Understanding our Melchizedekian Priestly Pedigree-Part 2 : Abram’s Melchizedek

by | Feb 13, 2025 | Blog, Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

 

          This is “Understanding our Melchizedekian Priestly Pedigree Part 2: Avram’s Melchizedek.”

 

 

Rehash of Part 1: The Royal Priesthood: Exploring the Historical, Spiritual, and Eschatological Roles of Melchizedek – Part 1

 

In part one of this series, we embarked on the journey to uncover the enigmatic figure Melchizedek, as mentioned in Genesis 14 and Hebrews 7. We started our focused study on the historic encounter that transpired between Avram and Melchizedek, King of Salem. Genesis/Beresheit 14.17-21 records that it is this mysterious gentleman who brought forth bread and wine, blessed Avram, and gave praise unto Al Elyon — God Most High — for delivering Avram’s enemies into his hands. And it is this encounter that sets the stage for understanding the Royal Melchizedekian Priestly Order, which is the purpose of this teaching series.

To develop a fuller understanding of this encounter (which ultimately will lead to an understanding of our Melchizedekian Priestly pedigree), we delved into the historical and cultural backdrop that existed in Avram’s day. Within that historical and cultural backdrop discussion, we highlighted the rise of city-states, the Battle of the Kings (i.e. four Mesopotamian kings who attacked the five city states of the Plain), and the concept of one individual — in this case Melchizedek — serving as both a king and priest in both Avram’s day and in his backyard, which was Canaan — the Land of Promise — the Covenant Land. Furthermore, we considered the reality that, unlike most other leaders of his time, Melchizedek served Yehovah Most High by consolidating political and religious authority in a manner similar to the Pharaohs of Egypt. That being one individual possessing and exercising the dual offices of king and priest. The difference being this man — the Melchizedek — served just Al Elyon — Yah Most High.

We concluded with a reflection on the profound implications of Melchizedek’s encounter with Avram so that we may later in this series establish a practical understanding of the eternal priesthood that we know to be inextricably linked to our Master and Savior, Yahoshua HaMashiyach. And so, as we continue this series, we will explore the deeper spiritual and eschatological (i.e. the end times and millennial era) aspects of this eternal priesthood and its relevance to our salvation and covenant relationship with the Almighty.

 

Abraham’s Encounter with Melchizedek

A Workup on Genesis 14.17-21

 

In working our way down to verse 17 of the 14th chapter of Genesis/Beresheit, we find, beginning in verse 1 of the same chapter, that Avram’s encounter with Melchizedek follows Avram’s decisive victory over Chedorlaomer’s Federation of Kings and his Rescue of Lot.

 

Avram’s victory over the Mesopotamian federation of kings must not be downplayed. This federation of kings successfully waged a campaign of destruction throughout the region even before they fought their way down to the city states of the Plain. These marauding kings started out in their Mesopotamian homeland and set out on a trek, wreaking death and destruction along their path to the city states of the Plain. Turns out that some of these city states, particularly Sodom, had been locked into a subservient relationship with Chedorlaomer, paying him tribute so that the tyrant would not destroy them. This extortion went on for 12-years (14:4).

 

Well, Sodom, along with other city states of the Plain, decide to stop being Chedorlaomer’s whipping boards and discontinued paying their tributes to him. The text describes their refusal to pay the extortion as being rebellious. Their rebelliousness, of course, enrages Chedorlaomer. And so, he decides to teach these rebel states a lesson.

 

He assembles this federation of four Mesopotamian kings and embarks on a retributive campaign against them. (I guess if he didn’t get his tribute from the states he was bullying, he’d just go in and take what he felt belonged to him.) The city states of the plain attempt to stand against the tyrant’s onslaught, but they are no match for the fighting skills and brute strength of this federation. Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela/Tso’ar are utterly overrun by Chedorlaomer’s juggernaut in the Valley of Siddim (14:8-10). This federation strips Sodom and Gomorrah of their possessions and people (14:11). Lot, having previously settled in Sodom gets caught up in the melee and he and all he had was taken captive by the marauders (14:12). How many warriors manned this irresistible federation is unknown. The text is silent on this. But we know that no military that stood in their path was a match for them.

 

A confidante of Avram living in the general vicinity where the slaughter is occurring escapes and informs our patriarch Avram of his nephew Lot’s abduction (14:13). And upon receiving this disturbing news, Avram assembles 318 trained members of his house and pursues Chedorlaomer’s federation, and with precision-military-tactics, Avram’s small but cunning band of fighters catches up to and decisively defeats them (14:15). And in the process of defeating what should have been an overwhelming military force, Avram and his band of warriors dispossess the enemy of their war loot/booty, as well as they free Avram’s nephew Lot, Lot’s family, along with all of Lot’s possessions, and the city state captives (14:16).

 

And this is where we begin our examination/study of Avram’s encounter with the Melchizedek. Record of this encounter is found in verses 14:17-20. And the passage reads:

 

(17) And the me-lech/king of Sedom (i.e. the King of Sodom. He is the new king. The previous king of Sodom had been killed in the raid that prompted Avram’s intervention against Chedorlaomer as recorded in verse 10 of our reading) went out to meet him (i.e. Avram) after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer and of the melechim/kings that were with him, at the Valley of Shaveh, which is the Me-lech’s/King’s Valley. (18) And Malki-Tzedek, me-lech of Shalem (aka Salem, otherwise known as Yerushalayim), brought out lechem (aka bread) and wine: and He was the Kohen of AL-Elyon (aka Priest of Al-Elyon). (19) And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Avram to AL-Elyon, Possessor (or Creator) of the shamayim (aka the heavens) and earth: (20) and blessed be AL-Elyon, who has delivered your enemies into your hand.” And he (i.e. Avram) paid him the ma’aser (i.e. the 10th or the tithe) of all. (RSTNE)

 

Certainly, a lot to unpack here in just these 4-verses. Let’s look.

 

  1. This Malki-Tzedek appears out of nowhere and is described by Moshe as (A) the Me-lech/King of Shalem/Yerushalayim and (B) Kohen/Priest of AL-Elyon. He’s clearly known to both the new king of Sodom and to Avram. And this Melchizedek knows about Avram, especially his recent exploits, which is the reason he goes out to meet him in the Valley of Sheva (14:17).
  2. The Malki-Tzedek celebrates Avram’s victory over the me-lechim/kings of the plain by bringing with him to this impromptu meeting bread and wine (14:18).
  3. The Melchizedek blesses Avram and AL-Elyon (14:19).
  4. Avram gives the Melchizedek a ma’aser/tithe of the spoils he received from his victory over Chedorlaomer Federation (14:19).

 

Let’s break down this encounter even further.

 

Moshe describes here the Melchizedek as king of Shalem/Yerushalayim and high priest of AL-Elyon – God/Yah Most High.

 

The Place of the Encounter

 

The encounter between Avram and the Melchizedek takes place at the “Vale of Shaveh” (aka the King’s Vale and the Valley of Jehoshaphat in the Kidron Valley). Its general geographic location, however, is very ancient Yerushalayim. This makes sense then that the Melchizedek would out of nowhere show up at the meeting between Avram and the unnamed new king of Sodom.

 

The Person of the Melchizedek

 

Some commentators such as Arnold Fruchtenbaum suggest Melchizedek was this second king’s (i.e. the King of Shalem/Salem/Yerushalayim) name (Ariel’s Bible Commentary). I find this interesting since he defines “the name Melchizedek” as “king of righteousness.” And thus, to Fruchtenbaum, this man was “the king of the City of Jerusalem… and the priest of God Most High — AL-Elyon” (ibid.).

 

Melchizedek: Name or Title

 

One could argue, as do I, that Melchizedek is not this man’s proper name. Rather, Melchizedek is this man’s title. And thus, from a literary standpoint, it makes more sense that Melchizedek was this man’s title as opposed to his personal name, since the other kings who were involved in the Battle of the Kings of the Plain were not named in our reading.

 

Melchizedek: Theophany or Just a Godly Man

 

However, I wholeheartedly agree with Fruchtenbaum that this person (1) was NOT a theophany, otherwise referred to as the so-called preincarnate Christ (i.e. Jesus Christ showing up in the form of a man to perform some heavenly task here on earth). Fruchtenbaum rightly postulates that for this to be a so-called theophany or the preincarnate Christ, as denominationalists seem to believe in overwhelming numbers, this individual would not have been so widely established, recognized, and accepted as the King of the city of Jerusalem and as a priest of Yehovah in that region. For by the very nature of a so-called theophany/preincarnate Christ, this being would have come, accomplished his mission, and then vanished. According to Fruchtenbaum, “Theophanies never held an office here on earth. Here, Melchizedek holds two offices: that of king and that of priest” (ibid.).

 

Melchizedek: One Man, Two Jobs

 

Therefore, this unnamed man who carries the title of “King of Righteousness” has two professions: (A) He is a sovereign king of Yerushalayim, and (B) he is a priest. And not a priest of some Canaanite pagan deities as one would expect, but a priest of Al-Elyon — God/Yah Most High.

 

 

Avram’s Melchizedek: A Royal Priest Without Genealogy, or No?

 

Question for you, beloved: How can one become a royal anything without possessing a royal pedigree or heritage of some sort? Not in the human sense. Right?

 

There is a Rabbinic tradition that recognizes this individual as Shem, Noach’s righteous son. The spurious Book of Jasher (which for a few years I gave some credence to, but have since concluded that it is indeed spurious for reasons I won’t get into in this discussion) assigns this man’s lineage to a line of men who had been chosen to be Melchizedek(s) or of the Melchizedekian Priestly Order, beginning with Adam, going through to Noach, and then down to Shem. But this cannot be biblically supported as our Apostolic Reading notes:

 

(1) For this Malki-Tzedek, Melech (aka King) of Wholeness (aka Shalom), Cohen of AL-Elyon, who met Avraham returning from the slaughter of the melechim (aka kings) and blessed him; (2) to whom also Avraham gave a ma’aser/a tithe; first being by interpretation Melech/King of Tzedakah (or righteousness) and after that also Melech/King of Healing and Wholeness, that is, Melech King of Shalom: (3) without abba (i.e. father), without Emma (mother), without records of any list or genealogy, without a start of Yamin (aka days), nor any end of Chayim (aka years): but this One was like the Son of Yehovah; Who is the one that abides in his kohanut-priesthood in ongoing victory. (Heb 7; RSTNE).

 

This is not a support passage for this man as the preincarnate Christ as so many Trinitarians, denominationalists, and not so few Messianics claim. What this is saying about this man is that, hey, this man served as the King of Salem and a Priest of God Most High in the days of Avraham. We don’t have any record of his lineage or of his days prior to him assuming these two-key, sacred roles. If this man was truly Shem, let’s say, then Hebrews 7 is in error. Rather, it is the so-called Book of Jasher/Yashar that is in error. And that is all we’ll say about that. (When I’m done with this series, I plan to compile my notes into a booklet of some type. I’ll put details of the whole Shem-Melchizedek paradigm in that booklet.)

 

But as far as Hebrew 7:1-3 is concerned in relation to our focus passage today, we’ll tackle this behemoth in coming installments to this series. It’s gonna be good!

 

Melchizedek: Priest of AL-Elyon

 

This man’s secondary title or role is that of a Priest. Specifically, this one is a Priest of Al Elyon — Yah or God Most High. This is the first mention of priest(s) or of some priesthood in Scripture (14.18; cf. Heb 5.6, 10, 11; 6.20; 7.1-21). The only other priest mentioned before that of the Levitical Priestly line seems to be that of Jethro (Exo 2.16; 3.1). Jethro (aka Reuel) was Zipporah’s (i.e. Moshe’s wife) dad. He was Moshe’s father-in-law. The text also records Jethro as being a Priest of Midian.

 

The Midianites worshiped several gods, including Ba’al-Peor and Ashtaroth (Wikipedia-Midian). It is suggested by some biblical scholars, however, that certain sects of Midianites may have worshiped YHVH. This is confirmed by the events of Exodus/Shemote 18 where Jethro, Priest of Midian, upon hearing of Yisrael’s miraculous deliverance from Egyptian bondage by the all-powerful-hand of Yehovah, meets up with Moshe at the base of Mount Sinai (Exo 18:1-9). And upon hearing from Moshe’s own mouth what Yah did for Yisrael, Jethro declared,

 

“Blessed be Yahweh, Who has delivered you from the hand of Pharaoh — Who has delivered the people from under the hand of Egypt. Now I know that Yahweh is greater than all the gods…” (18:10-11, LEB)

 

So, clearly Jethro served a pantheon of deities, but he was clearly aware of Yehovah, and upon hearing about Yehovah’s exploits involving Moshe and the Yisraelites, he became convinced of the supremacy of the Alohim of Yisrael to all deities of the pantheon he worshiped.

