of Yah and the promises He has made to us who are His chosen ones.

 

Mourning only distracts from our covenant mandate.

 

Furthermore, we are to be about making disciples of the nation peoples of this world for our Master Yahoshua. So, our focus should not be of the tragic things that occurred previously in our history—although we are wise to take heed and learn from those tragic events—but rather, our focus should be ahead of us as we await our Master’s glorious return.

 

Is it wrong to keep or observe Tisha B’Av? Probably not. But a better question would be: What should I be doing on Tisha B’Av to further Yah’s Kingdom and glorify His Name in all the world.

 

And with that beloved, let’s move into our Torah Reading discussion.

___________________________________________________________________

 He Called You by Name–Isaiah 43:1-7

I’ve chosen to title this discussion: “He called you by name.” And by the end of this discussion, I’m certain you will be able to identify with this themed title.

 

Our Reading Discussion today will be taken from the 44th Reading of our 3-Year Torah Reading Cycle. The Torah portion of today’s reading is found in Genesis/Beresheit 48:1-49:26. Consequently, we won’t be discussing this passage today. But rather, I want to discuss a verse from the Haftarah portion of this week’s reading, found in Isaiah 43:1-7, with a focus on just verse 1.

 

“But now thus says the LORD, He who created you, O Jacob, He who formed you, O Israel: ‘Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine’” (ESV).

 

 

Here we find the Prophet Yeshi’Yahu (aka Isaiah)—Yehovah is Salvation—very similar in meaning to our Master’s name—Yeshua (contracted form) or Yehoshua (compound form) which means “Yehovah saves or delivers [His people]—speaking to the nation Yisra’el.

 

Our focus verse is essentially a continuation of chapter 42 in which Yah addresses with Yisra’el, through Isaiah—Yeshayahu—the spiritual elephant in the room which was Yisra’el sin and the impending judgment and punishment that would come against the nation (verses 22-25).

 

And so, Yah calls Yisra’el out for her abandonment of the covenant she had with Yah:

 

Who gave up Jacob to the looter, and Israel to the plunderers? Was it not the LORD, against whom we have sinned, in whose ways they would not walk, and whose law they would not obey? So he poured on him the heat of his anger and the might of battle; it set him on fire all around, abut he did not understand; it burned him up, bbut he did not take it to heart. (Isa 42:24-25 ESV)

 

So, what we clearly see portrayed here is that Yah is not happy with Yisra’el at all. And because Yisra’el refused to keep her end of the covenant bargain or agreement, Yah had to harshly judge and then punish Yisra’el through Babylonian destruction and captivity.

 

But the amazing thing we see in our Haftarah Reading for today—Yeshi’Yahu—Isaiah 43:1-7–is a profound expression of Yah’s abiding—steadfast love for Yisra’el, despite the wrathful anger He just expressed towards her.

 

But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. 2 When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee. 3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. 4 Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life.1 5 Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west; 6 I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; 7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him. (Isa 43:1-7 KJV)

 

Despite Yisra’el’s obstinacy; despite her stiff-neckedness; despite incessant propensity to engage in idolatry and violate the terms of the marriage covenant between she and Yah, Yah remains steadfast in His devotion; His love; His keeping of the covenant promises to Yisra’el.

 

But being the holy and righteous Elohim He is, Yah cannot allow Yisra’el’s unrequited sins and her breaking of the covenant go without judgment and punishment.

 

And we see here a very touching explanation and expression of Yah’s abiding love for Yisra’el from the Creator’s own mouth. And Yah frames this quasi-intervention, if you will, as though He were the Father of an unruly child who just won’t do right, regardless how hard the Father tries to get the child to listen to reason and straighten up and fly right. Thus, Yah explains to Yisra’el just how special she is to Him and how He came to choose her as His chosen one; His redeemed one; His precious one; His beloved; the one He will in the end rescue and protect.

 

And through all of this dichotomous rhetoric of disappointment to be followed by wrathful judgment and steadfast love and devotion to be followed up with deliverance and restoration, Yah always leaves a pathway and light home for His wayward loved one, Yisra’el. Just as He does with us beloved. He always leaves a pathway and a light for our return to Him if we mess up.

 

But I must say that I found this reading to be quite powerful. I rarely if ever pay much attention to the Haftarah Readings each week, but I will concede that I’m certainly glad Abba’s Ruach—His Spirit—led me to study this week’s Haftarah reading.

 

As far as we’re concerned for this post, I want only to focus on the first verse of the 43rd chapter of the Book of Isaiah. This verse alone could take us hours to unpack if we really were led to drill down and dig deep into its eternal riches. But for today, I want to share with you some of my thoughts and reflections that I pray will lead you to conduct your own study of this passage.

 

In verse 1, Yah mentions or addresses the names Jacob (aka Ya’achov) and Israel (aka Yisra’el).

 

We know from Genesis/Beresheit 32:28 that Yah changed Jacob’s/Ya’achov’s name to Israel/Yisra’el after his wrestling match with an angel of Yah:

 

“Then he (the angel Jacob had just wrestled with) said, ‘Your name shall no longer be called Jacob (I.e., heel holder), but Yisra’el (I.e., Yah Prevails or Yah is God), for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed’” (ESV).

 

Here in our reading, Yah declares to Yisra’el that He created (I.e., bara’)—that He formed Yisra’el.

 

The Hebrew term “bara’ means bringing something into existence. Bara’ is used in Torah to describe the creation of the universe and the natural phenomena (Genesis/Beresheit 1:1, 21, 27; 2:3; etc.). The creation without ambiguity exemplifies the magnitude of Yah’s power. The ancient Hebrew term is associated with the feeding of livestock, believe it or not. Grain of course is fed to livestock. And it is that grain that makes one’s livestock fat or full. So, there is an allusion of Yah birthing and raising Yisra’el to serve His purpose, in part, by providing and nourishing them with His Words of life—His Torah, making Yisra’el fat and prosperous.

 

Our English term “formed” in the Hebrew of our text is “yatsar,” which carries the meaning of Yah fashioning or framing something such as the nation of Yisra’el. There is a distinct understanding here with the use of “yatsar” that Yah brought Yisra’el into existence.

 

The Prophet Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu is the only author to use this term in this way.

 

Yatsar, thus, denotes Yah’s creative and forming activity in the world, in particular, the creation and forming of Yisra’el, which the Book of Genesis/Beresheit brilliantly documents.

 

Anciently, Yatsar alludes to the pressing of clay to form a useful implement such as pottery. It would involve pressing and squeezing of the intended object out of or into shape, again, as one would see done to clay that will ultimately formed and shaped into pottery.

 

Consequently, taking what we’ve discussed here into consideration, we see that Yah brought Yisra’el into existence, and He formed Yisra’el into a nation to fulfill His divine purpose in the earth. We’ll talk more about this a little later in our discussion.

 

 

So, what did Yah form Yisra’el into. Or rather, what was Yah’s intent when He brought Yisra’el into existence and formed her into the nation He chose to enter into covenant with?

 

Deuteronomy/Devarim 7:6—Yisra’el would be a holy people unto Yah. She would be a set-apart people whom Yah chose to be a special people unto Himself.

 

Deuteronomy/Devarim 7:7, 14; 14:2; 4:37—Yisra’el would be, of all the nation peoples of the world, Yah’s exclusive, special possession.

