SCHOOLS OF GNOSTICISM
Gnosticism possessed no central authority for either doctrine or discipline; considered as a whole it had no organization similar to the vast organization of the Catholic Church. It was but a large conglomeration of sects, of which Marcionism alone attempted in some way to rival the constitution of the Church, and even Marcionism had no unity. No other classification of these sects is possible than that according to their main trend of thought. We can therefore distinguish: (a) Syrian or Semitic; (b) Hellenistic or Alexandrian; (c) dualistic; (d) antinomian Gnostics.
(a) The Syrian School
This school represents the oldest phase of Gnosticism, as Western Asia was the birthplace of the movement. Dositheus, Simon Magus, Menander, Cerinthus, Cerdo, Saturninus Justin, the Bardesanites, Sevrians, Ebionites, Encratites, Ophites, Naassenes, the Gnostics of the "Acts of Thomas", the Sethians, the Peratae, the Cainites may be said to belong to this school.
The more fantastic elements and elaborate genealogies and syzygies of æons of the later Gnosis are still absent in these systems. The terminology is some barbarous form of Semitic; Egypt is the symbolic name for the soul's land of bondage.
The opposition between the good God and the World-Creator is not eternal or cosmogonic, though there is strong ethical opposition to Jehovah the God of the Jews. He is the last of the seven angels who fashioned this world out of eternally pre-existent matter. The demiurgic angels, attempting to create man, created but a miserable worm, to which the Good God, however, gave the spark of divine life. The rule of the god of the Jews must pass away, for the good God calls us to his own immediate service through Christ his Son. We obey the Supreme Deity by abstaining from flesh meat and marriage, and by leading an ascetic life.
Such was the system of Saturninus of Antioch, who taught during the reign of Hadrian (c. A.D. 120). The Naassenes (from Nahas, the Hebrew for serpent) were worshippers of the serpent as a symbol of wisdom, which the God of the Jews tried to hide from men. The Ophites (ophianoi, from ophis, serpent), who, when transplanted on Alexandrian soil, supplied the main ideas of Valentinianism, become one of the most widely spread sects of Gnosticism. Though not strictly serpent-worshippers, they recognized the serpent as symbol of the supreme emanation, Achamoth or Divine Wisdom. They were styled Gnostics par excellence. The Sethians saw in Seth the father of all spiritual (pneumatikoi) men; in Cain and Abel the father of the psychic (psychikoi) and hylic (hylikoi) men. According to the Peratae there exists a trinity of Father, Son, and Hyle (Matter). The Son is the Cosmic Serpent, who freed Eve from the power of the rule of Hyle.
The universe they symbolized by a triangle enclosed in a circle. The number three is the key to all mysteries. There are three supreme principles: the not-generated, the self-generated, the generated. There are three logoi, of gods; the Saviour has a threefold nature, threefold body, threefold power, etc. They are called Peretae (peran) because they have "crossed over" out of Egypt, through the Red Sea of generation. They are the true Hebrews, in fact (the word comes from the Hebrew meaning "to cross over"). The Peratae were founded by Euphrates and Celbes (Acembes?) and Ademes. This Euphrates, whose name is perhaps connected with the name Peratae itself, is said to be the founder of the Ophites mentioned by Celsus about A.D. 175. The Cainites were so called because they venerated Cain, and Esau, and the Sodomites, and Core, and Judas, because they had all resisted the god of the Jews.
(b) The Hellenistic or Alexandrian School
These systems were more abstract, and philosophical, and self-consistent than the Syrian. The Semitic nomenclature was almost entirely replaced by Greek names. The cosmogonic problem had outgrown all proportions, the ethical side was less prominent, asceticism less strictly enforced.
The two great thinkers of this school were Basilides and Valentinus.
Though born at Antioch, in Syria, Basilides founded his school in Alexandria (c. A.D. 130), and was followed by his son Isidorus. His system was the most consistent and sober emanationism that Gnosticism ever produced. His school never spread so widely as the next to be mentioned, but in Spain it survived for several centuries.
Valentinus, who taught first at Alexandria and then at Rome (c. A.D. 160), elaborated a system of sexual duality in the process of emanation; a long series of male and female pairs of personified ideas is employed to bridge over the distance from the unknown God to this present world. His system is more confused than Basilidianism, especially as it is disturbed by the intrusion of the figure or figures of Sophia in the cosmogonic process. Being Syrian Ophitism in Egyptian guise, it can claim to be the true representative of the Gnostic spirit.
The reductio ad absurdum of these unbridled speculations can be seen in the Pitis Sophia, which is light-maidens, paralemptores, spheres, Heimarmene, thirteen æons, light-treasures, realms of the midst, realms of the right and of the left, Jaldabaoth, Adamas, Michael, Gabriel, Christ, the Saviour, and mysteries without number whirl past and return like witches in a dance. The impression created on the same reader can only be fitly described in the words of "Jabberwocky": "gyre and gimble on the wabe".
We learn from Hippolytus (Adv. Haer., IV, xxxv), Tertullian (Adv. Valent., iv) and Clemens Alex. (Exc. ex Theod., title) that there were two main schools of Valentinianism, the Italian and the Anatolian or Asiatic. In the Italian school were teachers of note: Secundus, who divided the Ogdoad within the Pleroma into two tetrads, Right and Left; Epiphanes, who described this Tetras as Monotes, Henotes, Monas, and To Hen; and possibly Colorbasus, unless his name be a misreading of Kol Arba "All Four". But the most important were Ptolemy and Heracleon.
Ptolemy is especially known to fame by his letter to Flora, a noble lady who had written to him as Prom Presbyter (Texte u. Unters., N.S., XIII, Anal. z. alt. Gesch. d. Chr.) to explain the meaning of the Old Testament. This Ptolemy split up the names and numbers of the æons into personified substances outside the deity, as Tertullian relates. He was given to Biblical studies, and was a man of unbridled imagination.
Clemens Alex. (Strom., IV, ix, 73) calls Heracleon the most eminent teacher of the Valentinian school. Origen devotes a large part of his commentary on St. John to combating Heracleon's commentary on the same Evangelist. Heracleon called the source of all being Anthropos, instead of Bythos, and rejected the immortality of the soul -- meaning, probably, the merely psychic element. He apparently stood nearer to the Catholic Church than Ptolemy and was a man of better judgment.
Tertullian mentions two other names (Valent., iv), Theotimus and (De Carne Christ, xvii) Alexander.
The Anatolian school had as a prominent teacher Axionicus (Tertullian, Adv. Valent., iv; Hipp., Adv. Haer., VI, 30) who had his collegium at Antioch about A.D. 220, "the master's most faithful disciple". Theodotus is only known to us from the fragment of his writings preserved by Clement of Alexandria. Marcus the Conjuror's system, an elaborate speculation with ciphers and numbers, is given by Irenaeus (I, 11-12) and also by Hippolytus (VI, 42). Irenaeus's account of Marcus was repudiated by the Marcosians, but Hippolytus asserts that they did so without reason. Marcus was probably an Egyptian and a contemporary of Irenaeus.
A system not unlike that of the Marcosians was worked out by Monoimus the Arabian, to whom Hippolytus devotes chapters 5 to 8 of Book VIII, and who is mentioned only by Theodoret besides him. Hippolytus is right in calling these two Gnostics imitations of Pythagoras rather than Christians. According to the Epistles of Julian the Apostate, Valentinian collegia existed in Asia Minor up to his own times (d. 363).
(c) The Dualistic School
Some dualism was indeed congenital with Gnosticism, yet but rarely did it overcome the main tendency of Gnosticism, i.e. Pantheism. This, however, was certainly the case in the system of Marcion, who distinguished between the God of the New Testament and the God of the Old Testament, as between two eternal principles, the first being Good, agathos; the second merely dikaios, or just; yet even Marcion did not carry this system to its ultimate consequences. He may be considered rather as a forerunner of Mani than a pure Gnostic. Three of his disciples, Potitus, Basilicus, and Lucanus, are mentioned by Eusebius as being true to their master's dualism (H.E., V, xiii), but Apelles, his chief disciple, though he went farther than his master in rejecting the Old-Testament Scriptures, returned to monotheism by considering the Inspirer of Old-Testament prophecies to be not a god, but an evil angel. On the other hand, Syneros and Prepon, also his disciples, postulated three different principles. A somewhat different dualism was taught by Hermogenes in the beginning of the second century at Carthage. The opponent of the good God was not the God of the Jews, but Eternal Matter, the source of all evil. This Gnostic was combatted by Theophilus of Antioch and Tertullian.
(d) The Antinomian School
As a moral law was given by the God of the Jews, and opposition to the God of the Jews was a duty, the breaking of the moral law to spite its give was considered a solemn obligation. Such a sect, called the Nicolaites, existed in Apostolic times, their principle, according to Origen, was parachresthai te sarki. Carpocrates, whom Tertullian (De animâ, xxxv) calls a magician and a fornicator, was a contemporary of Basilides. One could only escape the cosmic powers through discharging one's obligations to them by infamous conduct. To disregard all law and sink oneself into the Monad by remembering one's pre-existence in the Cosmic Unit -- such was the Gnosis of Carpocrates. His son Epiphanes followed his father's doctrine so closely that he died in consequence of his sins at the age of seventeen. Antinomian views were further maintained by the Prodicians and Antitactae. No more ghastly instance of insane immorality can be found than the one mentioned in Pistis Sophia itself as practised by some Gnostics. St. Justin (Apol., I, xxvi), Irenaeus (I, xxv, 3) and Eusebius (H.E., IV, vii) make it clear that "the reputation of these men brought infamy upon the whole race of Christians".
LITERATURE
The Gnostics developed an astounding literary activity, which produced a quantity of writings far surpassing contemporary output of Catholic literature. They were most prolific in the sphere of fiction, as it is safe to say that three-fourths of the early Christians romances about Christ and His disciples emanated from Gnostic circles. Besides these -- often crude and clumsy -- romances they possessed what may be called "theosophic" treatises and revelations of a highly mystical character. These are best described as a stupefying roar of bombast occasionally interrupted by a few words of real sublimity. Traine remarks with justice: "Anyone who reads the teachings of the Gnostics breathes in an atmosphere of fever and fancies himself in a hospital, amongst delirious patients, who are lost in gazing at their own teeming thought and who fix their lustrous eyes on empty space" (Essais de crit. et d'histoire, Paris, 1904). Gnostic literature, therefore, possesses little or no intrinsic value, however great its value for history and psychology. It is of unparalleled importance in the study of the surroundings in which Christianity first arose. The bulk of it is unfortunately no longer extant. With the exception of some Coptic translations and some expurgated or Catholicized Syriac versions, we possess only a number of fragments of what once must have formed a large library. Most of this literature will be found catalogued under the names of Gnostic authors in the articles BASILIDES; BARDESANES; CERINTHUS; MARCION; SIMON MAGUS; PTOLEMY; VALENTINUS. We shall enumerate in the following paragraphs only anonymous Gnostic works and such writings as are not attributed to any of the above authors.
The Nicolaites possessed "some books under the name of Jaldabaoth", a book called "Nôria" (the mythical wife of Noah), prophecy of Barcabbas, who was a soothsayer among the Basilidians, a "Gospel of the Consummation", and a kind of apocalypse called "the Gospel of Eva" (Epiph., Adv. Haer., xxv, xxvi; Philastr., 33). The Ophites possessed "thousands" of apocrypha, as Epiphanius tells us; among these he specially mentions: "Questions of Mary, great and small" (some of these questions are perhaps extant in the Pistis Sophia); also many books under the name of "Seth", "Revelations of Adam", Apocryphal Gospels attributed to Apostles; an Apocalypse of Elias, and a book called "Genna Marias". Of these writings some revelations of Adam and Seth, eight in number, are probably extant in an Armenian translation, published in the Mechitarist collection of the Old-Testament apocrypha (Venice, 1896). See Preuschen "Die apocryph. Gnost. Adamschr." (Giessen, 1900). The Cainites possessed a "Gospel of Judas", an "Ascension of Paul" (anabatikon Paulou) and some other book, of which we do not know the title, but which, according to Epiphanius, was full of wickedness. The Prodicians, according to Clem. Alex., possessed apocrypha under the name of Zoroaster (Strom., I, xv, 69). The Antinomians had an apocryphon "full of audacity and wickedness" (Strom., III, iv, 29; Origen, "In Matth,", xxviii). The Naassenes had a book out of which Hippolytus largely quotes, but of which we do not know the title. It contained a commentary on Bible texts, hymns, and psalms. The Peratae possessed a similar book. The Sethians possessed a "Paraphrasis Seth", consisting of seven books, explanatory of their system, a book called Allogeneis, or "Foreigners", an "Apocalypse of Adam", a book attributed to Moses, and others. The Archontians possessed a large and small book entitled "Symphonia"; this possibly extant in Pitra's "Analecta Sacra" (Paris, 1888). The Gnostics attacked by Plotinus possessed apocrypha attributed to Zoroaster, Zostrian, Nichotheus, Allogenes (the Sethian Book "Allogeneis"?), and others.
In addition to these writings the following apocrypha are evidently of Gnostic authorship:
"The Gospel of the Twelve" -- This is first referred to by Origen (Hom. I, in Luc.), is identical with the Gospel of the Ebionites, and is also called the "Gospel according to Matthew", because in it Christ refers to St. Matthew in the second person, and the author speaks of the other Apostles and himself as "we". This Gospel was written before A.D. 200, and has no connection with the so-called Hebrew St. Matthew or the Gospel according to the Hebrews.
"The Gospel according to the Egyptians", i.e. Christian countryfolk of Egypt, not Alexandrians. It was written about A.D. 150 and referred to by Clem. Alex. (Strom., III, ix, 63; xiii, 93) and Origen (Hom. I, in Luc), and was largely used in non-Catholic circles. Only small fragments are extant in Clem. Alex. (Strom. and Excerp. ex Theod.). Some people have referred the Oxyrhynchus "Logia" and the Strasburg Coptic papyri to this Gospel, but this is a mere guess.
"The Gospel of Peter", written about A.D. 140 in Antioch (see DOCETAE). Another Petrine Gospel, see description of the Ahmin Codex.
A "Gospel of Matthias" written about A.D. 125, used in Basilidian circles (see BASILIDES).
A "Gospel of Philip" and a "Gospel of Thomas". According to the Pistis Sophia, the three Apostles Matthew [read Matthias], Thomas, and Philip received a Divine commission to report all Christ's revelations after His Resurrection. The Gospel of Thomas must have been of considerable length (1300 lines); part of it, in an expurgated recension, is possibly extant in the once popular, but vulgar and foolish, "Stories of the Infancy of Our Lord by Thomas, an Israelite philosopher", of which two Greek, as Latin, a Syriac, and a Slavonic version exist.
"Acts of Peter" (Praxis Petrou), written about A.D. 165. Large fragments of this Gnostic production have been preserved to us in the original Greek and also in a Latin translation under the title of "Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Peter", to which the Latin adds, "a Lino episcopo conscriptum". Greater portions of this apocryphon are translated in the so-called "Actus Petri cum Simone", and likewise in Sahidic and Slavonic, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions. These fragments have been gathered by Lipsius and Bonnet in "Acta apostolorum apocr." (Leipzig, 1891), I. Though these recensions of the "Acts of Peter" have been somewhat Catholicized, their Gnostic character is unmistakable, and they are of value for Gnostic symbolism.
Closely connected with the "Acts of Peter" are the "Acts of Andrew" and the "Acts of John", which three have perhaps one and the same author, a certain Leucius Charinus, and were written before A.D. 200. They have come down to us in a number of Catholic recensions and in different versions. For the Acts of Andrew see Bonnet, "Acta", as above (1898), II, 1, pp. 1-127; for "Acts of John", ibid., pp. 151-216. To find the primitive Gnostic form in the bewildering variety and multiplicity of fragments and modifications is still a task for scholars.
Of paramount importance for the understanding of Gnosticism are the "Acts of Thomas", as they have been preserved in their entirety and contain the earliest Gnostic ritual, poetry, and speculation. They exist in two recensions, the Greek and the Syriac. It seems most likely, though not certain, that the original was Syriac; it is suggested that they were written about A.D. 232, when the relics of St. Thomas were translated to Edessa. Of the greatest value are the two prayers of Consecration, the "Ode to Wisdom" and the "Hymn of the Soul", which are inserted in the Syriac narrative, and which are wanting in the Greek Acts, though independent Greek texts of these passages are extant (Syriac with English translation by W. Wright, "Apocr. Acts of the Apost.", London, 1871). The "Hymn to the Soul" has been translated many times into English, especially, by A. Bevan, "Texts and Studies", Cambridge 1897; cf. F. Burkitt in "Journal of Theological Studies" (Oxford, 1900). The most complete edition of the Greek Acts is by M. Bonnet in "Acta", as above, II, 2 (Leipzig, 1903; see BARDESANES). The Acts, though written in the service of Gnosticism, and full of the weirdest adventures, are not entirely without an historical background.
There are a number of other apocrypha in which scholars have claimed to find traces of Gnostic authorship, but these traces are mostly vague and unsatisfactory. In connection with these undoubtedly Gnostic apocrypha mention must be made of the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies. It is true that these are more often classed under Judaistic than under strictly Gnostic literature, but their affinity to Gnostic speculations is at least a first sight so close and their connection with the Book of Elxai (cf. ELCESAITES) so generally recognized that they cannot be omitted in a list of Gnostic writings. If the theory maintained by Dom Chapman in "The Date of the Clementines" (Zeitschrift f. N. Test. Wiss., 1908) and in the article CLEMENTINES in the Catholic Encyclopedia be correct, and consequently Pseudo-Clemens be a crypto-Arian who wrote A.D. 330, the "Homilies" might still have at least some value in the study of Gnosticism. But Dom Chapman's theory, though ingenious, is too daring and as yet too unsupported, to justify the omission of the "Homilies" in this place.
A great, if not the greatest, part of Gnostic literature, which has been saved from the general wreck of Gnostic writings, is preserved to us in three Coptic codices, commonly called the Askew, the Bruce, and the Akhmim Codex. The Askew Codex, of the fifth of sixth century, contains the lengthy treatise "Pistis Sophia", i.e. Faith-Wisdom. This is a work in four books, written between A.D. 250 and 300; the fourth book, however, is an adaptation of an earlier work. The first two books describe the fall of the Æon Sophia and her salvation by the Æon Soter; the last two books describe the origin of sin and evil and the need of Gnostic repentance. In fact the whole is a treatise on repentance, as the last two books only apply in practice the example of penance set by Sophia. The work consists of a number of questions and answers between Christ and His male and female disciples in which five "Odes of Solomon", followed by mystical adaptations of the same, are inserted. As the questioning is mostly done by Mary, the Pistis Sophia is probably identical with the "Questions of Mary" mentioned above. The codex also contains extracts from the "Book of the Saviour". The dreary monotony of these writings can only be realized by those who have read them. An English translation of the Latin translation of the Coptic, which itself is a translation of the Greek, was made by G.R.S. Mead (London, 1896). The Bruce papyrus is of about the same date as the Askew vellum codex and contains two treatises:
the two books of Jeû, the first speculative and cosmogonic, the second practical, viz., the overcoming of the hostile world powers and the securing of salvation by the practice of certain rites: this latter book is styled "Of the Great Logos according to the mystery".
A treatise with unknown title, as the first and last pages are lost. This work is of a purely speculative character and of great antiquity, written between A.D. 150 and 200 in Sethian or Archontian circles, and containing a reference to the prophets Marsanes, Nikotheus, and Phosilampes.
No complete English translations of these treatises exist; some passages, however, are translated in the aforesaid G.R.S. Mead's "Fragments of a Faith Forgotten". Both the Bruce and Askew Codices have been translated into German by C. Schmidt (1892) in "Texte u. Unters" and (1901) in the Berlin "Greek Fathers". A Latin translation exists of the "Pistis Sophia" by Schwartze and Petermann (Berlin, 1851) and a French one of the Bruce Codex by Amélineau (Paris, 1890). The Akhmim Codex of the fifth century, found in 1896, and now in the Egyptian Museum at Berlin, contains
a "Gospel of Mary", called in the subscriptions "An Apocryphon of John": this Gospel must be of the highest antiquity, as St. Irenæus, about A.D. 170, made use of it in his description of the Barbelo-Gnostics;
a "Sophia Jesu Christi", containing revelations of Christ after His Resurrection;
a "Praxis Petri", containing a fantastic relation of the miracle worked on Peter's daughter.
The study of Gnosticism is seriously retarded by the entirely unaccountable delay in the publication of these treatises; for these thirteen years past we possess only the brief account of this codex published in the "Sitzungsber. d. k. preus. Acad." (Berlin, 1896), pp. 839-847.
This account of Gnostic literature would be incomplete without reference to a treatise commonly published amongst the works of Clement of Alexandria and called "Excerpta ex Theodoto". It consists of a number of Gnostic extracts made by Clement for his own use with the idea of future refutation; and, with Clement's notes and remarks on the same, form a very confusing anthology. See O. Bibelius, "Studien zur Gesch. der Valent." in "Zeitschr. f. N. Nest. Wiss." (Giessen, 1908).
Oriental non-Christian Gnosticism has left us the sacred books of the Mandaeans, viz.,
the "Genzâ rabâ" or "Great Treasure", a large collection of miscellaneous treatises of different date, some as late, probably, as the ninth, some as early, perhaps, as the third century. The Genzâ was translated into Latin, by Norberg (Copenhagen, 1817), and the most important treatises into German, by W. Brandt (Leipzig, 1892).
Kolasta, hymns and instructions on baptism and the journey of the soul, published in Mandaean by J. Euting (Stuttgart, 1867).
Drâshê d'Jahya, a biography of John the Baptist "ab utero useque ad tumulum" -- as Abraham Echellensis puts it -- not published.
Alexandrian non-Christian Gnosticism is perceptible in Trismegistic literature, published in English translation by G.R.S. Mead (London and Benares, 1902, three volumes). Specifically Jewish Gnosticism left no literature, but Gnostic speculations have an echo in several Jewish works, such as the Book of Enoch, the Zohar, the Talmudic treatise Chagiga XV. See Gförer, "Philo", Vol. I, and Karppe, "Etudes sur. ore. nat. d. Zohar" (Paris, 1901).
REFUTATION OF GNOSTICISM
From the first Gnosticism met with the most determined opposition from the Catholic Church.
The last words of the aged St. Paul in his First Epistle to Timothy are usually taken as referring to Gnosticism, which is described as "Profane novelties of words and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called [antitheseis tes pseudonomou gnoseos -- the antitheses of so-called Gnosis] which some professing have erred concerning the faith". Most probably St. Paul's use of the terms pleroma, the æon of this world, the archon of the power of the air, in Ephesians and Colossians, was suggested by the abuse of these terms by the Gnostics. Other allusions to Gnosticism in the New Testament are possible, but cannot be proven, such as Titus 3:9; 1 Timothy 4:3; 1 John 4:1-3.
The first anti-Gnostic writer was St. Justin Martyr (d. c. 165). His "Syntagma" (Syntagma kata pason ton gegenemenon aireseon), long thought lost, is substantially contained in the "Libellus adv. omn. haeres.", usually attached to Tertullian's "De Praescriptione"; such at least is the thesis of J. Kunze (1894) which is largely accepted. Of St. Justin's anti-Gnostic treatise on the Resurrection (Peri anastaseos) considerable fragments are extant in Methodius' "Dialogue on the Resurrection" and in St. John Damascene's "Sacra Parellela". St. Justin's "Comendium against Marcion", quoted by St. Irenæus (IV, vi, 2; V, xxvi, 2), is possibly identical with his Syntagma". Immediately after St. Justin, Miltiades, a Christian philosopher of Asia Minor, is mentioned by Tertullian and Hippolytus (Adv. Valent., v, and Eusebius, H.E., V., xxviii, 4) as having combated the Gnostics and especially the Valentinians. His writings are lost. Theophilus of Antioch (d. c. 185) wrote against the heresy of Hermogenes, and also an excellent treatise against Marcion (kata Markionos Logos). The book against Marcion is probably extant in the "Dialogus de rectâ in Deum fide" of Pseudo-Origen. For Agrippa Castor see BASILIDES.
Hegesippus, a Palestinian, traveled by way of Corinth to Rome, where he arrived under Anicetus (155-166), to ascertain the sound and orthodox faith from Apostolic tradition. He met many bishops on his way, who all taught the same faith and in Rome he made a list of the popes from Peter to Anicetus. In consequence he wrote five books of Memoirs (Upomnemata) "in a most simple style, giving the true tradition of Apostolic doctrine", becoming "a champion of the truth against the godless heresies" (Eusebius, H.E., IV, vii sqq., xxi sqq.). Of this work only a few fragments remain, and these are historical rather than theological.
Rhodon, a disciple of Tatian, Philip, Bishop of Gortyna in Crete, and a certain Modestus wrote against Marcion, but their writings are lost. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., I, xv, 6) and Epiphanius (xxxiv, 11) quote a short poem against the Oriental Valentinians and the conjuror Marcus by "an aged" but unknown author; and Zachaeus, Bishop of Caesarea, is said to have written against the Valentinians and especially Ptolemy.
Beyond all comparison most important is the great anti-Gnostic work of St. Irenæus, Elegchos kai anatrope tes psudonymou gnoseos, usually called "Adversus Haereses". It consists of five books, evidently not written at one time; the first three books about A.D. 180; the last two about a dozen years later. The greater part of the first book has come down to us in the original Greek, the rest in a very ancient and anxiously close Latin translation, and some fragments in Syriac.
St. Irenæus knew the Gnostics from personal intercourse and from their own writings and gives minute descriptions of their systems, especially of the Valentinians and Barbelo-Gnostics. A good test of how St. Irenæus employed his Gnostic sources can be made by comparing the newly found "Evangelium Mariae" with Adv. Haer., I, xxiv. Numerous attempts to discredit Irenaeus as a witness have proved failures (see SAINT IRENAEUS). Besides his great work, Irenaeus wrote an open letter to the Roman priest Florinus, who thought of joining the Valentinians; and when the unfortunate priest had apostatized, and had become a Gnostic, Irenaeus wrote on his account a treatise "On the Ogdoad", and also a letter to Pope Victor, begging him to use his authority against him. Only a few passages of these writings are extant.
Eusebius (H.E., IV, xxiii, 4) mentions a letter of Dionysius of Corinth (c. 170) to the Nicomedians, in which he attacks the heresy of Marcion. The letter is not extant. Clement of Alexandria (d. c. 215) only indirectly combated Gnosticism by defending the true Christian Gnosis, especially in "Paedagogos", Bk. I, "Stromateis", Bk. II, III, V, and in the so-called eighth book or "Excerpta ex Theodoto". Origen devoted no work exclusively to the refutation of Gnosticism but his four books "On First Principles" (Peri archon), written about the year 230, and preserved to us only in some Greek fragments and a free Latin translation by Rufinus, is practically a refutation of Gnostic dualism, Docetism, and Emanationism.
About the year 300 an unknown Syrian author, sometimes erroneously identified with Origen, and often called by the literary pseudonym Adamantius, or "The Man of Steel", wrote a long dialogue of which the title is lost, but which is usually designated by the words, "De rectâ in Deum fide". This dialogue, usually divided into five books, contains discussions with representatives of two sects of Marcionism, of Valentinianism, and of Bardesanism. The writer plagiarizes extensively from Theophilus of Antioch and Methodius of Olympus, especially the latter's anti-Gnostic dialogue "On Free Will" (Peri tou autexousiou).
The greatest anti-Gnostic controversialist of the early Christian Church is Tertullian (b. 169), who practically devoted his life to combating this dreadful sum of all heresies. We need but mention the titles of his anti-Gnostic works: "De Praescriptione haereticorum"; "Adversus Marcionem"; a book "Adversus Valentinianos"; "Scorpiace"; "De Carne Christi"; "De Resurrectione Carnis"; and finally "Adversus Praxeam".
A storehouse of information rather than a refutation is the great work of Hippolytus, written some time after A.D. 234, once called "Philosophoumena" and ascribed to Origen, but since the discovery of Books IV-X, in 1842, known by the name if its true author and its true title, "Refutation of All Heresies" (katapason aireseon elegchos).
The publication of the Athos Codex by E. Miller (Oxford, 1851) revolutionized the study of Gnosticism and rendered works published previous to that date antiquated and almost worthless. To students of Gnosticism this work is as indispensable as that of St. Irenæus. There is an English translation by J. MacMahon in "The Ante-Nicene Library" (Edinburgh, 1868). Hippolytus tried to prove that all Gnosticism was derived from heathen philosophy; his speculations may be disregarded, but, as he was in possession of a great number of Gnostic writings from which he quotes, his information is priceless. As he wrote nearly fifty years after St. Irenæus, whose disciple he had been, he describes a later development of Gnosis than the Bishop of Lyons. Besides his greater work, Hippolytus wrote, many years previously (before 217), a small compendium against all heresies, giving a list of the same, thirty-two in number, from Dositheus to Noetus; also a treatise against Marcion.
As, from the beginning of the fourth century, Gnosticism was in rapid decline, there was less need of champions of orthodoxy, hence there is a long interval between Adamantius's dialogue and St. Epiphanius's "Panarion", begun in the year 374. St. Epiphanius, who is his youth was brought into closest contact with Gnostic sects in Egypt, and especially the Phibionists, and perhaps even, as some hold, belonged to this sect himself, is still a first-class authority. With marvelous industry he gathered information on all sides, but his injudicious and too credulous acceptance of many details can hardly be excused.
Philastrius of Brescia, a few years later (383), gave to the Latin Church what St. Epiphanius had given to the Greek. He counted and described no fewer than one hundred and twenty-eight heresies, but took the word in a somewhat wide and vague sense. Though dependent on the "Syntagma" of Hippolytus, his account is entirely independent of that of Epiphanius.
Another Latin writer, who probably lived in the middle of the fifth century in Southern Gaul, and who is probably identical with Arnobius the Younger, left a work, commonly called "Praedestinatus", consisting of three books, in the first of which he describes ninety heresies from Simon Magus to the Praedestinationists. This work unfortunately contains many doubtful and fabulous statements. Some time after the Council of Chalcedon (451) Theodoret wrote a "Compendium of Heretical Fables" which is of considerable value for the history of Gnosticism, because it gives in a very concise and objective way the history of the heresies since the time of Simon Magus. St. Augustine's book "De Haeresibus" (written about 428) is too dependent on Philastrius and Epiphanius to be of much value. Amongst anti-Gnostic writers we must finally mention the neo-Platonist Plotinus (d. A.D. 270), who wrote a treatise "Against the Gnostics". These were evidently scholars who frequented his collegia, but whose Oriental and fantastic pessimism was irreconcilable with Plotinus's views.
CONCLUSION
The attempt to picture Gnosticism as a mighty movement of the human mind towards the noblest and highest truth, a movement in some way parallel to that of Christianity, has completely failed. It has been abandoned by recent unprejudiced scholars such as W. Bousset and O. Gruppe, and it is to be regretted that it should have been renewed by an English writer, G.R.S. Mead, in "Fragments of a Faith Forgotten", an unscholarly and misleading work, which in English-speaking countries may retard the sober and true appreciation of Gnosticism as it was in historical fact.
Gnosticism was not an advance, it was a retrogression. It was born amidst the last throes of expiring cults and civilizations in Western Asia and Egypt. Though hellenized, these countries remained Oriental and Semitic to the core. This Oriental spirit -- Attis of Asia Minor, Istar of Babylonia, Isis of Egypt, with the astrological and cosmogonic lore of the Asiatic world -- first sore beset by Ahuramazda in the East, and then overwhelmed by the Divine greatness of Jesus Christ in the West, called a truce by the fusion of both Parseeism and Christianity with itself. It tried to do for the East what Neo-Platonism tried to do for the West. During at least two centuries it was a real danger to Christianity, though not so great as some modern writers would make us believe, as if the merest breath might have changed the fortunes of Gnostic, as against orthodox, Christianity.
Similar things are said of Mithraism and neo-Platonism as against the religion of Jesus Christ. But these sayings have more piquancy than objective truth. Christianity survived, and not Gnosticism, because the former was the fittest -- immeasurably, nay infinitely, so. Gnosticism died not by chance, but because it lacked vital power within itself; and no amount of theosophistic literature, flooding English and German markets, can give life to that which perished from intrinsic and essential defects.
It is striking that the two earliest champions of Christianity against Gnosticism -- Hegesippus and Irenaeus -- brought out so clearly the method of warfare which alone was possible, but which also alone sufficed to secure the victory in the conflict, a method which Tertullian some years later scientifically explained in his "De Praescriptione". Both Hegesippus and Irenaeus proved that Gnostic doctrines did not belong to that deposit of faith which was taught by the true succession of bishops in the primary sees of Christendom; both in triumphant conclusion drew up a list of the Bishops of Rome, from Peter to the Roman bishop of their day; as Gnosticism was not taught by that Church with which the Christians everywhere must agree, it stood self-condemned.
A just verdict on the Gnostics is that of O. Gruppe (Ausführungen, p. 162); the circumstances of the period gave them a certain importance. But a living force they never were, either in general history or in the history of Christendom. Gnosticism deserves attention as showing what mention dispositions Christianity found in existence, what obstacles it had to overcome to maintain its own life; but "means of mental progress it never was".
Gnosticism possessed no central authority for either doctrine or discipline; considered as a whole it had no organization similar to the vast organization of the Catholic Church. It was but a large conglomeration of sects, of which Marcionism alone attempted in some way to rival the constitution of the Church, and even Marcionism had no unity. No other classification of these sects is possible than that according to their main trend of thought. We can therefore distinguish: (a) Syrian or Semitic; (b) Hellenistic or Alexandrian; (c) dualistic; (d) antinomian Gnostics.
(a) The Syrian School
This school represents the oldest phase of Gnosticism, as Western Asia was the birthplace of the movement. Dositheus, Simon Magus, Menander, Cerinthus, Cerdo, Saturninus Justin, the Bardesanites, Sevrians, Ebionites, Encratites, Ophites, Naassenes, the Gnostics of the "Acts of Thomas", the Sethians, the Peratae, the Cainites may be said to belong to this school.
The more fantastic elements and elaborate genealogies and syzygies of æons of the later Gnosis are still absent in these systems. The terminology is some barbarous form of Semitic; Egypt is the symbolic name for the soul's land of bondage.
The opposition between the good God and the World-Creator is not eternal or cosmogonic, though there is strong ethical opposition to Jehovah the God of the Jews. He is the last of the seven angels who fashioned this world out of eternally pre-existent matter. The demiurgic angels, attempting to create man, created but a miserable worm, to which the Good God, however, gave the spark of divine life. The rule of the god of the Jews must pass away, for the good God calls us to his own immediate service through Christ his Son. We obey the Supreme Deity by abstaining from flesh meat and marriage, and by leading an ascetic life.
Such was the system of Saturninus of Antioch, who taught during the reign of Hadrian (c. A.D. 120). The Naassenes (from Nahas, the Hebrew for serpent) were worshippers of the serpent as a symbol of wisdom, which the God of the Jews tried to hide from men. The Ophites (ophianoi, from ophis, serpent), who, when transplanted on Alexandrian soil, supplied the main ideas of Valentinianism, become one of the most widely spread sects of Gnosticism. Though not strictly serpent-worshippers, they recognized the serpent as symbol of the supreme emanation, Achamoth or Divine Wisdom. They were styled Gnostics par excellence. The Sethians saw in Seth the father of all spiritual (pneumatikoi) men; in Cain and Abel the father of the psychic (psychikoi) and hylic (hylikoi) men. According to the Peratae there exists a trinity of Father, Son, and Hyle (Matter). The Son is the Cosmic Serpent, who freed Eve from the power of the rule of Hyle.