 

And just to make sure we’re all on the same page, so to speak, a priest in the biblical sense (as opposed to pagan priests) serves as an intermediary between Yehovah and people (Lev 4.3; 13.2; 14.2; 1 Sam 2.13; Hos 4.4). The root of the Hebrew term Kohen/Cohen means “to stand” and it “literally denotes one who stands serving God” (Klein, Ernest; CEDHLRE). These men might render sacrifices unto Yehovah on behalf of the people, as well as deliver instructions and information to people from Yah. Priests also perform specific tasks on behalf of Yehovah that may involve communicating the will of the Almighty to select individuals. We have no indication from the reading before us that the Melchizedek offered any sacrificial offerings or delivered privileged communications to Avram and the King of Sodom. But he did “bless Yehovah and Avram” and hosted a celebratory bread and wine ceremony with Avram and the King of Sodom. Whether this bread and wine ceremony was a precursor of what most of us know today as the Kiddush is not entirely clear. But given that Yah placed value in this celebratory act, and given the Melchizedek’s blessing acclamation, I would not write off that it may very well have been a Kiddush precursor.

 

Now, this is a very interesting situation I want to touch briefly upon. I mentioned in our discussion on Torah Reading 10, which is entitled “Trusting in the Divine Plan — The Significance of Avraham’s Covenant with Yehovah,” dealt primarily with Yah cutting a covenant with Avram, popularly referred to as the Avrahamic Covenant (and if you’ve not had the opportunity to listen to that discussion, I humbly invite you to do so as you are so led) that Avram was the only human on the planet that Yehovah was working His Plan of Salvation, Redemption, and Restoration through. In my saying that, it did not exclude any reality or possibility that Yehovah was interacting, communicating, and being worshiped by other individuals across the known world. And case in point is this obviously established and regionally known king-priest that we identify as the Melek-Tzedek or Melchizedek.

 

But the point I want to convey here is that Yah is multifaceted in that He is always doing a lot of things at the same time. Some of those things we may know about, while other things we won’t. And in the case of the Melchizedek, here’s a man who worships and serves Yehovah, separate and unrelated to Avram and His relationship with the Almighty. And what this tells us, or what this tells me, is that we may reach a place in our Faith Walk or covenant relationship with Yehovah, where we feel alone and that we’re the only one Yah is working with in the world. But we don’t always know the true situation on the ground, now, do we? Yehovah is always working with other souls throughout the world in a powerful way.

 

When Elijah erroneously believed he was the only Yehovah-fearer left in the Land — if not left in the world — the Father informed Him:

 

“Yet I have left Me 7,000 in Israel, all the knees which have NOT bowed unto Ba’al, and every mouth which hath not kissed him” (1 Kin 19:18; KJV).

 

And it becomes our blessed fortune when Yah permits us to come into contact with those other individuals whom He has been working with. Yah is bigger than we could ever comprehend, and He is always the “Smartest One in the Room.” He reveals Himself and works with those He chooses despite what we may feel or think of such individuals. So, it behooves us as Yah’s elect to not shut out of our hearts and minds the possibility that Yah has others whom He is working with at the same time He is working with, through, and in us as individuals.

 

Now, the other important, but more so, fascinating aspect of this gentleman’s pedigree/credentials, if you will, has to do with his ministry. Riddle me this Batman: What good is a priest — especially a priest of the Most High Al-Elyon — if there existed no people for him to minister to? Think about that for a moment. Our text, if read without a modicum of understanding of the biblical purpose and responsibilities of the would-be priest of Al-Elyon and our thoughts about Yehovah’s direct interactions with His human creation up to this point in the biblical narrative are confined to just the patriarchs, then we just might presume that besides Avram, his family, and maybe his servants, there were no other living souls on the planet who worshiped and revered Al Elyon. But clearly there had to have been, otherwise, our Melchizedek would have no true worth; no true purpose; and no true responsibilities.

 

Our text describes this Melchizedek as being THE PRIEST of Al Elyon (14.18). Who is this, Al Elyon? Well, Al Elyon means God Most High. It is a title that is unique to Yehovah. It’s a title that is rarely used today, but in our so-called canonical scriptures, it is found in 18 separate verses, in three specific forms (Gen 14.18-22; Num 24.16; Psa 46.4; 50.14; 57.2; 73.11; 78.56; 107.11; Dan 3.26; 5.18, 21; Mar 5.7; Luk 8.28; Act 16.17; Heb 7.1). This appellation regarding our Great Elyon/Elohim is that it identifies Yehovah as “the possessor of all the earth” (14.19, 22; TWOT Lexicon). This appellation separates Yehovah apart from and above all other gods/demigods. And when we’re talking about an ancient Middle Eastern set of cultures that worshiped a pantheon of gods/elohim, the appellation Al Elyon/El Elyon serves as a definitive spiritual distinction. Each god in the pantheon of gods of the ancient world possessed distinctive powers, and they dwelt in distinctive realms (e.g. Anu/An the god of the sky; Enki/Ea the water god; Inanna/Ishtar goddess of love, beauty, sex, desire, fertility, war, and justice; Marduk, god of judgment and magic who created the earth; and Nanna/Sin, the moon god, just to name a few). This Melchizedek served and worshiped the One Being, who is above these alleged beings, in every conceivable way. These demigods were nothing more than fallen angels who’d abandoned their assigned domains and responsibilities for the sake of fulfilling their own ambitions and confounding the will, plans, and purpose of Yehovah for His human creation. They are created beings at the end of the day. They ultimately must answer to Yehovah. Thus, the appellation Al Elyon.

 

Who Was this Mysterious King-Priest?

 

As we previously established, Melchizedek is the title as opposed to the proper name of this individual. It describes the established offices this individual held in Avram’s day: That of a “king” (of Salem or of nascent Yerushalayim) and a “priest” (of the Most High Alohim). Beyond the Melchizedek as mentioned in our text, there is no other reference in the Tanach apart from a single mention of this gentleman’s royal order or priesthood in Psalm 110.4:

 

“YHVH has sworn and will not lie so as to relent: ‘You are a Kohen le Olam va-ed (a Priest forever) based upon My Word — My Dabar Malki-Tzedek’” (RSTNE).

 

This verse will come in handy when we consider the Rabbinic tradition of who the Melchizedeks were and are today.

 

We find in Beresheit Rabbah 43.6 of the Targumim the traditionally held identity of Avram’s Melchizedek. According to tradition, Avram’s Melchizedek was none other than Shem, one of Noah’s sons.

 

Recall that in response to the Noah naked-drunkenness incident involving Ham, Noah cursed Ham’s son Canaan, but blessed Shem with:

 

(26) “Barchu-et-YHVH Alhohim of Shem (i.e. blessed Yehovah, God of Shem); and Kanaan/Canaan shall be his Eved/slave. (27) Alhohim shall enlarge Yahpheth and YHVH shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Kanaan/Canaan shall be his Eved/slave.” (Gen 9; RSTNE)

 

Rabbinic tradition holds that it is here that Noah passed down to his righteous son Shem’s responsibility for maintaining the righteous Ways of Yehovah (which originated with Adam) and the Melchizedekian Priestly Order. These sacred traditions were faithfully handed down to a select individual in each generation. And of his generation, Shem was the chosen one to safeguard and pass on these sacred traditions. Shem accomplished this by running an academy.

 

Jewish tradition further holds that so “perfect” and spiritually mature was Shem that he was born circumcised. (Yikes!)

 

I can clearly see just from this Midrashic passage how portions of the version of the so-called Ancient Book of Jasher, as is popularly known and read today, came up with the patriarch Shem being Melchizedek story. Jasher is a rehashing, if you will, of the musings of the so-called Jewish sages.

 

The Shem-Melchizedek story goes even further to postulate that the Melchizedekian priesthood was stripped from Shem and given to Avram and his descendants (reference Talmud, Nedarim 32b). This occurred because Shem/Melchizedek, believe it or not, blessed Avram before YHVH Most High. Proof of this transfer of the Melchizedekian Priesthood to Avram and his descendants, according to tradition, is found in Psalm 110.4:

 

“YHVH has sworn and will not lie so as to relent: ‘You are a Kohen le Olam va-ed (a Priest forever) based upon My Word — My Dabar Malki-Tzedek’” (RSTNE).

 

According to the Rabbis, this passage is a direct reference to bene Yisrael receiving the Melchizedekian Priesthood, as opposed to, of course, Yahoshua our Messiah, the Person of Whom this passage is clearly alluding to. (Yeah.)

 

Such thinking defies all principles of sound biblical exegesis.

 

I vividly recall from Timothy Mahoney’s Exodus Documentary an interviewed Rabbi stating that in Judaism, they like a good story. And from my experiences going through such Rabbinic gibberish, that statement certainly holds a lot of water.

 

The Priest King Melchizedek Brings Out Bread and Wine: A Foreshadow of Denominationalism’s Holy Communion or the Hebrew Kiddush?

 

In Avram’s day, offering bread and wine to a guest or honored person held significant cultural and symbolic meaning:

 

1. Hospitality and Respect:

 

Bread and wine were basic staples of life and offering them to a guest was a gesture of hospitality and respect. It showed the host’s willingness to provide for their guest’s needs and ensure their well-being.

 

Immediately after Avram’s return from defeating Kedorlaomer’s/Chedorlaomer’s evil confederacy, the unnamed king of Sodom meets up with Avram in the Valley of Shaveh (aka the King’s Valley and some have made this location synonymous with the Kidron Valley which would have been just outside Yerushalayim’s walls), is about 1 mile/1.6 K from Yerushalayim proper (Valley of Shaveh – Encyclopedia of The Bible – Bible Gateway). And it doesn’t take a bible scholar to see why our Melchizedek would high-tail himself out to meet the triumphant Avram. The Valley of Shaveh would have been right in his backyard, so to speak. And with Kedorlaomer’s Confederacy’s assault on the nearby cities of the plain, it seems reasonable to conclude that Salem, the city and her citizenry, would have been at risk of perishing if not for Avram’s decisive intervention.

 

2. Symbol of Peace and Blessing:

 

Bread and wine were often associated with blessings and peace. By offering these items, the Melchizedek was symbolically extending a blessing and a wish for peace to Avram. From just these four verses (i.e. 14:17-20) it is virtually impossible to determine what Avram knew of the Melchizedek and what the Melchizedek knew of Avram. Given Avram’s home being so close to Salem proper, it is conceivable that Avram had a previous encounter with the Melchizedek. The text does not provide us with any such information. Clearly, though, the Melchizedek was known to both Avram and the King of Sedom as the text does not show estrangement between these parties when they meet. But the Melchizedek’s focus to render a blessing and desire for peace was on Avram. And so, it would seem to me, given the likely relationship the Melchizedek had with Yehovah (Melchizedek being His — Yah’s — regional priest and all) and his familiarity with his neighbor Avram, that prior to this meeting in the Valley of Shaveh, he would have had some appreciable level of understanding that Avram was in a unique relationship with Al Elyon. Thus, these two men had something in common: They both were faithful servants of Al Elyon in a Land that was steeped in paganism and idolatry.

 

3. Ritual Significance:

 

It’s impossible to ascertain any ritualistic significance that would have been attached to the Melchizedek’s offering of bread and wine to Avram, especially in light that this is the very first mention of such an act in scripture. I could not trace any bread and wine rituals prior to Avram, and the Melchizedek meet up. It would seem reasonable to conclude that this ritual was at the very least an established practice in Avram’s day, whether to show forth one’s hospitality towards a guest or visitor, or to enact some form of sacred ritual to invoke the Name of Yehovah or pagan demigods and or exalt an individual. That the Melchizedek blessed Avram and Al Elyon in conjunction with the bread and wine offering suggests to me there was indeed some form of ritualistic significance attached to this act. Most certainly a priestly significance. Of this, Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum writes:

 

“The very fact that Melchizedek blessed the Patriarch shows Melchizedek’s exalted position as the priest of God Most High. Second, Melchizedek blesses God… As the priest of this God, he could make this proclamation and the reason for this proclamation was that God had delivered Avram’s enemies into his hand. Melchizedek recognized two things: This was the work of the true God, and Abram was the servant of the true God.” (Ariel’s Bible Commentary-The Book of Genesis)

 

Now, we would be remiss to not presume that the Melchizedek’s bread and wine offering was a precursor or foreshadowing of what we know today as Holy Communion in Catholicism and Denominationalism and or as a precursor of what we Messianics/Netsarim know as the Hebrew Kiddush?

 

This reference in our text of the Melchizedek bringing forth to the meeting he was having with the king of Sodom and Avram seems oddly akin to the Jewish tradition of Kiddush. Kiddush is a Jewish tradition performed on the Sabbath. It involves the recitation of a blessing over the bread and the wine and serves, in part, as an act symbolizing the sanctification of the weekly Sabbath. And following the Kiddush, it is customary to have a meal.