 

Deuteronomy/Devarim 32:9—Yah’s portion. Yah’s possession from all the nation peoples of the earth. The lot of Yah’s inheritance.

 

Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 44:21—Ya’achov and Yisra’el would be Yah’s servant. And because Yisra’el was a special, beloved servant, she would not be forgotten by Yah.

 

Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 44:2-22—Yah formed Ya’achov/Yisra’el from the womb. She would be Yah’s special servant. Yah’s chosen one in the earth.

 

Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 45:4—Yisra’el would be Yah’s elect whom He called by name.

 

Clearly, with all this and so much more, Yisra’el had the potential to be the most favored nation on the planet—the most blessed nation—the most powerful and prosperous nation on the planet. But Yisra’el failed to live up to that potential and fulfill her end of the covenant bargain. Thus, she was facing Yah’s wrathful judgment.

 

Nevertheless, Yah tells Yisra’el that she should not fear because He has redeemed her. (Verse 1).

 

Our English term “redeemed” in the Hebrew is “ga’al,” which implies that Yah was Yisra’el’s Redeemer who would stand-up for His chosen people; deliver them and vindicate them. And speaking of Yah’s wrathful judgment coming upon Yisra’el for her abandonment of Yah’s covenant and her sin, there is a sense of judgment to be meted out or upon Yisra’el’s oppressors as a ransom for Yisra’el.

 

Anciently, “ga’al” alludes to a restoration of one to their former or original state or position, as well as it alludes to the avenging of a loved one’s death.

 

Yah in our text informs Yisra’el that He called them. Our English verb “called” in the Hebrew is “qara’”. In this context, “qara’” suggests that Yah had appointed and commissioned Yisra’el to accomplish special purposes in the earth, which would make them a special possession unto Yah.

 

We get a real sense of what that calling, and purpose was in Exodus/Shemot 19:5-6:

 

 5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. (Exo 19:5-6 KJV)

 

Yisra’el was and is meant to be a kingdom of priests and a set-apart nation people in the earth for the glory and honor of Yehovah our Elohim.

 

Yah declares unto Yisra’el in our reading that He called her by name. Our English term “name” in Hebrew is “shem” {shame}. Hebraically-speaking, it denotes breath/breathe and character. It turns out that Hebrew names are generally words given to someone or to places to describe the character of those individuals and places.

 

The breath of a man is associated with his character. It is that which makes one what he is. So, the name of an individual, again Hebraically, is more than an identifier. It is a descriptive of his or her character or breath.

 

 

Yisra’el was called by name according to her purpose and character. And because we have become engrafted into the commonwealth of Yisra’el through the auspices of Yahoshua’s atoning sacrifice and Yah’s Plan of salvation, redemption, and restoration, we can legally and righteously claim the name of Yisra’el as our own.

 

 

Now, the name or title Yisra’el means “Yah prevails” and or “Yah rules as Elohim;” or “Yah retains Elohim;” or “Yah is upright.”

 

Clearly, there is some disparity in the meaning of the name Yisra’el. Maybe better described, the title and name of Yisra’el is multi-faceted and is not restricted to just a single meaning.

 

But we can clearly see that the nation and her people carry upon themselves the Name and authority of the Creator of the Universe: Yehovah Elohim.

 

The name Yisra’el consists of two-elements:

 

  1. A verb—to fight or contend.

 

  1. A personage, who is El, the condensed form of Elohim.

 

Now, the theophoric element of the name/title Yisra’el defines the subject of the verb to fight and contend.

 

As mentioned previously, we find in Genesis/Beresheit 32:28 that Yah renamed Jacob/Ya’achov, Yisra’el. Within the context in which Ya’achov’s name was changed to Yisra’el, we get a sense that Ya’achov, having been chosen over Esav/Esau by Yah, would most certainly receive the victory and Yah’s covenant promises, as Yah would fight for and deliver him.

 

 

Hebraically-speaking, names are extremely important to Yah and to the Hebrew historical, biographical context.

 

Recall that one of the first tasks assigned to Adam after he was placed in the Garden of Eden, was for him to name every creature of Yah’s animal creation (Genesis/Beresheit 2:19).

 

Next, Adam named his wife, Eve, aka Chavah (Genesis/Beresheit 3:20). The texts says that Adam named the woman “Chavah” or Eve because she was the mother of all living. Again, the naming that was rendered unto Eve defined her purpose in Yah’s grand Plan of salvation, restoration, and redemption.

 

Torah tells us that Ya’achov was named accordingly because he’d taken hold of his twin-brother Esau’s/Esav’s heels when they were being born (Genesis/Beresheit 25:26). It also follows that Ya’achov would later seek to usurp his brother’s birthright, despite him being the chosen one of Yah who would ultimately become the patriarch of the 12-tribe nation of Yisra’el.

 

In our Torah-Reading this week, we find that as Ya’achov was dying on his death bed, he blessed his 12-sons and 2-grandsons. But in that blessing, he described each of his sons by name (Genesis/Beresheit 48-49). It’s a fascinating and important read, with tremendous spiritual and eschatological significance attached to it. I would highly encourage you to take the time to read it if you are so led.

 

 

Lastly, Yah claims Yisra’el as His possession: “Thou art mine.”

 

Once Yisra’el straightens up and flies right, as Yah removes the scales from their blinded eyes (Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 42:7) and turns their hearts towards Himself and the children of promise (Luke 1:17; Mal. 4:6). Yisra’el will ultimately teshuvah, on that day, says Yah, they, Yisra’el will be mine. Yah says He will spare Yisra’el (Malachi 3:17).

 

Yah chose Yisra’el for reasons we may not understand until all is made known to us in the Kingdom. He sees Yisra’el as His peculiar treasure (Psalm 135:4). Yah says that Yisra’el is not a happenstance. For He, Yah, formed the nation for Himself. In other words, Yah’s purpose in the earth will be fulfilled, in part, through Yisra’el. And because of Yisra’el, again in part, He will receive the praise and honor He so justly deserves (Isaiah/Yeshi’Yahu 43:21).

 

 

But what about the other nation-peoples of the world?

 

Yah, through the pen of Moshe, reveals that He, Yah, apportioned the nations of this world and left them to the oversight of the Sons of Yah. That is, Yah left those other nations to the oversight of certain angelic overseers (Deuteronomy/Devarim 32:8). Some of these angelic overseers were apparently evil.

 

The Masoretic Text sights these overseers of the nations as “the Sons of Yisra’el,” or “bene Yisra’el.” This appears to be a patently, intentional mistranslation. For the most ancient, extant Hebrew texts of this passage, which predates the Masoretic Text by more than 1,000-years, renders these overseers as “bene Elohim” or “Sons of Elohim.”

 

Other ancient sources that predate the Masoretic Text by a millennium or more, the LXX—the Septuagint—renders these overseers as “aggelon Theo” or “angels of Yah.”

 

Now, this gets us into what some refer to as “Divine Council” stuff that I’m not prepared to go into today. But suffice to take in verse 32:9 where Moshe wrote that Ya’achov—aka Yisra’el—is Yah’s “special possession” or “the portion of His inheritance” (NET). Yisra’el would be assigned/belong to Yehovah Elohim.