The universe they symbolized by a triangle enclosed in a circle. The number three is the key to all mysteries. There are three supreme principles: the not-generated, the self-generated, the generated. There are three logoi, of gods; the Saviour has a threefold nature, threefold body, threefold power, etc. They are called Peretae (peran) because they have "crossed over" out of Egypt, through the Red Sea of generation. They are the true Hebrews, in fact (the word comes from the Hebrew meaning "to cross over"). The Peratae were founded by Euphrates and Celbes (Acembes?) and Ademes. This Euphrates, whose name is perhaps connected with the name Peratae itself, is said to be the founder of the Ophites mentioned by Celsus about A.D. 175. The Cainites were so called because they venerated Cain, and Esau, and the Sodomites, and Core, and Judas, because they had all resisted the god of the Jews.
(b) The Hellenistic or Alexandrian School
These systems were more abstract, and philosophical, and self-consistent than the Syrian. The Semitic nomenclature was almost entirely replaced by Greek names. The cosmogonic problem had outgrown all proportions, the ethical side was less prominent, asceticism less strictly enforced.
The two great thinkers of this school were Basilides and Valentinus.
Though born at Antioch, in Syria, Basilides founded his school in Alexandria (c. A.D. 130), and was followed by his son Isidorus. His system was the most consistent and sober emanationism that Gnosticism ever produced. His school never spread so widely as the next to be mentioned, but in Spain it survived for several centuries.
Valentinus, who taught first at Alexandria and then at Rome (c. A.D. 160), elaborated a system of sexual duality in the process of emanation; a long series of male and female pairs of personified ideas is employed to bridge over the distance from the unknown God to this present world. His system is more confused than Basilidianism, especially as it is disturbed by the intrusion of the figure or figures of Sophia in the cosmogonic process. Being Syrian Ophitism in Egyptian guise, it can claim to be the true representative of the Gnostic spirit.
The reductio ad absurdum of these unbridled speculations can be seen in the Pitis Sophia, which is light-maidens, paralemptores, spheres, Heimarmene, thirteen æons, light-treasures, realms of the midst, realms of the right and of the left, Jaldabaoth, Adamas, Michael, Gabriel, Christ, the Saviour, and mysteries without number whirl past and return like witches in a dance. The impression created on the same reader can only be fitly described in the words of "Jabberwocky": "gyre and gimble on the wabe".
We learn from Hippolytus (Adv. Haer., IV, xxxv), Tertullian (Adv. Valent., iv) and Clemens Alex. (Exc. ex Theod., title) that there were two main schools of Valentinianism, the Italian and the Anatolian or Asiatic. In the Italian school were teachers of note: Secundus, who divided the Ogdoad within the Pleroma into two tetrads, Right and Left; Epiphanes, who described this Tetras as Monotes, Henotes, Monas, and To Hen; and possibly Colorbasus, unless his name be a misreading of Kol Arba "All Four". But the most important were Ptolemy and Heracleon.
Ptolemy is especially known to fame by his letter to Flora, a noble lady who had written to him as Prom Presbyter (Texte u. Unters., N.S., XIII, Anal. z. alt. Gesch. d. Chr.) to explain the meaning of the Old Testament. This Ptolemy split up the names and numbers of the æons into personified substances outside the deity, as Tertullian relates. He was given to Biblical studies, and was a man of unbridled imagination.
Clemens Alex. (Strom., IV, ix, 73) calls Heracleon the most eminent teacher of the Valentinian school. Origen devotes a large part of his commentary on St. John to combating Heracleon's commentary on the same Evangelist. Heracleon called the source of all being Anthropos, instead of Bythos, and rejected the immortality of the soul -- meaning, probably, the merely psychic element. He apparently stood nearer to the Catholic Church than Ptolemy and was a man of better judgment.
Tertullian mentions two other names (Valent., iv), Theotimus and (De Carne Christ, xvii) Alexander.
The Anatolian school had as a prominent teacher Axionicus (Tertullian, Adv. Valent., iv; Hipp., Adv. Haer., VI, 30) who had his collegium at Antioch about A.D. 220, "the master's most faithful disciple". Theodotus is only known to us from the fragment of his writings preserved by Clement of Alexandria. Marcus the Conjuror's system, an elaborate speculation with ciphers and numbers, is given by Irenaeus (I, 11-12) and also by Hippolytus (VI, 42). Irenaeus's account of Marcus was repudiated by the Marcosians, but Hippolytus asserts that they did so without reason. Marcus was probably an Egyptian and a contemporary of Irenaeus.
A system not unlike that of the Marcosians was worked out by Monoimus the Arabian, to whom Hippolytus devotes chapters 5 to 8 of Book VIII, and who is mentioned only by Theodoret besides him. Hippolytus is right in calling these two Gnostics imitations of Pythagoras rather than Christians. According to the Epistles of Julian the Apostate, Valentinian collegia existed in Asia Minor up to his own times (d. 363).
(c) The Dualistic School
Some dualism was indeed congenital with Gnosticism, yet but rarely did it overcome the main tendency of Gnosticism, i.e. Pantheism. This, however, was certainly the case in the system of Marcion, who distinguished between the God of the New Testament and the God of the Old Testament, as between two eternal principles, the first being Good, agathos; the second merely dikaios, or just; yet even Marcion did not carry this system to its ultimate consequences. He may be considered rather as a forerunner of Mani than a pure Gnostic. Three of his disciples, Potitus, Basilicus, and Lucanus, are mentioned by Eusebius as being true to their master's dualism (H.E., V, xiii), but Apelles, his chief disciple, though he went farther than his master in rejecting the Old-Testament Scriptures, returned to monotheism by considering the Inspirer of Old-Testament prophecies to be not a god, but an evil angel. On the other hand, Syneros and Prepon, also his disciples, postulated three different principles. A somewhat different dualism was taught by Hermogenes in the beginning of the second century at Carthage. The opponent of the good God was not the God of the Jews, but Eternal Matter, the source of all evil. This Gnostic was combatted by Theophilus of Antioch and Tertullian.
(d) The Antinomian School
As a moral law was given by the God of the Jews, and opposition to the God of the Jews was a duty, the breaking of the moral law to spite its give was considered a solemn obligation. Such a sect, called the Nicolaites, existed in Apostolic times, their principle, according to Origen, was parachresthai te sarki. Carpocrates, whom Tertullian (De animâ, xxxv) calls a magician and a fornicator, was a contemporary of Basilides. One could only escape the cosmic powers through discharging one's obligations to them by infamous conduct. To disregard all law and sink oneself into the Monad by remembering one's pre-existence in the Cosmic Unit -- such was the Gnosis of Carpocrates. His son Epiphanes followed his father's doctrine so closely that he died in consequence of his sins at the age of seventeen. Antinomian views were further maintained by the Prodicians and Antitactae. No more ghastly instance of insane immorality can be found than the one mentioned in Pistis Sophia itself as practised by some Gnostics. St. Justin (Apol., I, xxvi), Irenaeus (I, xxv, 3) and Eusebius (H.E., IV, vii) make it clear that "the reputation of these men brought infamy upon the whole race of Christians".
LITERATURE
The Gnostics developed an astounding literary activity, which produced a quantity of writings far surpassing contemporary output of Catholic literature. They were most prolific in the sphere of fiction, as it is safe to say that three-fourths of the early Christians romances about Christ and His disciples emanated from Gnostic circles. Besides these -- often crude and clumsy -- romances they possessed what may be called "theosophic" treatises and revelations of a highly mystical character. These are best described as a stupefying roar of bombast occasionally interrupted by a few words of real sublimity. Traine remarks with justice: "Anyone who reads the teachings of the Gnostics breathes in an atmosphere of fever and fancies himself in a hospital, amongst delirious patients, who are lost in gazing at their own teeming thought and who fix their lustrous eyes on empty space" (Essais de crit. et d'histoire, Paris, 1904). Gnostic literature, therefore, possesses little or no intrinsic value, however great its value for history and psychology. It is of unparalleled importance in the study of the surroundings in which Christianity first arose. The bulk of it is unfortunately no longer extant. With the exception of some Coptic translations and some expurgated or Catholicized Syriac versions, we possess only a number of fragments of what once must have formed a large library. Most of this literature will be found catalogued under the names of Gnostic authors in the articles BASILIDES; BARDESANES; CERINTHUS; MARCION; SIMON MAGUS; PTOLEMY; VALENTINUS. We shall enumerate in the following paragraphs only anonymous Gnostic works and such writings as are not attributed to any of the above authors.
The Nicolaites possessed "some books under the name of Jaldabaoth", a book called "Nôria" (the mythical wife of Noah), prophecy of Barcabbas, who was a soothsayer among the Basilidians, a "Gospel of the Consummation", and a kind of apocalypse called "the Gospel of Eva" (Epiph., Adv. Haer., xxv, xxvi; Philastr., 33). The Ophites possessed "thousands" of apocrypha, as Epiphanius tells us; among these he specially mentions: "Questions of Mary, great and small" (some of these questions are perhaps extant in the Pistis Sophia); also many books under the name of "Seth", "Revelations of Adam", Apocryphal Gospels attributed to Apostles; an Apocalypse of Elias, and a book called "Genna Marias". Of these writings some revelations of Adam and Seth, eight in number, are probably extant in an Armenian translation, published in the Mechitarist collection of the Old-Testament apocrypha (Venice, 1896). See Preuschen "Die apocryph. Gnost. Adamschr." (Giessen, 1900). The Cainites possessed a "Gospel of Judas", an "Ascension of Paul" (anabatikon Paulou) and some other book, of which we do not know the title, but which, according to Epiphanius, was full of wickedness. The Prodicians, according to Clem. Alex., possessed apocrypha under the name of Zoroaster (Strom., I, xv, 69). The Antinomians had an apocryphon "full of audacity and wickedness" (Strom., III, iv, 29; Origen, "In Matth,", xxviii). The Naassenes had a book out of which Hippolytus largely quotes, but of which we do not know the title. It contained a commentary on Bible texts, hymns, and psalms. The Peratae possessed a similar book. The Sethians possessed a "Paraphrasis Seth", consisting of seven books, explanatory of their system, a book called Allogeneis, or "Foreigners", an "Apocalypse of Adam", a book attributed to Moses, and others. The Archontians possessed a large and small book entitled "Symphonia"; this possibly extant in Pitra's "Analecta Sacra" (Paris, 1888). The Gnostics attacked by Plotinus possessed apocrypha attributed to Zoroaster, Zostrian, Nichotheus, Allogenes (the Sethian Book "Allogeneis"?), and others.
In addition to these writings the following apocrypha are evidently of Gnostic authorship:
"The Gospel of the Twelve" -- This is first referred to by Origen (Hom. I, in Luc.), is identical with the Gospel of the Ebionites, and is also called the "Gospel according to Matthew", because in it Christ refers to St. Matthew in the second person, and the author speaks of the other Apostles and himself as "we". This Gospel was written before A.D. 200, and has no connection with the so-called Hebrew St. Matthew or the Gospel according to the Hebrews.
"The Gospel according to the Egyptians", i.e. Christian countryfolk of Egypt, not Alexandrians. It was written about A.D. 150 and referred to by Clem. Alex. (Strom., III, ix, 63; xiii, 93) and Origen (Hom. I, in Luc), and was largely used in non-Catholic circles. Only small fragments are extant in Clem. Alex. (Strom. and Excerp. ex Theod.). Some people have referred the Oxyrhynchus "Logia" and the Strasburg Coptic papyri to this Gospel, but this is a mere guess.
"The Gospel of Peter", written about A.D. 140 in Antioch (see DOCETAE). Another Petrine Gospel, see description of the Ahmin Codex.
A "Gospel of Matthias" written about A.D. 125, used in Basilidian circles (see BASILIDES).
A "Gospel of Philip" and a "Gospel of Thomas". According to the Pistis Sophia, the three Apostles Matthew [read Matthias], Thomas, and Philip received a Divine commission to report all Christ's revelations after His Resurrection. The Gospel of Thomas must have been of considerable length (1300 lines); part of it, in an expurgated recension, is possibly extant in the once popular, but vulgar and foolish, "Stories of the Infancy of Our Lord by Thomas, an Israelite philosopher", of which two Greek, as Latin, a Syriac, and a Slavonic version exist.
"Acts of Peter" (Praxis Petrou), written about A.D. 165. Large fragments of this Gnostic production have been preserved to us in the original Greek and also in a Latin translation under the title of "Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Peter", to which the Latin adds, "a Lino episcopo conscriptum". Greater portions of this apocryphon are translated in the so-called "Actus Petri cum Simone", and likewise in Sahidic and Slavonic, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions. These fragments have been gathered by Lipsius and Bonnet in "Acta apostolorum apocr." (Leipzig, 1891), I. Though these recensions of the "Acts of Peter" have been somewhat Catholicized, their Gnostic character is unmistakable, and they are of value for Gnostic symbolism.
Closely connected with the "Acts of Peter" are the "Acts of Andrew" and the "Acts of John", which three have perhaps one and the same author, a certain Leucius Charinus, and were written before A.D. 200. They have come down to us in a number of Catholic recensions and in different versions. For the Acts of Andrew see Bonnet, "Acta", as above (1898), II, 1, pp. 1-127; for "Acts of John", ibid., pp. 151-216. To find the primitive Gnostic form in the bewildering variety and multiplicity of fragments and modifications is still a task for scholars.
Of paramount importance for the understanding of Gnosticism are the "Acts of Thomas", as they have been preserved in their entirety and contain the earliest Gnostic ritual, poetry, and speculation. They exist in two recensions, the Greek and the Syriac. It seems most likely, though not certain, that the original was Syriac; it is suggested that they were written about A.D. 232, when the relics of St. Thomas were translated to Edessa. Of the greatest value are the two prayers of Consecration, the "Ode to Wisdom" and the "Hymn of the Soul", which are inserted in the Syriac narrative, and which are wanting in the Greek Acts, though independent Greek texts of these passages are extant (Syriac with English translation by W. Wright, "Apocr. Acts of the Apost.", London, 1871). The "Hymn to the Soul" has been translated many times into English, especially, by A. Bevan, "Texts and Studies", Cambridge 1897; cf. F. Burkitt in "Journal of Theological Studies" (Oxford, 1900). The most complete edition of the Greek Acts is by M. Bonnet in "Acta", as above, II, 2 (Leipzig, 1903; see BARDESANES). The Acts, though written in the service of Gnosticism, and full of the weirdest adventures, are not entirely without an historical background.
There are a number of other apocrypha in which scholars have claimed to find traces of Gnostic authorship, but these traces are mostly vague and unsatisfactory. In connection with these undoubtedly Gnostic apocrypha mention must be made of the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies. It is true that these are more often classed under Judaistic than under strictly Gnostic literature, but their affinity to Gnostic speculations is at least a first sight so close and their connection with the Book of Elxai (cf. ELCESAITES) so generally recognized that they cannot be omitted in a list of Gnostic writings. If the theory maintained by Dom Chapman in "The Date of the Clementines" (Zeitschrift f. N. Test. Wiss., 1908) and in the article CLEMENTINES in the Catholic Encyclopedia be correct, and consequently Pseudo-Clemens be a crypto-Arian who wrote A.D. 330, the "Homilies" might still have at least some value in the study of Gnosticism. But Dom Chapman's theory, though ingenious, is too daring and as yet too unsupported, to justify the omission of the "Homilies" in this place.
A great, if not the greatest, part of Gnostic literature, which has been saved from the general wreck of Gnostic writings, is preserved to us in three Coptic codices, commonly called the Askew, the Bruce, and the Akhmim Codex. The Askew Codex, of the fifth of sixth century, contains the lengthy treatise "Pistis Sophia", i.e. Faith-Wisdom. This is a work in four books, written between A.D. 250 and 300; the fourth book, however, is an adaptation of an earlier work. The first two books describe the fall of the Æon Sophia and her salvation by the Æon Soter; the last two books describe the origin of sin and evil and the need of Gnostic repentance. In fact the whole is a treatise on repentance, as the last two books only apply in practice the example of penance set by Sophia. The work consists of a number of questions and answers between Christ and His male and female disciples in which five "Odes of Solomon", followed by mystical adaptations of the same, are inserted. As the questioning is mostly done by Mary, the Pistis Sophia is probably identical with the "Questions of Mary" mentioned above. The codex also contains extracts from the "Book of the Saviour". The dreary monotony of these writings can only be realized by those who have read them. An English translation of the Latin translation of the Coptic, which itself is a translation of the Greek, was made by G.R.S. Mead (London, 1896). The Bruce papyrus is of about the same date as the Askew vellum codex and contains two treatises:
the two books of Jeû, the first speculative and cosmogonic, the second practical, viz., the overcoming of the hostile world powers and the securing of salvation by the practice of certain rites: this latter book is styled "Of the Great Logos according to the mystery".
A treatise with unknown title, as the first and last pages are lost. This work is of a purely speculative character and of great antiquity, written between A.D. 150 and 200 in Sethian or Archontian circles, and containing a reference to the prophets Marsanes, Nikotheus, and Phosilampes.
No complete English translations of these treatises exist; some passages, however, are translated in the aforesaid G.R.S. Mead's "Fragments of a Faith Forgotten". Both the Bruce and Askew Codices have been translated into German by C. Schmidt (1892) in "Texte u. Unters" and (1901) in the Berlin "Greek Fathers". A Latin translation exists of the "Pistis Sophia" by Schwartze and Petermann (Berlin, 1851) and a French one of the Bruce Codex by Amélineau (Paris, 1890). The Akhmim Codex of the fifth century, found in 1896, and now in the Egyptian Museum at Berlin, contains
a "Gospel of Mary", called in the subscriptions "An Apocryphon of John": this Gospel must be of the highest antiquity, as St. Irenæus, about A.D. 170, made use of it in his description of the Barbelo-Gnostics;
a "Sophia Jesu Christi", containing revelations of Christ after His Resurrection;
a "Praxis Petri", containing a fantastic relation of the miracle worked on Peter's daughter.
The study of Gnosticism is seriously retarded by the entirely unaccountable delay in the publication of these treatises; for these thirteen years past we possess only the brief account of this codex published in the "Sitzungsber. d. k. preus. Acad." (Berlin, 1896), pp. 839-847.
This account of Gnostic literature would be incomplete without reference to a treatise commonly published amongst the works of Clement of Alexandria and called "Excerpta ex Theodoto". It consists of a number of Gnostic extracts made by Clement for his own use with the idea of future refutation; and, with Clement's notes and remarks on the same, form a very confusing anthology. See O. Bibelius, "Studien zur Gesch. der Valent." in "Zeitschr. f. N. Nest. Wiss." (Giessen, 1908).
Oriental non-Christian Gnosticism has left us the sacred books of the Mandaeans, viz.,
the "Genzâ rabâ" or "Great Treasure", a large collection of miscellaneous treatises of different date, some as late, probably, as the ninth, some as early, perhaps, as the third century. The Genzâ was translated into Latin, by Norberg (Copenhagen, 1817), and the most important treatises into German, by W. Brandt (Leipzig, 1892).
Kolasta, hymns and instructions on baptism and the journey of the soul, published in Mandaean by J. Euting (Stuttgart, 1867).
Drâshê d'Jahya, a biography of John the Baptist "ab utero useque ad tumulum" -- as Abraham Echellensis puts it -- not published.
Alexandrian non-Christian Gnosticism is perceptible in Trismegistic literature, published in English translation by G.R.S. Mead (London and Benares, 1902, three volumes). Specifically Jewish Gnosticism left no literature, but Gnostic speculations have an echo in several Jewish works, such as the Book of Enoch, the Zohar, the Talmudic treatise Chagiga XV. See Gförer, "Philo", Vol. I, and Karppe, "Etudes sur. ore. nat. d. Zohar" (Paris, 1901).
REFUTATION OF GNOSTICISM
From the first Gnosticism met with the most determined opposition from the Catholic Church.
The last words of the aged St. Paul in his First Epistle to Timothy are usually taken as referring to Gnosticism, which is described as "Profane novelties of words and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called [antitheseis tes pseudonomou gnoseos -- the antitheses of so-called Gnosis] which some professing have erred concerning the faith". Most probably St. Paul's use of the terms pleroma, the æon of this world, the archon of the power of the air, in Ephesians and Colossians, was suggested by the abuse of these terms by the Gnostics. Other allusions to Gnosticism in the New Testament are possible, but cannot be proven, such as Titus 3:9; 1 Timothy 4:3; 1 John 4:1-3.
The first anti-Gnostic writer was St. Justin Martyr (d. c. 165). His "Syntagma" (Syntagma kata pason ton gegenemenon aireseon), long thought lost, is substantially contained in the "Libellus adv. omn. haeres.", usually attached to Tertullian's "De Praescriptione"; such at least is the thesis of J. Kunze (1894) which is largely accepted. Of St. Justin's anti-Gnostic treatise on the Resurrection (Peri anastaseos) considerable fragments are extant in Methodius' "Dialogue on the Resurrection" and in St. John Damascene's "Sacra Parellela". St. Justin's "Comendium against Marcion", quoted by St. Irenæus (IV, vi, 2; V, xxvi, 2), is possibly identical with his Syntagma". Immediately after St. Justin, Miltiades, a Christian philosopher of Asia Minor, is mentioned by Tertullian and Hippolytus (Adv. Valent., v, and Eusebius, H.E., V., xxviii, 4) as having combated the Gnostics and especially the Valentinians. His writings are lost. Theophilus of Antioch (d. c. 185) wrote against the heresy of Hermogenes, and also an excellent treatise against Marcion (kata Markionos Logos). The book against Marcion is probably extant in the "Dialogus de rectâ in Deum fide" of Pseudo-Origen. For Agrippa Castor see BASILIDES.
Hegesippus, a Palestinian, traveled by way of Corinth to Rome, where he arrived under Anicetus (155-166), to ascertain the sound and orthodox faith from Apostolic tradition. He met many bishops on his way, who all taught the same faith and in Rome he made a list of the popes from Peter to Anicetus. In consequence he wrote five books of Memoirs (Upomnemata) "in a most simple style, giving the true tradition of Apostolic doctrine", becoming "a champion of the truth against the godless heresies" (Eusebius, H.E., IV, vii sqq., xxi sqq.). Of this work only a few fragments remain, and these are historical rather than theological.
Rhodon, a disciple of Tatian, Philip, Bishop of Gortyna in Crete, and a certain Modestus wrote against Marcion, but their writings are lost. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., I, xv, 6) and Epiphanius (xxxiv, 11) quote a short poem against the Oriental Valentinians and the conjuror Marcus by "an aged" but unknown author; and Zachaeus, Bishop of Caesarea, is said to have written against the Valentinians and especially Ptolemy.
Beyond all comparison most important is the great anti-Gnostic work of St. Irenæus, Elegchos kai anatrope tes psudonymou gnoseos, usually called "Adversus Haereses". It consists of five books, evidently not written at one time; the first three books about A.D. 180; the last two about a dozen years later. The greater part of the first book has come down to us in the original Greek, the rest in a very ancient and anxiously close Latin translation, and some fragments in Syriac.
St. Irenæus knew the Gnostics from personal intercourse and from their own writings and gives minute descriptions of their systems, especially of the Valentinians and Barbelo-Gnostics. A good test of how St. Irenæus employed his Gnostic sources can be made by comparing the newly found "Evangelium Mariae" with Adv. Haer., I, xxiv. Numerous attempts to discredit Irenaeus as a witness have proved failures (see SAINT IRENAEUS). Besides his great work, Irenaeus wrote an open letter to the Roman priest Florinus, who thought of joining the Valentinians; and when the unfortunate priest had apostatized, and had become a Gnostic, Irenaeus wrote on his account a treatise "On the Ogdoad", and also a letter to Pope Victor, begging him to use his authority against him. Only a few passages of these writings are extant.
Eusebius (H.E., IV, xxiii, 4) mentions a letter of Dionysius of Corinth (c. 170) to the Nicomedians, in which he attacks the heresy of Marcion. The letter is not extant. Clement of Alexandria (d. c. 215) only indirectly combated Gnosticism by defending the true Christian Gnosis, especially in "Paedagogos", Bk. I, "Stromateis", Bk. II, III, V, and in the so-called eighth book or "Excerpta ex Theodoto". Origen devoted no work exclusively to the refutation of Gnosticism but his four books "On First Principles" (Peri archon), written about the year 230, and preserved to us only in some Greek fragments and a free Latin translation by Rufinus, is practically a refutation of Gnostic dualism, Docetism, and Emanationism.
About the year 300 an unknown Syrian author, sometimes erroneously identified with Origen, and often called by the literary pseudonym Adamantius, or "The Man of Steel", wrote a long dialogue of which the title is lost, but which is usually designated by the words, "De rectâ in Deum fide". This dialogue, usually divided into five books, contains discussions with representatives of two sects of Marcionism, of Valentinianism, and of Bardesanism. The writer plagiarizes extensively from Theophilus of Antioch and Methodius of Olympus, especially the latter's anti-Gnostic dialogue "On Free Will" (Peri tou autexousiou).
The greatest anti-Gnostic controversialist of the early Christian Church is Tertullian (b. 169), who practically devoted his life to combating this dreadful sum of all heresies. We need but mention the titles of his anti-Gnostic works: "De Praescriptione haereticorum"; "Adversus Marcionem"; a book "Adversus Valentinianos"; "Scorpiace"; "De Carne Christi"; "De Resurrectione Carnis"; and finally "Adversus Praxeam".
A storehouse of information rather than a refutation is the great work of Hippolytus, written some time after A.D. 234, once called "Philosophoumena" and ascribed to Origen, but since the discovery of Books IV-X, in 1842, known by the name if its true author and its true title, "Refutation of All Heresies" (katapason aireseon elegchos).
The publication of the Athos Codex by E. Miller (Oxford, 1851) revolutionized the study of Gnosticism and rendered works published previous to that date antiquated and almost worthless. To students of Gnosticism this work is as indispensable as that of St. Irenæus. There is an English translation by J. MacMahon in "The Ante-Nicene Library" (Edinburgh, 1868). Hippolytus tried to prove that all Gnosticism was derived from heathen philosophy; his speculations may be disregarded, but, as he was in possession of a great number of Gnostic writings from which he quotes, his information is priceless. As he wrote nearly fifty years after St. Irenæus, whose disciple he had been, he describes a later development of Gnosis than the Bishop of Lyons. Besides his greater work, Hippolytus wrote, many years previously (before 217), a small compendium against all heresies, giving a list of the same, thirty-two in number, from Dositheus to Noetus; also a treatise against Marcion.
As, from the beginning of the fourth century, Gnosticism was in rapid decline, there was less need of champions of orthodoxy, hence there is a long interval between Adamantius's dialogue and St. Epiphanius's "Panarion", begun in the year 374. St. Epiphanius, who is his youth was brought into closest contact with Gnostic sects in Egypt, and especially the Phibionists, and perhaps even, as some hold, belonged to this sect himself, is still a first-class authority. With marvelous industry he gathered information on all sides, but his injudicious and too credulous acceptance of many details can hardly be excused.
Philastrius of Brescia, a few years later (383), gave to the Latin Church what St. Epiphanius had given to the Greek. He counted and described no fewer than one hundred and twenty-eight heresies, but took the word in a somewhat wide and vague sense. Though dependent on the "Syntagma" of Hippolytus, his account is entirely independent of that of Epiphanius.
Another Latin writer, who probably lived in the middle of the fifth century in Southern Gaul, and who is probably identical with Arnobius the Younger, left a work, commonly called "Praedestinatus", consisting of three books, in the first of which he describes ninety heresies from Simon Magus to the Praedestinationists. This work unfortunately contains many doubtful and fabulous statements. Some time after the Council of Chalcedon (451) Theodoret wrote a "Compendium of Heretical Fables" which is of considerable value for the history of Gnosticism, because it gives in a very concise and objective way the history of the heresies since the time of Simon Magus. St. Augustine's book "De Haeresibus" (written about 428) is too dependent on Philastrius and Epiphanius to be of much value. Amongst anti-Gnostic writers we must finally mention the neo-Platonist Plotinus (d. A.D. 270), who wrote a treatise "Against the Gnostics". These were evidently scholars who frequented his collegia, but whose Oriental and fantastic pessimism was irreconcilable with Plotinus's views.
CONCLUSION
The attempt to picture Gnosticism as a mighty movement of the human mind towards the noblest and highest truth, a movement in some way parallel to that of Christianity, has completely failed. It has been abandoned by recent unprejudiced scholars such as W. Bousset and O. Gruppe, and it is to be regretted that it should have been renewed by an English writer, G.R.S. Mead, in "Fragments of a Faith Forgotten", an unscholarly and misleading work, which in English-speaking countries may retard the sober and true appreciation of Gnosticism as it was in historical fact.
Gnosticism was not an advance, it was a retrogression. It was born amidst the last throes of expiring cults and civilizations in Western Asia and Egypt. Though hellenized, these countries remained Oriental and Semitic to the core. This Oriental spirit -- Attis of Asia Minor, Istar of Babylonia, Isis of Egypt, with the astrological and cosmogonic lore of the Asiatic world -- first sore beset by Ahuramazda in the East, and then overwhelmed by the Divine greatness of Jesus Christ in the West, called a truce by the fusion of both Parseeism and Christianity with itself. It tried to do for the East what Neo-Platonism tried to do for the West. During at least two centuries it was a real danger to Christianity, though not so great as some modern writers would make us believe, as if the merest breath might have changed the fortunes of Gnostic, as against orthodox, Christianity.
Similar things are said of Mithraism and neo-Platonism as against the religion of Jesus Christ. But these sayings have more piquancy than objective truth. Christianity survived, and not Gnosticism, because the former was the fittest -- immeasurably, nay infinitely, so. Gnosticism died not by chance, but because it lacked vital power within itself; and no amount of theosophistic literature, flooding English and German markets, can give life to that which perished from intrinsic and essential defects.
It is striking that the two earliest champions of Christianity against Gnosticism -- Hegesippus and Irenaeus -- brought out so clearly the method of warfare which alone was possible, but which also alone sufficed to secure the victory in the conflict, a method which Tertullian some years later scientifically explained in his "De Praescriptione". Both Hegesippus and Irenaeus proved that Gnostic doctrines did not belong to that deposit of faith which was taught by the true succession of bishops in the primary sees of Christendom; both in triumphant conclusion drew up a list of the Bishops of Rome, from Peter to the Roman bishop of their day; as Gnosticism was not taught by that Church with which the Christians everywhere must agree, it stood self-condemned.
A just verdict on the Gnostics is that of O. Gruppe (Ausführungen, p. 162); the circumstances of the period gave them a certain importance. But a living force they never were, either in general history or in the history of Christendom. Gnosticism deserves attention as showing what mention dispositions Christianity found in existence, what obstacles it had to overcome to maintain its own life; but "means of mental progress it never was".
2 Maccabees 3: "Heli the King Verses Honi the Priest"
Listen to the story: stream MP3
Although we only relate the story in chapter three, we include the rest of the chapters here for the sake of context.
Chapter 1
1:1 The brethren, the Jews that be at Jerusalem and in the land of Judea, wish unto the brethren, the Jews that are throughout Egypt health and peace:
2 God be gracious unto you, and remember his covenant that he made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, his faithful servants; 3 And give you all an heart to serve him, and to do his will, with a good courage and a willing mind; 4 And open your hearts in his law and commandments, and send you peace, 5 And hear your prayers, and be at one with you, and never forsake you in time of trouble. 6 And now we be here praying for you.
7 What time as Demetrius reigned, in the hundred threescore and ninth year, we the Jews wrote unto you in the extremity of trouble that came upon us in those years, from the time that Jason and his company revolted from the holy land and kingdom, 8 And burned the porch, and shed innocent blood: then we prayed unto the Lord, and were heard; we offered also sacrifices and fine flour, and lighted the lamps, and set forth the loaves. 9 And now see that ye keep the feast of tabernacles in the month Casleu.
10 In the hundred fourscore and eighth year, the people that were at Jerusalem and in Judea, and the council, and Judas, sent greeting and health unto Aristobulus, king Ptolemeus’ master, who was of the stock of the anointed priests, and to the Jews that were in Egypt:
11 Insomuch as God hath delivered us from great perils, we thank him highly, as having been in battle against a king. 12 For he cast them out that fought within the holy city.
13 For when the leader was come into Persia, and the army with him that seemed invincible, they were slain in the temple of Nanea by the deceit of Nanea’s priests. 14 For Antiochus, as though he would marry her, came into the place, and his friends that were with him, to receive money in name of a dowry. 15 Which when the priests of Nanea had set forth, and he was entered with a small company into the compass of the temple, they shut the temple as soon as Antiochus was come in: 16 And opening a privy door of the roof, they threw stones like thunderbolts, and struck down the captain, hewed them in pieces, smote off their heads and cast them to those that were without.
17 Blessed be our God in all things, who hath delivered up the ungodly.
18 Therefore whereas we are now purposed to keep the purification of the temple upon the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, we thought it necessary to certify you thereof, that ye also might keep it, as the feast of the tabernacles, and of the fire, which was given us when Neemias offered sacrifice, after that he had builded the temple and the altar. 19 For when our fathers were led into Persia, the priests that were then devout took the fire of the altar privily, and hid it in an hollow place of a pit without water, where they kept it sure, so that the place was unknown to all men.
20 Now after many years, when it pleased God, Neemias, being sent from the king of Persia, did send of the posterity of those priests that had hid it to the fire: but when they told us they found no fire, but thick water; 21 Then commanded he them to draw it up, and to bring it; and when the sacrifices were laid on, Neemias commanded the priests to sprinkle the wood and the things laid thereupon with the water. 22 When this was done, and the time came that the sun shone, which afore was hid in the cloud, there was a great fire kindled, so that every man marvelled.
23 And the priests made a prayer whilst the sacrifice was consuming, I say, both the priests, and all the rest, Jonathan beginning, and the rest answering thereunto, as Neemias did.
24 And the prayer was after this manner; O Lord, Lord God, Creator of all things, who art fearful and strong, and righteous, and merciful, and the only and gracious King, 25 The only giver of all things, the only just, almighty, and everlasting, thou that deliverest Israel from all trouble, and didst choose the fathers, and sanctify them: 26 Receive the sacrifice for thy whole people Israel, and preserve thine own portion, and sanctify it. 27 Gather those together that are scattered from us, deliver them that serve among the heathen, look upon them that are despised and abhorred, and let the heathen know that thou art our God.
28 Punish them that oppress us, and with pride do us wrong. 29 Plant thy people again in thy holy place, as Moses hath spoken. 30 And the priests sung psalms of thanksgiving.
31 Now when the sacrifice was consumed, Neemias commanded the water that was left to be poured on the great stones. 32 When this was done, there was kindled a flame: but it was consumed by the light that shined from the altar.
33 So when this matter was known, it was told the king of Persia, that in the place, where the priests that were led away had hid the fire, there appeared water, and that Neemias had purified the sacrifices therewith. 34 Then the king, inclosing the place, made it holy, after he had tried the matter.
35 And the king took many gifts, and bestowed thereof on those whom he would gratify. 36 And Neemias called this thing Naphthar, which is as much as to say, a cleansing: but many men call it Nephi.
Chapter 2
2:1 It is also found in the records, that Jeremy the prophet commanded them that were carried away to take of the fire, as it hath been signified: 2 And how that the prophet, having given them the law, charged them not to forget the commandments of the Lord, and that they should not err in their minds, when they see images of silver and gold, with their ornaments. 3 And with other such speeches exhorted he them, that the law should not depart from their hearts.
4 It was also contained in the same writing, that the prophet, being warned of God, commanded the tabernacle and the ark to go with him, as he went forth into the mountain, where Moses climbed up, and saw the heritage of God. 5 And when Jeremy came thither, he found an hollow cave, wherein he laid the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of incense, and so stopped the door.
6 And some of those that followed him came to mark the way, but they could not find it. 7 Which when Jeremy perceived, he blamed them, saying, As for that place, it shall be unknown until the time that God gather his people again together, and receive them unto mercy. 8 Then shall the Lord shew them these things, and the glory of the Lord shall appear, and the cloud also, as it was shewed under Moses, and as when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably sanctified.