 

The Kiddush is believed to have originated between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE. The tradition developed over the centuries, with a final codified Talmudic instruction for its practice (Pesachim 106a-107a). However, it seems that the Rabbinites have not established any direct connection between the actions of Melchizedek and the Kiddush. This is not surprising. And this, what I’m about to say, is not meant to disparage our Orthodox Rabbinic Jewish brethren. But it is well established within and without our Faith communities and in denominationalism that the Judaisms make every effort conceivable to distance herself from anything having to do with Yeshua Messiah. They’re not stupid. The Melchizedek’s offering of bread and wine in the presence of Avram absolutely foreshadows Yeshua’s offering and prayer of the bread and wine at the last supper. It cannot otherwise. But if the Rabbinites dare make any association with the bread and wine and the praise and blessing rendered by Melchizedek in Avram’s presence, it’s more of a parallel from the perspective of Judaism establishing the tradition of rendering blessings over wine and bread to sanctify the Sabbath and moedim/holy days. But for those of us who belong to the Master Yahoshua, Melchizedek’s bringing forth of bread and wine, and the blessings that accompanied this ancient act of righteousness, foreshadowed the elements and symbolism of what is famously referred to as Holy Communion, which is a revealing of the true meaning behind the Hebrew Kiddush:

 

(26) As they (i.e. Yahoshua and His 12 taught ones) were eating, Yahoshua took bread, blessed the Most High (Al Alhohim) — Baruch ata YHVH, eloheinu melek ha Olam, ha motzi lechem min ha Aretz. Blessed are you YHVH, King of the Universe, Who brings forth bread from the earth. (Continuing) Yahoshua broke the bread, and gave it to His Talmidim — His taught ones — and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” (27) He, Yeshua, took the cup and gave thanks again — Baruch ata YHVH, eloheinu melek ha Olam. Boray prie ha gaffen. Blessed are you YHVH, King of the Universe, Creator of the fruit of the vine” — saying, “Drink all of it for this is the renewed covenant in My blood, which is shed for the remission of sins.” (Mat 26; Rood’s Chronology; cf. Mar 14:22-25; Luk 22:17-20)

 

The Apostle Paul recognized the shadow of Melchizedek’s bread and wine offering and our Master’s bread and wine offering:

 

(23) For I (Paul) have received from YHVH that which also I delivered to you, that the Master Yahoshua, the same Lyla (aka night) in which He was betrayed took whole wheat lechem (aka bread). (24) And when He had said the bracha/blessing, He broke it and said, “Take, eat: This is My gooff (i.e. my body) which is broken for you. This do in remembrance of Me.” (25) After the same manner also He took the kiddush cup. After He had eaten, saying, “This cup of geulah (aka wine) is the Brit Chadasha in My dahm/the renewed covenant in My blood. This do as often as you drink it (i.e. every Shabbat meal and at every Passover meal), in remembrance of Me. (26) For as often as you eat this lechem/bread and drink this cup, you do show Yahoshua’s death until He returns.” (1 Cor 11; RSTNE)

 

In our text, Avram’s Melchizedek, in bringing forth bread and wine to Avram, was pointing to this solemn event and ritual as recorded in the Apostolic Writings, that is forever to be linked to Yeshua’s Passion and the Renewed Covenant.

 

The Significance of Melchizedek’s Dual Blessings

 

The Melchizedek declares two simple blessings during this impromptu meeting:

 

(19) “Blessed be Avram to Al Elyon, possessor of the heavens and earth (20) and blessed be Al Elyon who has delivered your enemies into your hand” (Gen 14; RSTNE modified).

 

In blessing Avram, what was the Melchizedek declaring:

 

  • Avram belonged to Al Elyon. (All you demigods, take notice. This soul is taken and belongs to Yehovah Most High.)
  • Avram was Yehovah’s servant.
  • That he, Melchizedek, was a privileged and authorized representative/ambassador — even an agent — of the Possessor of the Heavens and the Earth: Al Elyon. The buck stopped with Melchizedek.

 

First Mention of Tithing

 

Avram’s response to the Melchizedek’s bread and wine and blessings was to render unto the Melchizedek “a tenth of all” (i.e. a tithe of “the spoils” of the victory he’d just won over Chedorlaomer’s federation). What was the precedence for this act by Avram? It’s difficult if not impossible to tell since this is the first mention of anyone rendering to another a tithe in scripture.

 

Arnold Fruchtenbaum brings up another salient point regarding Avram’s tithe to the Melchizedek: “There is no evidence from our text that Avram tithed to the Melchizedek or any other person from his accumulated family wealth” (Ariel’s Bible Commentary Genesis 14). The tithe he rendered to the Melchizedek was exclusive to the spoils Avram received from his victory over Chedorlaomer’s federation. So, this was indeed a unique sacrificial act. Was Avram establishing a precedence? Or was this a cultural norm in the Patriarch’s day?

 

All indications from our meager text are that Avram’s actions of rendering a tithe of the spoils of war unto the Melchizedek were spontaneous. At this early stage in the emerging Hebrew Faith, Yehovah had not yet given any instructions to him regarding rendering a tithe to His chosen priests. Furthermore, there is no further mention of the Patriarch Avram ever rendering tithes to any priest. Thus, the tithe Avram rendered unto the Melchizedek was a onetime, voluntary act of righteousness and contrition. If anything, an act of thanksgiving.

 

There isn’t a well-documented record of ancient warriors specifically rendering a tithe of their spoils to pagan priests. However, the practice of offering a portion of one’s wealth or spoils to religious authorities was common in many ancient cultures. For example, in Mesopotamia and Egypt, it was customary to offer a portion of agricultural produce or other wealth to support temples and priests.

 

Thus, the child of the Most High should resist basing his/her obedience and willingness to tithe of their increase on this historic event. Yah was not establishing a commandment for his people to tithe through the telling of this story. On the contrary. If anything, what we come to learn from Avram’s act of giving a tithe of his spoils to the Melchizedek is the content of his heart and a glimpse into his righteous character.

 

I would further add that through this righteous act, Avram was symbolically validating the legitimacy of the Melchizedek’s priestly office. And this cannot be overstated.

 

 

Practical Messianic Take-Aways From Avram’s Encounter with the Melchizedek

 

As Yehovah’s chosen and anointed ones, we are destined to be royal priests. This is confirmed twice by John the Revelator and Kefa/Peter:

 

(5) And from Yahoshua HaMashiyach, Who is the Faithful witness and the Bachor (i.e. the firstborn) from the dead and the Sar (i.e. ruler) of the melechim of the Olam (i.e. the kings of the earth). Unto Him that loved us and washed us from our sins in His own dahm/blood, (6) and has made us a Malchut of cohenim (i.e. a kingdom — royalty — of priests) to His Ahloha (i.e. His God) and Abba. To Him be tifereth and dominion le-Olam-va-ed. Amein. (Rev 1; RSTNE)

 

(10) And have made us a Malchut (i.e. a kingdom) of cohenim to our Ahloha. And we shall reign in the Olam/earth (Rev 5; RSTNE).

 

(5) You also, as lively stones, are built up as a spiritual bayit (i.e. house); a kadosh cohenot (i.e. a holy priesthood) to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to YHVH by Yehoshua HaMashiyach (1 Pet 2; RSTNE).

 

(9) But you are a chosen generation, a royal cohenot/priesthood, a kadosh/holy nation, and a peculiar people; that you should show forth the tehillot (i.e. the praises) of Him Who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous Ohr/light (1 Pet 2; RSTNE).

 

It stands to reason, beloved, that if the Creator of the Universe promoted our Master, older Brother, and soon coming King, to the office of Cohen HaGadol (i.e. High Priest) according to the Order of Melchizedek (Psa 110: 4; Heb 5: 6-10), and as John and Peter have indicated that we are destined to serve our Cohen HaGadol as priests in the Malchut Alhohim/the Kingdom of Yah, then we can certainly learn from Avram’s Melchizedek’s example.

 

  1. Avram’s Melchizedek was known by all in the region.

 

As future Melchizedekian cohenot/priests, our reputation must always precede us. No doubt Avram’s Melchizedek was known for his righteousness and stellar representation of Al Elyon-Yah. It therefore befalls us to perpetually walk in righteousness and represent our Alhohim in such a way that we are known by all who come into contact with us, as a servant and priest of Al Elyon.

 

  1. Avram’s Melchizedek Operated in His Purpose.

 

Like Avram’s Melchizedek, who served as King of Shalem and Priest of Al Elyon 24/7, we too are required to operate in our royal priestly calling.

 

  1. Avram’s Melchizedek operated where Yah called him to serve.

 

Like Avram’s Melchizedek, who served and operated in Shalem — nascent Jerusalem — we are called to serve Yehovah and the Kingdom wherever He places us. He places us where He chooses, and it falls to us as His priest to serve in that location accordingly.

 

  1. Avram’s Melchizedek was righteous.

 

Like Avram’s Melchizedek, we must always walk in righteousness. Avram’s Melchizedek carried himself before Avram and the king of Sodom in a righteous manner, imaging Al Elyon in the process. Our High Priest, Yeshua Messiah, instructed us to seek first Yah’s kingdom and righteousness. Yah cannot effectively work out His purpose in us if we are not walking uprightly before Him and before humanity.

 

  1. Honor Yah’s anointed.

 

Like Avram, when we come into contact with Yah’s anointed and chosen ones, we must honor them. I said honor, not worship. We are to respect them and show honor to them as the Spirit so leads.

 

  1. Learn to be a gracious host.

 

Like Avram’s Melchizedek, it befalls us to be gracious hosts to those who Yah places in our path. More so, we must learn to serve and love one another, for such is the Kingdom of Yah economy.

 

  1. Learn to render blessings and praise.

 

Live Avram’s Melchizedek, we must learn to render unto Yehovah blessings and praises continually. The writer of the Book of Hebrews encouraged us to render unto Yah always sacrifices of praise continually that is the fruit of our lips that confess the Name of our Holy Alhohim (Heb 13:15). Likewise, we must learn to thank and praise Yah for one another for the great things He has done and is doing to and through us, His people.

 

  1. Add the Kiddush to our Weekly Worship

 

Like Avram’s Melchizedek, celebrate each Sabbath by engaging in the Kiddush. Not for purposes of imitating our Jewish cousins in their rituals, but more so, as we discussed, to remember our Master’s sacrifice and the renewed covenant He has established in His blood.

Divine Judgment and Mercy and Righteousness: The Story of Sodom and Lot – Thoughts and Reflections on Torah Reading 16

by | Feb 5, 2025 | Blog, Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

Lot’s Privileged Life in Sodom

Lot, Abraham’s nephew, sits at Sodom’s gate (19:1).

What is the significance of Lot being seated at Sodom’s gate? It’s likely that Avraham’s victory over Chedorlaomer’s and three other powerful Mesopotamian kings’ assault on the city states of the Plain (Gen 14) resulted in Lot being perhaps promoted or having favored status conferred upon him by the citizens of Sodom. Why? No doubt his advancement in Sodom’s society came because of his relationship to Avraham, and maybe to some lesser degree, the wealth he accumulated while being attached to his uncle and bringing the wealth along with him to the area gave him a leg-up among the elite of Sodom society (Gen 13).

Some commentators suggest that Lot’s advancement in Sodom’s society included him being a community elder and or leader. Moshe’s notation that Lot was “sitting at the gateway of Sodom” clearly reveals Lot’s exalted position in Sodom society. For those who sat at the gateway of ancient Near Eastern cities did so for purposes of conducting business and tending to the legal affairs of the city. (Reference New Living Translation Study Bible, 2008)

We see this ancient custom played out in Genesis/Beresheit 23.18 and Job 29.7-17.

Righteous Living in Sin City

Sodom’s smuttiness and evil were known, as evidenced by Avraham’s intercession with Yehovah on the city’s behalf (reference Gen 18; Torah Reading 15). More so, word of Sodom’s evil had come to Yehovah’s attention:

(16) And the men rose up from there and looked toward Sedom (aka Sodom) and Avraham went with them to send them away … (20) And YHVH said, “Because the outcry against Sedom and Amorah is great, and because their sin is very heavy, (21) I am going down now to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me, and if not, I know.” (Gen 18; The Scriptures ISR; from Torah Reading 15)

Avraham’s upbringing of Lot in Yah’s righteous ways did not prevent Lot from succumbing to the lure of this city. No doubt his moral compass had become severely challenged because of his living in such a disgusting place.

How many of us willingly live compromised lives, despite our belonging to Yehovah?

Enter Two Powerful Angels to Accomplish the Will of Yehovah

Two holy malachim/messengers/angels walk into Sodom proper (19:1). Lot, upon seeing the two malachim entering the city, no doubt entering through the gateway at which he sat, leaves his post, humbles himself, and graciously meets the two malachim.

The way Lot greets the malachim strongly suggests to me that Lot recognized the two beings as holy malachim:

“… he (i.e. Lot) rose up to meet them (i.e. the two malachim), and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground” (19.1b).

Lot invites the two malachim — almost pleading with them — to accept his hospitality and stay with him and his family in their home for the night (19.2). The two malachim initially decline Lot’s invitation, telling Lot that they would spend the night in the city’s open square (19.2).

In ancient times, it was customary for travelers who had no available lodging accommodations to “sleep in the street wrapped up in their cloaks” (JFB Commentary on the Whole Bible).

I would add that for the malachim to stay in the city’s open square would have allowed them to see for themselves that which Yehovah revealed to Avraham in Genesis 18.20-21.

In just a few moments, we see that the malachim’s suspicions will be confirmed by the very Sodomites, who will seek to assault them while being in Lot’s home.

The two malachim ultimately give in to Lot’s pressuring and accept Lot’s hospitality.