 

 

The central point I’m attempting to get to here, although I’ve only scratched the surface of this amazing truth is that Yah’s focus is Yisra’el. Yah’s focus is not the Church, despite the Church’s insistence to the contrary.

 

It is through Yah’s great Plan of Salvation, Restoration, and Redemption, however, that we who were once far off have now been brought near by the blood of Messiah (Ephesians 2:13).

 

Contrary to denominationalists’ insistence, the Church as not and will not replace Yisra’el as Yah’s chosen one. American conservatism has not displaced the nation of Yisra’el.  Our Faith is not a separate Faith from that of our ancient Hebrew cousins and the patriarchs. But rather, our Faith is a blessed extension, dare I say, our Yeshua-focused Torah-living-based Faith is our ancient Hebrew cousins’ Faith on steroids. It is the fulfillment of the original Faith of our wandering cousins.

 

 

None of this is to say that we convert to orthodox, rabbinic Judaism and behave and worship as though we are orthodox Jews or even Messianic Jews—I.e., donning the attire and garb; reciting the liturgy; observing the traditions and such. And if that’s your thing and you believe you’ve been called to take-up and live and walk out Judaism as part of your walk with Mashiyach, have at it. Godspeed to you.

 

But just take heed beloved: Know which side your spiritual bread is buttered in this respect and don’t blindly fall into the trap of placing your eternal security and trusting faith in Judaism’s traditions and laws and culture. For the truth of the matter is this: and the Master’s disciples turned apostles had to find this out the hard way:

 

“And there is salvation in no other Name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

 

And that Name of course is Yahoshua/Yeshua HaMashiyach.

 

 

Our eternal focus must be on seeking and walking out Yah’s Kingdom and His righteousness (Matthew 6:33).

 

We achieve or put on or clothe ourselves, individually speaking that is, in Yah’s righteousness through the Person and Ministries of our Master Yahoshua HaMashiyach and Abba’s precious Holy Spirit—His Ruach HaKodesh.

 

Thus, on an individual level, we must identify ourselves with Yahoshua Messiah, the Author and Finisher of our Faith (Hebrews 12:2); the Mediator of the Renewed Covenant, that provides the framework by which we may enter in and remain in covenant relationship with Abba (Hebrews 12:24). And this is facilitated by our being grafted into the commonwealth of Yisra’el (Romans 11:17-24) —that is, True, Believing Yisra’el—not Zionist Yisra’el that so many of us have been duped over the decades to align ourselves with.

 

Because we have this unique calling and mantle over our lives within the corporate homestead, if you will, of the commonwealth of Yisra’el (Ephesians 2:12), the way we conduct ourselves as disciples of Yahoshua HaMashiyach is meant to , in part, provoke our Jewish cousin to jealousy (Romans 10:19), which will no doubt in part lead to the removal or healing of the blindness that has gripped orthodox-rabbinic Judaism—religious Yisra’el—for millennia:

 

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.1 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. (Rom 11:25-27 KJV)

 

Beloved, all Yisra’el will be saved. That’s quite a statement and promise, is it not?

 

So, what’s in a name? Well, in this case, a great deal. Let us be fully aware of the name by which we’ve individually and corporately been called. And walk in that calling with fear and trembling and joy, knowing that our redemption draws ever so closely nigh (Luke 21:28; Philippians 2:12).

 

 

Until next week beloved, may you be most blessed, fellow saints in training. Shabbat Shalom—Shavu’tov—Take care.

The Messianic Duty in Times of Global Crises

by | Jun 3, 2020

Given all the chaos and turmoil that is ongoing in the world today, I was led to talk to you today about duty. Specifically the Messianic duty in the midst of global chaos. Are we as Messianics required to put our two-cents towards fixing the clobal crises that are...

read more

The Shavuot-Pentecost Connection

by | May 28, 2020

Two-Competing Schools of Thought Regarding Shavuot and Pentecost When we talk about Shavuot and or Pentecost there are essentially two-prevailing schools of thought and understanding. Interestingly, these two schools or lines of thought are often at odds with one...

read more

The Gates of Hell

by | May 22, 2020

The Gates of Hell Today I want to discuss the enemy’s goal to destroy and hinder the Creator's Plan of Redemption, Restoration and Salvation. It will become the purpose of this discussion to examine how the enemy was defeated by Master Yahoshua (Yeshua) Messiah and to...

read more

The Book of Romans-To Whom Was It Written?

by | May 14, 2020

  Our Purpose for This Post   To whom was the Book of Romans Written? We know quite a bit about the author. But we may not know much about the so-called Romans or the Roman Church. Unfortunately, our understanding of who they are may be influenced by our...

read more

“Let No Man Judge You” in Your Keeping of Torah–A Messianic Examination of Colossians 2:16-17

by | Jul 4, 2022 | Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

This is “Let No Man Judge You” in Your Keeping of Torah–A Messianic Examination of Colossians 2:16-17.

 

 

This is sort of a continuation, if you will, to our very last installment which was entitled “Did the Apostle Paul Permit the Eating of all Meats? A Messianic Examination of 1 Timothy 4:1-5.” And I would encourage you, if you’ve not already done so and are so led, to read or listen to that installment.

 

In that post, we discussed what the apostle’s true position was as it related to the consumption of meats that Yah, according to Shaul, “created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth” (1 Timothy 4:3). But also in that post, we discussed a handful of issues that were taking place in the Colossian Assembly, that seemed to parallel that of the Ephesian Assembly. It was these parallel issues that we determined catalyzed or ignited the confusion and situation in both assemblies as it related to the assembly members’ consumption of Yah-sanctioned/Torah-sanctioned meats.

 

If you recall, the reason I brought up last week’s discussion was in response to a question regarding the meaning of that Pauline passage. For it is certainly one of those Pauline passages that the denominationalists love to twist, misinterpret, and misrepresent to further their anti-Torah agenda. Specifically, that the Torah-prohibitions against Yah’s people consuming certain meats had been done away with. So now, according to these lawless ones, Christians—believers—what have you, can eat whatever they want to, and if there is any question-concern-or problem as it relates to the prohibited meat being eaten, the grace or blessing that one says over their meals before eating it will somehow mitigate or eliminate those troublesome issues.

 

Nevertheless, we determined in that discussion, by way of our examining the context of 1 Timothy 4:1-5, that Shaul wasn’t talking about such foolishness. But rather, he was preparing Timothy, whom he’d placed in a leadership position over the Ephesian Assembly, for battle against the false-teachers and their teachings that had begun to spread into the Ephesian and Colossian Assemblies and were causing members of these assemblies to be led astray from the truth of the Torah and the Gospel that Yeshua and Paul had been preaching.

 

And so, if one were to simply read 1 Timothy 4:1-5 outside of its contextual framework, he or she just might be misled to go along with the denominationalists’ interpretation and understanding of this critical Pauline passage. But that’s why we’re here, isn’t it? To examine the apostle’s writings in their proper context and bring to the surface the truths of these matters and not be swayed by “Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth” (Titus 1:14).

 

Well, today’s focus passage of Colossians 2:16-17 is another one of those tricky Pauline passages that must be taken in its proper context if one is to successfully overcome the anti-Torah crowd’s false and twisted interpretations of it.