9 It was also declared, that he being wise offered the sacrifice of dedication, and of the finishing of the temple. 10 And as when Moses prayed unto the Lord, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the sacrifices: even so prayed Solomon also, and the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offerings. 11 And Moses said, Because the sin offering was not to be eaten, it was consumed. 12 So Solomon kept those eight days.
13 The same things also were reported in the writings and commentaries of Neemias; and how he founding a library gathered together the acts of the kings, and the prophets, and of David, and the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts. 14 In like manner also Judas gathered together all those things that were lost by reason of the war we had, and they remain with us, 15 Wherefore if ye have need thereof, send some to fetch them unto you.
16 Whereas we then are about to celebrate the purification, we have written unto you, and ye shall do well, if ye keep the same days. 17 We hope also, that the God, that delivered all his people, and gave them all an heritage, and the kingdom, and the priesthood, and the sanctuary, 18 As he promised in the law, will shortly have mercy upon us, and gather us together out of every land under heaven into the holy place: for he hath delivered us out of great troubles, and hath purified the place.
19 Now as concerning Judas Maccabeus, and his brethren, and the purification of the great temple, and the dedication of the altar, 20 And the wars against Antiochus Epiphanes, and Eupator his son, 21 And the manifest signs that came from heaven unto those that behaved themselves manfully to their honour for Judaism: so that, being but a few, they overcame the whole country, and chased barbarous multitudes, 22 And recovered again the temple renowned all the world over, and freed the city, and upheld the laws which were going down, the Lord being gracious unto them with all favour: 23 All these things, I say, being declared by Jason of Cyrene in five books, we will assay to abridge in one volume.
24 For considering the infinite number, and the difficulty which they find that desire to look into the narrations of the story, for the variety of the matter, 25 We have been careful, that they that will read may have delight, and that they that are desirous to commit to memory might have ease, and that all into whose hands it comes might have profit.
26 Therefore to us, that have taken upon us this painful labour of abridging, it was not easy, but a matter of sweat and watching; 27 Even as it is no ease unto him that prepareth a banquet, and seeketh the benefit of others: yet for the pleasuring of many we will undertake gladly this great pains; 28 Leaving to the author the exact handling of every particular, and labouring to follow the rules of an abridgement. 29 For as the master builder of a new house must care for the whole building; but he that undertaketh to set it out, and paint it, must seek out fit things for the adorning thereof: even so I think it is with us. 30 To stand upon every point, and go over things at large, and to be curious in particulars, belongeth to the first author of the story: 31 But to use brevity, and avoid much labouring of the work, is to be granted to him that will make an abridgment.
32 Here then will we begin the story: only adding thus much to that which hath been said, that it is a foolish thing to make a long prologue, and to be short in the story itself.
Chapter 3
3:1 Now when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws were kept very well, because of the godliness of Onias the high priest, and his hatred of wickedness, 2 It came to pass that even the kings themselves did honour the place, and magnify the temple with their best gifts; 3 Insomuch that Seleucus of Asia of his own revenues bare all the costs belonging to the service of the sacrifices.
4 But one Simon of the tribe of Benjamin, who was made governor of the temple, fell out with the high priest about disorder in the city. 5 And when he could not overcome Onias, he gat him to Apollonius the son of Thraseas, who then was governor of Celosyria and Phenice, 6 And told him that the treasury in Jerusalem was full of infinite sums of money, so that the multitude of their riches, which did not pertain to the account of the sacrifices, was innumerable, and that it was possible to bring all into the king’s hand.
7 Now when Apollonius came to the king, and had shewed him of the money whereof he was told, the king chose out Heliodorus his treasurer, and sent him with a commandment to bring him the foresaid money. 8 So forthwith Heliodorus took his journey; under a colour of visiting the cities of Celosyria and Phenice, but indeed to fulfil the king’s purpose.
9 And when he was come to Jerusalem, and had been courteously received of the high priest of the city, he told him what intelligence was given of the money, and declared wherefore he came, and asked if these things were so indeed.
10 Then the high priest told him that there was such money laid up for the relief of widows and fatherless children: 11 And that some of it belonged to Hircanus son of Tobias, a man of great dignity, and not as that wicked Simon had misinformed: the sum whereof in all was four hundred talents of silver, and two hundred of gold: 12 And that it was altogether impossible that such wrongs should be done unto them, that had committed it to the holiness of the place, and to the majesty and inviolable sanctity of the temple, honoured over all the world.
13 But Heliodorus, because of the king’s commandment given him, said, That in any wise it must be brought into the king’s treasury. 14 So at the day which he appointed he entered in to order this matter: wherefore there was no small agony throughout the whole city. 15 But the priests, prostrating themselves before the altar in their priests’ vestments, called unto heaven upon him that made a law concerning things given to he kept, that they should safely be preserved for such as had committed them to be kept.
16 Then whoso had looked the high priest in the face, it would have wounded his heart: for his countenance and the changing of his colour declared the inward agony of his mind. 17 For the man was so compassed with fear and horror of the body, that it was manifest to them that looked upon him, what sorrow he had now in his heart.
18 Others ran flocking out of their houses to the general supplication, because the place was like to come into contempt. 19 And the women, girt with sackcloth under their breasts, abounded in the streets, and the virgins that were kept in ran, some to the gates, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows. 20 And all, holding their hands toward heaven, made supplication.
21 Then it would have pitied a man to see the falling down of the multitude of all sorts, and the fear of the high priest being in such an agony. 22 They then called upon the Almighty Lord to keep the things committed of trust safe and sure for those that had committed them.
23 Nevertheless Heliodorus executed that which was decreed.
24 Now as he was there present himself with his guard about the treasury, the Lord of spirits, and the Prince of all power, caused a great apparition, so that all that presumed to come in with him were astonished at the power of God, and fainted, and were sore afraid. 25 For there appeared unto them an horse with a terrible rider upon him, and adorned with a very fair covering, and he ran fiercely, and smote at Heliodorus with his forefeet, and it seemed that he that sat upon the horse had complete harness of gold.
26 Moreover two other young men appeared before him, notable in strength, excellent in beauty, and comely in apparel, who stood by him on either side; and scourged him continually, and gave him many sore stripes.
27 And Heliodorus fell suddenly unto the ground, and was compassed with great darkness: but they that were with him took him up, and put him into a litter. 28 Thus him, that lately came with a great train and with all his guard into the said treasury, they carried out, being unable to help himself with his weapons: and manifestly they acknowledged the power of God. 29 For he by the hand of God was cast down, and lay speechless without all hope of life. 30 But they praised the Lord, that had miraculously honoured his own place: for the temple; which a little afore was full of fear and trouble, when the Almighty Lord appeared, was filled with joy and gladness.
31 Then straightways certain of Heliodorus’ friends prayed Onias, that he would call upon the most High to grant him his life, who lay ready to give up the ghost. 32 So the high priest, suspecting lest the king should misconceive that some treachery had been done to Heliodorus by the Jews, offered a sacrifice for the health of the man.
33 Now as the high priest was making an atonement, the same young men in the same clothing appeared and stood beside Heliodorus, saying, Give Onias the high priest great thanks, insomuch as for his sake the Lord hath granted thee life: 34 And seeing that thou hast been scourged from heaven, declare unto all men the mighty power of God. And when they had spoken these words, they appeared no more.
35 So Heliodorus, after he had offered sacrifice unto the Lord, and made great vows unto him that had saved his life, and saluted Onias, returned with his host to the king. 36 Then testified he to all men the works of the great God, which he had seen with his eyes.
37 And when the king Heliodorus, who might be a fit man to be sent yet once again to Jerusalem, he said, 38 If thou hast any enemy or traitor, send him thither, and thou shalt receive him well scourged, if he escape with his life: for in that place, no doubt; there is an especial power of God.
39 For he that dwelleth in heaven hath his eye on that place, and defendeth it; and he beateth and destroyeth them that come to hurt it.
40 And the things concerning Heliodorus, and the keeping of the treasury, fell out on this sort.
Chapter 4
4:1 This Simon now, of whom we spake afore, having been a betrayer of the money, and of his country, slandered Onias, as if he ha terrified Heliodorus, and been the worker of these evils. 2 Thus was he bold to call him a traitor, that had deserved well of the city, and tendered his own nation, and was so zealous of the laws.
3 But when their hatred went so far, that by one of Simon’s faction murders were committed, 4 Onias seeing the danger of this contention, and that Apollonius, as being the governor of Celosyria and Phenice, did rage, and increase Simon’s malice, 5 He went to the king, not to be an accuser of his countrymen, but seeking the good of all, both publick and private: 6 For he saw that it was impossible that the state should continue quiet, and Simon leave his folly, unless the king did look thereunto.
7 But after the death of Seleucus, when Antiochus, called Epiphanes, took the kingdom, Jason the brother of Onias laboured underhand to be high priest, 8 Promising unto the king by intercession three hundred and threescore talents of silver, and of another revenue eighty talents: 9 Beside this, he promised to assign an hundred and fifty more, if he might have licence to set him up a place for exercise, and for the training up of youth in the fashions of the heathen, and to write them of Jerusalem by the name of Antiochians. 10 Which when the king had granted, and he had gotten into his hand the rule he forthwith brought his own nation to Greekish fashion.
11 And the royal privileges granted of special favour to the Jews by the means of John the father of Eupolemus, who went ambassador to Rome for amity and aid, he took away; and putting down the governments which were according to the law, he brought up new customs against the law: 12 For he built gladly a place of exercise under the tower itself, and brought the chief young men under his subjection, and made them wear a hat.
13 Now such was the height of Greek fashions, and increase of heathenish manners, through the exceeding profaneness of Jason, that ungodly wretch, and no high priest; 14 That the priests had no courage to serve any more at the altar, but despising the temple, and neglecting the sacrifices, hastened to be partakers of the unlawful allowance in the place of exercise, after the game of Discus called them forth; 15 Not setting by the honours of their fathers, but liking the glory of the Grecians best of all.
16 By reason whereof sore calamity came upon them: for they had them to be their enemies and avengers, whose custom they followed so earnestly, and unto whom they desired to be like in all things. 17 For it is not a light thing to do wickedly against the laws of God: but the time following shall declare these things.
18 Now when the game that was used every faith year was kept at Tyrus, the king being present, 19 This ungracious Jason sent special messengers from Jerusalem, who were Antiochians, to carry three hundred drachms of silver to the sacrifice of Hercules, which even the bearers thereof thought fit not to bestow upon the sacrifice, because it was not convenient, but to be reserved for other charges. 20 This money then, in regard of the sender, was appointed to Hercules’ sacrifice; but because of the bearers thereof, it was employed to the making of gallies.
21 Now when Apollonius the son of Menestheus was sent into Egypt for the coronation of king Ptolemeus Philometor, Antiochus, understanding him not to be well affected to his affairs, provided for his own safety: whereupon he came to Joppa, and from thence to Jerusalem: 22 Where he was honourably received of Jason, and of the city, and was brought in with torch alight, and with great shoutings: and so afterward went with his host unto Phenice.
23 Three years afterward Jason sent Menelaus, the aforesaid Simon’s brother, to bear the money unto the king, and to put him in mind of certain necessary matters. 24 But he being brought to the presence of the king, when he had magnified him for the glorious appearance of his power, got the priesthood to himself, offering more than Jason by three hundred talents of silver. 25 So he came with the king’s mandate, bringing nothing worthy the high priesthood, but having the fury of a cruel tyrant, and the rage of a savage beast.
26 Then Jason, who had undermined his own brother, being undermined by another, was compelled to flee into the country of the Ammonites. 27 So Menelaus got the principality: but as for the money that he had promised unto the king, he took no good order for it, albeit Sostratis the ruler of the castle required it: 28 For unto him appertained the gathering of the customs. Wherefore they were both called before the king.
29 Now Menelaus left his brother Lysimachus in his stead in the priesthood; and Sostratus left Crates, who was governor of the Cyprians.
30 While those things were in doing, they of Tarsus and Mallos made insurrection, because they were given to the king’s concubine, called Antiochus. 31 Then came the king in all haste to appease matters, leaving Andronicus, a man in authority, for his deputy.
32 Now Menelaus, supposing that he had gotten a convenient time, stole certain vessels of gold out of the temple, and gave some of them to Andronicus, and some he sold into Tyrus and the cities round about. 33 Which when Onias knew of a surety, he reproved him, and withdrew himself into a sanctuary at Daphne, that lieth by Antiochia.
34 Wherefore Menelaus, taking Andronicus apart, prayed, him to get Onias into his hands; who being persuaded thereunto, and coming to Onias in deceit, gave him his right hand with oaths; and though he were suspected by him, yet persuaded he him to come forth of the sanctuary: whom forthwith he shut up without regard of justice. 35 For the which cause not only the Jews, but many also of other nations, took great indignation, and were much grieved for the unjust murder of the man.
36 And when the king was come again from the places about Cilicia, the Jews that were in the city, and certain of the Greeks that abhorred the fact also, complained because Onias was slain without cause. 37 Therefore Antiochus was heartily sorry, and moved to pity, and wept, because of the sober and modest behaviour of him that was dead. 38 And being kindled with anger, forthwith he took away Andronicus his purple, and rent off his clothes, and leading him through the whole city unto that very place, where he had committed impiety against Onias, there slew he the cursed murderer. Thus the Lord rewarded him his punishment, as he had deserved.
39 Now when many sacrileges had been committed in the city by Lysimachus with the consent of Menelaus, and the fruit thereof was spread abroad, the multitude gathered themselves together against Lysimachus, many vessels of gold being already carried away. 40 Whereupon the common people rising, and being filled with rage, Lysimachus armed about three thousand men, and began first to offer violence; one Auranus being the leader, a man far gone in years, and no less in folly.
41 They then seeing the attempt of Lysimachus, some of them caught stones, some clubs, others taking handfuls of dust, that was next at hand, cast them all together upon Lysimachus, and those that set upon them. 42 Thus many of them they wounded, and some they struck to the ground, and all of them they forced to flee: but as for the churchrobber himself, him they killed beside the treasury.
43 Of these matters therefore there was an accusation laid against Menelaus. 44 Now when the king came to Tyrus, three men that were sent from the senate pleaded the cause before him: 45 But Menelaus, being now convicted, promised Ptolemee the son of Dorymenes to give him much money, if he would pacify the king toward him. 46 Whereupon Ptolemee taking the king aside into a certain gallery, as it were to take the air, brought him to be of another mind: 47 Insomuch that he discharged Menelaus from the accusations, who notwithstanding was cause of all the mischief: and those poor men, who, if they had told their cause, yea, before the Scythians, should have been judged innocent, them he condemned to death.
48 Thus they that followed the matter for the city, and for the people, and for the holy vessels, did soon suffer unjust punishment. 49 Wherefore even they of Tyrus, moved with hatred of that wicked deed, caused them to be honourably buried. 50 And so through the covetousness of them that were of power Menelaus remained still in authority, increasing in malice, and being a great traitor to the citizens.
Chapter 5
5:1 About the same time Antiochus prepared his second voyage into Egypt: 2 And then it happened, that through all the city, for the space almost of forty days, there were seen horsemen running in the air, in cloth of gold, and armed with lances, like a band of soldiers, 3 And troops of horsemen in array, encountering and running one against another, with shaking of shields, and multitude of pikes, and drawing of swords, and casting of darts, and glittering of golden ornaments, and harness of all sorts. 4 Wherefore every man prayed that that apparition might turn to good.
5 Now when there was gone forth a false rumour, as though Antiochus had been dead, Jason took at the least a thousand men, and suddenly made an assault upon the city; and they that were upon the walls being put back, and the city at length taken, Menelaus fled into the castle: 6 But Jason slew his own citizens without mercy, not considering that to get the day of them of his own nation would be a most unhappy day for him; but thinking they had been his enemies, and not his countrymen, whom he conquered. 7 Howbeit for all this he obtained not the principality, but at the last received shame for the reward of his treason, and fled again into the country of the Ammonites.
8 In the end therefore he had an unhappy return, being accused before Aretas the king of the Arabians, fleeing from city to city, pursued of all men, hated as a forsaker of the laws, and being had in abomination as an open enemy of his country and countrymen, he was cast out into Egypt. 9 Thus he that had driven many out of their country perished in a strange land, retiring to the Lacedemonians, and thinking there to find succour by reason of his kindred: 10 And he that had cast out many unburied had none to mourn for him, nor any solemn funerals at all, nor sepulchre with his fathers.
11 Now when this that was done came to the king’s ear, he thought that Judea had revolted: whereupon removing out of Egypt in a furious mind, he took the city by force of arms, 12 And commanded his men of war not to spare such as they met, and to slay such as went up upon the houses. 13 Thus there was killing of young and old, making away of men, women, and children, slaying of virgins and infants. 14 And there were destroyed within the space of three whole days fourscore thousand, whereof forty thousand were slain in the conflict; and no fewer sold than slain.
15 Yet was he not content with this, but presumed to go into the most holy temple of all the world; Menelaus, that traitor to the laws, and to his own country, being his guide: 16 And taking the holy vessels with polluted hands, and with profane hands pulling down the things that were dedicated by other kings to the augmentation and glory and honour of the place, he gave them away.
17 And so haughty was Antiochus in mind, that he considered not that the Lord was angry for a while for the sins of them that dwelt in the city, and therefore his eye was not upon the place. 18 For had they not been formerly wrapped in many sins, this man, as soon as he had come, had forthwith been scourged, and put back from his presumption, as Heliodorus was, whom Seleucus the king sent to view the treasury.
19 Nevertheless God did not choose the people for the place’s sake, but the place for the people’s sake. 20 And therefore the place itself, that was partaker with them of the adversity that happened to the nation, did afterward communicate in the benefits sent from the Lord: and as it was forsaken in the wrath of the Almighty, so again, the great Lord being reconciled, it was set up with all glory.
21 So when Antiochus had carried out of the temple a thousand and eight hundred talents, he departed in all haste unto Antiochia, weening in his pride to make the land navigable, and the sea passable by foot: such was the haughtiness of his mind.
22 And he left governors to vex the nation: at Jerusalem, Philip, for his country a Phrygian, and for manners more barbarous than he that set him there; 23 And at Garizim, Andronicus; and besides, Menelaus, who worse than all the rest bare an heavy hand over the citizens, having a malicious mind against his countrymen the Jews.
24 He sent also that detestable ringleader Apollonius with an army of two and twenty thousand, commanding him to slay all those that were in their best age, and to sell the women and the younger sort: 25 Who coming to Jerusalem, and pretending peace, did forbear till the holy day of the sabbath, when taking the Jews keeping holy day, he commanded his men to arm themselves. 26 And so he slew all them that were gone to the celebrating of the sabbath, and running through the city with weapons slew great multitudes.
27 But Judas Maccabeus with nine others, or thereabout, withdrew himself into the wilderness, and lived in the mountains after the manner of beasts, with his company, who fed on herbs continually, lest they should be partakers of the pollution.
Chapter 6
6:1 Not long after this the king sent an old man of Athens to compel the Jews to depart from the laws of their fathers, and not to live after the laws of God: 2 And to pollute also the temple in Jerusalem, and to call it the temple of Jupiter Olympius; and that in Garizim, of Jupiter the Defender of strangers, as they did desire that dwelt in the place.
3 The coming in of this mischief was sore and grievous to the people: 4 For the temple was filled with riot and revelling by the Gentiles, who dallied with harlots, and had to do with women within the circuit of the holy places, and besides that brought in things that were not lawful. 5 The altar also was filled with profane things, which the law forbiddeth. 6 Neither was it lawful for a man to keep sabbath days or ancient fasts, or to profess himself at all to be a Jew.
7 And in the day of the king’s birth every month they were brought by bitter constraint to eat of the sacrifices; and when the fast of Bacchus was kept, the Jews were compelled to go in procession to Bacchus, carrying ivy.
8 Moreover there went out a decree to the neighbour cities of the heathen, by the suggestion of Ptolemee, against the Jews, that they should observe the same fashions, and be partakers of their sacrifices: 9 And whoso would not conform themselves to the manners of the Gentiles should be put to death. Then might a man have seen the present misery.
10 For there were two women brought, who had circumcised their children; whom when they had openly led round about the city, the babes handing at their breasts, they cast them down headlong from the wall. 11 And others, that had run together into caves near by, to keep the sabbath day secretly, being discovered by Philip, were all burnt together, because they made a conscience to help themselves for the honour of the most sacred day.
12 Now I beseech those that read this book, that they be not discouraged for these calamities, but that they judge those punishments not to be for destruction, but for a chastening of our nation. 13 For it is a token of his great goodness, when wicked doers are not suffered any long time, but forthwith punished.
14 For not as with other nations, whom the Lord patiently forbeareth to punish, till they be come to the fulness of their sins, so dealeth he with us, 15 Lest that, being come to the height of sin, afterwards he should take vengeance of us. 16 And therefore he never withdraweth his mercy from us: and though he punish with adversity, yet doth he never forsake his people. 17 But let this that we at spoken be for a warning unto us. And now will we come to the declaring of the matter in a few words.
18 Eleazar, one of the principal scribes, an aged man, and of a well favoured countenance, was constrained to open his mouth, and to eat swine’s flesh. 19 But he, choosing rather to die gloriously, than to live stained with such an abomination, spit it forth, and came of his own accord to the torment, 20 As it behoved them to come, that are resolute to stand out against such things, as are not lawful for love of life to be tasted.
21 But they that had the charge of that wicked feast, for the old acquaintance they had with the man, taking him aside, besought him to bring flesh of his own provision, such as was lawful for him to use, and make as if he did eat of the flesh taken from the sacrifice commanded by the king; 22 That in so doing he might be delivered from death, and for the old friendship with them find favour.
23 But he began to consider discreetly, and as became his age, and the excellency of his ancient years, and the honour of his gray head, whereon was come, and his most honest education from a child, or rather the holy law made and given by God: therefore he answered accordingly, and willed them straightways to send him to the grave.
24 For it becometh not our age, said he, in any wise to dissemble, whereby many young persons might think that Eleazar, being fourscore years old and ten, were now gone to a strange religion; 25 And so they through mine hypocrisy, and desire to live a little time and a moment longer, should be deceived by me, and I get a stain to mine old age, and make it abominable. 26 For though for the present time I should be delivered from the punishment of men: yet should I not escape the hand of the Almighty, neither alive, nor dead.
27 Wherefore now, manfully changing this life, I will shew myself such an one as mine age requireth, 28 And leave a notable example to such as be young to die willingly and courageously for the honourable and holy laws. And when he had said these words, immediately he went to the torment: 29 They that led him changing the good will they bare him a little before into hatred, because the foresaid speeches proceeded, as they thought, from a desperate mind.
30 But when he was ready to die with stripes, he groaned, and said, It is manifest unto the Lord, that hath the holy knowledge, that whereas I might have been delivered from death, I now endure sore pains in body by being beaten: but in soul am well content to suffer these things, because I fear him. 31 And thus this man died, leaving his death for an example of a noble courage, and a memorial of virtue, not only unto young men, but unto all his nation.
Chapter 7
7:1 It came to pass also, that seven brethren with their mother were taken, and compelled by the king against the law to taste swine’s flesh, and were tormented with scourges and whips.
2 But one of them that spake first said thus, What wouldest thou ask or learn of us? we are ready to die, rather than to transgress the laws of our fathers.
3 Then the king, being in a rage, commanded pans and caldrons to be made hot: 4 Which forthwith being heated, he commanded to cut out the tongue of him that spake first, and to cut off the utmost parts of his body, the rest of his brethren and his mother looking on.
5 Now when he was thus maimed in all his members, he commanded him being yet alive to be brought to the fire, and to be fried in the pan: and as the vapour of the pan was for a good space dispersed, they exhorted one another with the mother to die manfully, saying thus, 6 The Lord God looketh upon us, and in truth hath comfort in us, as Moses in his song, which witnessed to their faces, declared, saying, And he shall be comforted in his servants.
7 So when the first was dead after this number, they brought the second to make him a mocking stock: and when they had pulled off the skin of his head with the hair, they asked him, Wilt thou eat, before thou be punished throughout every member of thy body? 8 But he answered in his own language, and said, No. Wherefore he also received the next torment in order, as the former did. 9 And when he was at the last gasp, he said, Thou like a fury takest us out of this present life, but the King of the world shall raise us up, who have died for his laws, unto everlasting life.
10 After him was the third made a mocking stock: and when he was required, he put out his tongue, and that right soon, holding forth his hands manfully. 11 And said courageously, These I had from heaven; and for his laws I despise them; and from him I hope to receive them again. 12 Insomuch that the king, and they that were with him, marvelled at the young man’s courage, for that he nothing regarded the pains.
13 Now when this man was dead also, they tormented and mangled the fourth in like manner. 14 So when he was ready to die he said thus, It is good, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God to be raised up again by him: as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to life.
15 Afterward they brought the fifth also, and mangled him. 16 Then looked he unto the king, and said, Thou hast power over men, thou art corruptible, thou doest what thou wilt; yet think not that our nation is forsaken of God; 17 But abide a while, and behold his great power, how he will torment thee and thy seed.
18 After him also they brought the sixth, who being ready to die said, Be not deceived without cause: for we suffer these things for ourselves, having sinned against our God: therefore marvellous things are done unto us. 19 But think not thou, that takest in hand to strive against God, that thou shalt escape unpunished.
20 But the mother was marvellous above all, and worthy of honourable memory: for when she saw her seven sons slain within the space of one day, she bare it with a good courage, because of the hope that she had in the Lord. 21 Yea, she exhorted every one of them in her own language, filled with courageous spirits; and stirring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she said unto them, 22 I cannot tell how ye came into my womb: for I neither gave you breath nor life, neither was it I that formed the members of every one of you; 23 But doubtless the Creator of the world, who formed the generation of man, and found out the beginning of all things, will also of his own mercy give you breath and life again, as ye now regard not your own selves for his laws’ sake.
24 Now Antiochus, thinking himself despised, and suspecting it to be a reproachful speech, whilst the youngest was yet alive, did not only exhort him by words, but also assured him with oaths, that he would make him both a rich and a happy man, if he would turn from the laws of his fathers; and that also he would take him for his friend, and trust him with affairs.
25 But when the young man would in no case hearken unto him, the king called his mother, and exhorted her that she would counsel the young man to save his life. 26 And when he had exhorted her with many words, she promised him that she would counsel her son.
27 But she bowing herself toward him, laughing the cruel tyrant to scorn, spake in her country language on this manner; O my son, have pity upon me that bare thee nine months in my womb, and gave thee such three years, and nourished thee, and brought thee up unto this age, and endured the troubles of education. 28 I beseech thee, my son, look upon the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, and consider that God made them of things that were not; and so was mankind made likewise. 29 Fear not this tormentor, but, being worthy of thy brethren, take thy death that I may receive thee again in mercy with thy brethren.
30 Whiles she was yet speaking these words, the young man said, Whom wait ye for? I will not obey the king’s commandment: but I will obey the commandment of the law that was given unto our fathers by Moses. 31 And thou, that hast been the author of all mischief against the Hebrews, shalt not escape the hands of God.
32 For we suffer because of our sins. 33 And though the living Lord be angry with us a little while for our chastening and correction, yet shall he be at one again with his servants. 34 But thou, O godless man, and of all other most wicked, be not lifted up without a cause, nor puffed up with uncertain hopes, lifting up thy hand against the servants of God: 35 For thou hast not yet escaped the judgment of Almighty God, who seeth all things.
36 For our brethren, who now have suffered a short pain, are dead under God’s covenant of everlasting life: but thou, through the judgment of God, shalt receive just punishment for thy pride. 37 But I, as my brethren, offer up my body and life for the laws of our fathers, beseeching God that he would speedily be merciful unto our nation; and that thou by torments and plagues mayest confess, that he alone is God; 38 And that in me and my brethren the wrath of the Almighty, which is justly brought upon our nation, may cease.
39 Than the king’ being in a rage, handed him worse than all the rest, and took it grievously that he was mocked. 40 So this man died undefiled, and put his whole trust in the Lord.
41 Last of all after the sons the mother died.
42 Let this be enough now to have spoken concerning the idolatrous feasts, and the extreme tortures.
Chapter 8
8:1 Then Judas Maccabeus, and they that were with him, went privily into the towns, and called their kinsfolks together, and took unto them all such as continued in the Jews’ religion, and assembled about six thousand men.
2 And they called upon the Lord, that he would look upon the people that was trodden down of all; and also pity the temple profaned of ungodly men; 3 And that he would have compassion upon the city, sore defaced, and ready to be made even with the ground; and hear the blood that cried unto him, 4 And remember the wicked slaughter of harmless infants, and the blasphemies committed against his name; and that he would shew his hatred against the wicked.
5 Now when Maccabeus had his company about him, he could not be withstood by the heathen: for the wrath of the Lord was turned into mercy. 6 Therefore he came at unawares, and burnt up towns and cities, and got into his hands the most commodious places, and overcame and put to flight no small number of his enemies. 7 But specially took he advantage of the night for such privy attempts, insomuch that the fruit of his holiness was spread every where.
8 So when Philip saw that this man increased by little and little, and that things prospered with him still more and more, he wrote unto Ptolemeus, the governor of Celosyria and Phenice, to yield more aid to the king’s affairs.
9 Then forthwith choosing Nicanor the son of Patroclus, one of his special friends, he sent him with no fewer than twenty thousand of all nations under him, to root out the whole generation of the Jews; and with him he joined also Gorgias a captain, who in matters of war had great experience.
10 So Nicanor undertook to make so much money of the captive Jews, as should defray the tribute of two thousand talents, which the king was to pay to the Romans. 11 Wherefore immediately he sent to the cities upon the sea coast, proclaiming a sale of the captive Jews, and promising that they should have fourscore and ten bodies for one talent, not expecting the vengeance that was to follow upon him from the Almighty God.
12 Now when word was brought unto Judas of Nicanor’s coming, and he had imparted unto those that were with him that the army was at hand, 13 They that were fearful, and distrusted the justice of God, fled, and conveyed themselves away.
14 Others sold all that they had left, and withal besought the Lord to deliver them, sold by the wicked Nicanor before they met together: 15 And if not for their own sakes, yet for the covenants he had made with their fathers, and for his holy and glorious name’s sake, by which they were called.
16 So Maccabeus called his men together unto the number of six thousand, and exhorted them not to be stricken with terror of the enemy, nor to fear the great multitude of the heathen, who came wrongly against them; but to fight manfully, 17 And to set before their eyes the injury that they had unjustly done to the holy place, and the cruel handling of the city, whereof they made a mockery, and also the taking away of the government of their forefathers: 18 For they, said he, trust in their weapons and boldness; but our confidence is in the Almighty who at a beck can cast down both them that come against us, and also all the world.
19 Moreover, he recounted unto them what helps their forefathers had found, and how they were delivered, when under Sennacherib an hundred fourscore and five thousand perished. 20 And he told them of the battle that they had in Babylon with the Galatians, how they came but eight thousand in all to the business, with four thousand Macedonians, and that the Macedonians being perplexed, the eight thousand destroyed an hundred and twenty thousand because of the help that they had from heaven, and so received a great booty.
21 Thus when he had made them bold with these words, and ready to die for the law and the country, he divided his army into four parts; 22 And joined with himself his own brethren, leaders of each band, to wit Simon, and Joseph, and Jonathan, giving each one fifteen hundred men. 23 Also he appointed Eleazar to read the holy book: and when he had given them this watchword, The help of God; himself leading the first band,
24 And by the help of the Almighty they slew above nine thousand of their enemies, and wounded and maimed the most part of Nicanor’s host, and so put all to flight; 25 And took their money that came to buy them, and pursued them far: but lacking time they returned: 26 For it was the day before the sabbath, and therefore they would no longer pursue them.
27 So when they had gathered their armour together, and spoiled their enemies, they occupied themselves about the sabbath, yielding exceeding praise and thanks to the Lord, who had preserved them unto that day, which was the beginning of mercy distilling upon them.
28 And after the sabbath, when they had given part of the spoils to the maimed, and the widows, and orphans, the residue they divided among themselves and their servants. 29 When this was done, and they had made a common supplication, they besought the merciful Lord to be reconciled with his servants for ever.
30 Moreover of those that were with Timotheus and Bacchides, who fought against them, they slew above twenty thousand, and very easily got high and strong holds, and divided among themselves many spoils more, and made the maimed, orphans, widows, yea, and the aged also, equal in spoils with themselves. 31 And when they had gathered their armour together, they laid them up all carefully in convenient places, and the remnant of the spoils they brought to Jerusalem.
32 They slew also Philarches, that wicked person, who was with Timotheus, and had annoyed the Jews many ways. 33 Furthermore at such time as they kept the feast for the victory in their country they burnt Callisthenes, that had set fire upon the holy gates, who had fled into a little house; and so he received a reward meet for his wickedness.
34 As for that most ungracious Nicanor, who had brought a thousand merchants to buy the Jews, 35 He was through the help of the Lord brought down by them, of whom he made least account; and putting off his glorious apparel, and discharging his company, he came like a fugitive servant through the midland unto Antioch having very great dishonour, for that his host was destroyed. 36 Thus he, that took upon him to make good to the Romans their tribute by means of captives in Jerusalem, told abroad, that the Jews had God to fight for them, and therefore they could not be hurt, because they followed the laws that he gave them.
Chapter 9
9:1 About that time came Antiochus with dishonour out of the country of Persia 2 For he had entered the city called Persepolis, and went about to rob the temple, and to hold the city; whereupon the multitude running to defend themselves with their weapons put them to flight; and so it happened, that Antiochus being put to flight of the inhabitants returned with shame.
3 Now when he came to Ecbatane, news was brought him what had happened unto Nicanor and Timotheus. 4 Then swelling with anger. he thought to avenge upon the Jews the disgrace done unto him by those that made him flee. Therefore commanded he his chariotman to drive without ceasing, and to dispatch the journey, the judgment of God now following him. For he had spoken proudly in this sort, That he would come to Jerusalem and make it a common burying place of the Jews.
5 But the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, smote him with an incurable and invisible plague: or as soon as he had spoken these words, a pain of the bowels that was remediless came upon him, and sore torments of the inner parts; 6 And that most justly: for he had tormented other men’s bowels with many and strange torments.
7 Howbeit he nothing at all ceased from his bragging, but still was filled with pride, breathing out fire in his rage against the Jews, and commanding to haste the journey: but it came to pass that he fell down from his chariot, carried violently; so that having a sore fall, all the members of his body were much pained.
8 And thus he that a little afore thought he might command the waves of the sea, (so proud was he beyond the condition of man) and weigh the high mountains in a balance, was now cast on the ground, and carried in an horselitter, shewing forth unto all the manifest power of God. 9 So that the worms rose up out of the body of this wicked man, and whiles he lived in sorrow and pain, his flesh fell away, and the filthiness of his smell was noisome to all his army. 10 And the man, that thought a little afore he could reach to the stars of heaven, no man could endure to carry for his intolerable stink.
11 Here therefore, being plagued, he began to leave off his great pride, and to come to the knowledge of himself by the scourge of God, his pain increasing every moment. 12 And when he himself could not abide his own smell, he said these words, It is meet to be subject unto God, and that a man that is mortal should not proudly think of himself if he were God.
13 This wicked person vowed also unto the Lord, who now no more would have mercy upon him, saying thus, 14 That the holy city (to the which he was going in haste to lay it even with the ground, and to make it a common buryingplace,) he would set at liberty: 15 And as touching the Jews, whom he had judged not worthy so much as to be buried, but to be cast out with their children to be devoured of the fowls and wild beasts, he would make them all equals to the citizens of Athens: 16 And the holy temple, which before he had spoiled, he would garnish with goodly gifts, and restore all the holy vessels with many more, and out of his own revenue defray the charges belonging to the sacrifices: 17 Yea, and that also he would become a Jew himself, and go through all the world that was inhabited, and declare the power of God.