 

Lot’s Righteous Hospitality: An Imitation of Avraham’s Hospitality

In what could be seen as an imitation of the hospitality that Avraham extended to his three heavenly visitors in Genesis 18.1-8, Lot “made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread (no doubt because of the haste in the meal would have been prepared), and they ate” (19.3).

(I find the mention of Lot serving the two malachim unleavened bread to be interesting. Biblically, unleavened bread is symbolic of sin. And here we have two holy angels, sent by Yah to bring judgment to the sin-filled city.)

 

The Beginning of the End of Sodom: Evil Attempts to Assault Righteousness

Before the household, besides the two malachim, could settle down for the night, the men of Sodom surround Lot’s home and attempt to assault Lot’s guests.

The Sodomites demand Lot hand over to them the malachim, who were guests in his home for obvious evil purposes (19.4-5).

Lot, in going outside the door of his home, confronts the Sodomites, refusing to comply with their demands (19.6-7). Instead of handing over his heavenly guests to the Sodomites, Lot offers his daughters to the threatening evil men (19.8). I find this to be a desperate move on Lot’s part, since it’s likely that Lot knew the men attempting to assault his guests weren’t the least bit interested in his daughters. And the crowd confirms this in 19.9, warning Lot to “Stand back” (19.9)!

Question: Why hadn’t the crowd assaulted Lot on previous occasions? Seems as though even the evil citizens of Sodom respected Lot’s privileged position in their city, saying to Lot as he sought to quench the inflamed situation: “This one came in to sojourn and should he always judge” (19.9)?

Well, this situation had gotten so out of control that the gathered men’s passions had reached the point that they decide to assault Lot, defiantly declaring to him: “Now we are going to treat you worse than them” as they pressed themselves upon him (19.9).

The malachim rescue Lot from the clutches of the gathered Sodomites, pulling him back into his house, shutting the door behind him (19.10). The powerful malachim, knowing that their pulling of Lot into the confines of his home would not defuse the deteriorating situation, strike the attackers with blindness (19.11). And no doubt this was all the information that the malachim needed to pull the trigger on Sodom’s imminent destruction.

 

The Revealing of the City’s Demise Revealed to Lot

As the Sodomites writhe blindly on the ground around Lot’s home, the two malachim reveal to Lot the plan to destroy Sodom. They instruct Lot to gather his family and prepare to escape the impending wrathful judgment that would strike the city and its inhabitants (19.12-13).

Lot was unsuccessful, however, in convincing his two sons-in-law that they needed to evacuate the city along with him, his wife, and their wives (i.e. Lot’s two daughters). The text describes Lot’s sons-in-law as thinking Lot was joking (19.14).

Earlier in the text, when offering his two daughters to the gathered Sodomites instead of handing over to them the two malachim, Lot describes his daughters to the attackers as virgins (19.8). Yet here, in 19.14, the text shows his two daughters were married to these two gentlemen. What gives?

It’s conceivable that Lot, in a desperate attempt to have the attackers accept his daughters instead of the malachim, lied to the crowd to make his daughters more appealing to them. Or, conceivably, the two gentlemen in question were betrothed to Lot’s daughters. In Hebrew culture, people treated a formally betrothed woman as a married woman. This seems to be the case here, since the attackers would have likely known all there was to know about Lot and his family. Thus, Lot would likely have not tried to perpetrate such a fraud upon his attackers, knowing they would have had full knowledge of Lot’s family dynamics.

 

Yah’s Wrathful Judgment Unleashed Upon Sodom

The very next morning, the malachim forcibly usher Lot and his immediate family (Lot himself, his wife, and his two daughters) out of Sodom proper (19.15-17). The malachim instructs Lot to take himself and his family and flee to the mountains. Leave the cities of the Plain altogether (19.19). The malachim resort to extracting Lot and his family from their Sodom home. The text describes Lot’s response to the urging of the malachim for him and his family to leave the city quickly as “… he (Lot) loitered…” (19.16).

And even after being escorted outside the walls of Sodom, Lot pleads with the angels:

(18) “Oh no, Yehovah! (19) Look, please, your servant has found favor in your eyes, and you have increased your loving-commitment which you have shown me by saving my life, but I am unable to escape to the mountains, lest calamity overtake me, and I die. (20) Look, please, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is small (speaking about the city Tso’ar – one of the 5 cities of the Plain). Please, let me escape there. Is it not a small matter? And let my life be saved?”

The malachim have compassion for Lot and his situation and grant him (1) the opportunity to seek refuge in Tso’ar (19.21) with (2) the guarantee that Tso’ar would be spared the destruction that was to befall Sodom (19.21-22).

What we see here from a spiritual perspective is that even in our depravity, Yehovah is merciful and gracious. He grants Lot’s petition to flee and take refuge in Tso’ar.

And as horrible as the destruction of Sodom and of her people may seem to the self-righteous and woke souls among us, scholars have concluded that Yah’s wrathful destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah would have been swift and merciful. The citizens of these evil cities would not suffer, but succumb quickly to the fire and brimstone that would overtake them.

And thus, once Lot secures himself and his family within the confines of Tso’ar just after sunrise, the text states that “Yehovah rained sulfur and fire upon Sedom and Amorah … from heaven” (19.23). And so, all the cities of the plain, except for Tso’ar, are utterly destroyed (19.25). No life whatsoever survives Yah’s wrathful judgment against these evil cities.

 

If Looks Could Kill

The text states that Lot’s “wife looked back from behind him, and she became a post (some English translations render post as pillar) of salt” (19.26). But does the text not state that the destruction of the city states of the Plain did not suffer destruction until after Lot and his family had found refuge in Tso’ar? This being the case, how did Lot’s wife end up looking back? Did she simply turn around and look back at her beloved city Sodom while in transit to Tso’ar, which conflicts with the text? Or did she wander or venture back to Sodom amid the destruction?

The Hebrew wording in the text – “Lot’s wife, behind him, looked” — suggests an intense, long gaze at the ongoing destruction of the city she had grown accustomed to and loved (Speiser, E. A.; AB Genesis 19.26). There is a likelihood, then, that Lot’s wife either doesn’t enter Tso’ar fully with her family, but she loiters behind Lot and her daughters, in order that she may see for herself what was happening to her beloved city Sodom. I wouldn’t discount the possibility that after she and her family entered Tso’ar shortly thereafter, she leaves the confines of the city to circle back and check out what was happening to her beloved city.

Lot’s wife intentionally violated Yehovah’s explicit instructions to not look back towards Sodom (19.17). Yah had already showed forth tremendous mercy in sparing Lot and his family from His wrathful judgment against Sodom. To abuse that mercy and violate Yah’s explicit instructions is essentially a slap to Yah’s face. How many of us do such things: whereby Yehovah sheds His mercy upon us, yet we are quick to transgress His instructions/commands? When we take advantage of Yah’s mercy, yet intentionally violate His instructions, what are we calling down upon ourselves apart from an extension of the Almighty’s wrathful judgment that He levels against His enemies?

 

Righteous Often Comes at the Expense of a Broken Heart

Meanwhile, miles away in Mamre (18.1), Avraham witnesses the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (19.27-28). And one can only imagine what was going through Avraham’s mind at that moment. No doubt he had a sick feeling in his stomach, recalling the conversation he’d previously had with Yehovah, likely just a couple days before where He pleaded with the Almighty to spare the inhabitants of the city states of the Plain for the sake of just 10 righteous souls (18.32). I wonder if Avraham, perhaps, thought that his nephew Lot had become so consumed by Sodom’s evil that Yehovah no longer saw righteousness in him and that he perished along with the whole of Sodom. It would not be a stretch to think that Avraham knew of Lot’s whereabouts before the destruction of Sodom. Which is to say, that Avraham was aware of Lot’s compromised life in Sodom. I wouldn’t doubt that at the forefront of Avraham’s mind was the wellbeing of his nephew Lot and his family, whom he loved dearly. This is despite Lot’s pigheadedness (13.5-13). I would venture to guess that Avraham feared that Lot and his family all fell victim to the irresistible maelstrom he was witnessing from his homestead in Mamre. He was likely brokenhearted at the sight of the carnage he witnessed.

But knowing the legendary faith of Avraham, it would not be a stretch to presume that Avraham found peace in knowing that somehow, someway, Yehovah would honor him by saving his nephew. And certainly, history bears this reality out in that Avraham’s intercession did not fall on deaf ears. For Yah ultimately saved the life of Lot and his two daughters. How many of us have pleaded with the Almighty to have mercy upon our loved ones and save them from their respective situations and from their sins? We should never give up interceding on behalf of our loved ones. Yah may just honor our faithful intercessions and petitions and bring about miraculous salvation and restoration of our loved one. Yah is always in charge, and He is always the smartest Person in the room.

 

From Living in a Mansion to Dwelling in a Cave: Righteousness Often Comes at a Price

Eventually, Lot and his two daughters leave Tso’ar. For what reason, the text is silent, but only that “Alohim remembered Avraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow … and Lot went up out of Tso’ar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him, for he was afraid to dwell in Tso’ar. And he and his two daughters dwelt in a cave.” (19.29-30)

Why was Lot afraid to remain in Tso’ar? Did he not desperately petition the two malachim to allow him and his family to take refuge there? Indeed, he did.

Could it have been that the Tso’arians held him responsible for what happened to their sister cities of the Plain? Did the Tso’arians threaten Lot and his daughters out of fear that the same destruction that destroyed the other four cities of the Plain would eventually befall them if Lot and his daughters were permitted to remain within their city? Some commentators suggest Lot was afraid that a similar fate would befall Tso’ar. It’s impossible to tell from the text.

Needless to say, however, we see at this juncture of the story a massive decline in the quality of Lot’s once privileged life. Lot’s fear of living in Tso’ar leads to him living out his remaining days in a cave. At least it would seem so since we read nothing more about Lot in scripture beyond this reading. Modern archaeologists have found evidence suggesting that the mountains surrounding the Qumran Community and the Dead Sea region offered the local ancients refuge in the time of turmoil (ESV Study Bible Commentary).

 

The Dirty Deed That Leads to Generations of Trouble

While living life at his lowest in a cave along with his daughters, Lot consents to his daughters’ urging that he engages in drinking some wine, no doubt using the excuse that drinking the intoxicant might help him cope with the difficult times they found themselves in (19.31-36). The daughters intentionally use Lot’s altered – drunken – state to become pregnant with their father’s children (i.e. incest). Their excuse for getting their father drunk and being impregnated with their father’s babies was to “preserve the seed of our father” (19.32). The oldest daughter bore unto Lot a son by the name of Moab. This Moab would become the father of the Moabites who would run into conflict with Yisrael during their wilderness sojourn (Num 22, 26) and at various times when Yisrael dwelt in the Land (1 Sam 12; 22; 2 Sam 8; 2 Kin 1; 3; etc.). However, Yah’s plan of salvation, restoration, and redemption would factor heavily into Lot’s situation. For Ruth, a Moabitess, would centuries later become the great-grandmother of King David. And King David would become the sacred line by which our Master Yeshua would emerge. The youngest daughter bears unto Lot a son by the name of Ammon. This Ammon would become the father of the Ammonites who would, like the Moabites, run into conflict with our ancient cousins throughout her history, even up to the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (see Ezra 9.1; Nehemiah 2, 4, 13). Furthermore, the Ammonites instituted the worship of Molech. Molech was the god of the Ammonites, the worship of which featured child sacrifices.

Jewish tradition refers to the actions of Lot and his daughters as a “great sin upon the earth, warranting Lot’s seed to be eliminated from the earth on the Day of Condemnation” (Jubilees 16.7-9). Despite the suggested despicable nature of Lot’s daughters’ actions to perpetuate their father’s lineage, resulting in the emergence of two nations that would centuries later, become a thorn in our ancient cousins’ side – the Moabites and Ammonites – Yah’s sovereignty and omniscience overshadowed the enemy’s plans to thwart the Almighty’s will for His set apart people and the whole of humanity. As just mentioned, Ruth, great grandmother of King David, and matriarch of Yahoshua’s biological line, was a Moabite. So that adage holds true, even in our reading here, that Yehovah will make lemonade out of lemons.

 

Thoughts and Reflections on Torah Reading 16

As I studied through our reading this week, I couldn’t help but recall that passage in 2 Peter where the apostle refers to Lot as righteous (2:7). And given all that we’ve come to learn about Lot’s life choices, I couldn’t wrap my head around the concept of Lot being referred to as righteous by the apostle. Lot knew of and, for a period of time, no doubt walked in the ways of righteousness. But he ultimately got caught up in the allure of Sodom—and of wealth—and of authority and of notoriety.

We find in 1 John 2:

(15) Do not love the world nor that which is in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. (16) Because all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life (all of which Lot got caught up in)—is not of the Father but is of the world. (The Scriptures ISR)

Righteousness often struggles to overcome the lust of the flesh and the eyes, and the pride of life (i.e. believing that we have arrived; being presumptuous; and full of ourselves). Unfortunately, Lot seemed to have succumbed to these three areas of temptation.

Not that Lot engaged in any unseemly activity in Sodom. But the fact remains that he was compromised in various areas of his life because he embedded himself in an environment where righteousness could not and did not exist.

An unidentified voice from heaven admonishes Yah’s people,

“Come out of her, My people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues” (Rev 18.4; The Scriptures ISR).