 

Our focus passage reads as follows:

 

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Col 2:16-17 KJV)

 

Do the elements of this passage sound familiar? Well, of course they do. These are the fundamental mitzvot-the ritualistic instructions that Father gave Yisra’el—both natural born and engrafted Yisra’el to observe, guard, and keep in Spirit and in Truth. And what we see here is Shaul, for some unstated reason and in some detail, mentioning these 5-key elements of our Netzari-Messianic Faith. And we aim to get to the bottom of the reasoning behind Shaul’s counseling the Colossians to not permit anyone to judge them in their keeping of these fundamental mitzvot.

 

Now, before we tackle this bad boy, let’s look at this passage from the perspective of the fundamentalists-orthodox-denominationalists.

 

Some conservative denominationalists explain this passage from the perspective of the Apostle Paul challenging the Judaizers’/Influencers’ pro-Torah insistence that Gentile believers keep and obey the “Law” (ESV Study Bible; NASB  Life Application Study Bible). And thus, it is Paul to the rescue here, advising the Colossians that they need not pay attention to those dastardly Judaizers/Influencers. The Torah was made for the Jews. Not for Christian-Believers. But rather, Believers/Christians need not concern themselves with keeping Yah’s weekly Sabbath and Feast Days; or observe the Creator’s Calendar and its provisions; and for that matter, the Believer has the liberty to eat and drink whatever they want. The Colossians were not to let their Judaizing counterparts criticize what would be the living of their lives apart from Torah. But rather, live their lives based solely upon “faith in Christ alone” (NASB Study Bible; pg. 2104).

 

Now, on the surface, the conventional wisdom of the denominationalists regarding their understanding of our focus passage seems quite reasonable; especially considering that the apostle devoted a tremendous amount of ink and parchment and face-to-face teaching/preaching sessions challenging the teachings and works of the Judaizers/Influencers. What were the specific teachings and works of the Judaizers? Well, we’ve gone into great detail on this subject over the last year or so and I would, in particular, refer you to our series within a series entitled “A Question of One’s Jewishness” to get up to speed on this issue.

 

But in a nutshell: The problem that Shaul had with the Judaizers/Influencers that were operating within the various assemblies he oversaw, was not their teachings and promotion of Torah-living to the incoming converted Gentile-believers, but rather their insistence that the Gentile-believers convert to Judaism in order to be saved and become a part of the Messianic Assemblies of Messiah. These influencers, if you will, were ignoring the necessity of a believer’s trusting faith in the Person and Ministry of Yahoshua Messiah as the means for their justification before a holy and righteous Elohim. These were influencing their Gentile counterparts, like themselves, to place all of their trusting faith in their Jewishness—their keeping of both the oral and written laws for purposes of becoming members of the Messianic Community and being granted entry into the Kingdom of Heaven.

 

So, based on this reality, we can see that the denominationalists are correct in their understanding of the role that a trusting-faith should play in the life of a believer in Yahoshua HaMashiyach. However, these same individuals, being erroneously caught-up in their hyper-grace religious paradigm (I.e., sola gratia—grace alone doctrine)—these are leading millions of misinformed souls down a road towards destruction by urging/coaxing Yah’s people to transgress Yah’s Torah and Way of Life. These entirely ignore the foundational teachings of our Master Yahoshua who stated:

 

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Mat 5:17-20 KJV)

 

As clear as this teaching is, the denominationalists continue to double-down (so to speak) on their anti-Torah rhetoric, effectively throwing Rav Shaul under the proverbial bus by erroneously assigning him authorship of their hyper-grace-lawless doctrine.

 

And indeed, when we read passages such as 1 Timothy 4:1-5 and Colossians 2:16-17, outside of a proper contextual framework, the denominationalists’ arguments sure seem convincing. But, as the redeemed of Yah, we’ve been called to a higher standard of living and responsibility that, as Master stated, must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. And like the first-century Thessalonians, we are obliged to “receive the word of Yah with all readiness of mind” and then diligently “search the scriptures daily” to determine whether the things the Church Triumphant is telling us are so.

 

The very fact that the denominationalists so earnestly and steadfastly teach and preach a Gospel that is contrary and hostile towards the Gospel that Yahoshua and Shaul and the other Apostles taught and died for, should tell us where their loyalties lie. Their loyalties lie with their religion; with their organizations; with their leaders and teachers; with their own personal agendas, preferences, and experiences. In most cases, these want to live out their religious convictions on their own terms. They don’t want to be told by God what to do, just like our wandering ancient Hebrew cousins resisted Yah and Moshe at every turn. The denominationalists love the idea of being able to eat and drink whatever they want; to keep whatever pagan-based horror-days that tickle their fancy. They much prefer Sunday worship to that of Yah’s sanctioned Sabbath worship because their daddy Constantine told them to keep Sunday and disavow Sabbath worship. They refuse to be subject to Yah’s way of life in accordance with Yah’s reckoning of time. And for them, our focus passage offers one of the greatest opportunities and support for their lawless, grace-perverted lifestyle.

 

But, as we stated in our previous discussion, we cannot interpret our focus passage and any similar Pauline passages without first approaching them from a pro-Torah worldview or perspective. And when we approach such passages in their proper context and from a pro-Torah perspective, the Ruach HaKodesh will always lead us to the truth of the matter.

 

So, let’s now examine some common, denominational and Messianic interpretations of our focus passage.

 

Three Main Interpretations of our Focus Passage

 

Now, the religious world has interpreted our focus passage in a number of ways which are not limited to but includes the following:

 

  1. Don’t allow Judaizers or Influencers to look down upon or criticize you, the Christian believer, who has come to understand that the Torah mitzvot of keeping the Sabbaths and the Feasts; of eating clean (aka “kashruth” or kosher laws) and drinking according to scripture, and or those things related to the Creator’s reckoning of time—that all of these things have been done away with because Christ kept the Torah perfectly so that you don’t have to. More so, God nailed Torah to the Cross of Christ (Colossians 2:14).

 

So here, according to some anti-Torah advocates, we find Shaul instructing the Colossians to reject the criticism of the Judaizers or Influencers who were attempting to enforce variations of Torah-living upon the Gentile-Believing Colossians; the very same principles these extend over to modern day Christians.

 

 

  1. Flipping the script just a little, some have interpreted this passage from the perspective of new, non-Jewish Christians being told by the Apostle to not allow the Judaizers or Influencers to judge them as it related to their keeping of Sunday and Christmas, and Easter, and such; of the foods they chose to eat; and of the Roman calendar they chose to keep. For the Christian, their newly founded religion provided them with a whole other set of traditions and practices related to foods, drink, days for worship and holidays. But Torah was strictly for the Jews. Not for Christians.

 

Besides, in verse 17, the apostle made it clear that Torah was nothing more than a past-shadowing of that which Jesus Christ completed on the cross. Torah served the Jews as a schoolmaster that taught them about the coming Messiah, whose sacrifice would atone for their sins and provide them salvation/eternal life in heaven. And now, the only thing that matters is the Body of Christ being saved through God’s grace.

 

  1. People outside the Faith were castigating, criticizing, and judging those of the Colossae assembly for their keeping of various Torah instructions, and Shaul was telling his readers to not be subject to the criticism of those outside the Faith. Consequently, the only folks who have the right to criticize or influence people’s walk in Yeshua Messiah is the Body of Christ.