18 But for all this his pains would not cease: for the just judgment of God was come upon him: therefore despairing of his health, he wrote unto the Jews the letter underwritten, containing the form of a supplication, after this manner:
19 Antiochus, king and governor, to the good Jews his citizens wisheth much joy, health, and prosperity: 20 If ye and your children fare well, and your affairs be to your contentment, I give very great thanks to God, having my hope in heaven.
21 As for me, I was weak, or else I would have remembered kindly your honour and good will returning out of Persia, and being taken with a grievous disease, I thought it necessary to care for the common safety of all: 22 Not distrusting mine health, but having great hope to escape this sickness. 23 But considering that even my father, at what time he led an army into the high countries. appointed a successor, 24 To the end that, if any thing fell out contrary to expectation, or if any tidings were brought that were grievous, they of the land, knowing to whom the state was left, might not be troubled:
25 Again, considering how that the princes that are borderers and neighbours unto my kingdom wait for opportunities, and expect what shall be the event. I have appointed my son Antiochus king, whom I often committed and commended unto many of you, when I went up into the high provinces; to whom I have written as followeth:
26 Therefore I pray and request you to remember the benefits that I have done unto you generally, and in special, and that every man will be still faithful to me and my son. 27 For I am persuaded that he understanding my mind will favourably and graciously yield to your desires.
28 Thus the murderer and blasphemer having suffered most grievously, as he entreated other men, so died he a miserable death in a strange country in the mountains. 29 And Philip, that was brought up with him, carried away his body, who also fearing the son of Antiochus went into Egypt to Ptolemeus Philometor.
Chapter 10
10:1 Now Maccabeus and his company, the Lord guiding them, recovered the temple and the city: 2 But the altars which the heathen had built in the open street, and also the chapels, they pulled down.
3 And having cleansed the temple they made another altar, and striking stones they took fire out of them, and offered a sacrifice after two years, and set forth incense, and lights, and shewbread. 4 When that was done, they fell flat down, and besought the Lord that they might come no more into such troubles; but if they sinned any more against him, that he himself would chasten them with mercy, and that they might not be delivered unto the blasphemous and barbarous nations.
5 Now upon the same day that the strangers profaned the temple, on the very same day it was cleansed again, even the five and twentieth day of the same month, which is Casleu.
6 And they kept the eight days with gladness, as in the feast of the tabernacles, remembering that not long afore they had held the feast of the tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts. 7 Therefore they bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, and sang psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his place. 8 They ordained also by a common statute and decree, That every year those days should be kept of the whole nation of the Jews.
9 And this was the end of Antiochus, called Epiphanes.
10 Now will we declare the acts of Antiochus Eupator, who was the son of this wicked man, gathering briefly the calamities of the wars. 11 So when he was come to the crown, he set one Lysias over the affairs of his realm, and appointed him his chief governor of Celosyria and Phenice.
12 For Ptolemeus, that was called Macron, choosing rather to do justice unto the Jews for the wrong that had been done unto them, endeavoured to continue peace with them. 13 Whereupon being accused of the king’s friends before Eupator, and called traitor at every word because he had left Cyprus, that Philometor had committed unto him, and departed to Antiochus Epiphanes, and seeing that he was in no honourable place, he was so discouraged, that he poisoned himself and died.
14 But when Gorgias was governor of the holds, he hired soldiers, and nourished war continually with the Jews: 15 And therewithal the Idumeans, having gotten into their hands the most commodious holds, kept the Jews occupied, and receiving those that were banished from Jerusalem, they went about to nourish war.
16 Then they that were with Maccabeus made supplication, and besought God that he would be their helper; and so they ran with violence upon the strong holds of the Idumeans, 17 And assaulting them strongly, they won the holds, and kept off all that fought upon the wall, and slew all that fell into their hands, and killed no fewer than twenty thousand.
18 And because certain, who were no less than nine thousand, were fled together into two very strong castles, having all manner of things convenient to sustain the siege, 19 Maccabeus left Simon and Joseph, and Zaccheus also, and them that were with him, who were enough to besiege them, and departed himself unto those places which more needed his help.
20 Now they that were with Simon, being led with covetousness, were persuaded for money through certain of those that were in the castle, and took seventy thousand drachms, and let some of them escape. 21 But when it was told Maccabeus what was done, he called the governors of the people together, and accused those men, that they had sold their brethren for money, and set their enemies free to fight against them. 22 So he slew those that were found traitors, and immediately took the two castles. 23 And having good success with his weapons in all things he took in hand, he slew in the two holds more than twenty thousand.
24 Now Timotheus, whom the Jews had overcome before, when he had gathered a great multitude of foreign forces, and horses out of Asia not a few, came as though he would take Jewry by force of arms. 25 But when he drew near, they that were with Maccabeus turned themselves to pray unto God, and sprinkled earth upon their heads, and girded their loins with sackcloth, 26 And fell down at the foot of the altar, and besought him to be merciful to them, and to be an enemy to their enemies, and an adversary to their adversaries, as the law declareth. 27 So after the prayer they took their weapons, and went on further from the city: and when they drew near to their enemies, they kept by themselves.
28 Now the sun being newly risen, they joined both together; the one part having together with their virtue their refuge also unto the Lord for a pledge of their success and victory: the other side making their rage leader of their battle
29 But when the battle waxed strong, there appeared unto the enemies from heaven five comely men upon horses, with bridles of gold, and two of them led the Jews, 30 And took Maccabeus betwixt them, and covered him on every side weapons, and kept him safe, but shot arrows and lightnings against the enemies: so that being confounded with blindness, and full of trouble, they were killed. 31 And there were slain of footmen twenty thousand and five hundred, and six hundred horsemen.
32 As for Timotheus himself, he fled into a very strong hold, called Gazara, where Chereas was governor.
33 But they that were with Maccabeus laid siege against the fortress courageously four days. 34 And they that were within, trusting to the strength of the place, blasphemed exceedingly, and uttered wicked words.
35 Nevertheless upon the fifth day early twenty young men of Maccabeus’ company, inflamed with anger because of the blasphemies, assaulted the wall manly, and with a fierce courage killed all that they met withal. 36 Others likewise ascending after them, whiles they were busied with them that were within, burnt the towers, and kindling fires burnt the blasphemers alive; and others broke open the gates, and, having received in the rest of the army, took the city, 37 And killed Timotheus, that was hid in a certain pit, and Chereas his brother, with Apollophanes.
38 When this was done, they praised the Lord with psalms and thanksgiving, who had done so great things for Israel, and given them the victory.
Chapter 11
11:1 Not long after the, Lysias the king’s protector and cousin, who also managed the affairs, took sore displeasure for the things that were done. 2 And when he had gathered about fourscore thousand with all the horsemen, he came against the Jews, thinking to make the city an habitation of the Gentiles, 3 And to make a gain of the temple, as of the other chapels of the heathen, and to set the high priesthood to sale every year: 4 Not at all considering the power of God but puffed up with his ten thousands of footmen, and his thousands of horsemen, and his fourscore elephants.
5 So he came to Judea, and drew near to Bethsura, which was a strong town, but distant from Jerusalem about five furlongs, and he laid sore siege unto it.
6 Now when they that were with Maccabeus heard that he besieged the holds, they and all the people with lamentation and tears besought the Lord that he would send a good angel to deliver Israel. 7 Then Maccabeus himself first of all took weapons, exhorting the other that they would jeopard themselves together with him to help their brethren: so they went forth together with a willing mind.
8 And as they were at Jerusalem, there appeared before them on horseback one in white clothing, shaking his armour of gold. 9 Then they praised the merciful God all together, and took heart, insomuch that they were ready not only to fight with men, but with most cruel beasts, and to pierce through walls of iron. 10 Thus they marched forward in their armour, having an helper from heaven: for the Lord was merciful unto them 11 And giving a charge upon their enemies like lions, they slew eleven thousand footmen, and sixteen hundred horsemen, and put all the other to flight. 12 Many of them also being wounded escaped naked; and Lysias himself fled away shamefully, and so escaped.
13 Who, as he was a man of understanding, casting with himself what loss he had had, and considering that the Hebrews could not be overcome, because the Almighty God helped them, he sent unto them, 14 And persuaded them to agree to all reasonable conditions, and promised that he would persuade the king that he must needs be a friend unto them. 15 Then Maccabeus consented to all that Lysias desired, being careful of the common good; and whatsoever Maccabeus wrote unto Lysias concerning the Jews, the king granted it.
16 For there were letters written unto the Jews from Lysias to this effect: Lysias unto the people of the Jews sendeth greeting: 17 John and Absalon, who were sent from you, delivered me the petition subscribed, and made request for the performance of the contents thereof. 18 Therefore what things soever were meet to be reported to the king, I have declared them, and he hath granted as much as might be. 19 And if then ye will keep yourselves loyal to the state, hereafter also will I endeavour to be a means of your good. 20 But of the particulars I have given order both to these and the other that came from me, to commune with you. 21 Fare ye well. The hundred and eight and fortieth year, the four and twentieth day of the month Dioscorinthius.
22 Now the king’s letter contained these words: King Antiochus unto his brother Lysias sendeth greeting: 23 Since our father is translated unto the gods, our will is, that they that are in our realm live quietly, that every one may attend upon his own affairs. 24 We understand also that the Jews would not consent to our father, for to be brought unto the custom of the Gentiles, but had rather keep their own manner of living: for the which cause they require of us, that we should suffer them to live after their own laws. 25 Wherefore our mind is, that this nation shall be in rest, and we have determined to restore them their temple, that they may live according to the customs of their forefathers. 26 Thou shalt do well therefore to send unto them, and grant them peace, that when they are certified of our mind, they may be of good comfort, and ever go cheerfully about their own affairs.
27 And the letter of the king unto the nation of the Jews was after this manner: King Antiochus sendeth greeting unto the council, and the rest of the Jews: 28 If ye fare well, we have our desire; we are also in good health. 29 Menelaus declared unto us, that your desire was to return home, and to follow your own business: 30 Wherefore they that will depart shall have safe conduct till the thirtieth day of Xanthicus with security. 31 And the Jews shall use their own kind of meats and laws, as before; and none of them any manner of ways shall be molested for things ignorantly done. 32 I have sent also Menelaus, that he may comfort you. 33 Fare ye well. In the hundred forty and eighth year, and the fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus.
34 The Romans also sent unto them a letter containing these words: Quintus Memmius and Titus Manlius, ambassadors of the Romans, send greeting unto the people of the Jews. 35 Whatsoever Lysias the king’s cousin hath granted, therewith we also are well pleased. 36 But touching such things as he judged to be referred to the king, after ye have advised thereof, send one forthwith, that we may declare as it is convenient for you: for we are now going to Antioch.
37 Therefore send some with speed, that we may know what is your mind. 38 Farewell. This hundred and eight and fortieth year, the fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus.
Chapter 12
12:1 When these covenants were made, Lysias went unto the king, and the Jews were about their husbandry. 2 But of the governors of several places, Timotheus, and Apollonius the son of Genneus, also Hieronymus, and Demophon, and beside them Nicanor the governor of Cyprus, would not suffer them to be quiet and live in peace.
3 The men of Joppa also did such an ungodly deed: they prayed the Jews that dwelt among them to go with their wives and children into the boats which they had prepared, as though they had meant them no hurt. 4 Who accepted of it according to the common decree of the city, as being desirous to live in peace, and suspecting nothing: but when they were gone forth into the deep, they drowned no less than two hundred of them.
5 When Judas heard of this cruelty done unto his countrymen, he commanded those that were with him to make them ready. 6 And calling upon God the righteous Judge, he came against those murderers of his brethren, and burnt the haven by night, and set the boats on fire, and those that fled thither he slew. 7 And when the town was shut up, he went backward, as if he would return to root out all them of the city of Joppa.
8 But when he heard that the Jamnites were minded to do in like manner unto the Jews that dwelt among them, 9 He came upon the Jamnites also by night, and set fire on the haven and the navy, so that the light of the fire was seen at Jerusalem two hundred and forty furlongs off.
10 Now when they were gone from thence nine furlongs in their journey toward Timotheus, no fewer than five thousand men on foot and five hundred horsemen of the Arabians set upon him. 11 Whereupon there was a very sore battle; but Judas’ side by the help of God got the victory; so that the Nomades of Arabia, being overcome, besought Judas for peace, promising both to give him cattle, and to pleasure him otherwise.
12 Then Judas, thinking indeed that they would be profitable in many things, granted them peace: whereupon they shook hands, and so they departed to their tents.
13 He went also about to make a bridge to a certain strong city, which was fenced about with walls, and inhabited by people of divers countries; and the name of it was Caspis. 14 But they that were within it put such trust in the strength of the walls and provision of victuals, that they behaved themselves rudely toward them that were with Judas, railing and blaspheming, and uttering such words as were not to be spoken. 15 Wherefore Judas with his company, calling upon the great Lord of the world, who without rams or engines of war did cast down Jericho in the time of Joshua, gave a fierce assault against the walls, 16 And took the city by the will of God, and made unspeakable slaughters, insomuch that a lake two furlongs broad near adjoining thereunto, being filled full, was seen running with blood.
17 Then departed they from thence seven hundred and fifty furlongs, and came to Characa unto the Jews that are called Tubieni. 18 But as for Timotheus, they found him not in the places: for before he had dispatched any thing, he departed from thence, having left a very strong garrison in a certain hold. 19 Howbeit Dositheus and Sosipater, who were of Maccabeus’ captains, went forth, and slew those that Timotheus had left in the fortress, above ten thousand men.
20 And Maccabeus ranged his army by bands, and set them over the bands, and went against Timotheus, who had about him an hundred and twenty thousand men of foot, and two thousand and five hundred horsemen.
21 Now when Timotheus had knowledge of Judas’ coming, he sent the women and children and the other baggage unto a fortress called Carnion: for the town was hard to besiege, and uneasy to come unto, by reason of the straitness of all the places.
22 But when Judas his first band came in sight, the enemies, being smitten with fear and terror through the appearing of him who seeth all things, fled amain, one running into this way, another that way, so as that they were often hurt of their own men, and wounded with the points of their own swords. 23 Judas also was very earnest in pursuing them, killing those wicked wretches, of whom he slew about thirty thousand men.
24 Moreover Timotheus himself fell into the hands of Dositheus and Sosipater, whom he besought with much craft to let him go with his life, because he had many of the Jews’ parents, and the brethren of some of them, who, if they put him to death, should not be regarded. 25 So when he had assured them with many words that he would restore them without hurt, according to the agreement, they let him go for the saving of their brethren.
26 Then Maccabeus marched forth to Carnion, and to the temple of Atargatis, and there he slew five and twenty thousand persons.
27 And after he had put to flight and destroyed them, Judas removed the host toward Ephron, a strong city, wherein Lysias abode, and a great multitude of divers nations, and the strong young men kept the walls, and defended them mightily: wherein also was great provision of engines and darts. 28 But when Judas and his company had called upon Almighty God, who with his power breaketh the strength of his enemies, they won the city, and slew twenty and five thousand of them that were within,
29 From thence they departed to Scythopolis, which lieth six hundred furlongs from Jerusalem, 30 But when the Jews that dwelt there had testified that the Scythopolitans dealt lovingly with them, and entreated them kindly in the time of their adversity; 31 They gave them thanks, desiring them to be friendly still unto them: and so they came to Jerusalem, the feast of the weeks approaching.
32 And after the feast, called Pentecost, they went forth against Gorgias the governor of Idumea, 33 Who came out with three thousand men of foot and four hundred horsemen. 34 And it happened that in their fighting together a few of the Jews were slain. 35 At which time Dositheus, one of Bacenor’s company, who was on horseback, and a strong man, was still upon Gorgias, and taking hold of his coat drew him by force; and when he would have taken that cursed man alive, a horseman of Thracia coming upon him smote off his shoulder, so that Gorgias fled unto Marisa.
36 Now when they that were with Gorgias had fought long, and were weary, Judas called upon the Lord, that he would shew himself to be their helper and leader of the battle. 37 And with that he began in his own language, and sung psalms with a loud voice, and rushing unawares upon Gorgias’ men, he put them to flight. 38 So Judas gathered his host, and came into the city of Odollam, And when the seventh day came, they purified themselves, as the custom was, and kept the sabbath in the same place.
39 And upon the day following, as the use had been, Judas and his company came to take up the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen in their fathers’ graves. 40 Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain. 41 All men therefore praising the Lord, the righteous Judge, who had opened the things that were hid, 42 Betook themselves unto prayer, and besought him that the sin committed might wholly be put out of remembrance. Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain.
43 And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: 44 For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. 45 And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
Historical Documents Showing That The Rabbis destroyed the Aramaic and Hebrew New Testaments,
thus explaining why YHWH's Full Name is no longer included
except in the conjugated Aramaic form of MAR-YAH,
or Master YAH, or Adon-Yah.
Thankfully the Peshitta has been preserved as the oldest form of the originals,
if not being the originals themselves.
The author of this article is not known. If you are him / her, please contact.
In the Talmud, the rabbis discuss how to PROPERLY BURN WITH FIRE the gospels, but some rabbis are hesitant to do so because the gospels (or the an Gilyon, the same word for gospel in the Talmud as it appears in the Aramaic Peshitta of Mark 1:1, another hint that the Peshitta is the original) used the true Divine Name of Yahweh and some felt that burning the gospels WITH THE TRUE NAME is a greater mitzvah or good deed then somehow cutting out the sacred Name before burning them. I have this documented from Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 116 A, Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat 15C and the Tosefta Shabbat 13:5.You can look it up. Here is the reference with footnotes:
The following comes from Talmud Shabbat 116A. In this discussion several rabbis are discussing when a Torah scroll can be burned if damaged or defiled. The general consensus is that even in scrolls that have damaged or blank spaces must not be burned. Then the topic comes around to the scrolls or the GILYON or blank spaces in the Books (plural) of the Minim or (Nazarene heretics) and how they should be handled. The word GILYON means gospel or good tidings. So the issue here is the places in the gospels (BOOKS OF THE MINIM) that contain the Divine Name. HOW SHOULD THOSE HERETICAL BOOKS BE HANDLED? SHOULD THEY BE BURNED?
In verse 16 below one rabbi asks if their Torah scrolls with the Divine or Sacred Name are the issue. Another answers NO. He is referring to the gospel (blank spaces) of the MINIM. In other words the gospel books not the Torah scrolls. As you can see below, one rabbi says that on a weekday when its not Shabbat we must get the GOSPEL BOOKS and remove the DIVINE NAMES before we burn the books and another who disagrees with him and states that those books are such trash that he would burn them even without REMOVING THE DIVINE NAMES; even if he had to take the books to a heathen temple should a Nazarene follow and chase him to get the gospels back. Though Talmud is not scripture, it is a wonderful historical confirmation of what many of us already knew in our spirits .... that the original gospels or Books of The Minim [Nazarenes] DID HAVE THE DIVINE NAME and not KURIOS (kurioV - the Greek substitute).
For if they did not contain them, why would the rabbis spend all their time deciding how to get rid of the gospels without desecrating the DIVINE NAME in them. The actual text appears below from the SONCINO TALMUD ON CD ROM:
Come and hear: The blank spaces above and below, between the sections, between the columns, at the beginning and at the end of the Scroll, defile one's hands. 13 — It may be that [when they are] together with the Scroll of the Law they are different.1 4 Come and hear: The blank spaces 15 and the Books of the Minim 16 may not be saved from a fire, but they must be burnt in their place, they and the Divine Names occurring in them. Now surely it means the blank portions of a Scroll of the Law? No: the blank spaces in the Books of Minim. Seeing that we may not save the Books of Minim themselves, need their blank spaces [DIVINE SACRED NAMES] be stated? — This is its meaning: And the Books of Minim are like blank spaces.
It was stated in the text: The blank spaces and the Books of the Minim, we may not save them from a fire. R. Jose said: On weekdays one must cut out the Divine Names which they contain, hide them,17 and burn the rest. R. Tarfon said: May I bury my son if I would not burn them together with their Divine Names if they came to my hand. For even if one pursued me 18 to slay me, or a snake pursued me to bite me, I would enter a heathen Temple [for refuge], but not the houses of these [people], for the latter know (of God] yet deny [Him], whereas the former are ignorant and deny [Him], and of them the Writ saith, and behind the doors and the posts hast thou set up thy memorial.19 R. Ishmael said: [One can reason] a minori: If in order to make peace between man and wife the Torah decreed, Let my Name, written in sanctity, be blotted out in water, 20 these, who stir up jealousy, enmity, and wrath between Israel and their Father in Heaven, how much more so; 21 and of them David said, Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? And am I not grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate then with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. 22 And just as we may not rescue them from a fire, so may we not rescue them from a collapse [of debris] or from water or from anything that may destroy them.
R. Joseph b. Hanin asked R. Abbahu: As for the Books of Be Abedan [Ebionites}, 23 may we save them from a fire or not? — Yes and No, and he was uncertain about the matter. 24 Rab would not enter a Be Abedan, and certainly not a Bet Nizrefe [HOUSE OF NAZARENES]; 25 Samuel would not enter a Be Nizrefe [HOUSE OF NAZARENES], yet he would enter a Be Abedan [HOUSE OF EBIONITES]. Raba was asked: Why did you not attend at the Be Abedan? A certain palm-tree stands in the way, replied he, and it is difficult for me [to pass it]. 26 Then we will remove it? — Its spot will present difficulties to me.27 Mar b. Joseph said: I am one of them 28 and do not fear them. On one occasion he went there, [and] they wanted to harm him.29
NOTES
(15) Jast. s.v. iuhkd translates, the gospels, though observing that here it is understood as blanks. V. Herford, R.T., ‘Christianity in the Talmud’, p. 155 n.
(21) Not only do they themselves go astray from God, but lead many others astray from Him.
(25) hprmb hc; a meeting place of the Nazarenes, Jewish Christians, where local matters were discussed and religious debates were held. (Levy). [Ginzberg, MGWJ LXXVIII, p. 23 regards it as the name of a Persian house of worship meaning the Asylum of Helplessness].
(29) Uncensored text adds: R. Meir called it (the Gospel) ‘Awen Gilyon, the falsehood of blank Paper; R. Johanan called it ‘Awon Gilyon, the sin of etc. On the whole passage v. Herford, op. cit., pp. 161-171.
The Ancient Nazarene Commentaries
on Isaiah as Interpreted by Jerome
Jerome (347 – 440 AD) was an ecclesiastical historian best known for his many translations of scripture into Latin, including his best-known work, the Vulgate. He may well have been in contact with the ancient sect of the Nazarenes, which he speaks of in favorable terms, and we suppose the following commentaries proceeded from common discourse with them. If so, these commentaries may well be one of the most important and most neglected sources of Nazarene lore in our possession. For commentary on these notices and the Latin text, see Ray Pritz, Nazarene Jewish Christianity, 2010. I have edited slightly for clarity. [jhs]
Listen to the story: stream MP3
Although we only relate the story in chapter three, we include the rest of the chapters here for the sake of context.
Chapter 1
1:1 The brethren, the Jews that be at Jerusalem and in the land of Judea, wish unto the brethren, the Jews that are throughout Egypt health and peace:
2 God be gracious unto you, and remember his covenant that he made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, his faithful servants; 3 And give you all an heart to serve him, and to do his will, with a good courage and a willing mind; 4 And open your hearts in his law and commandments, and send you peace, 5 And hear your prayers, and be at one with you, and never forsake you in time of trouble. 6 And now we be here praying for you.
7 What time as Demetrius reigned, in the hundred threescore and ninth year, we the Jews wrote unto you in the extremity of trouble that came upon us in those years, from the time that Jason and his company revolted from the holy land and kingdom, 8 And burned the porch, and shed innocent blood: then we prayed unto the Lord, and were heard; we offered also sacrifices and fine flour, and lighted the lamps, and set forth the loaves. 9 And now see that ye keep the feast of tabernacles in the month Casleu.
10 In the hundred fourscore and eighth year, the people that were at Jerusalem and in Judea, and the council, and Judas, sent greeting and health unto Aristobulus, king Ptolemeus’ master, who was of the stock of the anointed priests, and to the Jews that were in Egypt:
11 Insomuch as God hath delivered us from great perils, we thank him highly, as having been in battle against a king. 12 For he cast them out that fought within the holy city.
13 For when the leader was come into Persia, and the army with him that seemed invincible, they were slain in the temple of Nanea by the deceit of Nanea’s priests. 14 For Antiochus, as though he would marry her, came into the place, and his friends that were with him, to receive money in name of a dowry. 15 Which when the priests of Nanea had set forth, and he was entered with a small company into the compass of the temple, they shut the temple as soon as Antiochus was come in: 16 And opening a privy door of the roof, they threw stones like thunderbolts, and struck down the captain, hewed them in pieces, smote off their heads and cast them to those that were without.
17 Blessed be our God in all things, who hath delivered up the ungodly.
18 Therefore whereas we are now purposed to keep the purification of the temple upon the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, we thought it necessary to certify you thereof, that ye also might keep it, as the feast of the tabernacles, and of the fire, which was given us when Neemias offered sacrifice, after that he had builded the temple and the altar. 19 For when our fathers were led into Persia, the priests that were then devout took the fire of the altar privily, and hid it in an hollow place of a pit without water, where they kept it sure, so that the place was unknown to all men.
20 Now after many years, when it pleased God, Neemias, being sent from the king of Persia, did send of the posterity of those priests that had hid it to the fire: but when they told us they found no fire, but thick water; 21 Then commanded he them to draw it up, and to bring it; and when the sacrifices were laid on, Neemias commanded the priests to sprinkle the wood and the things laid thereupon with the water. 22 When this was done, and the time came that the sun shone, which afore was hid in the cloud, there was a great fire kindled, so that every man marvelled.
23 And the priests made a prayer whilst the sacrifice was consuming, I say, both the priests, and all the rest, Jonathan beginning, and the rest answering thereunto, as Neemias did.
24 And the prayer was after this manner; O Lord, Lord God, Creator of all things, who art fearful and strong, and righteous, and merciful, and the only and gracious King, 25 The only giver of all things, the only just, almighty, and everlasting, thou that deliverest Israel from all trouble, and didst choose the fathers, and sanctify them: 26 Receive the sacrifice for thy whole people Israel, and preserve thine own portion, and sanctify it. 27 Gather those together that are scattered from us, deliver them that serve among the heathen, look upon them that are despised and abhorred, and let the heathen know that thou art our God.
28 Punish them that oppress us, and with pride do us wrong. 29 Plant thy people again in thy holy place, as Moses hath spoken. 30 And the priests sung psalms of thanksgiving.
31 Now when the sacrifice was consumed, Neemias commanded the water that was left to be poured on the great stones. 32 When this was done, there was kindled a flame: but it was consumed by the light that shined from the altar.
33 So when this matter was known, it was told the king of Persia, that in the place, where the priests that were led away had hid the fire, there appeared water, and that Neemias had purified the sacrifices therewith. 34 Then the king, inclosing the place, made it holy, after he had tried the matter.
35 And the king took many gifts, and bestowed thereof on those whom he would gratify. 36 And Neemias called this thing Naphthar, which is as much as to say, a cleansing: but many men call it Nephi.
Chapter 2
2:1 It is also found in the records, that Jeremy the prophet commanded them that were carried away to take of the fire, as it hath been signified: 2 And how that the prophet, having given them the law, charged them not to forget the commandments of the Lord, and that they should not err in their minds, when they see images of silver and gold, with their ornaments. 3 And with other such speeches exhorted he them, that the law should not depart from their hearts.
4 It was also contained in the same writing, that the prophet, being warned of God, commanded the tabernacle and the ark to go with him, as he went forth into the mountain, where Moses climbed up, and saw the heritage of God. 5 And when Jeremy came thither, he found an hollow cave, wherein he laid the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of incense, and so stopped the door.
6 And some of those that followed him came to mark the way, but they could not find it. 7 Which when Jeremy perceived, he blamed them, saying, As for that place, it shall be unknown until the time that God gather his people again together, and receive them unto mercy. 8 Then shall the Lord shew them these things, and the glory of the Lord shall appear, and the cloud also, as it was shewed under Moses, and as when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably sanctified.
9 It was also declared, that he being wise offered the sacrifice of dedication, and of the finishing of the temple. 10 And as when Moses prayed unto the Lord, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the sacrifices: even so prayed Solomon also, and the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offerings. 11 And Moses said, Because the sin offering was not to be eaten, it was consumed. 12 So Solomon kept those eight days.
13 The same things also were reported in the writings and commentaries of Neemias; and how he founding a library gathered together the acts of the kings, and the prophets, and of David, and the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts. 14 In like manner also Judas gathered together all those things that were lost by reason of the war we had, and they remain with us, 15 Wherefore if ye have need thereof, send some to fetch them unto you.
16 Whereas we then are about to celebrate the purification, we have written unto you, and ye shall do well, if ye keep the same days. 17 We hope also, that the God, that delivered all his people, and gave them all an heritage, and the kingdom, and the priesthood, and the sanctuary, 18 As he promised in the law, will shortly have mercy upon us, and gather us together out of every land under heaven into the holy place: for he hath delivered us out of great troubles, and hath purified the place.
19 Now as concerning Judas Maccabeus, and his brethren, and the purification of the great temple, and the dedication of the altar, 20 And the wars against Antiochus Epiphanes, and Eupator his son, 21 And the manifest signs that came from heaven unto those that behaved themselves manfully to their honour for Judaism: so that, being but a few, they overcame the whole country, and chased barbarous multitudes, 22 And recovered again the temple renowned all the world over, and freed the city, and upheld the laws which were going down, the Lord being gracious unto them with all favour: 23 All these things, I say, being declared by Jason of Cyrene in five books, we will assay to abridge in one volume.
24 For considering the infinite number, and the difficulty which they find that desire to look into the narrations of the story, for the variety of the matter, 25 We have been careful, that they that will read may have delight, and that they that are desirous to commit to memory might have ease, and that all into whose hands it comes might have profit.
26 Therefore to us, that have taken upon us this painful labour of abridging, it was not easy, but a matter of sweat and watching; 27 Even as it is no ease unto him that prepareth a banquet, and seeketh the benefit of others: yet for the pleasuring of many we will undertake gladly this great pains; 28 Leaving to the author the exact handling of every particular, and labouring to follow the rules of an abridgement. 29 For as the master builder of a new house must care for the whole building; but he that undertaketh to set it out, and paint it, must seek out fit things for the adorning thereof: even so I think it is with us. 30 To stand upon every point, and go over things at large, and to be curious in particulars, belongeth to the first author of the story: 31 But to use brevity, and avoid much labouring of the work, is to be granted to him that will make an abridgment.
32 Here then will we begin the story: only adding thus much to that which hath been said, that it is a foolish thing to make a long prologue, and to be short in the story itself.
Chapter 3
3:1 Now when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws were kept very well, because of the godliness of Onias the high priest, and his hatred of wickedness, 2 It came to pass that even the kings themselves did honour the place, and magnify the temple with their best gifts; 3 Insomuch that Seleucus of Asia of his own revenues bare all the costs belonging to the service of the sacrifices.
4 But one Simon of the tribe of Benjamin, who was made governor of the temple, fell out with the high priest about disorder in the city. 5 And when he could not overcome Onias, he gat him to Apollonius the son of Thraseas, who then was governor of Celosyria and Phenice, 6 And told him that the treasury in Jerusalem was full of infinite sums of money, so that the multitude of their riches, which did not pertain to the account of the sacrifices, was innumerable, and that it was possible to bring all into the king’s hand.
7 Now when Apollonius came to the king, and had shewed him of the money whereof he was told, the king chose out Heliodorus his treasurer, and sent him with a commandment to bring him the foresaid money. 8 So forthwith Heliodorus took his journey; under a colour of visiting the cities of Celosyria and Phenice, but indeed to fulfil the king’s purpose.
9 And when he was come to Jerusalem, and had been courteously received of the high priest of the city, he told him what intelligence was given of the money, and declared wherefore he came, and asked if these things were so indeed.
10 Then the high priest told him that there was such money laid up for the relief of widows and fatherless children: 11 And that some of it belonged to Hircanus son of Tobias, a man of great dignity, and not as that wicked Simon had misinformed: the sum whereof in all was four hundred talents of silver, and two hundred of gold: 12 And that it was altogether impossible that such wrongs should be done unto them, that had committed it to the holiness of the place, and to the majesty and inviolable sanctity of the temple, honoured over all the world.
13 But Heliodorus, because of the king’s commandment given him, said, That in any wise it must be brought into the king’s treasury. 14 So at the day which he appointed he entered in to order this matter: wherefore there was no small agony throughout the whole city. 15 But the priests, prostrating themselves before the altar in their priests’ vestments, called unto heaven upon him that made a law concerning things given to he kept, that they should safely be preserved for such as had committed them to be kept.
16 Then whoso had looked the high priest in the face, it would have wounded his heart: for his countenance and the changing of his colour declared the inward agony of his mind. 17 For the man was so compassed with fear and horror of the body, that it was manifest to them that looked upon him, what sorrow he had now in his heart.
18 Others ran flocking out of their houses to the general supplication, because the place was like to come into contempt. 19 And the women, girt with sackcloth under their breasts, abounded in the streets, and the virgins that were kept in ran, some to the gates, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows. 20 And all, holding their hands toward heaven, made supplication.
21 Then it would have pitied a man to see the falling down of the multitude of all sorts, and the fear of the high priest being in such an agony. 22 They then called upon the Almighty Lord to keep the things committed of trust safe and sure for those that had committed them.
23 Nevertheless Heliodorus executed that which was decreed.
24 Now as he was there present himself with his guard about the treasury, the Lord of spirits, and the Prince of all power, caused a great apparition, so that all that presumed to come in with him were astonished at the power of God, and fainted, and were sore afraid. 25 For there appeared unto them an horse with a terrible rider upon him, and adorned with a very fair covering, and he ran fiercely, and smote at Heliodorus with his forefeet, and it seemed that he that sat upon the horse had complete harness of gold.
26 Moreover two other young men appeared before him, notable in strength, excellent in beauty, and comely in apparel, who stood by him on either side; and scourged him continually, and gave him many sore stripes.
27 And Heliodorus fell suddenly unto the ground, and was compassed with great darkness: but they that were with him took him up, and put him into a litter. 28 Thus him, that lately came with a great train and with all his guard into the said treasury, they carried out, being unable to help himself with his weapons: and manifestly they acknowledged the power of God. 29 For he by the hand of God was cast down, and lay speechless without all hope of life. 30 But they praised the Lord, that had miraculously honoured his own place: for the temple; which a little afore was full of fear and trouble, when the Almighty Lord appeared, was filled with joy and gladness.
31 Then straightways certain of Heliodorus’ friends prayed Onias, that he would call upon the most High to grant him his life, who lay ready to give up the ghost. 32 So the high priest, suspecting lest the king should misconceive that some treachery had been done to Heliodorus by the Jews, offered a sacrifice for the health of the man.
33 Now as the high priest was making an atonement, the same young men in the same clothing appeared and stood beside Heliodorus, saying, Give Onias the high priest great thanks, insomuch as for his sake the Lord hath granted thee life: 34 And seeing that thou hast been scourged from heaven, declare unto all men the mighty power of God. And when they had spoken these words, they appeared no more.
35 So Heliodorus, after he had offered sacrifice unto the Lord, and made great vows unto him that had saved his life, and saluted Onias, returned with his host to the king. 36 Then testified he to all men the works of the great God, which he had seen with his eyes.
37 And when the king Heliodorus, who might be a fit man to be sent yet once again to Jerusalem, he said, 38 If thou hast any enemy or traitor, send him thither, and thou shalt receive him well scourged, if he escape with his life: for in that place, no doubt; there is an especial power of God.
39 For he that dwelleth in heaven hath his eye on that place, and defendeth it; and he beateth and destroyeth them that come to hurt it.
40 And the things concerning Heliodorus, and the keeping of the treasury, fell out on this sort.
Chapter 4
4:1 This Simon now, of whom we spake afore, having been a betrayer of the money, and of his country, slandered Onias, as if he ha terrified Heliodorus, and been the worker of these evils. 2 Thus was he bold to call him a traitor, that had deserved well of the city, and tendered his own nation, and was so zealous of the laws.