Despite all the negative stuff that befell Lot in our reading, we see righteousness prevail. Yehovah facilitated Lot and his family’s rescue as a testimony to his righteousness. Avraham had previously interceded and pleaded for his nephew’s salvation, undoubtedly including Lot in his petition that Sodom be spared if just 10 righteous people were found there (Gen 18.32). Clearly, Yehovah deemed Lot righteous. Righteous enough to save him from His wrathful judgment against Sodom. Yah searches the hearts of humanity (1 Chr 28.9; Rom 8.27; Rev 2.23). And He works with and saves those Whom He chooses. Clearly Yehovah loved Lot. Why? Maybe because of His steadfast love for His friend Avraham, Lot’s uncle. Or maybe Yah saw something in Lot that resonated with Him. Only Yah knows.

What we have before us in this amazing story is a foreshadowing of Yah’s grand plan of salvation, redemption, and restoration. Avraham is a type of Yeshua while Lot foreshadows, us who desperately need deliverance, redemption, and restoration. The patriarch intercedes for others, particularly his nephew Lot, all of whom faced destruction were it not for the intercessors’ pleas. Lot and his family are saved through Avraham’s righteousness. Halleluyah. Lot then is a reflection – a portrait of ourselves. For despite our many deficiencies, Yehovah has chosen us from the billions of souls that inhabit this planet to have a relationship with and to save us and to deem us righteous through His glorious Son and Right Hand, Yahoshua Messiah. And because of His Son’s righteousness, we are being saved from Yah’s coming wrathful judgment against this world. What then, do we do with this amazing reality, beloved, other than worship, trust, obey, thank Him, and love Him even more for extending His Perfect Son’s righteousness to us?

 

 

Unveiling the Truth-Yeshua’s Prohibition Against Titles in Matthew 23:8-12-Part 2

by | Jan 31, 2025 | Blog, Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

Greetings and Introduction

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

As I am publishing this discussion, it is the first day of the 11th Month of Abba Yah’s sacred calendar year, which translates to January 31st, 2025. Happy and blessed Feast of Rosh Chodesh to you, your families, and fellowships.

The Feast of Rosh Chodesh, although not a High Sabbath, is a special day on Yah’s sacred calendar. It affords those who belong to Yah through Yeshua Messiah a renewed opportunity to worship and dedicate themselves to Yah’s service and the work of the Gospel. And so, may we find favor in Yah’s eyes as we work the fields while it is still day: Awaiting the glorious day of our Master’s return and the establishment of His illustrious Malchut Elohim — The Kingdom of Alohim.

This is “Unveiling the Truth-Yeshua’s Prohibition Against Titles in Matthew 23:8-12-Part 2.”

 

Quick Review of Part 1

In Part 1 of “Unveiling the Truth: Yeshua’s Prohibition Against Titles in Matthew 23:8-12,” we examined Jesus’ instructions to His taught and sent ones to permit no one to call them Rabbi, Father, or Teacher. And just so that we are all on the same page, literally speaking, let’s re-read this important passage:

8 But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ because one is your teacher, and you are all brothers, 9 And do not call anyone* your father on earth, for one is your heavenly Father. 10 And do not be called teachers, because one is your teacher, the Christ. 11 And the greatest among you will be your servant. 12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.  Bible[1]

I began the last discussion with an emphasis on the importance of we who belong to Yehovah through Yeshua, adhering to Yeshua’s teachings and example, as well as walking out our Father’s Torah. I then shared a personal experience I recently had attending a local Messianic Jewish congregation where the congregation’s leader was referred to as Rabbi. And I mentioned to you it was this event that prompted me to conduct a deeper exploration of what I believe to be Yeshua’s prohibition against His taught and sent ones taking on such titles as contained in Matthew 23:8-12, the results of that exploration being the content of these two posts. We looked at the historic, cultural, and religious context of the passage by briefly examining the surrounding verses of the passage. And we concluded that Yeshua’s admonishments against the titles of rabbi, father, and teacher were not made by Him in a vacuum (i.e. He didn’t just one day out of the blue declare these prohibitions), so to speak. But the Master made these seeming title prohibitions in response to the demonstrated corrupt and hypocritical behavior of the Scribes and Pharisees. And so, in arriving at these seeming title prohibitions, the Master beforehand laid out quite an indictment against the Jewish religious leaders who, not only in many cases abused their authority over the people, but who were also some of the most corrupt of character and hypocritical individuals one would ever want to meet.

We also attempted to contextually define the terms Rabbi, Father, and Teacher as they would have been understood in the first-century Judaisms. We learned the titles held somewhat different meanings in Yeshua’s day than they do today. It was important to establish the titles’ baseline meanings so that we can better determine whether Yeshua’s seeming prohibition should be understood by us today as literal prohibitions against their use by His taught and sent ones. Our discussion also touched on the broader implications of Yeshua’s instructions for modern Messianic believers, emphasizing the need to follow Yeshua’s example and teachings rather than the man-made traditions and hierarchical structures of organized religion.

In today’s discussion, I’d like to examine why Yahoshua rendered these three seeming prohibitions to His taught ones in the first place; examine the two-sides of the general argument regarding the literalness of Yeshua’s seeming prohibitions; explore the practical implications of the Master’s seeming prohibitions for our Faith Community today; and lastly offer my personal take on the literalness of Yeshua’s declaration to His taught ones.

 

Yahoshua’s Prohibition

In accusing the religious leaders of a laundry list of spiritual and moral crimes, Yahoshua laid down to His disciples His standards for true spiritual leadership in the Body of Mashiyach: (1) They are not to be called Rabbi(s); (2) not to be called Father(s); and (3) not to be called teacher(s). And the reason they — and by extension we who hold leadership roles in the Body of Mashiyach today — are not to be called rabbis, teachers, and fathers is because He, Yeshua, is their sole rabbi; Yehovah is their [Heavenly] Father; and Mashiyach is their teacher. For the Kingdom economy holds that the greatest among the Master’s sent ones would be those that served and tended to the needs of their brethren. The sent one who would err towards being exalted before the people like the Scribes and Pharisees would be humbled, while the humbler of the Master’s sent ones would ultimately be exalted (23:11-12). And the point was not to invalidate Judaism and the leadership offices of the Scribes and Pharisees, as much as it was about Who His sent ones should direct the peoples’ attention to. The Scribes’ and Pharisees’ corrupt character caused the people to take their eyes or focus off Yehovah and Yeshua and instead place them upon themselves. They were effectively exalting themselves, before the people, above Yehovah and His Ways, and that was extremely problematic. And the Master clearly didn’t want to see that corrupt tendency repeated by His sent ones once they went forth and assumed leadership roles in the Body of Mashiyach.

Furthermore, the Master admonished His taught ones to not give themselves over to and follow the “takanot” and “ma’asim” of the Pharisees/Prushim (i.e. the religious leaders’ enacted rules and traditions that had the effect of overriding and nullifying Yehovah’s Torah). Thus, the only instructions they were to follow/keep/observe were Yah’s instructions in righteousness, otherwise referred to as the written Torah or Moshe’s commandments.

Unfortunately, the Body of Mashiyach has not fully embraced the Master’s instructions, choosing instead to indulge themselves in the very practices that Yahoshua said not do. Exalted titles and authority are readily rendered unto various members of our Faith Community. And the focus of these installed leaders is not that of servant-leadership, but that of self-aggrandizement at various levels.

  Yeshua therefore insists that His taught and sent ones abide by the principles of “humility” and “servanthood.” These form the essence of the Great Commandments Yeshua taught about:

 

   Discussion of humility and servanthood as core principles.

(25) And see, a certain one learned in the Torah stood up (i.e. a Scribe no doubt), trying Him (exercising arrogance and pride), and saying, “Teacher (i.e. didaskale/moreh), what shall I do to inherit everlasting life?” (26) And He (i.e. Yahoshua) says to him, “What has been written in the Torah? How do you read it?” (27) And he (i.e. the Scribe) answering says, “You shall love Yehovah your Elohim with all your heart and with all your being, and with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” (28) And He [Yeshua] says to him, “You have answered rightly. Do this and you shall live.” (Luk 10; The Scriptures ISR).

 

Yeshua’s Kingdom economy is all about serving one another’s needs and love for both one’s Creator and for one’s neighbor, both of which breed humility. When we love our neighbor as much as we love ourselves, and we love our Creator with our whole being, we begin to meet the criteria for true servanthood, which is an essential trait for making it into the Kingdom. What Yeshua observed from the Scribes and Pharisees here in our focus passage was self-indulgence, arrogance, self-aggrandizement, hypocrisy, etc., where these leaders did not serve the people who were placed under their spiritual care. Rather, these religious leaders were being served by the people they were supposed to serve through the accolades and authority the people placed upon them. And so, these religious leaders took advantage of their exalted positions. Such is contrary to the Kingdom economy or the Kingdom Way of Life, whereby the first will be last and the last will be first (Luk 13.30). We see the realities of the Kingdom economy expressed in the Master’s Beatitude teaching where the poor in spirit receive the Kingdom of Heaven; the mournful are comforted; the meek inherit the earth; the righteous hungry and thirsty are satiated; the merciful receive mercy; the pure in heart see Yehovah; the peacemakers receive sonship from Yah; and the wrongly persecuted receive the Malchut Elohim — the Kingdom of Yah.

Many of the Scribes and Pharisees that Yeshua had a problem with in our focus passage did not possess such character traits, despite them being in positions of great authority. We talked in detail about their spiritual rap sheets in Part 1 of this discussion. And Yeshua’s devastating edict against these corrupt religious leaders was:

“For this reason, I tell you that the Kingdom of God/Yah will be taken away from you and will be given to a people who produce its fruits” (Mat 21.43; LEB).

 

   Practical implications for modern Messianic communities

Yeshua, being our Mashiyach, is our head and our covering. We are not supposed to be under any Rabbinic authority and or covering. We are not to be subject to any such religious hierarchy in the Body of Mashiyach. Yes, the Master gifted the Body a five-fold ministry comprising apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph 4.8-11). These ministries Yahoshua gifted the Body for:

“The perfecting of the saints; for the work of the ministry; for the edifying of the Body of Mashiyach until we all come in the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of Yehovah, even unto a perfect man; even unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Mashiyach” (Eph 4.12-13; KJV).

 

Those who have, over the centuries, manned such offices (i.e. rabbis, teachers, and spiritual fathers) have often abused them and used them to usurp authority over the people they were supposed to serve; materially enrich themselves; receive rock-star notoriety and differential and privileged treatment from members of their religious community; and spiritually abuse the people by placing yokes and burdens upon their adherents that none of them could truly bear.

Given what we know about the Scribes and Pharisees, it is easy for many of us to mercilessly condemn them. Yet many of us who may have been brought up in denominationalism or Catholicism have at one time or another witnessed similar abuses of authority within the Church Triumphant. Sadly, many of us were also conditioned to revere, if not deify, these same religious leaders. Indeed, there is nothing new under the sun.

And it is human nature for many to deify, if not unreasonably, exalt those who hold such authoritative-ecclesiastical-offices. Now, I doubt very much that Yahoshua has ever been happy to see this forbidden practice take place in His set apart Kehila/Assemblies. The problem once again is one that when we fix our eyes (i.e. our physical and spiritual eyes, ears, and minds) upon those who’ve been exalted to positions of authority, it is only human nature to eventually start taking our eyes off of our Heavenly Father (with Whom we are supposed to have a covenant relationship with) and our Messiah, Yahoshua (our Older Brother, our Savior, and our Soon Coming King), and place our spiritual and physical eyes upon our leaders. And of course, our Master acutely understood the potential for such a thing and thus He imposed such title restrictions upon His taught and sent ones. But the billion-dollar question that remains unanswered here is: Are we to take His restrictions literally?

 

Diverse Viewpoints  

As I mentioned in Part 1 of this discussion, our Faith Community is divided on this question of the literalness of the Master’s seeming prohibition against His taught and sent ones being referred to as Rabbi, father, and teacher. On the one hand, I, like many others in our Faith Community, believe we should take Yeshua’s prohibitions against these cited titles literally, keeping in mind the religious, cultural, historic, circumstantial context in which He declared them. And I will certainly expound upon why I personally believe we, as Yeshua’s taught and sent ones, should take these prohibitions literally in just a few moments.

 

On the other hand, there are many members of our Faith Community, primarily those in Messianic Jewish assemblies and congregations, who reject a literal understanding of the prohibitions. This side of the Faith Community sees Yeshua’s prohibitive declaration, not as prohibitions that His taught and sent ones must follow, but from the perspective of “The Issue of authority and respect to be afforded to the ancient Pharisees and by extension various Jewish authorities today” (J.K. McKee “Messianic Rabbis”).

McKee, like many in our Faith Community, believes that Yeshua had wide theological agreement with the Pharisees, particularly in terms of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead (Mat 22.23-32). As they correctly see it, Yeshua recognized the Pharisees held legitimate leadership roles in and over Yisrael. However, the Master warned His followers not to emulate their behavior and attitudes. In other words, Yeshua respected the authority the Scribes and Pharisees possessed over the people, but He rejected them as individuals because they were corrupt of character. I would add that not only did the Master reject the individual Scribes and Pharisees for their corrupt character, He also rejected their Torah-nullifying traditions (aka their takanot and ma’asim) (Mat 15:1-9). And this point cannot be overlooked.