 

 

 

Intentional Alteration of Verse-17 Designed to Promote an Anti-Torah Agenda

 

 

Now, here’s a fun fact: The NET translation of our focus passage reads:

 

(16) Therefore, do not let anyone judge you with respect to food or drink, or in the matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days—(17) these ARE ONLY the shadow of the things to come, but the reality is Christ (Colossians 2).

 

Did you catch that beloved? “These are only the shadow of the things to come.” In other words, Torah serves only as a shadow or reminder or artifact of the things to come: The atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ that leads to the salvation of believing Christians. And it is this portion of verse-17 that the anti-Torah crowd uses to cement their claim that Torah has absolutely no relevance or efficacy for today’s Christian believers.

 

Would it surprise you to learn that the term “only” as used in verse 17 in some English Bible translations is not found in any of the extant Greek texts? So then, let me ask you: Why was the term “only” added to a number of English translations such as the NET, the NLT, the RSV; with the NASB using instead the term “mere” to describe Torah?

 

Well, it turns out that terms such as “only” and “mere” were allegedly added to these translations to “bring out the force of the Greek phrase” “esti skia” or “a shadow”.

 

Which should prompt us to question why these translators felt the need to “bring out the force of the Greek phrase” skia or shadow. It certainly seems as though there was an intent by these translators to push forth an agenda of some form. Maybe that agenda was anti-Torah in nature, designed to marginalize the keeping of Yah’s Torah by Yah’s people. That the elements of Yah’s Torah that were particularly stated in verse 16 of our focus passage, were only or mere symbols of Jesus Christ’s atoning sacrifice. And that these elements have no relevance or efficacy or significance to Yah’s people beyond this symbolism. So, there was some obvious, intentional anti-Torah manipulation of our text.

 

 

Messianics have set-out to interpret our focus passage from the perspective of outsiders to the Colossian Faith Community, casting criticisms and judgments against them for keeping Yah’s Torah.

 

 

Andrew Gabriel Roth’s Aramaic English New Testament records our focus passage as following:

 

(16) Let no (pagan) therefore judge you about food and drink, or about the distinctions of festivals and new moons and Shabbats (17) which were shadows of the things then future; but the body of Mashiyach (AENT).

 

Now, as much as I admire Roth’s AENT’s contribution to our Faith Community over the last decade or so, I do from time-to-time disagree with Mr. Roth’s interpretations and explanations of various Brit HaDashah passages such as our focus passage. Obviously, he chose to insert the parenthetical term “pagan” in verse 16, which clearly does not exist in the Aramaic text. It would seem that he chose to insert “pagan” into the verse to definitively clarify who the “let no one’s” were. And as much as I would not rule out his assessment that Shaul is referring to a pagan-population that is casting judgment upon the Torah-keeping Messianic Believers of Colossae, I’m not a fan of inserting such terms into the text, even for the purposes of clarification. In my opinion, inserted clarifications such as this are extremely leading to the reader. But then, such clarifying content should be reserved for the comment sections of whatever Bible one is referencing.

 

The other problem I have with Roth’s rendering here is his phrasing “which were shadows.” For as we previously mentioned, interpretations of verse 17 that assign a past-tense to the shadow-pictures that Torah-living provides the Body of Messiah, is not only contextually problematic, but it also plays into the hands of the anti-Torah crowd who contend that Torah’s shadow-picture significance has already served its useful purpose and is henceforth and forevermore relegated to the trash-heap of historical Judaism.

 

Roth does provide explanation for his insertion of the term “pagan” by way of comment:

 

“The Body of Mashiyach must not be concerned with the judgments of those who are outside the Malchut Elohim…that Shaul is addressing the local talk of the pagans whose religion dominates this region” (pg. 604).

 

Now, this is a statement that I agree with in part: That we not give in to the anti-Torah criticisms of those outside our Faith Community. But the rest of Roth’s comment presumes that Shaul was in fact writing about the Colossians having to endure the anti-Torah criticisms of those outside the Colossian Faith Community.

 

Which then begs the question: Was the apostle writing about pagans (that is, folks outside their Faith Community) casting judgment toward the Colossian Messianics who were keeping properly keeping Torah? Well, once we examine the contextual framework of the Book of Colossians, we will see that the apostle was likely referring to criticizers operating within the Colossian assembly rather than criticizers operating outside the assembly.

 

Contextually speaking, the verses of Colossians that lead up to our focus passage suggest that there were false-teachers actively operating WITHIN the Colossian Assemblies. This being the case, our focus passage would seem to suggest that the apostle was confronting false teachers and their teachings that were misleading some of the Colossian Messianics as it related to their proper keeping of Torah, or rather, their Spirit and Truth walking out of Torah.

 

But we will certainly get back to this point momentarily.

 

Now, continuing on to verse-17: Roth mentions in his commentary that issues related to how believers are to walk out their faith, in particular, walking in Torah, are to be regulated by the Body of Mashiyach. That is, the only individuals who have a right to judge or criticize one’s walk in Messiah is the Body of Messiah. Or rather, the so-called, often self-appointed leaders, of our Messianic Faith Community. And at one point, I used to think that this was exactly the point that Shaul was getting at. However, if false-teachers and their false teachings were indeed influencing the Body, how reasonable is it to think that the Colossian Body is somehow going to properly regulate her members’ walk in Messiah. It would be like putting a convicted thief or robber in charge of one’s personal possessions.

 

But I do agree with Roth’s statement:

 

“…don’t let family, friends, pastors, or co-workers judge you for observing truthful Torah festivals, because their motive is for you to return to the pagan substitutes they themselves prefer” (pg. 604). And my agreement with Roth’s comment here is not born of any doctrinal or theological basis, but rather from an anecdotal standpoint. Outsiders to our Faith have no true knowledge of what Torah is about and the significance and efficacy that Torah has in the lives of Yah’s set-apart, covenant-keeping/living people. These have nothing whatsoever to base their criticisms on.

 

Now, having covered some of the existing interpretations of our focus passage, let’s take a brief look at the contextual framework of the Book of Colossians before breaking down our focus passage.

 

 

Background Information that Sets the Table for the Discussion of our Focus Passage

 

Despite the Book of Colossians being clearer in its overall message to its intended audience than some of the other letters the apostle wrote, focusing on Colossian sound-bites (that is isolated verses of the letter without benefit of its contextual framework) may easily cause one to misinterpret or misunderstand their focus passage. If outside resources are brought in to assist in one’s understanding of the focus verse, such as a commentary or a teaching, the reader is going to find themselves at the mercy of those who composed those resources. They will be subject to the personal and religious opinions and beliefs of those who’ve put forth those resources. So, it’s essential that one possesses at least a cursory understanding of the cultural, political, religious, historical, and organizational situation on the ground in Colossae and in the Colossian Assembly before attempting to interpret his or her focus passage.

 

That being said, allow me to first lay out some background information on Colossae and the Colossian Assembly so that we may find ourselves in a better position to properly interpret our focus passage.

 

  1. We get a sense from chapters 1 and 4 that Epaphras, a prominent member of the Colossian Assembly and possible citizen of Colossae, may have been the individual who informed Shaul that certain false teachers were operating in the Colossian assembly (1:7; 4:12-13). Seems that early on, Epaphras started his evangelical journey with Shaul and was also destined to be imprisoned with Shaul in Rome. Shaul referred to Epaphras as a “fellow-servant” (Philemon 1:23). So, Shaul was not operating in a vacuum when he wrote the Book of Colossians (that is, the apostle didn’t just wake-up one morning and decide to discuss the various things he wrote about in this letter, but rather, he was likely responding to those things brought to his attention by his protege Epaphras, since he, Shaul, was not personally present in Colossae). And being young and inexperienced in the ministry like Timothy, Epaphras sought the apostle’s wisdom and counsel on the issues presented in our focus passage.