3 But when their hatred went so far, that by one of Simon’s faction murders were committed, 4 Onias seeing the danger of this contention, and that Apollonius, as being the governor of Celosyria and Phenice, did rage, and increase Simon’s malice, 5 He went to the king, not to be an accuser of his countrymen, but seeking the good of all, both publick and private: 6 For he saw that it was impossible that the state should continue quiet, and Simon leave his folly, unless the king did look thereunto.
7 But after the death of Seleucus, when Antiochus, called Epiphanes, took the kingdom, Jason the brother of Onias laboured underhand to be high priest, 8 Promising unto the king by intercession three hundred and threescore talents of silver, and of another revenue eighty talents: 9 Beside this, he promised to assign an hundred and fifty more, if he might have licence to set him up a place for exercise, and for the training up of youth in the fashions of the heathen, and to write them of Jerusalem by the name of Antiochians. 10 Which when the king had granted, and he had gotten into his hand the rule he forthwith brought his own nation to Greekish fashion.
11 And the royal privileges granted of special favour to the Jews by the means of John the father of Eupolemus, who went ambassador to Rome for amity and aid, he took away; and putting down the governments which were according to the law, he brought up new customs against the law: 12 For he built gladly a place of exercise under the tower itself, and brought the chief young men under his subjection, and made them wear a hat.
13 Now such was the height of Greek fashions, and increase of heathenish manners, through the exceeding profaneness of Jason, that ungodly wretch, and no high priest; 14 That the priests had no courage to serve any more at the altar, but despising the temple, and neglecting the sacrifices, hastened to be partakers of the unlawful allowance in the place of exercise, after the game of Discus called them forth; 15 Not setting by the honours of their fathers, but liking the glory of the Grecians best of all.
16 By reason whereof sore calamity came upon them: for they had them to be their enemies and avengers, whose custom they followed so earnestly, and unto whom they desired to be like in all things. 17 For it is not a light thing to do wickedly against the laws of God: but the time following shall declare these things.
18 Now when the game that was used every faith year was kept at Tyrus, the king being present, 19 This ungracious Jason sent special messengers from Jerusalem, who were Antiochians, to carry three hundred drachms of silver to the sacrifice of Hercules, which even the bearers thereof thought fit not to bestow upon the sacrifice, because it was not convenient, but to be reserved for other charges. 20 This money then, in regard of the sender, was appointed to Hercules’ sacrifice; but because of the bearers thereof, it was employed to the making of gallies.
21 Now when Apollonius the son of Menestheus was sent into Egypt for the coronation of king Ptolemeus Philometor, Antiochus, understanding him not to be well affected to his affairs, provided for his own safety: whereupon he came to Joppa, and from thence to Jerusalem: 22 Where he was honourably received of Jason, and of the city, and was brought in with torch alight, and with great shoutings: and so afterward went with his host unto Phenice.
23 Three years afterward Jason sent Menelaus, the aforesaid Simon’s brother, to bear the money unto the king, and to put him in mind of certain necessary matters. 24 But he being brought to the presence of the king, when he had magnified him for the glorious appearance of his power, got the priesthood to himself, offering more than Jason by three hundred talents of silver. 25 So he came with the king’s mandate, bringing nothing worthy the high priesthood, but having the fury of a cruel tyrant, and the rage of a savage beast.
26 Then Jason, who had undermined his own brother, being undermined by another, was compelled to flee into the country of the Ammonites. 27 So Menelaus got the principality: but as for the money that he had promised unto the king, he took no good order for it, albeit Sostratis the ruler of the castle required it: 28 For unto him appertained the gathering of the customs. Wherefore they were both called before the king.
29 Now Menelaus left his brother Lysimachus in his stead in the priesthood; and Sostratus left Crates, who was governor of the Cyprians.
30 While those things were in doing, they of Tarsus and Mallos made insurrection, because they were given to the king’s concubine, called Antiochus. 31 Then came the king in all haste to appease matters, leaving Andronicus, a man in authority, for his deputy.
32 Now Menelaus, supposing that he had gotten a convenient time, stole certain vessels of gold out of the temple, and gave some of them to Andronicus, and some he sold into Tyrus and the cities round about. 33 Which when Onias knew of a surety, he reproved him, and withdrew himself into a sanctuary at Daphne, that lieth by Antiochia.
34 Wherefore Menelaus, taking Andronicus apart, prayed, him to get Onias into his hands; who being persuaded thereunto, and coming to Onias in deceit, gave him his right hand with oaths; and though he were suspected by him, yet persuaded he him to come forth of the sanctuary: whom forthwith he shut up without regard of justice. 35 For the which cause not only the Jews, but many also of other nations, took great indignation, and were much grieved for the unjust murder of the man.
36 And when the king was come again from the places about Cilicia, the Jews that were in the city, and certain of the Greeks that abhorred the fact also, complained because Onias was slain without cause. 37 Therefore Antiochus was heartily sorry, and moved to pity, and wept, because of the sober and modest behaviour of him that was dead. 38 And being kindled with anger, forthwith he took away Andronicus his purple, and rent off his clothes, and leading him through the whole city unto that very place, where he had committed impiety against Onias, there slew he the cursed murderer. Thus the Lord rewarded him his punishment, as he had deserved.
39 Now when many sacrileges had been committed in the city by Lysimachus with the consent of Menelaus, and the fruit thereof was spread abroad, the multitude gathered themselves together against Lysimachus, many vessels of gold being already carried away. 40 Whereupon the common people rising, and being filled with rage, Lysimachus armed about three thousand men, and began first to offer violence; one Auranus being the leader, a man far gone in years, and no less in folly.
41 They then seeing the attempt of Lysimachus, some of them caught stones, some clubs, others taking handfuls of dust, that was next at hand, cast them all together upon Lysimachus, and those that set upon them. 42 Thus many of them they wounded, and some they struck to the ground, and all of them they forced to flee: but as for the churchrobber himself, him they killed beside the treasury.
43 Of these matters therefore there was an accusation laid against Menelaus. 44 Now when the king came to Tyrus, three men that were sent from the senate pleaded the cause before him: 45 But Menelaus, being now convicted, promised Ptolemee the son of Dorymenes to give him much money, if he would pacify the king toward him. 46 Whereupon Ptolemee taking the king aside into a certain gallery, as it were to take the air, brought him to be of another mind: 47 Insomuch that he discharged Menelaus from the accusations, who notwithstanding was cause of all the mischief: and those poor men, who, if they had told their cause, yea, before the Scythians, should have been judged innocent, them he condemned to death.
48 Thus they that followed the matter for the city, and for the people, and for the holy vessels, did soon suffer unjust punishment. 49 Wherefore even they of Tyrus, moved with hatred of that wicked deed, caused them to be honourably buried. 50 And so through the covetousness of them that were of power Menelaus remained still in authority, increasing in malice, and being a great traitor to the citizens.
Chapter 5
5:1 About the same time Antiochus prepared his second voyage into Egypt: 2 And then it happened, that through all the city, for the space almost of forty days, there were seen horsemen running in the air, in cloth of gold, and armed with lances, like a band of soldiers, 3 And troops of horsemen in array, encountering and running one against another, with shaking of shields, and multitude of pikes, and drawing of swords, and casting of darts, and glittering of golden ornaments, and harness of all sorts. 4 Wherefore every man prayed that that apparition might turn to good.
5 Now when there was gone forth a false rumour, as though Antiochus had been dead, Jason took at the least a thousand men, and suddenly made an assault upon the city; and they that were upon the walls being put back, and the city at length taken, Menelaus fled into the castle: 6 But Jason slew his own citizens without mercy, not considering that to get the day of them of his own nation would be a most unhappy day for him; but thinking they had been his enemies, and not his countrymen, whom he conquered. 7 Howbeit for all this he obtained not the principality, but at the last received shame for the reward of his treason, and fled again into the country of the Ammonites.
8 In the end therefore he had an unhappy return, being accused before Aretas the king of the Arabians, fleeing from city to city, pursued of all men, hated as a forsaker of the laws, and being had in abomination as an open enemy of his country and countrymen, he was cast out into Egypt. 9 Thus he that had driven many out of their country perished in a strange land, retiring to the Lacedemonians, and thinking there to find succour by reason of his kindred: 10 And he that had cast out many unburied had none to mourn for him, nor any solemn funerals at all, nor sepulchre with his fathers.
11 Now when this that was done came to the king’s ear, he thought that Judea had revolted: whereupon removing out of Egypt in a furious mind, he took the city by force of arms, 12 And commanded his men of war not to spare such as they met, and to slay such as went up upon the houses. 13 Thus there was killing of young and old, making away of men, women, and children, slaying of virgins and infants. 14 And there were destroyed within the space of three whole days fourscore thousand, whereof forty thousand were slain in the conflict; and no fewer sold than slain.
15 Yet was he not content with this, but presumed to go into the most holy temple of all the world; Menelaus, that traitor to the laws, and to his own country, being his guide: 16 And taking the holy vessels with polluted hands, and with profane hands pulling down the things that were dedicated by other kings to the augmentation and glory and honour of the place, he gave them away.
17 And so haughty was Antiochus in mind, that he considered not that the Lord was angry for a while for the sins of them that dwelt in the city, and therefore his eye was not upon the place. 18 For had they not been formerly wrapped in many sins, this man, as soon as he had come, had forthwith been scourged, and put back from his presumption, as Heliodorus was, whom Seleucus the king sent to view the treasury.
19 Nevertheless God did not choose the people for the place’s sake, but the place for the people’s sake. 20 And therefore the place itself, that was partaker with them of the adversity that happened to the nation, did afterward communicate in the benefits sent from the Lord: and as it was forsaken in the wrath of the Almighty, so again, the great Lord being reconciled, it was set up with all glory.
21 So when Antiochus had carried out of the temple a thousand and eight hundred talents, he departed in all haste unto Antiochia, weening in his pride to make the land navigable, and the sea passable by foot: such was the haughtiness of his mind.
22 And he left governors to vex the nation: at Jerusalem, Philip, for his country a Phrygian, and for manners more barbarous than he that set him there; 23 And at Garizim, Andronicus; and besides, Menelaus, who worse than all the rest bare an heavy hand over the citizens, having a malicious mind against his countrymen the Jews.
24 He sent also that detestable ringleader Apollonius with an army of two and twenty thousand, commanding him to slay all those that were in their best age, and to sell the women and the younger sort: 25 Who coming to Jerusalem, and pretending peace, did forbear till the holy day of the sabbath, when taking the Jews keeping holy day, he commanded his men to arm themselves. 26 And so he slew all them that were gone to the celebrating of the sabbath, and running through the city with weapons slew great multitudes.
27 But Judas Maccabeus with nine others, or thereabout, withdrew himself into the wilderness, and lived in the mountains after the manner of beasts, with his company, who fed on herbs continually, lest they should be partakers of the pollution.
Chapter 6
6:1 Not long after this the king sent an old man of Athens to compel the Jews to depart from the laws of their fathers, and not to live after the laws of God: 2 And to pollute also the temple in Jerusalem, and to call it the temple of Jupiter Olympius; and that in Garizim, of Jupiter the Defender of strangers, as they did desire that dwelt in the place.
3 The coming in of this mischief was sore and grievous to the people: 4 For the temple was filled with riot and revelling by the Gentiles, who dallied with harlots, and had to do with women within the circuit of the holy places, and besides that brought in things that were not lawful. 5 The altar also was filled with profane things, which the law forbiddeth. 6 Neither was it lawful for a man to keep sabbath days or ancient fasts, or to profess himself at all to be a Jew.
7 And in the day of the king’s birth every month they were brought by bitter constraint to eat of the sacrifices; and when the fast of Bacchus was kept, the Jews were compelled to go in procession to Bacchus, carrying ivy.
8 Moreover there went out a decree to the neighbour cities of the heathen, by the suggestion of Ptolemee, against the Jews, that they should observe the same fashions, and be partakers of their sacrifices: 9 And whoso would not conform themselves to the manners of the Gentiles should be put to death. Then might a man have seen the present misery.
10 For there were two women brought, who had circumcised their children; whom when they had openly led round about the city, the babes handing at their breasts, they cast them down headlong from the wall. 11 And others, that had run together into caves near by, to keep the sabbath day secretly, being discovered by Philip, were all burnt together, because they made a conscience to help themselves for the honour of the most sacred day.
12 Now I beseech those that read this book, that they be not discouraged for these calamities, but that they judge those punishments not to be for destruction, but for a chastening of our nation. 13 For it is a token of his great goodness, when wicked doers are not suffered any long time, but forthwith punished.
14 For not as with other nations, whom the Lord patiently forbeareth to punish, till they be come to the fulness of their sins, so dealeth he with us, 15 Lest that, being come to the height of sin, afterwards he should take vengeance of us. 16 And therefore he never withdraweth his mercy from us: and though he punish with adversity, yet doth he never forsake his people. 17 But let this that we at spoken be for a warning unto us. And now will we come to the declaring of the matter in a few words.
18 Eleazar, one of the principal scribes, an aged man, and of a well favoured countenance, was constrained to open his mouth, and to eat swine’s flesh. 19 But he, choosing rather to die gloriously, than to live stained with such an abomination, spit it forth, and came of his own accord to the torment, 20 As it behoved them to come, that are resolute to stand out against such things, as are not lawful for love of life to be tasted.
21 But they that had the charge of that wicked feast, for the old acquaintance they had with the man, taking him aside, besought him to bring flesh of his own provision, such as was lawful for him to use, and make as if he did eat of the flesh taken from the sacrifice commanded by the king; 22 That in so doing he might be delivered from death, and for the old friendship with them find favour.
23 But he began to consider discreetly, and as became his age, and the excellency of his ancient years, and the honour of his gray head, whereon was come, and his most honest education from a child, or rather the holy law made and given by God: therefore he answered accordingly, and willed them straightways to send him to the grave.
24 For it becometh not our age, said he, in any wise to dissemble, whereby many young persons might think that Eleazar, being fourscore years old and ten, were now gone to a strange religion; 25 And so they through mine hypocrisy, and desire to live a little time and a moment longer, should be deceived by me, and I get a stain to mine old age, and make it abominable. 26 For though for the present time I should be delivered from the punishment of men: yet should I not escape the hand of the Almighty, neither alive, nor dead.
27 Wherefore now, manfully changing this life, I will shew myself such an one as mine age requireth, 28 And leave a notable example to such as be young to die willingly and courageously for the honourable and holy laws. And when he had said these words, immediately he went to the torment: 29 They that led him changing the good will they bare him a little before into hatred, because the foresaid speeches proceeded, as they thought, from a desperate mind.
30 But when he was ready to die with stripes, he groaned, and said, It is manifest unto the Lord, that hath the holy knowledge, that whereas I might have been delivered from death, I now endure sore pains in body by being beaten: but in soul am well content to suffer these things, because I fear him. 31 And thus this man died, leaving his death for an example of a noble courage, and a memorial of virtue, not only unto young men, but unto all his nation.
Chapter 7
7:1 It came to pass also, that seven brethren with their mother were taken, and compelled by the king against the law to taste swine’s flesh, and were tormented with scourges and whips.
2 But one of them that spake first said thus, What wouldest thou ask or learn of us? we are ready to die, rather than to transgress the laws of our fathers.
3 Then the king, being in a rage, commanded pans and caldrons to be made hot: 4 Which forthwith being heated, he commanded to cut out the tongue of him that spake first, and to cut off the utmost parts of his body, the rest of his brethren and his mother looking on.
5 Now when he was thus maimed in all his members, he commanded him being yet alive to be brought to the fire, and to be fried in the pan: and as the vapour of the pan was for a good space dispersed, they exhorted one another with the mother to die manfully, saying thus, 6 The Lord God looketh upon us, and in truth hath comfort in us, as Moses in his song, which witnessed to their faces, declared, saying, And he shall be comforted in his servants.
7 So when the first was dead after this number, they brought the second to make him a mocking stock: and when they had pulled off the skin of his head with the hair, they asked him, Wilt thou eat, before thou be punished throughout every member of thy body? 8 But he answered in his own language, and said, No. Wherefore he also received the next torment in order, as the former did. 9 And when he was at the last gasp, he said, Thou like a fury takest us out of this present life, but the King of the world shall raise us up, who have died for his laws, unto everlasting life.
10 After him was the third made a mocking stock: and when he was required, he put out his tongue, and that right soon, holding forth his hands manfully. 11 And said courageously, These I had from heaven; and for his laws I despise them; and from him I hope to receive them again. 12 Insomuch that the king, and they that were with him, marvelled at the young man’s courage, for that he nothing regarded the pains.
13 Now when this man was dead also, they tormented and mangled the fourth in like manner. 14 So when he was ready to die he said thus, It is good, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God to be raised up again by him: as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to life.
15 Afterward they brought the fifth also, and mangled him. 16 Then looked he unto the king, and said, Thou hast power over men, thou art corruptible, thou doest what thou wilt; yet think not that our nation is forsaken of God; 17 But abide a while, and behold his great power, how he will torment thee and thy seed.
18 After him also they brought the sixth, who being ready to die said, Be not deceived without cause: for we suffer these things for ourselves, having sinned against our God: therefore marvellous things are done unto us. 19 But think not thou, that takest in hand to strive against God, that thou shalt escape unpunished.
20 But the mother was marvellous above all, and worthy of honourable memory: for when she saw her seven sons slain within the space of one day, she bare it with a good courage, because of the hope that she had in the Lord. 21 Yea, she exhorted every one of them in her own language, filled with courageous spirits; and stirring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she said unto them, 22 I cannot tell how ye came into my womb: for I neither gave you breath nor life, neither was it I that formed the members of every one of you; 23 But doubtless the Creator of the world, who formed the generation of man, and found out the beginning of all things, will also of his own mercy give you breath and life again, as ye now regard not your own selves for his laws’ sake.
24 Now Antiochus, thinking himself despised, and suspecting it to be a reproachful speech, whilst the youngest was yet alive, did not only exhort him by words, but also assured him with oaths, that he would make him both a rich and a happy man, if he would turn from the laws of his fathers; and that also he would take him for his friend, and trust him with affairs.
25 But when the young man would in no case hearken unto him, the king called his mother, and exhorted her that she would counsel the young man to save his life. 26 And when he had exhorted her with many words, she promised him that she would counsel her son.
27 But she bowing herself toward him, laughing the cruel tyrant to scorn, spake in her country language on this manner; O my son, have pity upon me that bare thee nine months in my womb, and gave thee such three years, and nourished thee, and brought thee up unto this age, and endured the troubles of education. 28 I beseech thee, my son, look upon the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, and consider that God made them of things that were not; and so was mankind made likewise. 29 Fear not this tormentor, but, being worthy of thy brethren, take thy death that I may receive thee again in mercy with thy brethren.
30 Whiles she was yet speaking these words, the young man said, Whom wait ye for? I will not obey the king’s commandment: but I will obey the commandment of the law that was given unto our fathers by Moses. 31 And thou, that hast been the author of all mischief against the Hebrews, shalt not escape the hands of God.
32 For we suffer because of our sins. 33 And though the living Lord be angry with us a little while for our chastening and correction, yet shall he be at one again with his servants. 34 But thou, O godless man, and of all other most wicked, be not lifted up without a cause, nor puffed up with uncertain hopes, lifting up thy hand against the servants of God: 35 For thou hast not yet escaped the judgment of Almighty God, who seeth all things.
36 For our brethren, who now have suffered a short pain, are dead under God’s covenant of everlasting life: but thou, through the judgment of God, shalt receive just punishment for thy pride. 37 But I, as my brethren, offer up my body and life for the laws of our fathers, beseeching God that he would speedily be merciful unto our nation; and that thou by torments and plagues mayest confess, that he alone is God; 38 And that in me and my brethren the wrath of the Almighty, which is justly brought upon our nation, may cease.
39 Than the king’ being in a rage, handed him worse than all the rest, and took it grievously that he was mocked. 40 So this man died undefiled, and put his whole trust in the Lord.
41 Last of all after the sons the mother died.
42 Let this be enough now to have spoken concerning the idolatrous feasts, and the extreme tortures.
Chapter 8
8:1 Then Judas Maccabeus, and they that were with him, went privily into the towns, and called their kinsfolks together, and took unto them all such as continued in the Jews’ religion, and assembled about six thousand men.
2 And they called upon the Lord, that he would look upon the people that was trodden down of all; and also pity the temple profaned of ungodly men; 3 And that he would have compassion upon the city, sore defaced, and ready to be made even with the ground; and hear the blood that cried unto him, 4 And remember the wicked slaughter of harmless infants, and the blasphemies committed against his name; and that he would shew his hatred against the wicked.
5 Now when Maccabeus had his company about him, he could not be withstood by the heathen: for the wrath of the Lord was turned into mercy. 6 Therefore he came at unawares, and burnt up towns and cities, and got into his hands the most commodious places, and overcame and put to flight no small number of his enemies. 7 But specially took he advantage of the night for such privy attempts, insomuch that the fruit of his holiness was spread every where.
8 So when Philip saw that this man increased by little and little, and that things prospered with him still more and more, he wrote unto Ptolemeus, the governor of Celosyria and Phenice, to yield more aid to the king’s affairs.
9 Then forthwith choosing Nicanor the son of Patroclus, one of his special friends, he sent him with no fewer than twenty thousand of all nations under him, to root out the whole generation of the Jews; and with him he joined also Gorgias a captain, who in matters of war had great experience.
10 So Nicanor undertook to make so much money of the captive Jews, as should defray the tribute of two thousand talents, which the king was to pay to the Romans. 11 Wherefore immediately he sent to the cities upon the sea coast, proclaiming a sale of the captive Jews, and promising that they should have fourscore and ten bodies for one talent, not expecting the vengeance that was to follow upon him from the Almighty God.
12 Now when word was brought unto Judas of Nicanor’s coming, and he had imparted unto those that were with him that the army was at hand, 13 They that were fearful, and distrusted the justice of God, fled, and conveyed themselves away.
14 Others sold all that they had left, and withal besought the Lord to deliver them, sold by the wicked Nicanor before they met together: 15 And if not for their own sakes, yet for the covenants he had made with their fathers, and for his holy and glorious name’s sake, by which they were called.
16 So Maccabeus called his men together unto the number of six thousand, and exhorted them not to be stricken with terror of the enemy, nor to fear the great multitude of the heathen, who came wrongly against them; but to fight manfully, 17 And to set before their eyes the injury that they had unjustly done to the holy place, and the cruel handling of the city, whereof they made a mockery, and also the taking away of the government of their forefathers: 18 For they, said he, trust in their weapons and boldness; but our confidence is in the Almighty who at a beck can cast down both them that come against us, and also all the world.
19 Moreover, he recounted unto them what helps their forefathers had found, and how they were delivered, when under Sennacherib an hundred fourscore and five thousand perished. 20 And he told them of the battle that they had in Babylon with the Galatians, how they came but eight thousand in all to the business, with four thousand Macedonians, and that the Macedonians being perplexed, the eight thousand destroyed an hundred and twenty thousand because of the help that they had from heaven, and so received a great booty.
21 Thus when he had made them bold with these words, and ready to die for the law and the country, he divided his army into four parts; 22 And joined with himself his own brethren, leaders of each band, to wit Simon, and Joseph, and Jonathan, giving each one fifteen hundred men. 23 Also he appointed Eleazar to read the holy book: and when he had given them this watchword, The help of God; himself leading the first band,
24 And by the help of the Almighty they slew above nine thousand of their enemies, and wounded and maimed the most part of Nicanor’s host, and so put all to flight; 25 And took their money that came to buy them, and pursued them far: but lacking time they returned: 26 For it was the day before the sabbath, and therefore they would no longer pursue them.
27 So when they had gathered their armour together, and spoiled their enemies, they occupied themselves about the sabbath, yielding exceeding praise and thanks to the Lord, who had preserved them unto that day, which was the beginning of mercy distilling upon them.
28 And after the sabbath, when they had given part of the spoils to the maimed, and the widows, and orphans, the residue they divided among themselves and their servants. 29 When this was done, and they had made a common supplication, they besought the merciful Lord to be reconciled with his servants for ever.
30 Moreover of those that were with Timotheus and Bacchides, who fought against them, they slew above twenty thousand, and very easily got high and strong holds, and divided among themselves many spoils more, and made the maimed, orphans, widows, yea, and the aged also, equal in spoils with themselves. 31 And when they had gathered their armour together, they laid them up all carefully in convenient places, and the remnant of the spoils they brought to Jerusalem.
32 They slew also Philarches, that wicked person, who was with Timotheus, and had annoyed the Jews many ways. 33 Furthermore at such time as they kept the feast for the victory in their country they burnt Callisthenes, that had set fire upon the holy gates, who had fled into a little house; and so he received a reward meet for his wickedness.
34 As for that most ungracious Nicanor, who had brought a thousand merchants to buy the Jews, 35 He was through the help of the Lord brought down by them, of whom he made least account; and putting off his glorious apparel, and discharging his company, he came like a fugitive servant through the midland unto Antioch having very great dishonour, for that his host was destroyed. 36 Thus he, that took upon him to make good to the Romans their tribute by means of captives in Jerusalem, told abroad, that the Jews had God to fight for them, and therefore they could not be hurt, because they followed the laws that he gave them.
Chapter 9
9:1 About that time came Antiochus with dishonour out of the country of Persia 2 For he had entered the city called Persepolis, and went about to rob the temple, and to hold the city; whereupon the multitude running to defend themselves with their weapons put them to flight; and so it happened, that Antiochus being put to flight of the inhabitants returned with shame.
3 Now when he came to Ecbatane, news was brought him what had happened unto Nicanor and Timotheus. 4 Then swelling with anger. he thought to avenge upon the Jews the disgrace done unto him by those that made him flee. Therefore commanded he his chariotman to drive without ceasing, and to dispatch the journey, the judgment of God now following him. For he had spoken proudly in this sort, That he would come to Jerusalem and make it a common burying place of the Jews.
5 But the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, smote him with an incurable and invisible plague: or as soon as he had spoken these words, a pain of the bowels that was remediless came upon him, and sore torments of the inner parts; 6 And that most justly: for he had tormented other men’s bowels with many and strange torments.
7 Howbeit he nothing at all ceased from his bragging, but still was filled with pride, breathing out fire in his rage against the Jews, and commanding to haste the journey: but it came to pass that he fell down from his chariot, carried violently; so that having a sore fall, all the members of his body were much pained.
8 And thus he that a little afore thought he might command the waves of the sea, (so proud was he beyond the condition of man) and weigh the high mountains in a balance, was now cast on the ground, and carried in an horselitter, shewing forth unto all the manifest power of God. 9 So that the worms rose up out of the body of this wicked man, and whiles he lived in sorrow and pain, his flesh fell away, and the filthiness of his smell was noisome to all his army. 10 And the man, that thought a little afore he could reach to the stars of heaven, no man could endure to carry for his intolerable stink.
11 Here therefore, being plagued, he began to leave off his great pride, and to come to the knowledge of himself by the scourge of God, his pain increasing every moment. 12 And when he himself could not abide his own smell, he said these words, It is meet to be subject unto God, and that a man that is mortal should not proudly think of himself if he were God.
13 This wicked person vowed also unto the Lord, who now no more would have mercy upon him, saying thus, 14 That the holy city (to the which he was going in haste to lay it even with the ground, and to make it a common buryingplace,) he would set at liberty: 15 And as touching the Jews, whom he had judged not worthy so much as to be buried, but to be cast out with their children to be devoured of the fowls and wild beasts, he would make them all equals to the citizens of Athens: 16 And the holy temple, which before he had spoiled, he would garnish with goodly gifts, and restore all the holy vessels with many more, and out of his own revenue defray the charges belonging to the sacrifices: 17 Yea, and that also he would become a Jew himself, and go through all the world that was inhabited, and declare the power of God.
18 But for all this his pains would not cease: for the just judgment of God was come upon him: therefore despairing of his health, he wrote unto the Jews the letter underwritten, containing the form of a supplication, after this manner:
19 Antiochus, king and governor, to the good Jews his citizens wisheth much joy, health, and prosperity: 20 If ye and your children fare well, and your affairs be to your contentment, I give very great thanks to God, having my hope in heaven.
21 As for me, I was weak, or else I would have remembered kindly your honour and good will returning out of Persia, and being taken with a grievous disease, I thought it necessary to care for the common safety of all: 22 Not distrusting mine health, but having great hope to escape this sickness. 23 But considering that even my father, at what time he led an army into the high countries. appointed a successor, 24 To the end that, if any thing fell out contrary to expectation, or if any tidings were brought that were grievous, they of the land, knowing to whom the state was left, might not be troubled:
25 Again, considering how that the princes that are borderers and neighbours unto my kingdom wait for opportunities, and expect what shall be the event. I have appointed my son Antiochus king, whom I often committed and commended unto many of you, when I went up into the high provinces; to whom I have written as followeth:
26 Therefore I pray and request you to remember the benefits that I have done unto you generally, and in special, and that every man will be still faithful to me and my son. 27 For I am persuaded that he understanding my mind will favourably and graciously yield to your desires.
28 Thus the murderer and blasphemer having suffered most grievously, as he entreated other men, so died he a miserable death in a strange country in the mountains. 29 And Philip, that was brought up with him, carried away his body, who also fearing the son of Antiochus went into Egypt to Ptolemeus Philometor.
Chapter 10
10:1 Now Maccabeus and his company, the Lord guiding them, recovered the temple and the city: 2 But the altars which the heathen had built in the open street, and also the chapels, they pulled down.
3 And having cleansed the temple they made another altar, and striking stones they took fire out of them, and offered a sacrifice after two years, and set forth incense, and lights, and shewbread. 4 When that was done, they fell flat down, and besought the Lord that they might come no more into such troubles; but if they sinned any more against him, that he himself would chasten them with mercy, and that they might not be delivered unto the blasphemous and barbarous nations.
5 Now upon the same day that the strangers profaned the temple, on the very same day it was cleansed again, even the five and twentieth day of the same month, which is Casleu.
6 And they kept the eight days with gladness, as in the feast of the tabernacles, remembering that not long afore they had held the feast of the tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts. 7 Therefore they bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, and sang psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his place. 8 They ordained also by a common statute and decree, That every year those days should be kept of the whole nation of the Jews.
9 And this was the end of Antiochus, called Epiphanes.
10 Now will we declare the acts of Antiochus Eupator, who was the son of this wicked man, gathering briefly the calamities of the wars. 11 So when he was come to the crown, he set one Lysias over the affairs of his realm, and appointed him his chief governor of Celosyria and Phenice.
12 For Ptolemeus, that was called Macron, choosing rather to do justice unto the Jews for the wrong that had been done unto them, endeavoured to continue peace with them. 13 Whereupon being accused of the king’s friends before Eupator, and called traitor at every word because he had left Cyprus, that Philometor had committed unto him, and departed to Antiochus Epiphanes, and seeing that he was in no honourable place, he was so discouraged, that he poisoned himself and died.
14 But when Gorgias was governor of the holds, he hired soldiers, and nourished war continually with the Jews: 15 And therewithal the Idumeans, having gotten into their hands the most commodious holds, kept the Jews occupied, and receiving those that were banished from Jerusalem, they went about to nourish war.
16 Then they that were with Maccabeus made supplication, and besought God that he would be their helper; and so they ran with violence upon the strong holds of the Idumeans, 17 And assaulting them strongly, they won the holds, and kept off all that fought upon the wall, and slew all that fell into their hands, and killed no fewer than twenty thousand.
18 And because certain, who were no less than nine thousand, were fled together into two very strong castles, having all manner of things convenient to sustain the siege, 19 Maccabeus left Simon and Joseph, and Zaccheus also, and them that were with him, who were enough to besiege them, and departed himself unto those places which more needed his help.
20 Now they that were with Simon, being led with covetousness, were persuaded for money through certain of those that were in the castle, and took seventy thousand drachms, and let some of them escape. 21 But when it was told Maccabeus what was done, he called the governors of the people together, and accused those men, that they had sold their brethren for money, and set their enemies free to fight against them. 22 So he slew those that were found traitors, and immediately took the two castles. 23 And having good success with his weapons in all things he took in hand, he slew in the two holds more than twenty thousand.
24 Now Timotheus, whom the Jews had overcome before, when he had gathered a great multitude of foreign forces, and horses out of Asia not a few, came as though he would take Jewry by force of arms. 25 But when he drew near, they that were with Maccabeus turned themselves to pray unto God, and sprinkled earth upon their heads, and girded their loins with sackcloth, 26 And fell down at the foot of the altar, and besought him to be merciful to them, and to be an enemy to their enemies, and an adversary to their adversaries, as the law declareth. 27 So after the prayer they took their weapons, and went on further from the city: and when they drew near to their enemies, they kept by themselves.
28 Now the sun being newly risen, they joined both together; the one part having together with their virtue their refuge also unto the Lord for a pledge of their success and victory: the other side making their rage leader of their battle
29 But when the battle waxed strong, there appeared unto the enemies from heaven five comely men upon horses, with bridles of gold, and two of them led the Jews, 30 And took Maccabeus betwixt them, and covered him on every side weapons, and kept him safe, but shot arrows and lightnings against the enemies: so that being confounded with blindness, and full of trouble, they were killed. 31 And there were slain of footmen twenty thousand and five hundred, and six hundred horsemen.
32 As for Timotheus himself, he fled into a very strong hold, called Gazara, where Chereas was governor.
33 But they that were with Maccabeus laid siege against the fortress courageously four days. 34 And they that were within, trusting to the strength of the place, blasphemed exceedingly, and uttered wicked words.
35 Nevertheless upon the fifth day early twenty young men of Maccabeus’ company, inflamed with anger because of the blasphemies, assaulted the wall manly, and with a fierce courage killed all that they met withal. 36 Others likewise ascending after them, whiles they were busied with them that were within, burnt the towers, and kindling fires burnt the blasphemers alive; and others broke open the gates, and, having received in the rest of the army, took the city, 37 And killed Timotheus, that was hid in a certain pit, and Chereas his brother, with Apollophanes.
38 When this was done, they praised the Lord with psalms and thanksgiving, who had done so great things for Israel, and given them the victory.
Chapter 11
11:1 Not long after the, Lysias the king’s protector and cousin, who also managed the affairs, took sore displeasure for the things that were done. 2 And when he had gathered about fourscore thousand with all the horsemen, he came against the Jews, thinking to make the city an habitation of the Gentiles, 3 And to make a gain of the temple, as of the other chapels of the heathen, and to set the high priesthood to sale every year: 4 Not at all considering the power of God but puffed up with his ten thousands of footmen, and his thousands of horsemen, and his fourscore elephants.
5 So he came to Judea, and drew near to Bethsura, which was a strong town, but distant from Jerusalem about five furlongs, and he laid sore siege unto it.
6 Now when they that were with Maccabeus heard that he besieged the holds, they and all the people with lamentation and tears besought the Lord that he would send a good angel to deliver Israel. 7 Then Maccabeus himself first of all took weapons, exhorting the other that they would jeopard themselves together with him to help their brethren: so they went forth together with a willing mind.
8 And as they were at Jerusalem, there appeared before them on horseback one in white clothing, shaking his armour of gold. 9 Then they praised the merciful God all together, and took heart, insomuch that they were ready not only to fight with men, but with most cruel beasts, and to pierce through walls of iron. 10 Thus they marched forward in their armour, having an helper from heaven: for the Lord was merciful unto them 11 And giving a charge upon their enemies like lions, they slew eleven thousand footmen, and sixteen hundred horsemen, and put all the other to flight. 12 Many of them also being wounded escaped naked; and Lysias himself fled away shamefully, and so escaped.