J.K. McKee goes on to say that Yeshua’s admonishment to His taught ones they should not let themselves be called Rabbi “has been widely and unfairly cast at many diligently serving and sincere Messianic Jewish leaders who widely use the title Rabbi as an alternative to Pastor” (ibid.). He states that many set aside the context of what Yeshua admonishes His taught ones here to do but choose instead to focus on the Master’s “words being a uniform moratorium on using the title, Rabbi. These have not made any attempt to insist that there be a similar moratorium on calling human fathers … father.” Furthermore, he adds, that many of the 1st century Pharisaical leaders’ hypocrisy made being called Rabbi an intense source of personal pride, arrogance, and condescension (Mat 23.7). “A literal understanding of the Rabbi title prohibition mandates the same prohibition against calling one’s biological father…father.” And it is at this juncture of his presentation that I found fault with his line of thinking on this subject. To me, it appeared Mr. McKee, whose ministry is intimately tied to the Messianic Jewish Community (which, by the way, I truly respect and appreciate), was taking the criticisms of those who rejected the title Rabbi personally. For if I am understanding him correctly, he believes it is hypocritical to deny hardworking and qualified Messianic Jewish leaders the privileged title of Rabbi (emphasis here is mine alone) while ignoring the seeming prohibition against calling others father. And if I am reading him correctly, I believe his criticism is unjustified. And I’ll explain why this is so in just a few moments.

 

McKee further points out that Yeshua’s prohibition against His taught and sent ones being called Rabbi must be related to the “position of significance” (I guess as opposed to the actual title), which so many at that time and location of the world (i.e. first century Judah) ascribed to those possessing the title, Rabbi. Many have looked to individuals possessing the title Rabbi as being the ultimate authority from which to receive instruction. Obviously, this is wrong. For the ultimate teacher is Yahoshua Messiah. The ultimate source of instruction is Yehovah’s Torah.

McKee correctly pointed out that many Jewish students throughout the centuries have viewed their teachers as father figures who they may have considered being superior to Yehovah. And Yeshua saw that this needed to be corrected.

Yahoshua’s intent in bringing this issue to His taught ones’ attention was in response to the arrogance of those who allowed themselves to be called Rabbi, while thinking within themselves that they possessed authority at the level of or superior to Yehovah. Such individuals were to be dismissed. The attention of Mashiyach followers then is to be focused exclusively on Master Yahoshua. Furthermore, Yeshua wanted His followers to be especially mindful of the needs of their brethren (Mat 23.11-12). For as sent ones, they were to practice servanthood above self. This was the Kingdom-Character that our Master modeled for each of His taught ones, the application of which applies to each of us even today.

McKee’s bottom line was that Yeshua did not prohibit His taught ones from using the title Rabbi or occupying the office of Rabbi.

I will say that J.K. McKee brought up some salient points in his presentation on this issue. But I believe his liberal view on this issue — that being Yeshua did not prohibit the use of these titles but prohibited the abuse of authority behind these titles — is clouded by his direct affiliation with the Messianic Jewish sect of our Faith Community. He rationalizes that critics of Messianic Jewish leaders taking unto themselves the title of Rabbi are disingenuous because they do not take the prohibition against calling others father, literally. I get the impression that maybe those who hold McKee’s line of reasoning have concerns that antisemitism may be behind much of the rejection to the use of the title Rabbi within and outside the greater Messianic Community.

McKee and others that hold to his line of thinking have what I believe to be valid thoughts and concerns about this subject. And I certainly respect their opinions and positions on the subject. However, I disagree with the premise that Yeshua’s polemic against the use of the titles Rabbi, father, and teacher should NOT be taken literally, but taken as a warning against the abuse of authority and corrupt personal character that leadership positions, particularly religious leadership positions, often engender within those holding such positions.

 

  1. Personal Reflection and Insight

And so, here we are at the conclusion of this matter, and it is time for me to render my thoughts on this important issue. I hold an opposite view to that of McKee and those who share his perspective on this subject. And I will say at this juncture that this is an important issue despite the opinions to the contrary by so many on both sides of this issue.

Why do I say that this is an important issue? Because our King and Savior Yahoshua Messiah gave His taught ones an order and it falls to His taught and sent ones to carry out the Master’s orders. And if we are brazen enough to treat our Master’s words and instructions as if they are simple platitudes or suggestions or ideals that we who are His have the option to follow or not, then we really don’t belong to Him, do we?

When we heard and accepted the true Gospel of the Kingdom — that is when we came into this Faith — we made the conscious decision to pickup our execution stakes (aka our crosses) and follow Master Yahoshua (Mat 16:24; Mar 8:34; Luk 9:23). Master Yeshua declared that anyone who doesn’t carry his own cross and follow Him cannot be His disciple/His taught one (Luk 14:27). To follow one whom we’ve decided will be our Master and sovereign — at least from a Hebraic standpoint — means that we have decided to leave our former master(s) behind with all the stuff that went along with following that former master, take up the yoke and burden of our new Master, and walk in His pathways. And so, in taking up His yoke and burden and walking in His pathways, we are obliged — mandated, if you will — to do all that He instructs us to do. And if we ever come to the place where we just don’t want to do the things that our Master has instructed us to do, for whatever reason, then it’s probably time to pack-up our crap, wave goodbye to the Master Yeshua, and return to our old master and his ways. Don’t you think?

Why am I soap boxing this issue? I’m soap boxing here because the instructions that our Master gave to His taught ones are unambiguous. They are clear and unimpeachable. We can make this bold claim by virtue of the spiritually criminal case our Master made against the Scribes and Pharisees. And we spent much of the last installment of this discussion going over what some of those spiritual crimes were and why the spiritual crimes of the Scribes and Pharisees, along with their takanot and ma’asim, disqualified them from leading and teaching the people in the paths of righteousness. Their halachah and personal example was not what the Father would ever approve of. In fact, the Father had a label for such individuals who took unto themselves ecclesiastical authority under a false veneer of righteousness and holiness and competence. Abba Yah called such spiritual leaders false prophets (Deu 13:5; Jer 5:31; 27:15). False prophets served no purpose apart from leading Yah’s people astray; causing Yah’s people to take their eyes off of Him — Yehovah —  and putting their eyes on them — the false prophets. Yeshua called such false religious leaders blind guides (Mat 15:14; 23:16, 24).

And so Yeshua, in laying out a spiritually criminal case against the Jewish religious leaders, instructs His taught ones, and by extension we who are His today, that “you are not to be called “Rabbi” … do not call anyone your father on earth … and do not be called teachers” (Mat 23:8-9; LEB). And He puts forth this three-part prohibition, not because the titles Rabbi, father, and teacher are inherently evil, but rather, because these titles carry with them the tendency of being abused and misused by those who take on these titles. Yeshua supports His prohibition against the use of these titles and offices by reminding us He alone is our Rabbi, we have but One Father who resides in heaven, and that Mashiyach is our one true teacher. And based upon the case the Master made against the “spiritual authority” (and note I’m specifying spiritual authority here because indeed these religionists did in fact possess authority over the people whether or not we choose to accept it and Yeshua recognized this) — against the spiritual authority and example of the Scribes and Pharisees, and this clear prohibition against we who are His taught and sent ones adopting or referring to others by these titles, I believe we must take this prohibition literally.

Now, I’m going to humbly ask you to hear what I’m saying here: I am not advocating that we blindly obey every commandment and instruction in scripture literally without having a full understanding of those commandments and instructions. To do so would be foolish. But what I am saying, beloved, is that we must exercise wisdom when studying and applying the tenets of scripture to our Faith Walk. And by exercising wisdom, I mean studying scripture: taking into account in our exegetical studies, the cultural, historical, linguistic context of the passages and verses we’ve been led to study. And of course, we could spend quite a bit of time discussing the proper way to study scripture, but this is a topic for another day.

Again, I believe that I’ve laid out for you the context upon which we should base our understanding of this prohibition against referring to our Faith leaders by the titles Rabbi, father, and teacher.

 

Prohibition Against Being Called Rabbi

Consider the following: as I stated in Part 1 of this discussion, the title or office of Rabbi is distinctly Jewish and is specifically applied to qualified synagogal, yeshiva, and Messianic Jewish congregational leaders. I’ve not been able to find any religion apart from Judaism where the office or title of Rabbi is used. So, to suggest that Yeshua’s prohibition against His taught and sent ones being referred to as a Rabbi is more of a slight against His challengers there on the Temple Mount and a slight against the misuse of their authority is a weak defense for using the title Rabbi today. The title means “my Great One” or “Great One.” The meaning has and will never change, regardless of where it is used on the earth even today.

 

Prohibition Against Being Called Father

Father is one of those cultural, linguistic, and historical contextual titles that has and continues to be used and applied to all sorts of individuals (in one form or another) throughout history and across every nation and culture. Indeed, many within and outside our faith communities use Yeshua’s prohibition against addressing others as father as proof that we cannot take the Master’s prohibitions here literally. These contend that if we were to take Yeshua’s prohibition against referring to others as father, then we can never justify referring to our biological male parent as our father. Or we cannot refer to those individuals who nurture, care, and provide for us as fathers or father-like, and such. Which then means, according to the naysayers, that we cannot refer to historical figures who birthed or brought into existence entities such as a nation, a company, or an organization as fathers of those entities.

But, contextually, the title or office of father that the Master is prohibiting here is specific to the Judaisms of that day. The closest thing to the title or office of father we know of today in Judaism is “Nasi” and “sages.” Then, and even today, the title Nasi (pronounced “nah-see”) historically means “prince” or “leader.” It is an esteemed title used for the head of the Sanhedrin. I’ve come across a handful of Messianic Jewish congregational leaders who have either been awarded or taken unto themselves the office or title of Nasi. The title Nasi carries with it the sense that the one who possesses the title or office has ultimate authority and spiritual insight over their congregation. These were and are today considered the spiritual progenitors (or founders) and heads of their religious community.

Yeshua prohibited us from calling or being called father or Ab or Abba within our Faith Community. Abba or Ab or father in English, was commonly used within the rabbinical hierarchy of first century Judaism. The Nasi was the president of the Sanhedrin. We have the title and office of the “Ab-Bet,” or the “Ab-Bet-Din,” aka “Father of the Court,” according to Barney Kasdan. The title Ab or Abba when used to describe an exalted spiritual leader carries with it the likelihood that members of the congregation/community/assembly will naturally take their eyes off of Yehovah and His Son Yeshua, and place them on the one who is revered as the community Abba or Father.

Stepping outside the Messianic Faith for a moment, we see the title father used quite a bit in Catholicism and other ecumenical religions throughout the world. Those who carry this title are viewed by their parishioners as the ultimate religious authority and leader in their lives. And this, I believe, is the point that the Master was attempting to get across in His prohibition against calling someone or being referred to as father. It’s a reference to the one possessing the title ‘father’ as that organization’s or an individual’s spiritual father. And having such an elevated reverential attitude towards someone who is supposed to be our brother in the faith can cause us to take our eyes off our Heavenly Father and place them on the leader who carries the title father. Such an exalted leader becomes the ultimate authority over an organization. His teachings and rulings might supplant — nullify, if you will — the Word of Yah within the minds of the people who see him as the ultimate authority over their religious community.

So yes, within the context of referring to others as an organization’s or as one’s personal spiritual father, Yeshua’s prohibition against conferring the title upon members of our Faith Community must be taken literally. And again, it falls to our Faith Community’s leaders to always point us towards Yahoshua and redirect any and all attention away from themselves.

 

Prohibition Against Calling Others Teachers

As I mentioned in Part 1 of this discussion, the prohibition against calling members of our Faith Community teachers was the most challenging one for me. For me, the challenge was rationalizing in my pea brain what I may or may not refer to myself as on this platform. Or, for that matter, what others in our Faith Community may or may not refer to me as. I’m not concerned at all about calling myself or having others refer to me as “Rabbi” or “father.” That ain’t gonna happen. I’m specifically concerned about the title or office of “teacher.”

So then, the trick here was for me to gain an understanding of the title or office of teacher as Yeshua saw it. And I believed the best way for me to arrive at that understanding was to, again, look at this thing from a cultural, historic, and linguistic contextual standpoint. The surrounding verses of our focus passage of Matthew 23:8-12 are specific to Yeshua’s polemic and criticism against the Scribes and Pharisees. So, what about the Scribes and Pharisees does the title or office of teacher most apply? And I’ve concluded that the title or office of teacher in this context applied to the Scribes.