 

  1. Despite having knowledge that false teachers were operating in the Colossian Assembly and that to some extent, these false teachers were successful in causing some of the members to be led astray in their understanding and walking out of their faith, this letter fails to provide specifics of who the false teachers were and any substantive description of their false teachings.

 

Now, some have proposed that the Colossian Assembly may have been overrun by those annoying proto-nascent-Jewish Gnostics or mystics and their heretical, ascetic teachings, similar to those Shaul took issue with and instructed Timothy to get a hold of in 1 Timothy and the Book of Ephesians. Recall that we discussed at great length this very issue in our last post entitled: “Did the Apostle Paul Permit the Eating of All Meats? A Messianic Examination of 1 Timothy 4:1-5.”

 

 

The best information we have about these insidious shysters and their heretical teachings is found in Colossians 2:8, 20-23:

 

(8) See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ…(20) If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations (22) according to human precepts and teachings? (23) These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh (ESV).

 

Certainly, the descriptions provided in these handful of verses seem to match the basic elements of Jewish Gnosticism or Mysticism. For we find that even among the earliest forms of Jewish Mysticism or Gnosticism (e.g., Merkabah Mysticism, which was known to exist in Shaul’s day), its central purpose was to “reveal the ancient hidden esoteric tradition of Torah” (according to Wikipedia article entitled “Jewish Mysticism”).

 

It would seem that these false teachers set out to redact (or edit) both the Written and Oral Torahs. Their intentions were to blur the lines of distinction between their twisted and altered version of Judaism and Orthodox-Rabbinic Judaism. Their twisted version of Torah sought to (1) describe the spirit world and heaven; (2) to bring one closer to the Creator of the Universe; and (3) create an ordered set of rituals (called “theurgy”) that would permit one to evoke or invoke certain pagan, spiritual entities for the purpose of perfecting oneself in the universe.

 

And so, if what I’m suggesting here is correct, our focus verse is not so much addressing criticism that the Colossian Messianics were having to endure from outsiders of the Faith. But rather, addressing the criticisms leveled against those faithful Messianics who were steadfastly walking in the True Faith by those who were supposed to have been converted to the true Faith but instead had gone over to the dark-side of Judaism.

 

The conditions that the Colossian Messianics were having to endure was that of severe syncretism, or the merging of two or more religions and their respective elements—leading to the creation of a hybrid faith or religion.

 

(3) The Colossian Messianic Assembly appeared to have consisted primarily of non-Jewish believers as evinced by Colossians 1:21-22; 3:5-7:

 

(1:21) And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your minds as expressed through your evil deeds, (23) but now He has reconciled you by His physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before Him…” (ESV)

 

(3:5) So put to death whatever in your nature belongs to the earth: sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, evil desire, and greed which is idolatry. (6) Because of these things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience. (7)You also lived your lives in this way at one time, when you used to live among them” (NET).

 

Philo and Josephus attest that there was a sizable Jewish population in Colossae, estimated to be somewhere around 2,500. And the origins of this Jewish population seems to date back to the 3rd-century BCE.

 

Here’s a lovely fun fact: The city of Colossae was just 100-miles east of Ephesus (J.K. McKee—Colossians and Philemon for the Practical Messianic; pg. 9). So, it’s not too much of a stretch for us to recognize similarities between the assemblies of Colossae and Ephesus. They were both in near proximity to the other and were both bustling Greco-Roman cities.

 

It is believed that, like Ephesus, Colossae was a prosperous Greco-Roman city consisting of Phrygians and Greeks.

 

From a religious standpoint—important to know because a population’s general religious affiliations could challenge the integrity and viability of the True Faith once delivered–essentially all of the traditional Greco-Roman religions and cults were to be found among the citizens of Colossae: e.g., polytheistic; formed of a pantheon of gods; the Mystery Religions; the Ancient Greek religion along with their gods melding into a Roman adaptation of the same Greek religion; Emperor worship; worship of Artemis; Men; Selene; Demeter; Hygeia; Helios; Athena; Tyche; Boule; the Egyptian Isis and Sarapis—Clinton E. Arnold, “Colossae”. Add to this the religious baggage that the regional and international travelers brought in with them as a result of Colossae’s thriving economy, religious and social syncretism was an inevitability.

 

From an economic standpoint, Colossae’s primary source of wealth came from textiles, in particular purple-colored woolen-textiles that were referred to as “colossinius” (Clinton E. Arnold, “Colossae”).

 

Other than what little we have here before us, there is essentially no other substantive historical-archaeological information to be had about Colossae.

 

What is well known about Colossae is that it was permanently destroyed by an earthquake in the middle of the first-century C.E.

 

A Messianic Examination of Colossians 2:16-17

 

Now that we’ve laid the contextual ground-work for the Book of Colossae, we’re now ready to examine our focus passage.

 

The ESV rendering of verse 16 is as follows:

 

“Therefore let no one/man (man=a certain person) pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.”

 

There’s certainly nothing too challenging about this verse apart from its true, contextual meaning that can only be arrived at by examining the letter as a whole and referencing the information available to us regarding the religious, cultural, geographical and historical aspects of Ephesus and Colossae.

 

The “therefore” that precedes the apostle’s admonishment to not allow no one or no person to judge them—the them being Torah-keeping Colossians–requires us to step-back three or so verses where we run into yet another one of those hard to understand and challenging Pauline passages, which reads:

 

(13) And you (the you being the Colossian Messianics, mostly Colossian non-Jews), who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, Yah made alive together with Him (the Him being Yeshua), having forgiven us all our trespasses, (14) by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This He (Yah) set aside, nailing it to the cross. (15) He (Yah) disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in Him (ESV modified).

 

Clearly there’s a lot here that we could spend an entire discussion or more unpacking. But for the sake of time and to stay on track as it relates to our focus passage, we’ll simply summarize this passage that the sin debt/penalty that every person owes was paid in full by the Person and Ministries of Yahoshua Messiah. And it is because of Yeshua our Master that the ungodly powers that control this world no longer have power over Yah’s chosen ones (vs. 15). And this is contextually important (ie., verse 15) transitioning to our focus passage because it gives us a clue as to the content or make-up of the false teachings that had permeated the Colossian Assembly. For we find in verse 8 of this same second chapter of Colossians where the apostle warns his Colossian readers to:

 

“Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Messiah (NET modified).

 

It would appear that some of the Colossian Messianics were being influenced by teachings that were rooted in human philosophies that were also tied to the spirit world, including “the worship of angels as mentioned in Colossians 2:18.” And these purveyors of such false, syncretized teachings were seemingly casting judgment upon those who were earnestly contending for the true faith once delivered by faithfully walking in and honoring Torah as they’d originally been taught (Jude 1:3). It’s quite possible that these false teachers were discrediting the Person and Ministry of Yeshua Messiah and attempting to sway the people to accept a different Gospel along with an altered understanding of Torah and its purpose in the Body of Messiah. The false teachers in verse 16 are referred to as “me…tis”, essentially meaning “no one” or “no man” or “no person.”