13 Who, as he was a man of understanding, casting with himself what loss he had had, and considering that the Hebrews could not be overcome, because the Almighty God helped them, he sent unto them, 14 And persuaded them to agree to all reasonable conditions, and promised that he would persuade the king that he must needs be a friend unto them. 15 Then Maccabeus consented to all that Lysias desired, being careful of the common good; and whatsoever Maccabeus wrote unto Lysias concerning the Jews, the king granted it.
16 For there were letters written unto the Jews from Lysias to this effect: Lysias unto the people of the Jews sendeth greeting: 17 John and Absalon, who were sent from you, delivered me the petition subscribed, and made request for the performance of the contents thereof. 18 Therefore what things soever were meet to be reported to the king, I have declared them, and he hath granted as much as might be. 19 And if then ye will keep yourselves loyal to the state, hereafter also will I endeavour to be a means of your good. 20 But of the particulars I have given order both to these and the other that came from me, to commune with you. 21 Fare ye well. The hundred and eight and fortieth year, the four and twentieth day of the month Dioscorinthius.
22 Now the king’s letter contained these words: King Antiochus unto his brother Lysias sendeth greeting: 23 Since our father is translated unto the gods, our will is, that they that are in our realm live quietly, that every one may attend upon his own affairs. 24 We understand also that the Jews would not consent to our father, for to be brought unto the custom of the Gentiles, but had rather keep their own manner of living: for the which cause they require of us, that we should suffer them to live after their own laws. 25 Wherefore our mind is, that this nation shall be in rest, and we have determined to restore them their temple, that they may live according to the customs of their forefathers. 26 Thou shalt do well therefore to send unto them, and grant them peace, that when they are certified of our mind, they may be of good comfort, and ever go cheerfully about their own affairs.
27 And the letter of the king unto the nation of the Jews was after this manner: King Antiochus sendeth greeting unto the council, and the rest of the Jews: 28 If ye fare well, we have our desire; we are also in good health. 29 Menelaus declared unto us, that your desire was to return home, and to follow your own business: 30 Wherefore they that will depart shall have safe conduct till the thirtieth day of Xanthicus with security. 31 And the Jews shall use their own kind of meats and laws, as before; and none of them any manner of ways shall be molested for things ignorantly done. 32 I have sent also Menelaus, that he may comfort you. 33 Fare ye well. In the hundred forty and eighth year, and the fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus.
34 The Romans also sent unto them a letter containing these words: Quintus Memmius and Titus Manlius, ambassadors of the Romans, send greeting unto the people of the Jews. 35 Whatsoever Lysias the king’s cousin hath granted, therewith we also are well pleased. 36 But touching such things as he judged to be referred to the king, after ye have advised thereof, send one forthwith, that we may declare as it is convenient for you: for we are now going to Antioch.
37 Therefore send some with speed, that we may know what is your mind. 38 Farewell. This hundred and eight and fortieth year, the fifteenth day of the month Xanthicus.
Chapter 12
12:1 When these covenants were made, Lysias went unto the king, and the Jews were about their husbandry. 2 But of the governors of several places, Timotheus, and Apollonius the son of Genneus, also Hieronymus, and Demophon, and beside them Nicanor the governor of Cyprus, would not suffer them to be quiet and live in peace.
3 The men of Joppa also did such an ungodly deed: they prayed the Jews that dwelt among them to go with their wives and children into the boats which they had prepared, as though they had meant them no hurt. 4 Who accepted of it according to the common decree of the city, as being desirous to live in peace, and suspecting nothing: but when they were gone forth into the deep, they drowned no less than two hundred of them.
5 When Judas heard of this cruelty done unto his countrymen, he commanded those that were with him to make them ready. 6 And calling upon God the righteous Judge, he came against those murderers of his brethren, and burnt the haven by night, and set the boats on fire, and those that fled thither he slew. 7 And when the town was shut up, he went backward, as if he would return to root out all them of the city of Joppa.
8 But when he heard that the Jamnites were minded to do in like manner unto the Jews that dwelt among them, 9 He came upon the Jamnites also by night, and set fire on the haven and the navy, so that the light of the fire was seen at Jerusalem two hundred and forty furlongs off.
10 Now when they were gone from thence nine furlongs in their journey toward Timotheus, no fewer than five thousand men on foot and five hundred horsemen of the Arabians set upon him. 11 Whereupon there was a very sore battle; but Judas’ side by the help of God got the victory; so that the Nomades of Arabia, being overcome, besought Judas for peace, promising both to give him cattle, and to pleasure him otherwise.
12 Then Judas, thinking indeed that they would be profitable in many things, granted them peace: whereupon they shook hands, and so they departed to their tents.
13 He went also about to make a bridge to a certain strong city, which was fenced about with walls, and inhabited by people of divers countries; and the name of it was Caspis. 14 But they that were within it put such trust in the strength of the walls and provision of victuals, that they behaved themselves rudely toward them that were with Judas, railing and blaspheming, and uttering such words as were not to be spoken. 15 Wherefore Judas with his company, calling upon the great Lord of the world, who without rams or engines of war did cast down Jericho in the time of Joshua, gave a fierce assault against the walls, 16 And took the city by the will of God, and made unspeakable slaughters, insomuch that a lake two furlongs broad near adjoining thereunto, being filled full, was seen running with blood.
17 Then departed they from thence seven hundred and fifty furlongs, and came to Characa unto the Jews that are called Tubieni. 18 But as for Timotheus, they found him not in the places: for before he had dispatched any thing, he departed from thence, having left a very strong garrison in a certain hold. 19 Howbeit Dositheus and Sosipater, who were of Maccabeus’ captains, went forth, and slew those that Timotheus had left in the fortress, above ten thousand men.
20 And Maccabeus ranged his army by bands, and set them over the bands, and went against Timotheus, who had about him an hundred and twenty thousand men of foot, and two thousand and five hundred horsemen.
21 Now when Timotheus had knowledge of Judas’ coming, he sent the women and children and the other baggage unto a fortress called Carnion: for the town was hard to besiege, and uneasy to come unto, by reason of the straitness of all the places.
22 But when Judas his first band came in sight, the enemies, being smitten with fear and terror through the appearing of him who seeth all things, fled amain, one running into this way, another that way, so as that they were often hurt of their own men, and wounded with the points of their own swords. 23 Judas also was very earnest in pursuing them, killing those wicked wretches, of whom he slew about thirty thousand men.
24 Moreover Timotheus himself fell into the hands of Dositheus and Sosipater, whom he besought with much craft to let him go with his life, because he had many of the Jews’ parents, and the brethren of some of them, who, if they put him to death, should not be regarded. 25 So when he had assured them with many words that he would restore them without hurt, according to the agreement, they let him go for the saving of their brethren.
26 Then Maccabeus marched forth to Carnion, and to the temple of Atargatis, and there he slew five and twenty thousand persons.
27 And after he had put to flight and destroyed them, Judas removed the host toward Ephron, a strong city, wherein Lysias abode, and a great multitude of divers nations, and the strong young men kept the walls, and defended them mightily: wherein also was great provision of engines and darts. 28 But when Judas and his company had called upon Almighty God, who with his power breaketh the strength of his enemies, they won the city, and slew twenty and five thousand of them that were within,
29 From thence they departed to Scythopolis, which lieth six hundred furlongs from Jerusalem, 30 But when the Jews that dwelt there had testified that the Scythopolitans dealt lovingly with them, and entreated them kindly in the time of their adversity; 31 They gave them thanks, desiring them to be friendly still unto them: and so they came to Jerusalem, the feast of the weeks approaching.
32 And after the feast, called Pentecost, they went forth against Gorgias the governor of Idumea, 33 Who came out with three thousand men of foot and four hundred horsemen. 34 And it happened that in their fighting together a few of the Jews were slain. 35 At which time Dositheus, one of Bacenor’s company, who was on horseback, and a strong man, was still upon Gorgias, and taking hold of his coat drew him by force; and when he would have taken that cursed man alive, a horseman of Thracia coming upon him smote off his shoulder, so that Gorgias fled unto Marisa.
36 Now when they that were with Gorgias had fought long, and were weary, Judas called upon the Lord, that he would shew himself to be their helper and leader of the battle. 37 And with that he began in his own language, and sung psalms with a loud voice, and rushing unawares upon Gorgias’ men, he put them to flight. 38 So Judas gathered his host, and came into the city of Odollam, And when the seventh day came, they purified themselves, as the custom was, and kept the sabbath in the same place.
39 And upon the day following, as the use had been, Judas and his company came to take up the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen in their fathers’ graves. 40 Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain. 41 All men therefore praising the Lord, the righteous Judge, who had opened the things that were hid, 42 Betook themselves unto prayer, and besought him that the sin committed might wholly be put out of remembrance. Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain.
43 And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: 44 For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. 45 And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
Historical Documents Showing That The Rabbis destroyed the Aramaic and Hebrew New Testaments,
thus explaining why YHWH's Full Name is no longer included
except in the conjugated Aramaic form of MAR-YAH,
or Master YAH, or Adon-Yah.
Thankfully the Peshitta has been preserved as the oldest form of the originals,
if not being the originals themselves.
The author of this article is not known. If you are him / her, please contact.
In the Talmud, the rabbis discuss how to PROPERLY BURN WITH FIRE the gospels, but some rabbis are hesitant to do so because the gospels (or the an Gilyon, the same word for gospel in the Talmud as it appears in the Aramaic Peshitta of Mark 1:1, another hint that the Peshitta is the original) used the true Divine Name of Yahweh and some felt that burning the gospels WITH THE TRUE NAME is a greater mitzvah or good deed then somehow cutting out the sacred Name before burning them. I have this documented from Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 116 A, Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat 15C and the Tosefta Shabbat 13:5.You can look it up. Here is the reference with footnotes:
The following comes from Talmud Shabbat 116A. In this discussion several rabbis are discussing when a Torah scroll can be burned if damaged or defiled. The general consensus is that even in scrolls that have damaged or blank spaces must not be burned. Then the topic comes around to the scrolls or the GILYON or blank spaces in the Books (plural) of the Minim or (Nazarene heretics) and how they should be handled. The word GILYON means gospel or good tidings. So the issue here is the places in the gospels (BOOKS OF THE MINIM) that contain the Divine Name. HOW SHOULD THOSE HERETICAL BOOKS BE HANDLED? SHOULD THEY BE BURNED?
In verse 16 below one rabbi asks if their Torah scrolls with the Divine or Sacred Name are the issue. Another answers NO. He is referring to the gospel (blank spaces) of the MINIM. In other words the gospel books not the Torah scrolls. As you can see below, one rabbi says that on a weekday when its not Shabbat we must get the GOSPEL BOOKS and remove the DIVINE NAMES before we burn the books and another who disagrees with him and states that those books are such trash that he would burn them even without REMOVING THE DIVINE NAMES; even if he had to take the books to a heathen temple should a Nazarene follow and chase him to get the gospels back. Though Talmud is not scripture, it is a wonderful historical confirmation of what many of us already knew in our spirits .... that the original gospels or Books of The Minim [Nazarenes] DID HAVE THE DIVINE NAME and not KURIOS (kurioV - the Greek substitute).
For if they did not contain them, why would the rabbis spend all their time deciding how to get rid of the gospels without desecrating the DIVINE NAME in them. The actual text appears below from the SONCINO TALMUD ON CD ROM:
Come and hear: The blank spaces above and below, between the sections, between the columns, at the beginning and at the end of the Scroll, defile one's hands. 13 — It may be that [when they are] together with the Scroll of the Law they are different.1 4 Come and hear: The blank spaces 15 and the Books of the Minim 16 may not be saved from a fire, but they must be burnt in their place, they and the Divine Names occurring in them. Now surely it means the blank portions of a Scroll of the Law? No: the blank spaces in the Books of Minim. Seeing that we may not save the Books of Minim themselves, need their blank spaces [DIVINE SACRED NAMES] be stated? — This is its meaning: And the Books of Minim are like blank spaces.
It was stated in the text: The blank spaces and the Books of the Minim, we may not save them from a fire. R. Jose said: On weekdays one must cut out the Divine Names which they contain, hide them,17 and burn the rest. R. Tarfon said: May I bury my son if I would not burn them together with their Divine Names if they came to my hand. For even if one pursued me 18 to slay me, or a snake pursued me to bite me, I would enter a heathen Temple [for refuge], but not the houses of these [people], for the latter know (of God] yet deny [Him], whereas the former are ignorant and deny [Him], and of them the Writ saith, and behind the doors and the posts hast thou set up thy memorial.19 R. Ishmael said: [One can reason] a minori: If in order to make peace between man and wife the Torah decreed, Let my Name, written in sanctity, be blotted out in water, 20 these, who stir up jealousy, enmity, and wrath between Israel and their Father in Heaven, how much more so; 21 and of them David said, Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? And am I not grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate then with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. 22 And just as we may not rescue them from a fire, so may we not rescue them from a collapse [of debris] or from water or from anything that may destroy them.
R. Joseph b. Hanin asked R. Abbahu: As for the Books of Be Abedan [Ebionites}, 23 may we save them from a fire or not? — Yes and No, and he was uncertain about the matter. 24 Rab would not enter a Be Abedan, and certainly not a Bet Nizrefe [HOUSE OF NAZARENES]; 25 Samuel would not enter a Be Nizrefe [HOUSE OF NAZARENES], yet he would enter a Be Abedan [HOUSE OF EBIONITES]. Raba was asked: Why did you not attend at the Be Abedan? A certain palm-tree stands in the way, replied he, and it is difficult for me [to pass it]. 26 Then we will remove it? — Its spot will present difficulties to me.27 Mar b. Joseph said: I am one of them 28 and do not fear them. On one occasion he went there, [and] they wanted to harm him.29
NOTES
(15) Jast. s.v. iuhkd translates, the gospels, though observing that here it is understood as blanks. V. Herford, R.T., ‘Christianity in the Talmud’, p. 155 n.
(21) Not only do they themselves go astray from God, but lead many others astray from Him.
(25) hprmb hc; a meeting place of the Nazarenes, Jewish Christians, where local matters were discussed and religious debates were held. (Levy). [Ginzberg, MGWJ LXXVIII, p. 23 regards it as the name of a Persian house of worship meaning the Asylum of Helplessness].
(29) Uncensored text adds: R. Meir called it (the Gospel) ‘Awen Gilyon, the falsehood of blank Paper; R. Johanan called it ‘Awon Gilyon, the sin of etc. On the whole passage v. Herford, op. cit., pp. 161-171.
The Ancient Nazarene Commentaries
on Isaiah as Interpreted by Jerome
Jerome (347 – 440 AD) was an ecclesiastical historian best known for his many translations of scripture into Latin, including his best-known work, the Vulgate. He may well have been in contact with the ancient sect of the Nazarenes, which he speaks of in favorable terms, and we suppose the following commentaries proceeded from common discourse with them. If so, these commentaries may well be one of the most important and most neglected sources of Nazarene lore in our possession. For commentary on these notices and the Latin text, see Ray Pritz, Nazarene Jewish Christianity, 2010. I have edited slightly for clarity. [jhs]
On Isaiah 8:14. And [YHWH Tviot] will be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a trap to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
The Nazarenes, who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old law, explain the two houses as the two families, viz. of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and the Pharisees. (Akiba, who took over their school, is called the master of Aquila the proselyte, and after him came Meir who … succeeded … Joannes the son of Zakkai and after him Eliezer and further Telphon, and next Joseph Galilaeus and Joshua up to the capture of Jerusalem.) Shammai then and Hillel were born not long before the Master; they originated in Judea. The name of the first means scatterer and of the second unholy, because he scattered and denied the precepts of the Torah by his traditions and deuterōseis[1]. And these are the two houses who did not accept the Savior who has become to them destruction and shame.
On Isaiah 8:20. For Torah and for testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. 21. And they will pass through it, greatly distressed and hungry; and it will come to pass, that when they will be hungry, they will be enraged, and curse their king and their gods, and look upward.
For the rest the Nazarenes explain the passage in this way: when the Scribes and Pharisees tell you to listen to them, men who do everything for the love of the belly and who hiss during their incantations in the way of magicians in order to deceive you, you must answer them like this: "It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe consults its own idols. We must not, therefore, consult your dead about the living ones. On the contrary. Elohim has given us the Torah and the testimonies of the scriptures. If you are not willing to follow them you will not have light, and the darkness will always oppress you. It will cover your earth and your doctrine so that, when you see that they have been deceived by you in error and they feel a longing for the truth, they will then be sad or angry. And let them who believe themselves to be like their own gods and kings curse you. And let them look at the sky and the earth in vain since they are always in darkness and they cannot flee away from your ambushes."
On Isaiah 9:1. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; they who dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them has the light shined. 2. You have multiplied the nation, and increased the joy; they rejoice before you according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the plunder. 3. For you have broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the days of Midian. 4. For every shoe of the stormy warrior, and every garment rolled in blood will be burned as fuel of fire.
The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above, try to explain this passage in the following way: When Messiah came and his preaching shone out, the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the preaching became more dominant, that means the preaching was multiplied, through the Good News of the apostle Paul who was the last of all the apostles. And the Good News of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the Good News.
On Isaiah 29:20. For the terrible one is brought to nothing, and the scorner is consumed, and all who watch for iniquity are cut off; 21. Who, by a word, make a man an offender, and lay a trap for him who reproves in the gate, and turn aside the just for nothing.
What we have understood to have been written about the devil and his angels, the Nazarenes believe to have been said against the Scribes and the Pharisees, because the deuterōseis passed away, who earlier deceived the people with very vicious traditions (and they watch day and night to deceive the simple ones), who made men sin against the Word of Elohim in order that they should deny that Messiah was the Son of Elohim.
On Isaiah 31:6. Behold, you trust in the staff of this broken reed, on Egypt; which will pierce the hand of a man who leans in it; so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him. 7. But if you say to me, We trust in YHWH our Elohim; is it not he, whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah has taken away, and said to Judah and to Jerusalem, You shall worship before this altar? 8. Now therefore make a wager, I beg you, with my master the king of Assyria, and I will give you two thousand horses, if you are able on your part to set riders upon them. 9. How then will you turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master's servants, and put your trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen?
The Nazarenes understand this passage in this way: Sons of Israel, who deny the Son of Elohim with a most vicious opinion, turn to him and his apostles. For if you will do this, you will reject all idols that to you were a cause of sin in the past, and the devil will fall before you, not because of your powers, but because of the compassion of Elohim. And his young men, who at a certain time earlier fought for him, will be the tributaries of the assembly and any of [his] power and stone will pass. Also the philosophers and every perverse dogma will turn their backs to the sign of the cross. Because this is the meaning of YHWH that his will take place, whose fire or light is in Zion and his oven in Jerusalem.
Balaam in the Tell Deir 'Alla Inscription
In 1967 pieces of a plaster inscription was discovered in some building ruins (generally thought to be an ancient sanctuary)[1] located at Tell Deir 'Alla the Transjordan valley near the Jabbok River. The dating of the ink on plaster inscription has ranged from the eighth century to the Persian period, although most seem to hold an eighth century date.[2] The issue of dating was initially complicated by two problems. First, the text is fragmentary and at least fifteen combinations of the inscription have been proposed.[3] Second, the form of the text is debated (Canaanite, Aramaic, both?).[4] However, it is now generally agreed that the first combination (see below) is the most likely and that the text is Aramaic (at least primarily).
In the first combination, and in the first line, Balaam is described as a “seer of the gods.” Interestingly, Yahweh is never mentioned, although El, El Shaddayin (plural), and a goddess (whose name is mostly missing from the fragmentary text) are found in the text. The superscription also mentions that Balaam sees an oracle like a vision. The rest of the text contains material not found in the biblical record (although some of the language is similar).[5] The oracle itself appears to relate to divine punishment and the loss of fertility.[6] A detailed examination of the text is not possible here but such treatments are available.[7]
Overall, the inscription, unlike most of the biblical material, presents Balaam as a positive figure. Although he is not called a prophet, he is identified as a seer and his oracle apparently was seen as significant enough to record and place on a wall or stele in a sanctuary. The fact that he is mentioned at all suggests some prominence. What is not certain is who held him in such high regard. The question as to whether the sanctuary was Israelite or non-Israelite has also not been answered definitively.
(“The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla,” 51-2)
(1) [VACAT] The sa]ying[s of Bala]am, [son of Be]or, the man who was a seer of the gods. Lo! Gods came to him in the night [and spoke to] him (2) according to these w[ord]s. Then they said to [Bala]am, son of Beor, thus: “Let someone make a [ ] hereafter, so that [what] you have hea[rd may be se]en!” (3) And Balaam rose in the morning [ ] right hand [ ]and could not [eat] and wept (4) aloud. Then his people came in to him [and said] to Balaam, son of Beor, “Do you fast? [ ] Do you weep?” And he (5) said to them, “Si[t do]wn! I shall inform you what the Shad[daying have done]. Now come, see the deeds of the g[o]ds! The g[o]ds have gathered (6) and the Shaddayin have taken their places in the assembly and said to Sh[ , thus:] ‘Sew shut the skies with your thick cloud! There let there be darkness and no (7) perpetual shining and n[o] radiance! For you will put a sea[l upon the thick] cloud of darkness and you will not remove it forever! For the swift has (8) reproached the eagle, and the voice of vultures resounds. The st[ork has ] the young of the NHS-bird and ripped up the chicks of the heron. The swallow has belittled (9) the dove, and the sparrow [ ] and [ ] the staff. Instead of ewes the stick is driven along. Hares have eaten (10) [ ]. Freemen[ ] have drunk wine, and hyenas have listened to instruction. The whelps of the (11) f[ox ] laughs at wise men, and the poor woman has mixed myrrh, and the priestess (12) [ ] to the one who wears a girdle of threads. The esteemed esteems and the esteemer is es[teemed. ] and everyone has seen those things that decree offspring and young. (15) [ ] to the leopard. The piglet has chased the young (16) [of ] those who are girded, and the eye. . .’”
[1] There is some discussion regarding the original placement of the plaster. Some suggest that it was on a wall and other suggest that it may have been part of a stele. See Gerrit van der Kooij, “Book and Script at Deir 'Alla,” in The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla Re-Evaluated: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Leiden 21-24 August 1989, ed. J. Hoftijzer and G. Van Der Kooij (New York: E. J. Brill, 1991), 239-41.
[2] See P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., “The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla: The First Combination,” Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental Research 237 (1980): 49-60, J. Naveh, “The Date of the Deir 'Alla Inscription in Aramaic Script,” Israel Exploration Journal 17 (1967): 236-38.
[3] M. W. Chavalas, “Balaam,” in Dictionary of the Old Testament Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2003), 76.
[4] Dennis Pardee, “The Linguistic Classification of the Deir 'Alla Text,” in The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla Re-Evaluated: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Leiden 21-24 August 1989, ed. J. Hoftijzer and G. Van Der Kooij (New York: E. J. Brill, 1991), 100-05.
[5] Hackett, “Balaam,” 572
[6] Chavalas, “Balaam,” 76.
[7] See Jo Ann Hackett, The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla, Harvard Semitic Monographs 31, ed. Frank Moore Cross (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980), 21-89, McCarter, “The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla: The First Combination,” 51-9.
The Hazon Gabriel - Revelation of Gabriel - stone "scroll" dated to first century B.C.
Messiah, Son of Joseph, After Three Day, LIVE, Prince of Princes!
Sacred Name YAHWEH plainly found on the stone.
Israel Knohl NY Times article on biblical stone cites Knohl research (06/07/2008)
A New York Times article on the Hazon Gabriel tablet, a three-foot-tall stone with 87 lines of Hebrew that apparently dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus quotes Shalom Hartman Institute scholars Israel Knohl, authr of a recent scholarly journal article posted here on the controversial subject, and Moshe Idel.The Times article describes the stone tablet as "causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.." Knohl's recent article suggests the stone's text supports his controversial thesis that messianic activity in the ancient land of Israel predated Jesus, as discussed originally in his 2000 book, "The Messiah Before Jesus: the Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls." The case Knohl presents will resurface in greater detail in an upcoming book. Knohl's theory first received exposure in his book, but the Times said Knohl's theory "did not shake the world of Christology as he had hoped, partly because he had no textual evidence from before Jesus." However, the tablet does, indeed, in Knohl's view, provide information that supports his theory, and the tablet's provenance from the days before Jesus was said to have lived seems clear. The Times wrote of Knohl:
When he read “Gabriel’s Revelation,” he said, he believed he saw what he needed to solidify his thesis, and he has published his argument in the latest issue of The Journal of Religion.
Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.
In Mr. Knohl’s interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.
The slaying of Simon, or any case of the suffering messiah, is seen as a necessary step toward national salvation, he says, pointing to lines 19 through 21 of the tablet — “In three days you will know that evil will be defeated by justice” — and other lines that speak of blood and slaughter as pathways to justice.
To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words “L’shloshet yamin,” meaning “in three days.” The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible...but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is “hayeh,” or “live” in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.
Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, “In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.”
To whom is the archangel speaking? The next line says “Sar hasarin,” or prince of princes. Since the Book of Daniel, one of the primary sources for the Gabriel text, speaks of Gabriel and of “a prince of princes,” Mr. Knohl contends that the stone’s writings are about the death of a leader of the Jews who will be resurrected in three days.
He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity,” he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow.... “Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.”
...Moshe Idel, a professor of Jewish thought at Hebrew University, said that given the way every tiny fragment from that era yielded scores of articles and books, “Gabriel’s Revelation” and Mr. Knohl’s analysis deserved serious attention. “Here we have a real stone with a real text,” he said. “This is truly significant.”
Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and “Gabriel’s Revelation” shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”
The Israel Museum, which houses many of the Dead Sea Scrolls in its famous "Shrine of the Book," is opening a conference this week marking 60 years since the first scroll's discovery. The issue of whether the tablet speaks of a resurrected messiah, as Knohl believes, also will be discussed.
Messianic message stirs debate
Posted: Monday, July 07, 2008
(English Translation - Vision of Gabriel - below)
A foot-wide stone tablet is said to bear Jewish messianic messages from the first century B.C.
Scriptural scholars are abuzz over a stone tablet that is said to bear previously unknown prophecies about a Jewish messiah who would rise from the dead in three days. But there are far more questions than answers about the tablet, which some have suggested could represent "a new Dead Sea Scroll in stone."
Do the tablet and the inked text really date back to the first century B.C., as claimed? Where did the artifact come from? Can the gaps in the text be filled in to make sense? Is the seeming reference to a coming resurrection correct, and to whom does that passage refer? Finally, what impact would a pre-Christian reference to suffering, death and resurrection have on Christian scholarship?
Such questions are being addressed this week in Jerusalem, at an international conference marking the 60th anniversary of the Dead Sea Scrolls' discovery. They're also being addressed in reports about the "Vision of Gabriel" tablet that have trickled out over the past few months.
That trickle flooded onto the front page of The New York Times on Sunday, in a story that quoted one professor as saying some Christians would "find it shocking" that Jewish scriptures prefigured Christian theology.
But Herschel Shanks, founder of the Biblical Archaeology Society and editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, said that such a linkage really isn't surprising, let alone shocking.
"The really unique thing about Christian theology is in the life of Jesus - but in the doctrines, when I was a kid, you had little stories about the Sermon on the Mount and the people listening to this saying, 'What is this man saying? I never heard anything like this! This is different,'" Shanks told me. "Today, this view is out. There are Jewish roots to almost everything in Christian experience."
This revised view comes through loud and clear in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which chronicle the spiritual and even the sanitary practices of a Jewish sect that existed around the time of Jesus. It was the similarity to the style of the scrolls that first brought the "Vision of Gabriel" tablet to the attention of archaeologists.
How the tablet came to light
The 1-foot-wide, 3-foot-tall (30-by-90-centimeter) tablet has a checkered past: According to the tale that has been woven around the stone, it was found near Jordan's Dead Sea shore and sold by a Jordanian dealer to Israeli-Swiss collector David Jeselsohn a decade ago. A few years ago, Jeselsohn showed the stone to Ada Yardeni, an expert on ancient Semitic scripts, who consulted with another expert, Binyamin Elitzur.
Yardeni's take on the tablet, published in the Hebrew-language journal Cathedra and in the Biblical Archaeology Review, was that the text was of a style going back to the late first century B.C. or the early first century A.D. - right around the time when Jesus would be growing up.
The 87-line text was written in ink, not inscribed in the stone, and it was laid out just the way one would expect on a scroll, in two nearly even columns. "If it were written on leather (and smaller) I would say it was another Dead Sea Scroll fragment - but it isn't," Yardeni wrote.
The text appears to be a set of apocalyptic pronouncements from a personage named Gabriel - hence the name given to the text, "The Vision of Gabriel" or "Gabriel's Revelations." Biblical Archaeology Review has put the Hebrew text as well as an English translation online.
As you'll see by reading the text, there are so many gaps that it's hard to make out exactly what is being said - but even those fragments were intriguing to Israel Knohl, a Biblical scholar at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Back in the year 2000, Knohl had written a book titled "The Messiah Before Jesus," contending that there was plenty of Jewish precedent for the Christian messianic story. When Knohl read the Cathedra article and looked into the tablet further, he saw new evidence for his thesis:
He reconstructed one phrase to read, "In three days, you shall live" - which would be an eerie parallel to the Christian account of Jesus' resurrection on the third day of his entombment.
He deduced that the phrase was addressed by Gabriel to a "prince of princes" who was slain by an evil king.
Based on his previous research, Knohl even suggested that the text referred to a Jewish rebel leader named Simon, who was killed by Herod's army in 4 B.C.
Knohl laid out his case for interpreting Gabriel's vision last year in an essay for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and wrote up a more scholarly analysis for April's issue of The Journal of Religion (which you can read by following the links from this Web page). He's also due to discuss the tablet this week during the Dead Sea Scrolls conference.
The resurrection-in-three-days angle was the attention-getter for Sunday's Times report. But many steps in the scientific analysis of the tablet still have to be verified, starting with the origins of the stone and the inked text.
Faith-based archaeology?
"This story has the big caveat of 'where did it come from?'" Mark Rose, online editor for Archaeology magazine, told me. "Someone knows where it came from, someone found it, someone sold it."
The field of biblical archaeology has had its share of controversies over artifacts that may or may not be genuine - most notably the ossuary of James and the "lost tomb of Jesus." Rose said the tablet would have to face the same kind of scrutiny - and could well end up in an archaeological limbo, neither verified nor debunked.
"You want to look at these stories as having to do with faith? Well, there's a lot of faith involved," he said.
Shanks, who was caught up in the earlier debate over the ossuary (a.k.a. the "Jesus box"), has faith that the tablet ultimately will prove genuine. Some of most exacting judges of antiquities have been taking a close look at the artifact - and the advance indications are that the tablet has been passing the tests so far.
"I don't think that you'll find any competent scholar who will call it a forgery," Shanks said.
What does it all mean?
Even assuming that the stone tablet (and the ink writing) are accepted as dating back to the first century B.C., scholars will likely struggle over how the scriptural fragments are pieced together. Perhaps the best way to firm up Knohl's textual interpretation is to find parallel texts elsewhere, as others have done with the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Then there's the question of what effect the "Vision of Gabriel" might have on Jewish and Christian belief.
During the troubled times into which Jesus was born, Jews yearned for the rise of a messiah who would emerge as a powerful military leader and throw out the Roman-backed regime.
"You have in Christian theology a very different kind of messiah, a messiah who's going to shed blood and atone for your sins," Shanks observed. "Where the hell did this come from, baby? Are there elements of this in Jewish messianism?"
The Dead Sea Scrolls have already shown that the idea of a suffering messiah was part of the cultural milieu back then. If the tablet's text and its three-day messianic interpretation are verified, it could shrink the theological gap between pre-Christian Judaism and early Christianity even further. But that shouldn't come as a shock, Rose said.
"Is this going to redefine the relationship between Judaism and Christianity? I don't think so," he said.
Believers might say the "Vision of Gabriel" is yet another scriptural foreshadowing of Jesus' actual death and resurrection - while skeptics might say the text provides more evidence that the gospels fit into a tradition of untrue messianic tales.
What do you think? Will the "Vision of Gabriel" become a religious bombshell? Will it fizzle out? Or will it turn out to be just one more interesting twist in the saga of scriptural scholarship?
Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection
By ETHAN BRONNER
Published: July 6, 2008
JERUSALEM A three-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
The tablet, probably found near the Dead Sea in Jordan according to some scholars who have studied it, is a rare example of a stone with ink writings from that era in essence, a Dead Sea Scroll on stone.
It is written, not engraved, across two neat columns, similar to columns in a Torah. But the stone is broken, and some of the text is faded, meaning that much of what it says is open to debate.
Still, its authenticity has so far faced no challenge, so its role in helping to understand the roots of Christianity in the devastating political crisis faced by the Jews of the time seems likely to increase.
Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmudic culture at the University of California at Berkeley, said that the stone was part of a growing body of evidence suggesting that Jesus could be best understood through a close reading of the Jewish history of his day.
“Some Christians will find it shocking a challenge to the uniqueness of their theology while others will be comforted by the idea of it being a traditional part of Judaism, Mr. Boyarin said.
Given the highly charged atmosphere surrounding all Jesus-era artifacts and writings, both in the general public and in the fractured and fiercely competitive scholarly community, as well as the concern over forgery and charlatanism, it will probably be some time before the tablet’s contribution is fully assessed. It has been around 60 years since the Dead Sea Scrolls were uncovered, and they continue to generate enormous controversy regarding their authors and meaning.
The scrolls, documents found in the Qumran caves of the West Bank, contain some of the only known surviving copies of biblical writings from before the first century A.D. In addition to quoting from key books of the Bible, the scrolls describe a variety of practices and beliefs of a Jewish sect at the time of Jesus.
How representative the descriptions are and what they tell us about the era are still strongly debated. For example, a question that arises is whether the authors of the scrolls were members of a monastic sect or in fact mainstream. A conference marking 60 years since the discovery of the scrolls will begin on Sunday at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, where the stone, and the debate over whether it speaks of a resurrected messiah, as one iconoclastic scholar believes, also will be discussed.
Oddly, the stone is not really a new discovery. It was found about a decade ago and bought from a Jordanian antiquities dealer by an Israeli-Swiss collector who kept it in his Zurich home. When an Israeli scholar examined it closely a few years ago and wrote a paper on it last year, interest began to rise. There is now a spate of scholarly articles on the stone, with several due to be published in the coming months.
“I couldn’t make much out of it when I got it, said David Jeselsohn, the owner, who is himself an expert in antiquities. I didn’t realize how significant it was until I showed it to Ada Yardeni, who specializes in Hebrew writing, a few years ago. She was overwhelmed. ‘You have got a Dead Sea Scroll on stone,’ she told me.
Much of the text, a vision of the apocalypse transmitted by the angel Gabriel, draws on the Old Testament, especially the prophets Daniel, Zechariah and Haggai.
Ms. Yardeni, who analyzed the stone along with Binyamin Elitzur, is an expert on Hebrew script, especially of the era of King Herod, who died in 4 B.C. The two of them published a long analysis of the stone more than a year ago in Cathedra, a Hebrew-language quarterly devoted to the history and archaeology of Israel, and said that, based on the shape of the script and the language, the text dated from the late first century B.C.
A chemical examination by Yuval Goren, a professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University who specializes in the verification of ancient artifacts, has been submitted to a peer-review journal. He declined to give details of his analysis until publication, but he said that he knew of no reason to doubt the stone’s authenticity.
It was in Cathedra that Israel Knohl, an iconoclastic professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, first heard of the stone, which Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur dubbed Gabriel’s Revelation, also the title of their article. Mr. Knohl posited in a book published in 2000 the idea of a suffering messiah before Jesus, using a variety of rabbinic and early apocalyptic literature as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls. But his theory did not shake the world of Christology as he had hoped, partly because he had no textual evidence from before Jesus.
When he read Gabriel’s Revelation, he said, he believed he saw what he needed to solidify his thesis, and he has published his argument in the latest issue of The Journal of Religion.
Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.
In Mr. Knohl’s interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.