Who were the Scribes in Yeshua’s day? The Scribes were the experts of Jewish Law (aka the oral torah) and of the Written Torah — Yah’s Torah. They were often referred to as “lawyers” and the “sages” and “teachers of the Law” who also sat on the kesay or the Seat of Moses/Moshe and rendered judgments and rulings over the people. And because these held so much knowledge and authority over our first-century Jewish cousins, their teachings and example certainly influenced the people whom they were supposed to be serving. Like their counterparts, the Pharisees, the Scribes were just as hypocritical and guilty of a great many spiritual crimes. And Yeshua applied the same cautions about the Scribes as He did about the Pharisees:

(2) … The sages (aka the Scribes) and the Prushim sit in Moshe’s seat. (3) Therefore, whatever he (Moshe) commands you to observe, that observe and do. But do not follow the takanot and ma’asim of the Prushim. For they say (i.e. they claim to follow Yah’s Torah) but they do not do (i.e. they do not do what Moshe’s Torah says to do) (Mat 23.2-3).

Again, throughout scripture, in particular the Renewed Covenant or Apostolic Writings, Yeshua’s chosen ones are often destined to be teachers (i.e. didaskalos or didaskaloi) within the Faith Community. The apostle Shaul described teachers as gifts to the Body of Mashiyach for the perfecting of the saints (1 Cor 12.38, 29; Eph 4:11). Consequently, renewed covenant teachers are not meant to rule over the Body nor take unto themselves authority that should only be given to “Ho Didaskalos” or “The Teacher” (Mat 26.18). And “Ho Didaskalos” is none other than Yeshua HaMashiyach.

Teachers of the Body of Mashiyach are tasked with pointing the members of the Body to Yeshua, as opposed to diverting the members’ attention onto themselves. So in this respect, the title and office of “teacher” is not the same title and office that Yeshua prohibited in our focus passage.

Although some of us may minister to the Body of Mashiyach through one of the many giftings of apostle, prophet, teacher, miracles, healer, helper, administrator, worshiper, and so forth, we are not to seek after and love the attention and deferential treatment that these giftings often engender or tend to engender in us. Furthermore, as taught and sent ones of Mashiyach, we are to be wary of leaders who possess and operate with corrupt motives, having taken on such titles and functions in the Body. Yeshua’s prohibition against the use of Rabbi, Father, and Teacher — from the perspective of the Scribes in Yeshua’s day — to address and revere members of the Body aside, the other thing to consider is the intent behind one taking on to themselves or being awarded exalted titles and authorities. Service and loving transparency must be at the heart of what the leaders in our Faith Community do for the Body of Mashiyach.

So, is it proper to refer to someone like me in the Body of Mashiyach as a teacher? Yes. But teacher, from the perspective of what I do for and in the Body of Mashiyach. When it comes to the point of our teachers being awarded the title of teacher which confers upon them authority over members of the Body of Mashiyach, then the use of the title and office of teacher should not be used or conferred.

Personally, I’d much prefer just Rod. And Rod teaches the Word.

 

Conclusion

In summary, it would seem that based upon the context in which these prohibitions were given to us by our Master and King, Yahoshua, that we must consider them to be valid, literal instructions. Again, I want to stress that we must take these prohibitions within the context in which Yeshua delivered them to us. They weren’t made in a vacuum. And the context in which they were delivered is linked to those who held the titles of Rabbi, Father, and Teacher in Yeshua’s day. The prohibition is against referring to our spiritual leaders by these three exalted titles.

And these three exalted titles may or may not have the same meaning as they did when Yeshua prohibited their use. But the application of these titles remains valid even today. We are not to call another or be called Rabbi or Great One; not be called or referred to as Father in our congregations, such as the term Nasi or spiritual Father is used of certain leaders in some of our Messianic Jewish congregations; and not be called The Teacher, or an exalted teacher of any congregation or faith community circle. None of us should see ourselves as being exalted above another in our Faith Community. As Master instructed, we are all brethren, one to the other. We are all supposed to be in service one to another. There must not be any hierarchical systems operating in our congregations and assemblies.

Now, none of what I’m saying here implies that we are not to have structure and order in our assemblies and congregations. Yeshua gifted His Body various human resources to bring the Body of Mashiyach to perfection, or maturity; unity, and knowledge of the Son of Yehovah: Apostles; Prophets; Pastors; Teachers; Miracle Workers; Healers; Helpers; Administrators; and Worshipers (1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11-14). These installed human gifts were never intended to rule over the Body, as denominationalists have successfully attempted to do throughout the ages. To make these human gifts into ruling classes of leaders in the Body of Mashiyach is to essentially repeat or imitate the very religious system our Master had to contend with in His day.

 

   Encouragement for listeners to reflect on their own views

All this being said, and in the spirit of all that I’ve put forth to you in these two discussion sessions, I humbly encourage you to conduct your own study of this subject and seek Yah’s Spirit for understanding. If you are led to disagree with anything I’ve put forth to you here, that’s okay. I’m certainly not naïve to think that I’m going to change too many minds on this subject. My only goal in bringing this subject to your attention is to stimulate thinking and mindfulness of Yeshua’s teachings, instructions, and example. And also, to inform the Body that it’s alright to question the various doctrines that are found in our Faith Community; question those doctrines in the light of sound biblical exegesis and Spirit-led understanding and practice.

 

[1] W. Hall Harris III et al., eds.,  (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012), Mt 23:7–12.

 

The Lexham English

Living in Yah’s Presence: The Call to Holistic Righteousness

by | Jan 28, 2025 | Blog, Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

Greetings and Shalom to you saints of the Most High.

I went through some of this past Sabbath’s Torah Reading (i.e. Torah Reading 14 of Yah’s 3-year Torah Reading Cycle). And in my reading of this parshah, I became captivated by just the first three-verses of the Reading. So captivated was I that I embarked on a modest study just on those three verses. Yah opened my mind and heart to some important things about our Walk in Messiah that I am eager to share with you today.

The Focus Passage

The passage I’m referring to is Genesis/Beresheit 17:1-3a. And The Scriptures ISR rendering of this passage reads:

(1) And it came to be when Aḇram was ninety-nine years old, that יהוה appeared to Aḇram and said to him, “I am Ěl Shaddai—walk before Me and be perfect. 2And I give My covenant between Me and you and shall greatly increase you.” 3And Aḇram fell on his face … (The Scriptures, 3rd edition (Northriding: Institute for Scripture Research, 2009), Ge 17)

 

Avram’s Relationship with Yehovah

Moshe informs us that Avram is 99-y/o when Yehovah appears to him, identifies Himself to Avram as El/Al Shaddai (God Almighty), and instructs Avram to “walk before Him” (RSTNE = have your halachah before Him) and be “blameless” (RSTNE = be perfect). Yah reiterates He intends to cut a covenant between Himself and Avram and multiply Avram exceedingly. This is Yah’s 5th appearance to Avram. The text does not describe Yehovah’s appearance to Avram. The Jameson, Faussett and Brown Commentary on the Whole Bible suggests it is conceivable Yah’s appearance was of the “Shekinah glory of overpowering effulgence.”

From a chronological perspective, this is Avram’s fifth encounter with the Almighty and many years have passed between each of those encounters (Gen 12.1, 7; 13.14; 15.1; 17.1). And in each of these encounters, Yah reiterates the covenant He is going to cut with Avram. Each time he meets with Avram, Yah introduces an additional element into the Covenant He is cutting with Avram. Let’s not forget that Avram began His journey with Yehovah when he was 75 years of age. So, he wasn’t a spring chicken starting off. And here we have in the reading before us today notice that Avram was 99-years old in this fifth encounter with the Almighty. Twenty-four years have passed since Yah first appeared to Avram in Haran and proposed cutting a covenant with him. Here in this reading, it’s already been 13-years since the birth of Ishmael, as recorded in Genesis/Beresheit 16. Avram is a young 99-years old, and still no heir or son of the Promise has been born to Elizebeth/Elisheva and him. It is unclear from the text where in Canaan Avram and family were living.

 

Yah Reveals Another Aspect of His Awesomeness to Avram

Upon appearing to Avram this fifth-time, Yehovah identifies himself as “Al Shaddai/El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty.” Al Shaddai/El Shaddai appears 48 times in the Tanach. Scholars believe the title Shaddai originated in Akkadian, meaning “breast.” It carries with it the implication that Yehovah has the power to provide all that His child needs and do all that He has promised His child that He would do. This title also denotes Yah’s self-sufficiency in that Yehovah is all-in-all. Halleluyah!

In Avram’s fourth-encounter, Yehovah describes Himself as Avram’s “shield” (i.e. ma-gen = protector) and “exceeding great reward” (i.e. har-beh sa-kar = maintainer or provider). This is after Avram’s miraculous victory over Chedorlaomer’s confederacy against the city-states of the Plain, whereby Avram no doubt would have had some concern for the wellbeing of himself and his family (Genesis/Beresheit 14). And so, here, Yehovah allays the patriarch’s fears that He need not worry because He—Yah — had his back. Amein.  

And so, in these two encounters, we not only come to learn more about the man Avram and the unfolding covenant Yehovah had in mind for him, but most importantly, Yah uses two of these encounters to reveal to us more about Himself: His Person; Nature; Character; Capabilities; History; His Purpose for His chosen ones; and so forth.

 

The Instruction to Walk Before His Alohim/Elohim and be Perfect

And as the story goes, Al Shaddai/El Shaddai instruct Avram to Walk before Him. Our English verb walk in Hebrew is “hal-lek” or “halak”. Halek/halak is where we get the familiar Hebraic verb “halachah” denoting the sacred path we Messianics embark upon in this Faith Walk of ours. Anciently, “halak/halek” is spelled “lamed”– “kaph.” The “lamed” pictures a shepherd’s staff while the “kaph” pictures the palm of a man’s hand. These two letter concepts, when combined, suggest one’s travel on foot with staff (for support and protection) in hand. A journey. More so, a set apart lifestyle and custom.

In such a sense, it is our Al Shaddai/El Shaddai Who sets or establishes the path that His chosen one is to take. And that pathway for us who are of the true faith once delivered is Torah. The Torah is Yah’s loving instructions in righteousness. Yah communicated His halachah to Avraham in Genesis 17:1-3, and Avraham followed Yah’s instructions. Yes, Avraham had a couple of hiccups during his 24-year journey with Yehovah, as we all do throughout our halachah with Yehovah through Yeshua Messiah, but Avram’s obedience, which was a brilliant manifestation of his faith, was legendary.

On a human level, the concept of “walking” before one’s sovereign denotes one’s faithful service and devotion to their king. To live out one’s life in service to one’s king as well as to serve one’s king in his court. This same principle applies to the chosen one’s relationship with Al Shaddai-Yehovah. To walk before Him implies unwavering service in His glorious presence. The chosen one therefore stands in the presence of Yehovah, ever-ready to serve Him and do according to His expressed Will. In our reading, Yehovah was claiming Avram’s complete life’s attention. The fact that Yehovah appeared to Avraham underscores the link between walking before Him (i.e. in such a way that Avram is seen by Yehovah) and the reality of Yehovah’s abiding presence in His life. Yah’s presence in Avram’s life – and by extension our lives — coupled with our steadfast/faithful service to Him moves us towards perfection – imaging Him in the world. The English term “perfect” in our reading is “tamim” in Hebrew. The Hebrew word “tamiym” is spelled “tav” – “mem”. Anciently, people depicted the “tav” as a cross denoting a mark. Anciently, people depicted the “mem” as water, like a body of water. The two letters, when combined, carry a meaning of one being designated filled and whole. It denotes one who is mature and upright as one is whole. This one is without blemish—blameless — complete.

So, are we talking then about Yah’s people living perfect, sinless, blameless lives? Can’t you hear the anti-Torah crowd screaming at the top of their lungs that it is impossible for anyone to keep Torah flawlessly? That being the case, why even think about keeping Torah? Keeping Torah, or even intending to keep Torah, is a sign that the individual has fallen from grace.

Yes, it is impossible for one to keep Torah perfectly. Truth be told, we’re all human and we make mistakes from time-to-time. But that reality does not excuse the fact that Yehovah still demands that His chosen ones walk in His established Ways — His Torah — with the full-intent to walk it out perfectly. That is, at least try dying. It’s the intent — the heart —behind the walking out that gets Yah’s attention. And let’s not fool ourselves beloved. We don’t have to sin all the time. Especially under the auspices of the renewed covenant. We, as Yah’s chosen ones, have the Holy Spirit and Yah’s Torah being inscribed on our hearts and in our minds (Jer 31). The Holy Spirit — Yah’s abiding, indwelling presence — provides us the wherewithal to resist our flesh, to stop sinning, and to walk out Yah’s instructions and fulfill our purpose in the earth to the very best of our ability.

 

The Reality of Yah’s Abiding Presence in the Elect One’s Pursuit for Perfection

But it is imperative that the one who endeavors to walk before Yehovah realizes Yah’s presence in their life in order for them to move towards Yah’s expressed perfection. We, under the Renewed Covenant, experience Yah’s presence through His abiding Ruach HaKodesh/Holy Spirit. How much are we willing to give ourselves over to the divine presence – the Ruach Kodesh – in our quest for blamelessness/perfection/wholeness? This is critical: It befalls us to devote our entire being to the providence of Yah’s abiding Ruach – His Holy Spirit – and we accomplish this “by habitual mindfulness of His presence” (Exell, Joseph S.; Genesis Vol 1 & 2). The elect one must always be cognizant – be it amid trying periods of any given day, or even during the mundane moments that speckle his/her day – that not only is Yah’s eye upon them, but He is dwelling within them. This mindfulness, in fact, should become second nature to the elect one.