 

So, these false teachers—likely proto-Jewish Gnostics who twisted and syncretized Torah with philosophical and ungodly spiritual foolishness, and who also diminished the significance of the Gospel and the Person of Yeshua Messiah—these false teachers seemingly were the ones casting judgment upon the tried and true members of the Colossian Assemblies who were steadfastly sticking to the tents of the faith as originally taught to them by possibly Epaphras through Shaul.

 

Clearly what is at issue here, regardless how one chooses to interpret the passage, is the keeping and walking out of Torah by members of the Colossian Assembly. And so, we must answer the question as to why these converted non-Jewish Colossian believers were keeping Torah? Well, it goes back to the edict that James—the half-brother of our Master Yeshua, and the head of the Yerushalayim Counsel—put forth to the Assemblies of Messiah as recorded in Acts 15:

 

(19) Therefore, my (James’) judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to Yah, (20) but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood (ie., those common pagan lifestyle practices that would prohibit one from entering a Jewish congregation and synagogue for Sabbath worship services). (21) For from ancient generations, Moshe has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues (ESV modified).

 

So, these Colossian Assembly members would have been well taught and practiced in the keeping and walking out of Torah in response to this Jerusalem Council’s edict. For the apostles all knew, contrary to denominationalists’ conventional wisdom, that Torah instruction and Torah-living was part and parcel of the True Faith once delivered. Torah-living was essential for both converted Jew and converted non-Jew alike.

 

Now, what is interesting here in verse 16 of our focus passage is that the apostle is quite specific in terms of the elements of Torah-living that his Colossian readers were being harassed over:

 

  • Consumption of sanctioned meats.
  • The consumption of certain drinks—conceivably that of wine that is associated with certain Torah-based rituals and traditions.
  • The keeping of the annual Feasts of Yah—Yah’s set-apart days.
  • New Moon observances and celebrations.
  • The keeping of the weekly Sabbath.

 

Consequently, these Torah-elements appear to feature prominently in some form or another in the false teachers’—the proto-Jewish Gnostic teachers’–teachings and philosophies.

 

Recall that from our last discussion–Did the Apostle Paul Permit the Eating of All Meats? A Messianic Examination of 1 Timothy 4:1-5—Shaul specifically mentions that these false teachers were forbidding the consumption of meats which Yah sanctioned as food for His set-apart people. But these false teachers were rejecting the consumption of these sanctioned meats—that is, these were advocating an extreme ascetic, vegan-based diet for their followers–for the purpose of making themselves closer to God and to universal perfection. This was the basis of their syncretized–lifestyle: To deny themselves the things that Yah has provided to His elect as gifts and elements for their righteous living, for the twisted purpose of bringing him or her closer to God. The very fact that these teachers were advocating acts of piety and self-denial as a means for bringing their followers closer to Yah, challenges the reality and efficacy of a believer’s trusting faith in Yeshua Messiah that naturally leads to a covenant relationship with the Creator of the Universe.

 

So, there are indeed similarities in terms of this syncretized, ascetic false religion and the push to reject Spirit and Truth Torah-living by Yah’s set-apart people which had begun to take hold in the Messianic Assemblies of Ephesus and Colossae. Could this be, at least in part, what the apostle was referring to when he wrote:

 

“For the mystery of iniquity (of lawlessness) doth already work…” (2 Thessalonians 2:7; KJV)?

 

Shaul recognized that these false teachers had hijacked Torah and syncretized it in such a manner that it no longer served its intended purpose. But rather, the purpose these false teachers were assigning to their syncretized Torah and ascetic life-style was to somehow make one better suited to interact with the cosmic powers/spirits of this world. And Shaul reminds his readers that Yahoshua is superior to any and all these cosmic powers/spirits (verse 15).

 

So then, it would seem that for one to reject the false-teachers’ teachings and practices, he or she would not be found in an appropriate, enlightened state of being or existence and would consequently not be saved.

 

And this point, despite it being everything we as covenant-keeping believers should avoid with a 20-foot pole, is something we should take heed of. For many within our faith community have taken aspects of Torah-living and turned it into their own personal pathway to Yah. And because they’ve turned Torah into their personal path to Yah, they tend to stand in judgment of all those who don’t keep Torah—their enlightened way of keeping Torah—the way they keep it. For we know, and we’ve addressed this many times in this Paul and Hebrew Roots series, that no degree or amount of Torah-keeping or living will save anyone. It is only our Faith in Yahoshua that saves us. That which flows from our faith in Yeshua is our desire and wherewithal to walk in Torah and maintain a true, and substantive covenant relationship with Yah that is driven by our obedience to His prescribed Way of Life.

 

Now, the ESV rendering of verse 17 is as follows:

 

“These are (that is, the Torah provisions mentioned in verse 16) a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”

 

Earlier in our discussion we talked about how denominationalists, and even a few Messianics, have erroneously interpreted this passage. And a lot of the erroneous understanding that surrounds this verse is caused by the wonkiness of the wording in this verse, as well as the lack of context that these folks apply to their interpretation of this verse.

 

At the heart of the confusion surrounding this verse is the phrase “a shadow of things to come” or “skia ton mellonton.” And the logic that needs to be understood here is that the sighted Torah-provisions of verse 16 are expressions of the Person and Ministry of Yahoshua Messiah. The keeping of these stated Torah-provisions by Yah’s set-apart people serves to teach them about Yah’s Plan of Salvation, Redemption, and Restoration that is embodied in the Person and Ministries of Yahoshua Messiah. These provisions place Yah’s people in positions of knowing what Yah expects of them as His set-apart people, with Yeshua as their prototypical life-example. So, it becomes important, as the apostle so beautifully points out here, that the well-meaning Torah-honoring Child of Yah realize the purpose behind their steadfastly walking in Torah. For every mitzvah he or she keeps and does should illustrate to him or her, as well as the world about them, the reality of Yeshua to their covenant relationship with Yehovah.

 

So, it would seem that these false teachers, in their twisting and syncretizing of Torah, had all but nullified the centrality of Yahoshua to true Torah-living by Yah’s set-apart people. Their brand of Torah-living was all but denying the Person and Ministry of Yeshua, and the apostle here was earnestly advocating and promoting a sense of renewed dedication on the part of the Colossian Assembly members to remember the point of their living Torah, which is Yahoshua Messiah.

 

As previously mentioned, many, in an attempt to dissuade Yah’s people from operating in a Yeshua-focused Torah lifestyle, have set-out to twist, misinterpret, and misrepresent verse 17 to say that Torah contains only a passing relevance to Yah’s set-apart people: such that “these are only a shadow of what is to come.” Yet, the term “only” was intentionally added to the text for obviously stated reasons. Thus, as far as the denominationalists are concerned, those stated Torah provisions of verse 16 no longer have any true significance for Yah’s chosen ones, which we’ve all pretty much concluded is profoundly not true.

 

Anyone who has been in this Faith of ours for any length of time and who are well versed in the realities of these stated elements and provisions of Torah will know that the shadow pictures that are contained therein not only speak or address that which Yeshua has already done for us, but also points us to the things in Yeshua that are yet to come, such as Yahoshua’s return; the marriage feast of the Lamb; Yeshua establishing His Father’s eternal Kingdom here on earth; the restoration of all things back to their original purpose and operation; and the coming judgments and the advent of the new heaven and new earth.