The slaying of Simon, or any case of the suffering messiah, is seen as a necessary step toward national salvation, he says, pointing to lines 19 through 21 of the tablet In three days you will know that evil will be defeated by justice and other lines that speak of blood and slaughter as pathways to justice.
To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words L’shloshet yamin, meaning in three days. The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible by Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur, but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is hayeh, or live in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.
Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.
To whom is the archangel speaking? The next line says Sar hasarin, or prince of princes. Since the Book of Daniel, one of the primary sources for the Gabriel text, speaks of Gabriel and of a prince of princes, Mr. Knohl contends that the stone’s writings are about the death of a leader of the Jews who will be resurrected in three days.
He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity, he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow in addition to being the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University. Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.
Ms. Yardeni said she was impressed with the reading and considered it indeed likely that the key illegible word was hayeh, or live. Whether that means Simon is the messiah under discussion, she is less sure.
Moshe Bar-Asher, president of the Israeli Academy of Hebrew Language and emeritus professor of Hebrew and Aramaic at the Hebrew University, said he spent a long time studying the text and considered it authentic, dating from no later than the first century B.C. His 25-page paper on the stone will be published in the coming months.
Regarding Mr. Knohl’s thesis, Mr. Bar-Asher is also respectful but cautious. There is one problem, he said. In crucial places of the text there is lack of text. I understand Knohl’s tendency to find there keys to the pre-Christian period, but in two to three crucial lines of text there are a lot of missing words.
Moshe Idel, a professor of Jewish thought at Hebrew University, said that given the way every tiny fragment from that era yielded scores of articles and books, Gabriel’s Revelation and Mr. Knohl’s analysis deserved serious attention. Here we have a real stone with a real text, he said. This is truly significant.
Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and Gabriel’s Revelation shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come, Mr. Knohl said. This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.
Translation (Semitic sounds in caps and\or italics)
Column A
(Lines 1-6 are unintelligible)
7. [… ]the sons of Israel …[…]…
8. […]… […]…
9. [… ]the word of YHW[H …]…[…]
10. […]… I\you asked …
11. YHWH, you ask me. Thus said the Lord of Hosts:
12. […]… from my(?) house, Israel, and I will tell the greatness(es?) of Jerusalem.
13. [Thus] said YHWH, the Lord of Israel: Behold, all the nations are
14. … against(?)\to(?) Jerusalem and …,
15. [o]ne, two, three, fourty(?) prophets(?) and the returners(?),
16. [and] the Hasidin(?). My servant, David, asked from before Ephraim(?)
17. [to?] put the sign(?) I ask from you. Because He said, (namely,)
18. [Y]HWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel: …
19. sanctity(?)\sanctify(?) Israel! In three days you shall know, that(?)\for(?) He said,
20. (namely,) YHWH the Lord of Hosts, the Lord of Israel: The evil broke (down)
21. before justice. Ask me and I will tell you what 22this bad 21plant is,
22. lwbnsd/r/k (=? [To me? in libation?]) you are standing, the messenger\angel. He
23. … (= will ordain you?) to Torah(?). Blessed be the Glory of YHWH the Lord, from
24. his seat. “In a little while”, qyTuT (=a brawl?\ tiny?) it is, “and I will shake the
25. … of? heaven and the earth”. Here is the Glory of YHWH the Lord of
26. Hosts, the Lord of Israel. These are the chariots, seven,
27. [un]to(?) the gate(?) of Jerusalem, and the gates of Judah, and … for the
sake of
28. … His(?) angel, Michael, and to all the others(?) ask\asked
29. …. Thus He said, YHWH the Lord of Hosts, the Lord of
30. Israel: One, two, three, four, five, six,
31. [se]ven, these(?) are(?) His(?) angel …. 'What is it', said the blossom(?)\diadem(?)
32. …[…]… and (the?) … (= leader?/ruler?), the second,
33. … Jerusalem…. three, in\of the greatness(es?) of
34. […]…[…]…
35. […]…, who saw a man … working(?) and […]…
36. that he … […]… from(?) Jerusalem(?)
37. … on(?) … the exile(?) of …,
38. the exile(?) of …, Lord …, and I will see
39. …[…] Jerusalem, He will say, YHWH of
40. Hosts, …
41. […]… that will lift(?) …
42. […]… in all the
43. […]…
44. […]…
Column B
(Lines 45-50 are unintelligible)
51. Your people(?)\with you(?) …[…]
52. … the [me]ssengers(?)\[a]ngels(?)[ …]…
53. on\against His/My people. And …[…]…
54. [… ]three days(?). This is (that) which(?) …[… ]He(?)
55. the Lord(?)\these(?)[ …]…[…]
56. see(?) …[…]
57. closed(?). The blood of the slaughters(?)\sacrifices(?) of Jerusalem. For He said,
YHWH of Hos[ts],
58. the Lord of Israel: For He said, YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of
59. Israel: …
60. […]… me(?) the spirit?\wind of(?) …
61. …[…]…
62. in it(?) …[…]…[…]
63. …[…]…[…]
64. …[…]… loved(?)/… …[…]
65. The three saints of the world\eternity from\of …[…]
66. […]… peace he? said, to\in you we trust(?) …
67. Inform him of the blood of this chariot of them(?) …[…]
68. Many lovers He has, YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel …
69. Thus He said, (namely,) YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel …:
70. Prophets have I sent to my people, three. And I say
71. that I have seen …[…]…
72. the place for the sake of(?) David the servant of YHWH[ …]…[…]
73. the heaven and the earth. Blessed be …[…]
74. men(?). “Showing mercy unto thousands”, … mercy […].
75. Three shepherds went out to?/of? Israel …[…].
76. If there is a priest, if there are sons of saints …[…]
77. Who am I(?), I (am?) Gabri’el the …(=angel?)… […]
78. You(?) will save them, …[…]…
79. from before You, the three si[gn]s(?), three …[….]
80. In three days …, I, Gabri’el …[?],
81. the Prince of Princes, …, narrow holes(?) …[…]…
82. to/for … […]… and the …
83. to me(?), out of three - the small one, whom(?) I took, I, Gabri’el.
84. YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of(?)[ Israel …]…[….]
85. Then you will stand …[…]…
86. …\
87. in(?) … eternity(?)/… \
The Immortality of the Soul and the Afterlife
By
James Scott Trimm
The Nazarenes, who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old law, explain the two houses as the two families, viz. of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and the Pharisees. (Akiba, who took over their school, is called the master of Aquila the proselyte, and after him came Meir who … succeeded … Joannes the son of Zakkai and after him Eliezer and further Telphon, and next Joseph Galilaeus and Joshua up to the capture of Jerusalem.) Shammai then and Hillel were born not long before the Master; they originated in Judea. The name of the first means scatterer and of the second unholy, because he scattered and denied the precepts of the Torah by his traditions and deuterōseis[1]. And these are the two houses who did not accept the Savior who has become to them destruction and shame.
On Isaiah 8:20. For Torah and for testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. 21. And they will pass through it, greatly distressed and hungry; and it will come to pass, that when they will be hungry, they will be enraged, and curse their king and their gods, and look upward.
For the rest the Nazarenes explain the passage in this way: when the Scribes and Pharisees tell you to listen to them, men who do everything for the love of the belly and who hiss during their incantations in the way of magicians in order to deceive you, you must answer them like this: "It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe consults its own idols. We must not, therefore, consult your dead about the living ones. On the contrary. Elohim has given us the Torah and the testimonies of the scriptures. If you are not willing to follow them you will not have light, and the darkness will always oppress you. It will cover your earth and your doctrine so that, when you see that they have been deceived by you in error and they feel a longing for the truth, they will then be sad or angry. And let them who believe themselves to be like their own gods and kings curse you. And let them look at the sky and the earth in vain since they are always in darkness and they cannot flee away from your ambushes."
On Isaiah 9:1. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; they who dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them has the light shined. 2. You have multiplied the nation, and increased the joy; they rejoice before you according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the plunder. 3. For you have broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the days of Midian. 4. For every shoe of the stormy warrior, and every garment rolled in blood will be burned as fuel of fire.
The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above, try to explain this passage in the following way: When Messiah came and his preaching shone out, the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the preaching became more dominant, that means the preaching was multiplied, through the Good News of the apostle Paul who was the last of all the apostles. And the Good News of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the Good News.
On Isaiah 29:20. For the terrible one is brought to nothing, and the scorner is consumed, and all who watch for iniquity are cut off; 21. Who, by a word, make a man an offender, and lay a trap for him who reproves in the gate, and turn aside the just for nothing.
What we have understood to have been written about the devil and his angels, the Nazarenes believe to have been said against the Scribes and the Pharisees, because the deuterōseis passed away, who earlier deceived the people with very vicious traditions (and they watch day and night to deceive the simple ones), who made men sin against the Word of Elohim in order that they should deny that Messiah was the Son of Elohim.
On Isaiah 31:6. Behold, you trust in the staff of this broken reed, on Egypt; which will pierce the hand of a man who leans in it; so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him. 7. But if you say to me, We trust in YHWH our Elohim; is it not he, whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah has taken away, and said to Judah and to Jerusalem, You shall worship before this altar? 8. Now therefore make a wager, I beg you, with my master the king of Assyria, and I will give you two thousand horses, if you are able on your part to set riders upon them. 9. How then will you turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master's servants, and put your trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen?
The Nazarenes understand this passage in this way: Sons of Israel, who deny the Son of Elohim with a most vicious opinion, turn to him and his apostles. For if you will do this, you will reject all idols that to you were a cause of sin in the past, and the devil will fall before you, not because of your powers, but because of the compassion of Elohim. And his young men, who at a certain time earlier fought for him, will be the tributaries of the assembly and any of [his] power and stone will pass. Also the philosophers and every perverse dogma will turn their backs to the sign of the cross. Because this is the meaning of YHWH that his will take place, whose fire or light is in Zion and his oven in Jerusalem.
Balaam in the Tell Deir 'Alla Inscription
In 1967 pieces of a plaster inscription was discovered in some building ruins (generally thought to be an ancient sanctuary)[1] located at Tell Deir 'Alla the Transjordan valley near the Jabbok River. The dating of the ink on plaster inscription has ranged from the eighth century to the Persian period, although most seem to hold an eighth century date.[2] The issue of dating was initially complicated by two problems. First, the text is fragmentary and at least fifteen combinations of the inscription have been proposed.[3] Second, the form of the text is debated (Canaanite, Aramaic, both?).[4] However, it is now generally agreed that the first combination (see below) is the most likely and that the text is Aramaic (at least primarily).
In the first combination, and in the first line, Balaam is described as a “seer of the gods.” Interestingly, Yahweh is never mentioned, although El, El Shaddayin (plural), and a goddess (whose name is mostly missing from the fragmentary text) are found in the text. The superscription also mentions that Balaam sees an oracle like a vision. The rest of the text contains material not found in the biblical record (although some of the language is similar).[5] The oracle itself appears to relate to divine punishment and the loss of fertility.[6] A detailed examination of the text is not possible here but such treatments are available.[7]
Overall, the inscription, unlike most of the biblical material, presents Balaam as a positive figure. Although he is not called a prophet, he is identified as a seer and his oracle apparently was seen as significant enough to record and place on a wall or stele in a sanctuary. The fact that he is mentioned at all suggests some prominence. What is not certain is who held him in such high regard. The question as to whether the sanctuary was Israelite or non-Israelite has also not been answered definitively.
(“The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla,” 51-2)
(1) [VACAT] The sa]ying[s of Bala]am, [son of Be]or, the man who was a seer of the gods. Lo! Gods came to him in the night [and spoke to] him (2) according to these w[ord]s. Then they said to [Bala]am, son of Beor, thus: “Let someone make a [ ] hereafter, so that [what] you have hea[rd may be se]en!” (3) And Balaam rose in the morning [ ] right hand [ ]and could not [eat] and wept (4) aloud. Then his people came in to him [and said] to Balaam, son of Beor, “Do you fast? [ ] Do you weep?” And he (5) said to them, “Si[t do]wn! I shall inform you what the Shad[daying have done]. Now come, see the deeds of the g[o]ds! The g[o]ds have gathered (6) and the Shaddayin have taken their places in the assembly and said to Sh[ , thus:] ‘Sew shut the skies with your thick cloud! There let there be darkness and no (7) perpetual shining and n[o] radiance! For you will put a sea[l upon the thick] cloud of darkness and you will not remove it forever! For the swift has (8) reproached the eagle, and the voice of vultures resounds. The st[ork has ] the young of the NHS-bird and ripped up the chicks of the heron. The swallow has belittled (9) the dove, and the sparrow [ ] and [ ] the staff. Instead of ewes the stick is driven along. Hares have eaten (10) [ ]. Freemen[ ] have drunk wine, and hyenas have listened to instruction. The whelps of the (11) f[ox ] laughs at wise men, and the poor woman has mixed myrrh, and the priestess (12) [ ] to the one who wears a girdle of threads. The esteemed esteems and the esteemer is es[teemed. ] and everyone has seen those things that decree offspring and young. (15) [ ] to the leopard. The piglet has chased the young (16) [of ] those who are girded, and the eye. . .’”
[1] There is some discussion regarding the original placement of the plaster. Some suggest that it was on a wall and other suggest that it may have been part of a stele. See Gerrit van der Kooij, “Book and Script at Deir 'Alla,” in The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla Re-Evaluated: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Leiden 21-24 August 1989, ed. J. Hoftijzer and G. Van Der Kooij (New York: E. J. Brill, 1991), 239-41.
[2] See P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., “The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla: The First Combination,” Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental Research 237 (1980): 49-60, J. Naveh, “The Date of the Deir 'Alla Inscription in Aramaic Script,” Israel Exploration Journal 17 (1967): 236-38.
[3] M. W. Chavalas, “Balaam,” in Dictionary of the Old Testament Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2003), 76.
[4] Dennis Pardee, “The Linguistic Classification of the Deir 'Alla Text,” in The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla Re-Evaluated: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held at Leiden 21-24 August 1989, ed. J. Hoftijzer and G. Van Der Kooij (New York: E. J. Brill, 1991), 100-05.
[5] Hackett, “Balaam,” 572
[6] Chavalas, “Balaam,” 76.
[7] See Jo Ann Hackett, The Balaam Text from Deir 'Alla, Harvard Semitic Monographs 31, ed. Frank Moore Cross (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980), 21-89, McCarter, “The Balaam Texts from Deir 'Alla: The First Combination,” 51-9.
The Hazon Gabriel - Revelation of Gabriel - stone "scroll" dated to first century B.C.
Messiah, Son of Joseph, After Three Day, LIVE, Prince of Princes!
Sacred Name YAHWEH plainly found on the stone.
Israel Knohl NY Times article on biblical stone cites Knohl research (06/07/2008)
A New York Times article on the Hazon Gabriel tablet, a three-foot-tall stone with 87 lines of Hebrew that apparently dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus quotes Shalom Hartman Institute scholars Israel Knohl, authr of a recent scholarly journal article posted here on the controversial subject, and Moshe Idel.The Times article describes the stone tablet as "causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.." Knohl's recent article suggests the stone's text supports his controversial thesis that messianic activity in the ancient land of Israel predated Jesus, as discussed originally in his 2000 book, "The Messiah Before Jesus: the Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls." The case Knohl presents will resurface in greater detail in an upcoming book. Knohl's theory first received exposure in his book, but the Times said Knohl's theory "did not shake the world of Christology as he had hoped, partly because he had no textual evidence from before Jesus." However, the tablet does, indeed, in Knohl's view, provide information that supports his theory, and the tablet's provenance from the days before Jesus was said to have lived seems clear. The Times wrote of Knohl:
When he read “Gabriel’s Revelation,” he said, he believed he saw what he needed to solidify his thesis, and he has published his argument in the latest issue of The Journal of Religion.
Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.
In Mr. Knohl’s interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.
The slaying of Simon, or any case of the suffering messiah, is seen as a necessary step toward national salvation, he says, pointing to lines 19 through 21 of the tablet — “In three days you will know that evil will be defeated by justice” — and other lines that speak of blood and slaughter as pathways to justice.
To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words “L’shloshet yamin,” meaning “in three days.” The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible...but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is “hayeh,” or “live” in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.
Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, “In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.”
To whom is the archangel speaking? The next line says “Sar hasarin,” or prince of princes. Since the Book of Daniel, one of the primary sources for the Gabriel text, speaks of Gabriel and of “a prince of princes,” Mr. Knohl contends that the stone’s writings are about the death of a leader of the Jews who will be resurrected in three days.
He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity,” he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow.... “Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.”
...Moshe Idel, a professor of Jewish thought at Hebrew University, said that given the way every tiny fragment from that era yielded scores of articles and books, “Gabriel’s Revelation” and Mr. Knohl’s analysis deserved serious attention. “Here we have a real stone with a real text,” he said. “This is truly significant.”
Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and “Gabriel’s Revelation” shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”
The Israel Museum, which houses many of the Dead Sea Scrolls in its famous "Shrine of the Book," is opening a conference this week marking 60 years since the first scroll's discovery. The issue of whether the tablet speaks of a resurrected messiah, as Knohl believes, also will be discussed.
Messianic message stirs debate
Posted: Monday, July 07, 2008
(English Translation - Vision of Gabriel - below)
A foot-wide stone tablet is said to bear Jewish messianic messages from the first century B.C.
Scriptural scholars are abuzz over a stone tablet that is said to bear previously unknown prophecies about a Jewish messiah who would rise from the dead in three days. But there are far more questions than answers about the tablet, which some have suggested could represent "a new Dead Sea Scroll in stone."
Do the tablet and the inked text really date back to the first century B.C., as claimed? Where did the artifact come from? Can the gaps in the text be filled in to make sense? Is the seeming reference to a coming resurrection correct, and to whom does that passage refer? Finally, what impact would a pre-Christian reference to suffering, death and resurrection have on Christian scholarship?
Such questions are being addressed this week in Jerusalem, at an international conference marking the 60th anniversary of the Dead Sea Scrolls' discovery. They're also being addressed in reports about the "Vision of Gabriel" tablet that have trickled out over the past few months.
That trickle flooded onto the front page of The New York Times on Sunday, in a story that quoted one professor as saying some Christians would "find it shocking" that Jewish scriptures prefigured Christian theology.
But Herschel Shanks, founder of the Biblical Archaeology Society and editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, said that such a linkage really isn't surprising, let alone shocking.
"The really unique thing about Christian theology is in the life of Jesus - but in the doctrines, when I was a kid, you had little stories about the Sermon on the Mount and the people listening to this saying, 'What is this man saying? I never heard anything like this! This is different,'" Shanks told me. "Today, this view is out. There are Jewish roots to almost everything in Christian experience."
This revised view comes through loud and clear in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which chronicle the spiritual and even the sanitary practices of a Jewish sect that existed around the time of Jesus. It was the similarity to the style of the scrolls that first brought the "Vision of Gabriel" tablet to the attention of archaeologists.
How the tablet came to light
The 1-foot-wide, 3-foot-tall (30-by-90-centimeter) tablet has a checkered past: According to the tale that has been woven around the stone, it was found near Jordan's Dead Sea shore and sold by a Jordanian dealer to Israeli-Swiss collector David Jeselsohn a decade ago. A few years ago, Jeselsohn showed the stone to Ada Yardeni, an expert on ancient Semitic scripts, who consulted with another expert, Binyamin Elitzur.
Yardeni's take on the tablet, published in the Hebrew-language journal Cathedra and in the Biblical Archaeology Review, was that the text was of a style going back to the late first century B.C. or the early first century A.D. - right around the time when Jesus would be growing up.
The 87-line text was written in ink, not inscribed in the stone, and it was laid out just the way one would expect on a scroll, in two nearly even columns. "If it were written on leather (and smaller) I would say it was another Dead Sea Scroll fragment - but it isn't," Yardeni wrote.
The text appears to be a set of apocalyptic pronouncements from a personage named Gabriel - hence the name given to the text, "The Vision of Gabriel" or "Gabriel's Revelations." Biblical Archaeology Review has put the Hebrew text as well as an English translation online.
As you'll see by reading the text, there are so many gaps that it's hard to make out exactly what is being said - but even those fragments were intriguing to Israel Knohl, a Biblical scholar at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Back in the year 2000, Knohl had written a book titled "The Messiah Before Jesus," contending that there was plenty of Jewish precedent for the Christian messianic story. When Knohl read the Cathedra article and looked into the tablet further, he saw new evidence for his thesis:
He reconstructed one phrase to read, "In three days, you shall live" - which would be an eerie parallel to the Christian account of Jesus' resurrection on the third day of his entombment.
He deduced that the phrase was addressed by Gabriel to a "prince of princes" who was slain by an evil king.
Based on his previous research, Knohl even suggested that the text referred to a Jewish rebel leader named Simon, who was killed by Herod's army in 4 B.C.
Knohl laid out his case for interpreting Gabriel's vision last year in an essay for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and wrote up a more scholarly analysis for April's issue of The Journal of Religion (which you can read by following the links from this Web page). He's also due to discuss the tablet this week during the Dead Sea Scrolls conference.
The resurrection-in-three-days angle was the attention-getter for Sunday's Times report. But many steps in the scientific analysis of the tablet still have to be verified, starting with the origins of the stone and the inked text.
Faith-based archaeology?
"This story has the big caveat of 'where did it come from?'" Mark Rose, online editor for Archaeology magazine, told me. "Someone knows where it came from, someone found it, someone sold it."
The field of biblical archaeology has had its share of controversies over artifacts that may or may not be genuine - most notably the ossuary of James and the "lost tomb of Jesus." Rose said the tablet would have to face the same kind of scrutiny - and could well end up in an archaeological limbo, neither verified nor debunked.
"You want to look at these stories as having to do with faith? Well, there's a lot of faith involved," he said.
Shanks, who was caught up in the earlier debate over the ossuary (a.k.a. the "Jesus box"), has faith that the tablet ultimately will prove genuine. Some of most exacting judges of antiquities have been taking a close look at the artifact - and the advance indications are that the tablet has been passing the tests so far.
"I don't think that you'll find any competent scholar who will call it a forgery," Shanks said.
What does it all mean?
Even assuming that the stone tablet (and the ink writing) are accepted as dating back to the first century B.C., scholars will likely struggle over how the scriptural fragments are pieced together. Perhaps the best way to firm up Knohl's textual interpretation is to find parallel texts elsewhere, as others have done with the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Then there's the question of what effect the "Vision of Gabriel" might have on Jewish and Christian belief.
During the troubled times into which Jesus was born, Jews yearned for the rise of a messiah who would emerge as a powerful military leader and throw out the Roman-backed regime.
"You have in Christian theology a very different kind of messiah, a messiah who's going to shed blood and atone for your sins," Shanks observed. "Where the hell did this come from, baby? Are there elements of this in Jewish messianism?"
The Dead Sea Scrolls have already shown that the idea of a suffering messiah was part of the cultural milieu back then. If the tablet's text and its three-day messianic interpretation are verified, it could shrink the theological gap between pre-Christian Judaism and early Christianity even further. But that shouldn't come as a shock, Rose said.
"Is this going to redefine the relationship between Judaism and Christianity? I don't think so," he said.
Believers might say the "Vision of Gabriel" is yet another scriptural foreshadowing of Jesus' actual death and resurrection - while skeptics might say the text provides more evidence that the gospels fit into a tradition of untrue messianic tales.
What do you think? Will the "Vision of Gabriel" become a religious bombshell? Will it fizzle out? Or will it turn out to be just one more interesting twist in the saga of scriptural scholarship?
Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection
By ETHAN BRONNER
Published: July 6, 2008
JERUSALEM A three-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
The tablet, probably found near the Dead Sea in Jordan according to some scholars who have studied it, is a rare example of a stone with ink writings from that era in essence, a Dead Sea Scroll on stone.
It is written, not engraved, across two neat columns, similar to columns in a Torah. But the stone is broken, and some of the text is faded, meaning that much of what it says is open to debate.
Still, its authenticity has so far faced no challenge, so its role in helping to understand the roots of Christianity in the devastating political crisis faced by the Jews of the time seems likely to increase.
Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmudic culture at the University of California at Berkeley, said that the stone was part of a growing body of evidence suggesting that Jesus could be best understood through a close reading of the Jewish history of his day.
“Some Christians will find it shocking a challenge to the uniqueness of their theology while others will be comforted by the idea of it being a traditional part of Judaism, Mr. Boyarin said.
Given the highly charged atmosphere surrounding all Jesus-era artifacts and writings, both in the general public and in the fractured and fiercely competitive scholarly community, as well as the concern over forgery and charlatanism, it will probably be some time before the tablet’s contribution is fully assessed. It has been around 60 years since the Dead Sea Scrolls were uncovered, and they continue to generate enormous controversy regarding their authors and meaning.
The scrolls, documents found in the Qumran caves of the West Bank, contain some of the only known surviving copies of biblical writings from before the first century A.D. In addition to quoting from key books of the Bible, the scrolls describe a variety of practices and beliefs of a Jewish sect at the time of Jesus.
How representative the descriptions are and what they tell us about the era are still strongly debated. For example, a question that arises is whether the authors of the scrolls were members of a monastic sect or in fact mainstream. A conference marking 60 years since the discovery of the scrolls will begin on Sunday at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, where the stone, and the debate over whether it speaks of a resurrected messiah, as one iconoclastic scholar believes, also will be discussed.
Oddly, the stone is not really a new discovery. It was found about a decade ago and bought from a Jordanian antiquities dealer by an Israeli-Swiss collector who kept it in his Zurich home. When an Israeli scholar examined it closely a few years ago and wrote a paper on it last year, interest began to rise. There is now a spate of scholarly articles on the stone, with several due to be published in the coming months.
“I couldn’t make much out of it when I got it, said David Jeselsohn, the owner, who is himself an expert in antiquities. I didn’t realize how significant it was until I showed it to Ada Yardeni, who specializes in Hebrew writing, a few years ago. She was overwhelmed. ‘You have got a Dead Sea Scroll on stone,’ she told me.
Much of the text, a vision of the apocalypse transmitted by the angel Gabriel, draws on the Old Testament, especially the prophets Daniel, Zechariah and Haggai.
Ms. Yardeni, who analyzed the stone along with Binyamin Elitzur, is an expert on Hebrew script, especially of the era of King Herod, who died in 4 B.C. The two of them published a long analysis of the stone more than a year ago in Cathedra, a Hebrew-language quarterly devoted to the history and archaeology of Israel, and said that, based on the shape of the script and the language, the text dated from the late first century B.C.
A chemical examination by Yuval Goren, a professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University who specializes in the verification of ancient artifacts, has been submitted to a peer-review journal. He declined to give details of his analysis until publication, but he said that he knew of no reason to doubt the stone’s authenticity.
It was in Cathedra that Israel Knohl, an iconoclastic professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, first heard of the stone, which Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur dubbed Gabriel’s Revelation, also the title of their article. Mr. Knohl posited in a book published in 2000 the idea of a suffering messiah before Jesus, using a variety of rabbinic and early apocalyptic literature as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls. But his theory did not shake the world of Christology as he had hoped, partly because he had no textual evidence from before Jesus.
When he read Gabriel’s Revelation, he said, he believed he saw what he needed to solidify his thesis, and he has published his argument in the latest issue of The Journal of Religion.
Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.
In Mr. Knohl’s interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.
The slaying of Simon, or any case of the suffering messiah, is seen as a necessary step toward national salvation, he says, pointing to lines 19 through 21 of the tablet In three days you will know that evil will be defeated by justice and other lines that speak of blood and slaughter as pathways to justice.
To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words L’shloshet yamin, meaning in three days. The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible by Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur, but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is hayeh, or live in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.
Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.
To whom is the archangel speaking? The next line says Sar hasarin, or prince of princes. Since the Book of Daniel, one of the primary sources for the Gabriel text, speaks of Gabriel and of a prince of princes, Mr. Knohl contends that the stone’s writings are about the death of a leader of the Jews who will be resurrected in three days.
He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity, he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow in addition to being the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University. Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.
Ms. Yardeni said she was impressed with the reading and considered it indeed likely that the key illegible word was hayeh, or live. Whether that means Simon is the messiah under discussion, she is less sure.
Moshe Bar-Asher, president of the Israeli Academy of Hebrew Language and emeritus professor of Hebrew and Aramaic at the Hebrew University, said he spent a long time studying the text and considered it authentic, dating from no later than the first century B.C. His 25-page paper on the stone will be published in the coming months.
Regarding Mr. Knohl’s thesis, Mr. Bar-Asher is also respectful but cautious. There is one problem, he said. In crucial places of the text there is lack of text. I understand Knohl’s tendency to find there keys to the pre-Christian period, but in two to three crucial lines of text there are a lot of missing words.
Moshe Idel, a professor of Jewish thought at Hebrew University, said that given the way every tiny fragment from that era yielded scores of articles and books, Gabriel’s Revelation and Mr. Knohl’s analysis deserved serious attention. Here we have a real stone with a real text, he said. This is truly significant.
Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and Gabriel’s Revelation shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come, Mr. Knohl said. This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.
Translation (Semitic sounds in caps and\or italics)
Column A
(Lines 1-6 are unintelligible)
7. [… ]the sons of Israel …[…]…
8. […]… […]…
9. [… ]the word of YHW[H …]…[…]
10. […]… I\you asked …
11. YHWH, you ask me. Thus said the Lord of Hosts:
12. […]… from my(?) house, Israel, and I will tell the greatness(es?) of Jerusalem.
13. [Thus] said YHWH, the Lord of Israel: Behold, all the nations are
14. … against(?)\to(?) Jerusalem and …,
15. [o]ne, two, three, fourty(?) prophets(?) and the returners(?),
16. [and] the Hasidin(?). My servant, David, asked from before Ephraim(?)
17. [to?] put the sign(?) I ask from you. Because He said, (namely,)
18. [Y]HWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel: …
19. sanctity(?)\sanctify(?) Israel! In three days you shall know, that(?)\for(?) He said,
20. (namely,) YHWH the Lord of Hosts, the Lord of Israel: The evil broke (down)
21. before justice. Ask me and I will tell you what 22this bad 21plant is,
22. lwbnsd/r/k (=? [To me? in libation?]) you are standing, the messenger\angel. He
23. … (= will ordain you?) to Torah(?). Blessed be the Glory of YHWH the Lord, from
24. his seat. “In a little while”, qyTuT (=a brawl?\ tiny?) it is, “and I will shake the
25. … of? heaven and the earth”. Here is the Glory of YHWH the Lord of
26. Hosts, the Lord of Israel. These are the chariots, seven,
27. [un]to(?) the gate(?) of Jerusalem, and the gates of Judah, and … for the
sake of
28. … His(?) angel, Michael, and to all the others(?) ask\asked
29. …. Thus He said, YHWH the Lord of Hosts, the Lord of
30. Israel: One, two, three, four, five, six,
31. [se]ven, these(?) are(?) His(?) angel …. 'What is it', said the blossom(?)\diadem(?)
32. …[…]… and (the?) … (= leader?/ruler?), the second,
33. … Jerusalem…. three, in\of the greatness(es?) of
34. […]…[…]…
35. […]…, who saw a man … working(?) and […]…
36. that he … […]… from(?) Jerusalem(?)
37. … on(?) … the exile(?) of …,
38. the exile(?) of …, Lord …, and I will see
39. …[…] Jerusalem, He will say, YHWH of
40. Hosts, …
41. […]… that will lift(?) …
42. […]… in all the
43. […]…
44. […]…
Column B
(Lines 45-50 are unintelligible)
51. Your people(?)\with you(?) …[…]
52. … the [me]ssengers(?)\[a]ngels(?)[ …]…
53. on\against His/My people. And …[…]…
54. [… ]three days(?). This is (that) which(?) …[… ]He(?)
55. the Lord(?)\these(?)[ …]…[…]
56. see(?) …[…]
57. closed(?). The blood of the slaughters(?)\sacrifices(?) of Jerusalem. For He said,
YHWH of Hos[ts],
58. the Lord of Israel: For He said, YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of
59. Israel: …
60. […]… me(?) the spirit?\wind of(?) …
61. …[…]…
62. in it(?) …[…]…[…]
63. …[…]…[…]
64. …[…]… loved(?)/… …[…]
65. The three saints of the world\eternity from\of …[…]
66. […]… peace he? said, to\in you we trust(?) …
67. Inform him of the blood of this chariot of them(?) …[…]
68. Many lovers He has, YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel …
69. Thus He said, (namely,) YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of Israel …:
70. Prophets have I sent to my people, three. And I say
71. that I have seen …[…]…
72. the place for the sake of(?) David the servant of YHWH[ …]…[…]
73. the heaven and the earth. Blessed be …[…]
74. men(?). “Showing mercy unto thousands”, … mercy […].
75. Three shepherds went out to?/of? Israel …[…].
76. If there is a priest, if there are sons of saints …[…]
77. Who am I(?), I (am?) Gabri’el the …(=angel?)… […]
78. You(?) will save them, …[…]…
79. from before You, the three si[gn]s(?), three …[….]
80. In three days …, I, Gabri’el …[?],
81. the Prince of Princes, …, narrow holes(?) …[…]…
82. to/for … […]… and the …
83. to me(?), out of three - the small one, whom(?) I took, I, Gabri’el.
84. YHWH of Hosts, the Lord of(?)[ Israel …]…[….]
85. Then you will stand …[…]…
86. …\
87. in(?) … eternity(?)/… \
The Immortality of the Soul and the Afterlife
By
James Scott Trimm
What happens when we die? Many Christians believe we find ourselves as angelic beings in heaven, strumming on harps and hanging around on clouds. This is, of course, totally unscriptural, and totally ignores the biblical doctrine of the resurrection. On the other hand some Millerites (Millerites are Christian and para-Christian groups which descend from the teachings of William Millar, including SDA, The old Worldwide Church of God, the Jehovah’s Witnesses etc.) teach the doctrine of Soul Sleep. But this doctrine is also not Scriptural.
The Immortality of the Soul
Belief in the immortality of the Soul has always been a foundational belief of Judaism.
Josephus writes of the Pharisees of the first century: "They say that every soul is imperishable" (Josephus Wars 2.8.14) and "They hold the belief that an immortal strength belongs to souls" (Josephus Ant. 18.1.3).
And as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan has written: “One of the foundations of our faith is the belief in the immortality of the soul, and in life after death.” (The Soul; Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan)
Rabbi Kaplan explains that the immortality of the soul is an inescapable conclusion of the premise that Elohim is omniscient (all knowing). He writes:
But what happens to the real you -- the human personality? What happens to all this information -- the memories, thought patterns and personality traits? When a book is burned, its contents are no longer available. When a computer is smashed, the information within it is also destroyed.
What happens to all this information -- the memories, thought patterns and personality traits?
Does the same thing happen when a person dies? Is the mind and personality irretrievably lost?
We know that God is omniscient. He knows all and does not forget. God knows every thought and memory that exists within our brains. There is no bit of information that escapes His knowledge.
What, then, happens when a person dies?
God does not forget, and therefore all of this information continues to exist, at least in God's memory.
(An allusion to this is also found in the Kaballah. Gan Eden or Paradise is said to exist in the sefirah of Binah -- the divine understanding. This may well be related to the concept of memory. Souls, on the other hand, are conceived in the sefirah of Daas -- knowledge. One may say that while we live, we exist in God's knowledge; after death we exist in His memory.)
We may think of something existing only in memory as being static and effectively dead. But God's memory is not a static thing. The sum total of a human personality may indeed exist in God's memory, but it can still maintain its self-identity and volition, and remain in an active state.
This sum total of the human personality existing in God's memory is what lives on even after man dies...
(Immortality and the Soul; Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan)
(Immortality and the Soul; Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan)
The Soul Sleep Error
Before I give a theology concerning the afterlife, I must first respond to some of the “proof texts” used by those who advocate a theology known as “Soul Sleep”. This is a theology that teaches that a man’s soul ceases to exist at death, until his resurrection, at which time the righteous have immortality, while the souls of the wicked are destroyed in Gey Hinnom, and again cease to exist.