What does one’s mindfulness toward Yah’s abiding presence look like? According to Exell, “The conception of God’s presence will take different shapes in different minds. We may regard Him as locally present everywhere, the veil of matter screening Him from our view; or we may regard Him as having a certain intimate connection with our minds, as upholding momentarily in us the powers of life and thought.” (Joseph S. Exell, The Biblical Illustrator: Genesis, vol. 1, The Biblical Illustrator (London: James Nisbet & Co., n.d.), 640.) Regardless of how one rationalizes this,  nurturing and maintaining this state of spiritual awareness is necessary for the elect one to operate before Yah and walk uprightly/blamelessly before Him. Such nurtured maintenance of being mindful of Yah’s presences must include: Prayer without ceasing (1 The 5.17); rendering unto Yah incessant sacrifices of praise via the fruit of our lips throughout the day (Heb 13.15); daily scripture studies whereby we satiate our hunger and thirst for Yah’s righteousness (2 Tim 3.16); and so forth, facilitates this mindfulness of Yah’s abiding presence in the elect one’s life. These elements also prompt an ongoing accountability of one’s day-to-day actions, thoughts, and spoken words. These elements also, over time, cause the one to behave righteously throughout their journey. Little by little, the elect one conforms to the splitting image of their Master Yeshua HaMashiyach (Rom 8:29).

 Simply put, this is about the elect one functioning in a lifestyle that is both physically and spiritually holistic in scope and application. And so, the mere thought that Yah’s insistence that Avram, and by extension we who belong to Yah today, need only conduct our lives with only a cognitive understanding that Yehovah exists, is acceptable to the Creator. Such a mindset is far from the truth. Because Yah demands His set apart ones be righteous in all their ways (1 Pet 1.15-16). And not just righteous from an imputed righteousness standpoint. For as the half-brother of Master Yahoshua rightly declares: “… faith without works is dead …” (Jam 2.20-26).

 

To walk before Yehovah, then, is to live holistically (i.e. to live out every aspect of one’s life) in Yah’s presence. This, however, requires complete devotion and service to Yehovah. There are no vacations or days off when pressing toward the mark of the prize of the high calling of Yehovah in Messiah Yeshua (Phi 3:14). It’s a 24-hour 7-days a week commitment to Yah and His Ways. Yeshua instructed His taught ones to make the pursuit of doing whatever it takes to make it into the Malchut Elohim (aka the Kingdom of Yah) their highest priority in life (Mat 6:33). To seek first Yah’s righteousness is to walk in that holistic perfection that Yah is calling His chosen ones to. And to live holistically in Yah’s presence requires Yah’s elect ones to be blameless (i.e. tamiym). Exell defines blameless as being “unblemished” (as with the sacrifices we rendered unto Yehovah were supposed to be unblemished). Such were and are set apart. Holy unto Yehovah. The one who walks blamelessly before Yehovah is viewed by Yah as set apart (1 Pet 2:9).

Deuteronomy 10:12 commands Yah’s people to fear Yehovah their God, walk in all His ways, love Him, and serve Yehovah their God with all their heart and soul.

 

The Walkers Hall of Fame

Enoch walked with Yehovah some 300-years (Gen 5.22, 24). And because of his exceptional walk, the bible says that he was no more, for Yehovah took him.

Noach walked with Yehovah (Gen 6.9). Noach’s walk led to him finding favor in Yah’s eyes (6.8). He alone, with his immediate family, survived the destruction of the world by flood.

Avraham walked with Yehovah, as evident in Yah referring to him as His friend (2 Chr 20.7; Isa 41.8; Jas 2.23).

Moshe walked with Yehovah as evident in the unique relationship he enjoyed with Yah: “… Yehovah spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend” (Exo 33.11).

Luke describes Yochanan the Immerser’s parents — Elisheva and Zechariah – as “walking in all the commandments and ordinances of Yehovah blameless” (Luk 1.6).

 

Despite Denominationalists’ Claims that the Apostles were Anti-Torah, They Had Concerns

One of the apostle Paul’s many concerns for his followers throughout the Roman Empire was that they be found blameless in anticipation of the coming Day of the Lord as well as being found blameless among the nation peoples of the world (1 Cor 1.8; Phi 2.15; 1 The 5.23; 1 Tim 3.2, 10; Tit 1.7). The same concern was held by the Apostle Kefa/Peter, that his readers “be diligent that they may be found of Yeshua in peace, without spot, and blameless” (2 Pet 3.14).

If imputed righteousness was all one needed to receive the Kingdom and to be loved of Yehovah, why were Yeshua’s Sent Ones so focused on their readers being blameless before Yehovah and mankind?

 

A Misunderstanding of Which Righteousness Yah is Talking About

Imputed righteousness (aka justification) is the starting point of our sanctification journey. Our imputed righteousness is the blameless righteousness of Yahoshua Messiah, who bled, suffered, and died on our behalf. Yah gifted us Master Yeshua’s righteousness. The blood of Yeshua’s atoning sacrifice covered over our past, present, and future sins once and forever, making us eligible to receive Yah’s salvation. But from there, the road to blamelessness is founded upon our trusting faith, the state of our Torah-inscribed hearts, and the indwelling presence of Yehovah in these temples we call our bodies (1 Cor 6.19). It therefore befalls us, who are Yah’s chosen ones, to walk before Him and be blameless/perfect/unblemished/set apart as He has commanded us (1 Pet 1.15-16; 2 Pet 3.11). If imputed righteousness is all that Yah requires of His chosen ones, why is it that throughout His Word Yah insists that His chosen ones be holy as He is holy? Be blameless. Shaul poignantly declares to His Ephesian readers that Yeshua is seeking to present an unblemished, spotless, without wrinkle, Kehila to His Father (Eph 5.27).

Regardless of what the anti-Torah, grace-perverters may say or think, scripture verifies that there is the expectation that the one in which Yehovah’s presence dwells will walk before Him and be perfect — be tamiym.

The enemies of Torah will readily proclaim one cannot walk blamelessly before Yehovah. Thus, their irresistible and endless push for the supremacy of imputed righteousness in the life of every believer – holding ever so tightly to their perverted grace doctrine. This despite Yah’s recurring demand that we who belong to Him walk before Him and be perfect and holy. How do we, as Yah’s chosen ones, rectify this conundrum? As we’ve seen in the many scriptural passages I’ve noted in this post, the instruction to walk before Yehovah (i.e. persistently remain in Yah’s presence) and be perfect is not a suggestion or some pie-in-the sky ideal. It is a commandment. It is a requirement for those who choose to be in a covenant relationship with El Shaddai/Al Shaddai.

The requirement that Yehovah’s elect one’s walk out the tenets of their Faith – Yah’s instructions in righteousness as contained in His holy Torah and in the teachings and life example of our Master Yeshua – has always been a given. Our Master stated to His sent ones during His Sermon on the Mount that He had not come to destroy Torah or the prophets, but rather, He elevated His Father’s Torah to its ultimate reality in the lives of Yah’s set apart people (Mat 5.17). And in elevating His Father’s Torah to its greatest potential, our Master modeled for His taught ones, and by extension He modeled for us, the manner in which Yah’s Torah is to be kept and walked out.

It has only been with the rise of 21st century western evangelicalism that much of denominationalism has learned to feel quite at home, existing in her lawlessness. Even to the point of promoting a lawless lifestyle to any who would enter there in. These find Yah’s instructions to His chosen ones to “walk before Me and be perfect/holy/unblemished/blameless” to be an unrealistic ideal that any should never consider nor attempt who would seek salvation.

And when it comes to walking before their Creator – operating in their purpose and in accordance with Yah’s instructions and Yahoshua’s example – these find fulfillment of this mandate in their praise and worship entertainment services; their health-wealth-prosperity theologies and doctrines; and in the inclusiveness of their religious gatherings and affiliations, where “do as thou will” – live as you choose – be whoever and whatever you want is the name of the spiritual game. None of what Yah has said to His chosen ones regarding walking out His Torah and being holy and set apart as He is holy doesn’t matter to the anti-Torah, grace-perversion crowd, because they view each individual as one of God’s children. To these, God is everywhere. And God doesn’t turn a blind eye towards anyone, regardless of how evil and troubled they may be.

Sadly, such deluded individuals are living in their paradise today. These have received their rewards in the here and now. But their willful denial of the Truth of Yah and of His Ways does come with a shelf-life attached to it. The Apostle wrote Yehovah will give such deluded individuals over to “a debased (i.e. worthless) mind” to accomplish those things in their lives that are improper. These will continue to be filled with unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, malice, envy, murder, strife, deceit, malevolence; gossip, slander, hate for Yehovah and His Ways; insolence, arrogance, boastings, profligates of evil, disobedience to their parents; to be senseless in their deportment; faithless, unfeeling, unmerciful, all this despite knowing the requirements of Yah – despite knowing what Yah requires of them and that if they do not straighten up and fly right, will be subject to Yah’s righteous wrath and judgment (Rom 1.28-32). These same ones have deluded themselves into thinking that they are walking before Yehovah – that they are operating in Yah’s divine presence – are holy and perfect because they’ve received Yah’s imputed righteousness. Indeed, these may very well have received Yah’s imputed righteousness at some point in their lives. But they’ve persisted in living lawless lives. And on that Great Day, many of these will declare to Master Yeshua that they’ve indeed walked according to the instructions that Him and His Father had given them. But in response, Yeshua will inform them: “Sorry, despite all that you think you’ve done for the Kingdom and the work of the Gospel, you’ve insisted on living a lawless life. And because you’ve insisted on not walking before Yah and being perfect – walking blamelessly in His Ways – I cannot say that I’ve had a true covenant relationship with you. And because we’ve not had a true covenant relationship with one another, you will be denied receipt and entry into My Kingdom.” (Mat 7.22-23 paraphrased)

As I’ve said many times on this program, beloved, “there are no free lunches in this life.” Yah’s demand that His elect ones walk before Him and be perfect has and always will stand. The lifestyle of the one who chooses to operate in Yah’s divine presence is not an easy one. In fact, it’s antithetical to the belief structure of much of denominationalism. Yeshua likened this set apart lifestyle to that of an arduous pathway and a narrow gate that few on this planet ever find and embark upon (Mat 7.14). At a human level, this path – this halachah — this walk – Master Yeshua describes as being a difficult one. But He also declares that it leads to life. Unfortunately, the pathway and gate that most humans, including the religious ones take, is straight/smooth and wide. That path, Yeshua warned, leads only to destruction.

Despite the road and gate that leads to life being a difficult one, Master Yeshua also declared that His halachah – His way of life – walking with Him – His yoke – when adopted by the one who would be His taught one, is really easy. And He promises not to overburden those who are His, unlike many of the religionists of this world (Mat 11.30).

 

We Have Help to Help Our Walk and Efforts Toward Being Perfect

Unlike the patriarchs of our Faith, Yah has, through the auspices of His renewed covenant, provided all we need to properly and effectively walk before Him and be perfect/blameless/unblemished/set apart. He is inscribing His Torah upon our hearts and minds (Jer 31; Heb 8; 12). Father has come to dwell in us (1 Cor 6.19; Eph 1.13; 1 The 4.8). And He has given us His written Word. It then falls to us to, as the Apostle declares to the Messianic Assembly of Corinth: “Having, then, these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and spirit, perfecting set-apartness in the fear of Elohim” (The Scriptures, 3rd edition (Northriding: Institute for Scripture Research, 2009), 2 Co 7:1.)

And let’s not forget that we also have Yeshua’s perfect example of how to walk before Yehovah and be perfect. Yah’s Spirit will lead, guide, and equip us to that end. We just need to avail ourselves to His Ruach – His Holy Spirit’s ongoing work within us and not grieve His ongoing work (Eph 4.30).

Again, we need to be ceaseless in our prayers and quick to obey. Maintain an insatiable appetite for and frequently feast upon His Word (Mat 5.6). Regularly fellowship with like-minded, Spirit-filled brethren of our Faith (Heb 10.25). Engage in worship of the Father throughout the day via the fruit of our lips (Heb 13.15). Guard our eyes, hearts, and minds against evil. As much as possible, come out of Babylon and be separate – set apart unto Yehovah in every aspect of our being (2 Cor 6.17). Trust in Yehovah and in His Ways and not in man and his ways (2 Cor 1.9). And rejoice in Master Yeshua always, constantly looking up for His appearing (Phi 3.1; 4.4; 2 Tim 4.8; 1 Joh 2.28).

And so, in this manner, let us walk before Yehovah our Alohim – our Al Shaddai/El Shaddai, and be perfect.

 

Unveiling the Truth-Yeshua’s Prohibition Against Titles in Matthew 23:8-12-Part 1

by | Jan 24, 2025 | Blog, Podcasts

by Rod Thomas | The Messianic Torah Observer

  1. Introduction

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

    Relevance of the topic for Messianic believers.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

  1. Context of Matthew 23:8-12

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

 

It is Matthew 23.8-12, which reads:

 

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

 

   Explanation of the cultural and religious setting at the time.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

  1. Examination of Key Terms

  

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

____________________________________________________________________________________

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

 

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