 

The writer of Hebrews touches upon this point:

 

(27) And just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment,(28) so also after Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, to those who eagerly await Him He will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation (Hebrews 9:27-28; NET).

 

So then, the main point of our focus passage is the apostle counseling the Colossians regarding their proper use and understanding of Torah, which the false teachers—presumably those dastardly proto-Jewish Gnostics—had essentially taken and completely gutted and repackaged, robbing Torah of its intended purpose and meaning.

 

Unfortunately, the denominationalists have gone out of their way to downplay the significance of the ongoing shadow pictures that Torah projects for the would-be Child of Yah (Galatians 3:24). They downplay the schoolmaster aspect of Torah by denying that those aspects of Torah-living that brought us to salvation in Yeshua still have any significance for Yah’s people. In other words, the efficacy of Torah-living disappears after salvation comes. But such an idea is ludicrous at best. Think about it. Would a practicing medical doctor or lawyer scrap everything they learned in medical school and law school respectively. Should a seasoned police officer protecting and serving their chosen community ignore that which he or she learned in their police academy? Would a veteran pilot who safely flies hundreds of passengers to and from their appointed destinations scrap the very principles he or she learned in flight school and that led to him or her earning their wings. And the answer to these and countless other examples is a resounding no. It’s only those who reject Torah as the only sanctioned way of life for Yah’s people to walk-in that such misguided thinking is applied. And so, one must conclude that such asinine thinking is birthed and enforced by the enemy and his minions.

 

The true child of Yah who has ears to hear and eyes to see knows with their whole being that Torah-living is the only true and sanctioned way of life for Yah’s set-apart people. And as such, those precious ones that make-up the true remnant of Messiah value every morsel of truth and instruction and shadow picture that Torah has to provide. And also as such, the remnant, covenant-keeping child of Yah knows that he or she can never exhaust the brilliant shadow pictures that Torah paints for the Body of Messiah. These know that those shadow pictures are not limited to Yeshua’s atoning sacrifice, but also teach and admonish us to prepare for the times ahead. To be ready to receive Yah’s coming kingdom and so forth.

 

The wording of the last portion of verse 17 is extremely wonky:

 

“…but the body is Christ’s” (ASV).

 

“…but the body is OF Christ” (KJV; YLT).

 

“The substance is the Messiah” (CSB).

 

“…but the substance BELONGS to Christ” (ESV).

 

“…but the reality is Christ” (NET).

 

“Christ Himself is that reality” (NLT).

 

“…the substance belongs to Christ” (RSV).

 

There is no secret to the fact that denominationalists and not too few Messianics interpret this portion of verse-17 as an admonishment of sorts that one’s walk in Messiah is to be ordered and even judged by the general Body of Messiah.

 

I have to tell you, I used to believe that this is what this snippet of a verse meant. That we should not allow others to judge us as it relates to our walk in Messiah. But rather, we are to submit ourselves to the direction of the general Body of Messiah. We are to follow what the Body of Messiah appoints as the way and means by which Torah is to be kept: The Feast Days (that’s where the Churches of God got the idea of the Feast of Hotels). The weekly Sabbath (this is where we get brethren going out to dining facilities and restaurants and other venues on the Sabbath under the pretense of fellowship). What foods and drinks are sanctioned. And of course, the issue of the Calendar (why the overwhelming vast majority of Messianics adhere to the Calculated Jewish Calendar while judging those of us who are led to keep the Observational Calendar). Thus, there is this internal permissive credence given to certain leaders in our Faith to regulate how we are to walk in Torah, based in part, on a misinterpretation of this portion of verse-17.

 

But truth be told, there is no contextual evidence that this internal permissive regulating of Torah in the Body of Messiah is what the apostle is referring to here. Such an interpretation does not fit the contextual framework of the problems Shaul is addressing in in relation to the false teachings of the proto-Jewish Gnostics or Mystics and their judging of those who choose not to follow their false teachings.

 

As it relates to reason, why would the apostle counsel those who are keeping Torah in Spirit and in Truth to subject themselves to the judgment of the Body of Messiah, when a portion of the Body seems to had fallen sway to the false teachings of the Gnostics. For Shaul to put forth such counsel to the Colossian Messianics would be counterintuitive and spiritually defeating.

 

So then, what would be the proper interpretation of this portion of verse-17? Well, if we are steadfast in our commitment to interpreting all of the apostle’s writings within their proper context, we must factor into our efforts to interpret this portion of verse-17 the influence of the Gnostics and their manipulation and alteration of Torah and their insidious practice of judging and condemning those who were led to stay the course and contend for the true Faith once delivered. And when we put this reality in front of our interpretation efforts, we will quickly see that what the apostle is referring to here is that the true meaning and reality of Torah is NOT what the Gnostics are putting forth to the Colossians, but rather, the true meaning and reality of Torah is found only in Yeshua Messiah. Therefore, it becomes the mission and responsibility of the covenant-keeping child of Yah to embody this reality in their keeping and walking out of Torah. Essentially, Yahoshua is the walking-talking-eternal Torah whom we, as Yah’s elect, must imitate and whose image we must ultimately be transformed into. And our keeping, walking out, honoring of Yah’s Torah in Spirit and in Truth is what will lead us to this glorious end.

 

Not to mention, beloved, that Yah’s weekly Sabbath and His Feasts and New Moon observances are appointed times on His calendar that He has determined to meet with us. His food—kosher-kashrut laws separate these holy and pure temples of ours (our set-apart bodies) from bodies that are common and impure. For these temples of ours are supposed to be suitable dwelling places for Yah’s presence.

 

The Apostle wrote:

 

(19) What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Ruach HaKodesh which is in you, which ye have of Yehovah, and ye are not your own? (20) For ye are bought with a price: Therefore glorify Yah in your body, and in your spirit, which are Yehovah’s (1 Corinthians 6:19-20; KJV modified).

 

 

Practical Messianic Halachah

 

Therefore beloved, with all that we’ve discuss here, let us continue to walk according to our Faith (Habakkuk 2:4) and remain true and unswayed in our profession and in our keeping of Yah’s Torah in Spirit and in Truth. For each of us has been called and chosen into this Faith of ours and it is our solemn duty to walk out the tenets of our Faith in fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12). And if we truly aim to make it into the Kingdom of Yah, it behooves us to not allow ourselves to be influenced by those who have chosen to walk out their faith according to their own personal, syncretistic ways. But rather, let our Faith in the Person and Work of our Master Yeshua Messiah drive and influence our walk so that we glorify Yah and image Him in all the earth.

 

 

TMTO-20-Endure Sound Doctrine I Will Not

by

Many members of the Body of Messiah will not endure sound doctrine as they are being led astray by false teachers or they themselves are teaching false doctrine. We discuss this troubling situation and provide ways to overcome the deception. 

read more

To Call or Not Call on the Name of the LORD

by

What Does it Mean? What does it truly mean for a would-be disciple of Jesus Christ (ie., Yahoshua Messiah) to call on the Name of the L-rd? Is it simply an utterance whereby the would-be disciple utters or invokes the actual Name or Title of the Divine One? Or is it a...

read more