One passage cited to support the Soul Sleep doctrine is Genesis 3:19 “dust you are, dust you shall become”. Of course if “dust you shall become” means we are unconscious or cease to exist in the afterlife then “dust you are” would means that we are unconscious or do not exist now. And obviously an argument that proves to much, proves nothing at all.
Proponents of this theology often cite various verses from Ecclesiastes to support their position. However the purpose of Ecclesiates is not to give Elohim’s revelation on the subjects it treats, but to explain how things appear without the light of Elohim. Thus we read in the early verses of the book:
I Kohelet have been king over Yisra’el in Yerushalayim. And I applied my heart to seek and to search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven; it is a sore
task that Elohim has given to the sons of men to be exercised therewith. I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and a striving after wind.
That which is crooked cannot be made straight; and that which is wanting cannot be numbered. I spoke with my own heart, saying: 'Behold, I have gotten great wisdom, more also than all that were before me over Yerushalayim'; yes, my heart has had great experience of wisdom and knowledge. And I applied my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly--I perceived that this also was a striving after wind. For in much wisdom is much vexation; and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow.
(Eccl. 1:12-18 HRV)
task that Elohim has given to the sons of men to be exercised therewith. I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and a striving after wind.
That which is crooked cannot be made straight; and that which is wanting cannot be numbered. I spoke with my own heart, saying: 'Behold, I have gotten great wisdom, more also than all that were before me over Yerushalayim'; yes, my heart has had great experience of wisdom and knowledge. And I applied my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly--I perceived that this also was a striving after wind. For in much wisdom is much vexation; and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow.
(Eccl. 1:12-18 HRV)
For example “all is vanity” (Ecc. 1:14) is not Elohim’s revelation on the subject of life, but a pessimistic statement about what life seems like without Elohim’s revelation. Throughout the book of Ecclesiastes Solomon uses the phrases “under heaven” and “under the sun” to emphasize the context of his statements. In this context the book stresses how that, apart from Elohim’s revelation, a man’s life seems no more significant than an animals, that his death seems no different, and that we can see no afterlife. For example:
I said in my heart: 'It is because of the sons of men,
that Elohim may sift them, and that they may see that
they themselves are but as beasts.'
For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts;
even one thing befalls them; as the one dies, so dies
the other; yes, they have all one breath; so that man
has no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity.
All go unto one place; all are of the dust,
and all return to dust.
(Eccl. 3:18-20 HRV)
that Elohim may sift them, and that they may see that
they themselves are but as beasts.'
For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts;
even one thing befalls them; as the one dies, so dies
the other; yes, they have all one breath; so that man
has no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity.
All go unto one place; all are of the dust,
and all return to dust.
(Eccl. 3:18-20 HRV)
For the living know that they shall die; but the dead
know not any thing, neither have they any more
a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
(Eccl. 9:5 HRV)
know not any thing, neither have they any more
a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
(Eccl. 9:5 HRV)
Note that if we understand Ecc. 3:20 “all return to dust” means that there is no afterlife, then “all are dust” in the same verse, would have to mean we are not alive now! And if the same interpretation is applies to all of Ecc. 9:5 then “neither have they any more a reward” would mean that there is no reward in the afterlife for any man.
Another book used to “prove” the doctrine of soul sleep is the book of Job. The book of Job is similar to the book of Ecclesiastes, as much of the books contains the words of Job and his friends, but in the book YHWH rebukes Job’s unenlightened words saying:
1 Then YHWH answered Iyov, out of the whirlwind, and said:
2 Who is this that darkens counsel, by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up now your loins like a man: for I will demand of you, and declare you unto Me.
(Job 38:1-3 HRV)
2 Who is this that darkens counsel, by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up now your loins like a man: for I will demand of you, and declare you unto Me.
(Job 38:1-3 HRV)
Citing Job’s word’s in the Book of Job to support Soul Sleep is to make an uninformed use of the text of the book of Job.
Another passage often cited to support "Soul Sleep" is Psalm 146:4 "his thoughts are lost". The Hebrew word for "thoughts" in Ps. 146:4 is עשתנות can also be translated "counsels". It means that what thoughts that person might have shared with the world are lost.
Another passage often cited to support "Soul Sleep" is Psalm 146:4 "his thoughts are lost". The Hebrew word for "thoughts" in Ps. 146:4 is עשתנות can also be translated "counsels". It means that what thoughts that person might have shared with the world are lost.
What the Hell?
There are three words translated “Hell” in most English Bibles, however “Hell” may not be the best translation for all or any of these words. Let us examine these three words one at a time, and in the process, see what we may learn about the afterlife:
What is She’ol?
The first Hebrew word we will discuss is She’ol which the Greek texts render as “Hades.” Some have taught that the Hebrew word “She’ol” (commonly translated “Hell”) should be simply understood as a Hebrew word for “grave” or “pit”. However the Hebrew word She'ol always appears in the feminine form and NEVER has a definite artical in any of its many appearances in the Tanak. Therefore it is almost certain that SHE'OL is a proper noun, the name of a place. As the Encyclopedia Judaica states:
“Several names are given to the abode of the dead, the most common being She’ol—always feminine and without the definite article—a sign of proper nouns. The term does not occur in other Semitic languages, except as a loan word from Hebrew She’ol, and its etymology is obscure.”
(Encyclopedia Judaica; Article “Netherworld” p. 996)
(Encyclopedia Judaica; Article “Netherworld” p. 996)
In the Tanak the word SHE'OL is often contrasted with "Heaven" (Job 11:8; Ps. 139:8; Amos 9:2). According to the Tanak the wicked and godless nations go to SHE'OL (Ps. 9:17) According to Psalm 86:13 the soul goes to SHE'OL. According to Proverbs 15:24 SHE'OL can be avoided. In Prov. 23:14 a soul is delivered from SHE'OL. In Is. 57:9 a soul is lowered to SHE'OL.
So SHE'OL would seem to be the proper name of a place which may be contrasted with Heaven to which souls go and from which they may be delivered.
The First Century Jewish Historian Josephus describes the Pharisees as having a belief in this place of pre-resurrection afterlife. He writes of the Pharisees:
"They hold the belief that an immortal strength belongs to souls, and that there are beneath the earth punishments and rewards for those who in life devoted themselves to virtue or vileness, and that eternal imprisonment is appointed for the latter, but the possibility of returning to life for the former"
(Josephus Ant. 18.1.3)
(Josephus Ant. 18.1.3)
According to Ezek. 31:16-18 Gan Eden (The Garden of Eden) was cast into SHE'OL (Ezek. 31:16-18). Thus Gan Eden has become a compartment within She’ol, where the righteous await the resurrection.
The Book of Enoch describes this compartmentalized place of the pre-resurrection afterlife as follows:
1 And thence I went to another place, and he showed me toward the west a large and high mountain of hard rock.
2 And there was in it four hollow places, deep and wide and very smooth. How smooth are the hollow places and deep and dark to look at.
3 Then Rafa’el answered, one of the set-apart angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'These hollow places have been created for this very purpose, that the spirits of the souls of the dead should assemble therein, yea that all the souls of the children of men should assemble here.
4 And lo these are the pits for their imprisonment; they have been fashioned in this way till the day of their judgment and till the time of the end of the great judgment and till the time of the end of the great judgment, which is to be made against them.
5 ' There I saw the spirit of a dead man making suit, and his voice went forth to heaven crying unceasingly and making suit.
6 And I asked Rafa’el the watcher and set-apart one who was with me, and I said unto him: 'This spirit which makes suit, whose is it, whose voice goes forth and makes suit to heaven?'
7 And he answered me saying: 'This is the spirit which went forth from Abel, whom his brother Cain slew, and he makes his suit against him till his seed is destroyed from the face of the earth, and his seed is annihilated from among the seed of men.'
8 Then I asked regarding it, and regarding all the hollow places: 'Why is one separated from the other?'
9 And he answered me and said unto me: 'These three have been made that the spirits of the dead might be separated. And such a division has been make (for) the spirits of the righteous, in which there is the bright spring of water.
10 And such has been made for sinners when they die and are buried in the earth and judgment has not been executed on them in their lifetime.
11 Here their spirits shall be set apart in this great pain till the great day of judgment and punishment and torment of those who curse for ever and retribution for their spirits. There He shall bind them for ever.
12 And such a division has been made for the spirits of those who make their suit, who make disclosures concerning their destruction, when they were slain in the days of the sinners.
13 Such has been made for the spirits of men who were not righteous but sinners, who were complete in transgression, and of the transgressors they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgment nor shall they be afflicted from thence.'
14 Then I blessed YHWH of glory and said: 'Blessed be my Master, YHWH of righteousness, who rules for ever.'
(1Enoch 22:1-14)
2 And there was in it four hollow places, deep and wide and very smooth. How smooth are the hollow places and deep and dark to look at.
3 Then Rafa’el answered, one of the set-apart angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'These hollow places have been created for this very purpose, that the spirits of the souls of the dead should assemble therein, yea that all the souls of the children of men should assemble here.
4 And lo these are the pits for their imprisonment; they have been fashioned in this way till the day of their judgment and till the time of the end of the great judgment and till the time of the end of the great judgment, which is to be made against them.
5 ' There I saw the spirit of a dead man making suit, and his voice went forth to heaven crying unceasingly and making suit.
6 And I asked Rafa’el the watcher and set-apart one who was with me, and I said unto him: 'This spirit which makes suit, whose is it, whose voice goes forth and makes suit to heaven?'
7 And he answered me saying: 'This is the spirit which went forth from Abel, whom his brother Cain slew, and he makes his suit against him till his seed is destroyed from the face of the earth, and his seed is annihilated from among the seed of men.'
8 Then I asked regarding it, and regarding all the hollow places: 'Why is one separated from the other?'
9 And he answered me and said unto me: 'These three have been made that the spirits of the dead might be separated. And such a division has been make (for) the spirits of the righteous, in which there is the bright spring of water.
10 And such has been made for sinners when they die and are buried in the earth and judgment has not been executed on them in their lifetime.
11 Here their spirits shall be set apart in this great pain till the great day of judgment and punishment and torment of those who curse for ever and retribution for their spirits. There He shall bind them for ever.
12 And such a division has been made for the spirits of those who make their suit, who make disclosures concerning their destruction, when they were slain in the days of the sinners.
13 Such has been made for the spirits of men who were not righteous but sinners, who were complete in transgression, and of the transgressors they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgment nor shall they be afflicted from thence.'
14 Then I blessed YHWH of glory and said: 'Blessed be my Master, YHWH of righteousness, who rules for ever.'
(1Enoch 22:1-14)
Yeshua himself gives us a peek into the pre-resurrection afterlife in his account of El’azar and the rich man:
19 Now there was one rich man and he wore linen and purple, and everyday, he was luxuriously merry.
20 And there was one poor man, whose name was El’azar: and he lay at the gate of that rich man, stricken with sores.
21 And he desired that his belly be filled, from the crumbs that fell from the table of that rich man: but even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 Now time passed, and that poor man died, and the angels carried him to the bosom of Avraham: and also that rich man, died and was buried.
23 And while tormented in she’ol, he lifted up his eyes from afar, and saw Avraham, and El’azar in his bosom.
24 And he cried with a great voice and said, My father Avraham, have mercy on me. And send El’azar to dip the tip of his finger in water, and to moisten my tongue for me, for behold, I am tormented in this flame.
25 Avraham said to him, My son, remember that you received your good during your life, and El’azar his bad: and now, behold, he is resting here, and you are tormented.
26 And with all these things, a great gulf is placed between us and you, so that those who want to pass over from here to you, are not able, nor from there, to pass over to us.
27 Then he said to him, I beg of you, my father, that you send him to the house of my father,
28 For I have five brothers. Let him go and testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment!
29 Avraham said to him, They have Moshe and the prophets: let them hear them.
30 And he said to him, No, my father Avraham, but if a man from the dead would go to them, they would repent.
31 Avraham said to him, If they will not hear Moshe and the prophets, even if a man would rise from the dead, they would not believe him.
(Luke 16:19-31 HRV)
20 And there was one poor man, whose name was El’azar: and he lay at the gate of that rich man, stricken with sores.
21 And he desired that his belly be filled, from the crumbs that fell from the table of that rich man: but even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 Now time passed, and that poor man died, and the angels carried him to the bosom of Avraham: and also that rich man, died and was buried.
23 And while tormented in she’ol, he lifted up his eyes from afar, and saw Avraham, and El’azar in his bosom.
24 And he cried with a great voice and said, My father Avraham, have mercy on me. And send El’azar to dip the tip of his finger in water, and to moisten my tongue for me, for behold, I am tormented in this flame.
25 Avraham said to him, My son, remember that you received your good during your life, and El’azar his bad: and now, behold, he is resting here, and you are tormented.
26 And with all these things, a great gulf is placed between us and you, so that those who want to pass over from here to you, are not able, nor from there, to pass over to us.
27 Then he said to him, I beg of you, my father, that you send him to the house of my father,
28 For I have five brothers. Let him go and testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment!
29 Avraham said to him, They have Moshe and the prophets: let them hear them.
30 And he said to him, No, my father Avraham, but if a man from the dead would go to them, they would repent.
31 Avraham said to him, If they will not hear Moshe and the prophets, even if a man would rise from the dead, they would not believe him.
(Luke 16:19-31 HRV)
Some have tried to dismiss this account as a mere parable. However Yeshua does not introduce this account as a parable. Instead he tells us “there was one rich man” and “there was one poor man” so as to tell us that these men actually existed and these events actually occurred. However even if we were to accept that this account is a mere parable, the elements of the parable must be rooted in truth or the parable would be meaningless. For example in the parable of the seed, seed sown in the various types of ground does in fact react in the same manner described in the parable. A net cast into the sea does in fact bring forth fish. The basic aspects of this account therefore, even if they are a parable, must be true. Even if the events were meant as a parable, to be a valid parable with valid meaning, the events have to be events that at least COULD have happened.
In this account Yeshua describes Sheol as having at least two compartments, one is a place of rest, which he calls “The Bosom of Avraham” the other is not named, but is a place where one is “tormented in flame”. We are told that the two are separated by “a great gulf” so that souls cannot cross from one to the other.
Souls are Conscious and Aware in She’ol
Of course the above passages have already demonstrated that souls are conscious and aware while in Sheol (thus the conversation between Avraham and El’azar in Luke 16:19-31 and Abel making suit in 1Enoch 22). There are, however, several more:
9 And when He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar, the nefeshot [souls] of those who were killed because of the Word of Eloah, and because of the testimony of Yeshua that they had.
10 And they cried with a great voice and said, How long, YHWH, Set-Apart and True, do You not judge and require our blood of the inhabitants of the earth?
11 And there was given to each and every one of them a white robe. And it was said that they should rest for the period of a short time until it should be ended--even their fellows and their brothers who were about to be killed, as also they [had been].
(Rev. 6:9-11 HRV)
10 And they cried with a great voice and said, How long, YHWH, Set-Apart and True, do You not judge and require our blood of the inhabitants of the earth?
11 And there was given to each and every one of them a white robe. And it was said that they should rest for the period of a short time until it should be ended--even their fellows and their brothers who were about to be killed, as also they [had been].
(Rev. 6:9-11 HRV)
What is Gey Hinnim?
The next Hebrew word we will look at is Gey Hinnom sometimes abbreviated as Gehenna which the Greek transliterates into the Greek texts as “Gehenna”.
GEY HINNOM was a vally just outside of Jerusalem (Joh. 15:8; 18:16; Neh. 11:30; Jer. 19:2, 6) where pagans had offered up their own children to Ba'al and Molech (2Kn. 23:10; 2Ch. 28:3; 33:6; Jer. 7:31-32; 19:2, 6; 32:35). In the first century all of the refuse of the city was cast into GEY HINNOM and burned there.
In the Mishna GEY HINNOM is contrasted with Gan Eden and with the World to Come as the place where the wicked go (m.Avot 5:19-20; m.Eduy. 2:10) . The Talmud also contrasts GEY HINNOM with Heaven as a place where the wicked go (b.Ber. 28a). According to the Talmud GEY HINNOM is huge (b.Pes. 94a) and has seven compartments (b.Sotah 19b).
Josephus describes this place when he writes:
"They say that every soul is imperishable, but that only those of the righteous pass into another body, while those of the wicked are, on the contrary, punished with eternal torment"
(Josephus Wars 2.8.14)
(Josephus Wars 2.8.14)
"They hold the belief that an immortal strength belongs to souls, and that there are beneath the earth punishments and rewards for those who in life devoted themselves to virtue or vileness, and that eternal imprisonment is appointed for the latter, but the possibility of returning to life for the former"
(Josephus Ant. 18.1.3)
(Josephus Ant. 18.1.3)
Yeshua alludes to Gey Hinnom as follows:
43 Now, if your hand offends you, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed, than while you have two hands, to go to Gey-Hinnom,
44 <Where their worm does not die and their fire does not go out.>
45 And if your foot offends you, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, than while you have two feet, to fall into Gey-Hinnom,
46 <Where their worm does not die and their fire does not go out. >
47 And if your eye offends you, pluck it out. It is better for you that you enter the Kingdom of Eloah with one of your eyes, than while you have two eyes, to fall into Gey-Hinnom of fire,
48 Where their worm does not die, and their fire does not go out.
(Mark 9:43-48 HRV)
44 <Where their worm does not die and their fire does not go out.>
45 And if your foot offends you, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, than while you have two feet, to fall into Gey-Hinnom,
46 <Where their worm does not die and their fire does not go out. >
47 And if your eye offends you, pluck it out. It is better for you that you enter the Kingdom of Eloah with one of your eyes, than while you have two eyes, to fall into Gey-Hinnom of fire,
48 Where their worm does not die, and their fire does not go out.
(Mark 9:43-48 HRV)
The phrase “their worm does not die” is taken from the last verse of Isaiah:
And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have rebelled
against Me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, and they
shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.
(Isaiah 66:24 HRV)
against Me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, and they
shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.
(Isaiah 66:24 HRV)
According to Yeshua this verse of Isaiah speaks of Gey Hinnom. No doubt Yeshua draws this connection from the Targum to this verse which reads:
And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men, the sinners, who have rebelled against my Word: for their souls shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched; and the wicked shall be judged in Gehinnom, till the righteous shall say concerning them, we have seen enough.
(Isaiah 66:24 Targum Jonathan)
(Isaiah 66:24 Targum Jonathan)
Notice that the Targum which Yeshua clearly alludes to here, paraphrases “their worm shall not die” with “their SOULS shall not die” indicating the immortality of the souls in Gey Hinnom, and by implication eternal torment in “Hell”.
There is actually some debate in the ancient Jewish sources as to whether Gey Hinnom is a place of eternal torment, or whether souls sent there would eventually be released.
Some sources seem to point to Gey Hinnom as a place of eternal torment. As shown above the Targum Jonathan to Isaiah 66:24 speaks of Gey Hinnom as a place where the soul does not die. One passage in the Talmus tells us:
When Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai fell ill, his disciples went in to visit him. When he saw them he began to weep. His disciples said to him: Lamp of Israel, pillar of the right hand, mighty hammer! Wherefore weepest thou? He replied: If I were being taken today before a human king who is here today and tomorrow in the grave, whose anger if he is angry with me does not last for ever, who if he imprisons me does not imprison me forever and who if he puts me to death does not put me to everlasting death, and whom I can persuade with words and bribe with money, even so I would weep.
(b.Ber. 28b)
(b.Ber. 28b)
But while Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai speaks of eternal punishment, Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri held the view that the judgment of Gey Hinnom was only a temporary judgment:
Rabbi Akiva declared... The Judgment of the ungodly in Gehena is twelve months, for it is said, And it will be from one month until its [same] month (Is. 66:23-24). Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says: From Passover to Shavuot, for it is said from one sabbath until its next Sabbath.
(m.Eduyot 2:10)
(m.Eduyot 2:10)
It is for this reason that many Rabbinical books (Such as the common English edition of the Tanya) render Gey Hinnom into English with the word “Purgatory” rather than “Hell”.
Yet another passage of Talmud teaches that punishment in Gey Hinnom is temporary in some cases, yet eternal in others:
Wrongdoers of Israel who sin with their body and wrongdoers of the Gentiles who sin with their body go down to Gehinnom and are punished there for twelve months. After twelve months their body is consumed and their soul is burnt and the wind scatters them under the soles of the feet of the righteous as it says, And ye shall tread down the wicked, and they shall be as ashes under the soles of your feet. But as for the minim and the informers and the scoffers, who rejected the Torah and denied the resurrection of the dead, and those who abandoned the ways of the community, and those who ‘spread their terror in the land of the living’, and who sinned and made the masses sin, like Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his fellows — these will go down to Gehinnom and be punished there for all generations, as it says, And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men that have rebelled against me etc.
(b.Rosh HaShanna 17a)
(b.Rosh HaShanna 17a)
If some souls are ultimately freed from Gey Hinnom after they are purged and purified in Gey Hinnom, it might explain certain passages.
We read in 2nd Maccabees:
43 And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection:
44 For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
45 And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
(2Maccabees 12:43-45 KJV)
44 For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
45 And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
(2Maccabees 12:43-45 KJV)
This certainly implies that the eternal future of the dead, prior to the resurrection, may as yet be undetermined, that souls in Sheol, might yet be redeemed.
This might also shed some light on a statement Yeshua makes concerning Gey Hinnom:
22 But I tell you, that whoever shall be enraged against his brother, he will be condemned to the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, You are nothing: he will be condemned to the council of the synagogue. And whoever says to him, You impious one: he will be condemned to the fire of Gey Hinnom.
23 And if you present your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you:
24 Leave your offering there before the altar, and go you first, to atone to your brother, and then come and give your offering.
25 Come to terms with your adversary quickly, while you are with him on the way: lest HaSatan deliver you up to the judge, and the judge deliver you up to the officer, and you be cast into the jail.
26 Amen, I tell you, you will not go out from there, until you have paid the last penny.
(Matt. 5:22-26 HRV see also Luke 12:58-59)
23 And if you present your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you:
24 Leave your offering there before the altar, and go you first, to atone to your brother, and then come and give your offering.
25 Come to terms with your adversary quickly, while you are with him on the way: lest HaSatan deliver you up to the judge, and the judge deliver you up to the officer, and you be cast into the jail.
26 Amen, I tell you, you will not go out from there, until you have paid the last penny.
(Matt. 5:22-26 HRV see also Luke 12:58-59)
Here the “jail” (verse 25) is certainly Gey Hinnom (verse 22), but why does Yeshua add the statement “you will not go out from there, until you have paid the last penny.” (verse 26)? In keeping with the Jewish traditions presented herein, is Yeshua not implying that, at least in some cases, Gey Hinnom is a temporary state?
If so “blasphemy of the Ruach HaKodesh” would be one of the sins for which Gey Hinnom would be inescapable, as Yeshua says:
31 And therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven the sons of men:
but the blasphemy which is against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
32 And every man that says a word against a son of man, it will be forgiven him. But he
that says a word against the Ruach HaKodesh, it will not be forgiven him: neither in this
world, or in the world to come.
(Matt. 12:31-32 HRV)
but the blasphemy which is against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
32 And every man that says a word against a son of man, it will be forgiven him. But he
that says a word against the Ruach HaKodesh, it will not be forgiven him: neither in this
world, or in the world to come.
(Matt. 12:31-32 HRV)
It must be understood that this “temporary” Gey Hinnom, is not the temporary Gey Hinnom taught by the Soul Sleep doctrine, as these souls do not end their time in Gey Hinnom by being annihilated out of existence, (this is impossible, as we have already shown, the soul is inherently eternal) and as the Targum says “their soul does not die.” Instead these souls are released, not annihilated.
Of course the concept of a temporary stay in Gey Hinnom vs. a permanent stay there creates many questions. WHo is the temporary stay for? Do the unredeemed have an opportunity to become redeemed in Gey Hinnom? Is this the meaning of "for this reason was the goodnews proclaimed to them which are dead" (1Kefa 4:6)? Or are saved persons who have been unrighteous (not Torah Observant) purged in Gey Hinnom before they enter Gan Eden?
Of course the concept of a temporary stay in Gey Hinnom vs. a permanent stay there creates many questions. WHo is the temporary stay for? Do the unredeemed have an opportunity to become redeemed in Gey Hinnom? Is this the meaning of "for this reason was the goodnews proclaimed to them which are dead" (1Kefa 4:6)? Or are saved persons who have been unrighteous (not Torah Observant) purged in Gey Hinnom before they enter Gan Eden?
What is Tachti?
One final word translated as “hell” in the KJV is Greek Torturous (Heb: Tachti) which appears in only one verse:
For if Eloah did not spare the angels who sinned,
but cast them down to takh’ti,
and delivered them into chains of darkness
to be reserved for judgment,
(2Kefa 2:4 HRV)
but cast them down to takh’ti,
and delivered them into chains of darkness
to be reserved for judgment,
(2Kefa 2:4 HRV)
Takhti refers to the lowest parts of a pit, and in this case the lowest compartment of She’ol. This compartment is reserved only for fallen angels and not for human souls.
Bringing it Together
Upon death the soul goes into SHE'OL. The souls of the wicked go to a compartment known as Gey Hinnom while the righteous are kept in another compartment GAN EDEN which had been cast into SHE'OL (Ezek. 31:16-18). In between the two is a great fixed gulf (Luke 16:26). The souls of the dead await the resurrection in SHE'OL when they are reunited with their bodies and spirits at the resurrection. At that time GAN EDEN (or PARDES) is moved into the World to Come (the New heavens and the new Earth) (Rev. 2:7; 21:1; 22:2) while SHE'OL is cast into the lake of Fire (GEY HINNOM (Rev. 20:14)).
Parsha Nitzavim
and
Yeshua's Haftorah Reading
(Lk. 4:16-22)
Parsha Nitzavim
and
Yeshua's Haftorah Reading
(Lk. 4:16-22)
By
James Scott Trimm
James Scott Trimm
(Taken from the Hebraic Roots Commentary to Luke http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
In Luke 4:16-22 Yeshua delivers a haftorah reading:
16 And He came to Natzaret, where He had been raised. And He entered the synagogue,
on the day of the Sabbath, as He was accustomed.
17 And the scroll of Yeshayahu the prophet was given to Him, and He stood up to read.
And Yeshua opened the scroll and found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of YHWH is upon Me, and because of this, He has anointed Me to
proclaim to the poor, and has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, and to proclaim to
the captives forgiveness, and to the blind, sight, and to send away the broken
(hearted) with forgiveness,
19 And to proclaim the acceptable year of YHWH.(Is. 61:1-2; 58:6).
20 And He rolled up the scroll and gave it to the shammash, and went and sat down: and
all of those in the synagogue had their eyes fixed, on Him.
21 And He began to speak to them: Today, this Scripture is fulfilled in your ears.
22 And all were witnessing about Him, and were amazed at the words of blessing that
proceeded from His mouth: and they were saying, Is not this man Bar Yosef?
(Luke 4:16-22 HRV)
on the day of the Sabbath, as He was accustomed.
17 And the scroll of Yeshayahu the prophet was given to Him, and He stood up to read.
And Yeshua opened the scroll and found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of YHWH is upon Me, and because of this, He has anointed Me to
proclaim to the poor, and has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, and to proclaim to
the captives forgiveness, and to the blind, sight, and to send away the broken
(hearted) with forgiveness,
19 And to proclaim the acceptable year of YHWH.(Is. 61:1-2; 58:6).
20 And He rolled up the scroll and gave it to the shammash, and went and sat down: and
all of those in the synagogue had their eyes fixed, on Him.
21 And He began to speak to them: Today, this Scripture is fulfilled in your ears.
22 And all were witnessing about Him, and were amazed at the words of blessing that
proceeded from His mouth: and they were saying, Is not this man Bar Yosef?
(Luke 4:16-22 HRV)
Each Sabbath in the synagogues a portion of the Torah is read so that over the period of a year the entire Torah has been read. For a time, under the Hellene Empire, Jews were forbidden from reading the Torah in the synagogues. As a result parallel selections from the Prophets were chosen for each weeks reading. This reading, called a haftorah reading, was intended to bring to memory the parallel Torah reading. After Torah reading was again permitted in the synagogues, the haftorah readings were also retained, so that both sets of readings are done to this very day. Yeshua’s haftorah reading begins in Isaiah 61:1-2 although Yeshua abruptly stops after verse 2, rolls the scroll back up and says “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your ears.”
Now today Isaiah 61:1-2 is not part of the haftorah readings, but there is a haftorah reading which begins at 61:10 and runs thru 63:9. It would appear that this reading originally began in Isaiah 61:1. This haftorah reading is intended to remind us of the Torah reading known as Nitzavim (“standing”) (Deut. 29:9 (10)-30:20).
Thus the Torah reading which this haftorah reading is supposed to bring to our mind begins:
You are standing this day all of you
before YHWH your Elohim…
before YHWH your Elohim…
This Torah reading was being brought to mind as Yeshua said "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your ears."
This verse is also applied to the “Melchizadek” figure in the “Melchizadek Document” found among the Dead Sea Scrolls:
…Isaiah said: "To proclaim the Jubilee to the
captives" (Isa. 61;1) (...) just as (...) and from
the inheritance of Melchizedek, for (... Melchizedek) ,
who will return them to what is rightfully theirs.
He will proclaim to them the Jubilee, thereby
releasing them from the debt of all their sins…
Then the "Day of Atonement" shall follow …,
when he shall atone for all the Sons of Light,
and the people who are predestined to Melchizedek….
The visitation is the Day of Salvation that He has
decreed through Isaiah the prophet concerning
all the captives, inasmuch as Scripture says, "How
beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the
messenger who announces peace, who brings
good news, who announces salvation, who says to
Zion "Your divine being reigns"." (Isa. 52;7)
This scriptures interpretation : "the mountains"
are the prophets, they who were sent to proclaim
God's truth and to prophesy to all Israel. "The
messengers" is the Messiah of the spirit, of whom
Daniel spoke; "After the sixty-two weeks, Messiah
shall be cut off" (Dan. 9;26) The "messenger who
brings good news, who announces Salvation"
is the one of whom it is written; "to proclaim the
year of the LORD`s favor, the day of the vengeance
of our God; to comfort all who mourn" (Isa. 61;2)
(extracts from 11Q13)
captives" (Isa. 61;1) (...) just as (...) and from
the inheritance of Melchizedek, for (... Melchizedek) ,
who will return them to what is rightfully theirs.
He will proclaim to them the Jubilee, thereby
releasing them from the debt of all their sins…
Then the "Day of Atonement" shall follow …,
when he shall atone for all the Sons of Light,
and the people who are predestined to Melchizedek….
The visitation is the Day of Salvation that He has
decreed through Isaiah the prophet concerning
all the captives, inasmuch as Scripture says, "How
beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the
messenger who announces peace, who brings
good news, who announces salvation, who says to
Zion "Your divine being reigns"." (Isa. 52;7)
This scriptures interpretation : "the mountains"
are the prophets, they who were sent to proclaim
God's truth and to prophesy to all Israel. "The
messengers" is the Messiah of the spirit, of whom
Daniel spoke; "After the sixty-two weeks, Messiah
shall be cut off" (Dan. 9;26) The "messenger who
brings good news, who announces Salvation"
is the one of whom it is written; "to proclaim the
year of the LORD`s favor, the day of the vengeance
of our God; to comfort all who mourn" (Isa. 61;2)
(extracts from 11Q13)
The Genealogy of Messiah
The Genealogy of Messiah
By
James Scott Trimm
There have been a number of teachings going around, which allege that the genealogies of Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are both those of Yosef (Joseph), and in some versions of the teaching, that Miriam (Mary) was a Levite.
This teaching came up at our Sukkot gathering this last year, and I have seen it come up recently in the archive of our NazareneSpace chat room.
It is a simple matter to show that the two genealogies given of Yeshua in Matthew and Luke cannot be through the same parent (or step parent).
A quick look at the genealogy shows that the names are the same until we get to King David, then they diverge completely:
Matt. 1 Luke 3
Abraham Abraham
Isaac Isaac
Jacob Jacob
Judas Juda
Phares Phares
Esrom Esrom
Aram Aram
Aminadab Aminadab
Naasson Naasson
Salmon Salmon
Boaz Boaz
Obed Obed
Jesse Jesse
David David
Solomon Nathan
Roboam Mattatha
Abia Menan
Asa Melea
Josaphat Eliakim
Joram Jonan
Ozias Joseph
Joatham Juda
This shows clearly that one genealogy follows a line that passes from David to his son Solomon and then to the line of kings. The other line passes through another of David’s sons: Nathan. Both genealogies cannot be for the same parent, and both trace back to the Tribe of Judah.
Anti-missionaries like Tovia Singer love to attack the genealogy of Yeshua. The reason is that the genealogy of the Messiah is critical, and Yeshua fit these criteria perfectly.
The Tanak gives the following criteria for the genealogy of Messiah.
First off Messiah must be “seed” of Abraham:
19 And Elohim said: Nay, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Yitz’chak. And I will establish My covenant with him, for an everlasting covenant for his seed after him.
(Gen. 17:19)
And he must descend from Isaac:
17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. There shall step forth a star out of Ya’akov, and a scepter shall rise out of Yisra’el, and shall smite through the corners of Mo’av, and break down all the sons of Shet.
(Num. 24:17)
And he must be of the Tribe of Judah:
10 The scepter shall not depart from Y’hudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes. And unto him, shall the obedience of the peoples be.
(Gen. 49:10)
Who is this “Shiloh”?
This Gemara also asks “What is Messiah’s name?” Rabbi Shila offers the answer: “His name is Shiloh, for it is written, ‘until Shiloh comes.” (b.San. 98b)
The Targums (Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and Yerushalmi) all have “until Messiah comes” in place of “until Shiloh comes”.
The word “Shiloh” has a gematria (numerical value) of 345 which is the same as the value of “HaShem” (“the name”) and El Shaddai. The phrase “Shiloh comes” has a gematria of 358 which is the same as the gematria for “Messiah and “Moses” (because the Messiah is “the prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:18) (see my recent article A Prophet Like Moses http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/a-prophet-like-moses ). This is because “the name” of Messiah is imbedded in the phrase “until Shiloh comes.”
The Zohar says of Gen. 49:10:
…”the scepter” referring to the Messiah of the House of Judah,
and “the staff” to the Messiah of the House of Joseph.
“Until Shiloh comes”, this is Moses, the gematria of Shiloh
and Moses being the same [358].
(Zohar 1:25)
The word Shiloh, here, is spelt with both a yod and a he,
to allude to the holy supernal name, Yah,
by which the Shekinah shall rise…
(Zohar 1:237)
Thus the Zohar teaches us that in Genesis 49:10 we have the two Messiahs (or the two comings of Messiah) represented as a “scepter” and a “staff” which are one “Shiloh” and that the one “Shiloh” has Yah within him.
In my recent article “Lowly and Riding Upon an Ass” (http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/lowly-and-riding-upon-an-ass) I show how all of this also connects to Messianic Prophecies in Gen. 49:11 and Zech. 9:9.
Messiah must also be heir to David’s throne:
5 (9:6) For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us, and the government is upon His shoulder: and His Name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty El, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
6 (9:7) That the government may be increased, and of peace there be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom: to establish it and to uphold it, through justice and through righteousness, from henceforth even forever. The zeal of YHWH Tzva’ot does perform this.
(Is. 9:5-6 (6-7))
In my recent article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect” (http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/unto-us-a-child-is-born-isa…) I demonstrated that this is also a Messianic prophecy.
Anti-missionaries have argued that Yeshua was not heir to David’s throne if he was not actually Joseph’s son (of course the claim of the Gospels is that Yeshua was born to Miriam without any earthly father). This is actually a false claim, the throne can very clearly be passed by inheritance regardless of physical blood line. In fact David himself inherited the throne from Saul without being of Saul’s bloodline. David was the legitimate heir to Saul’s throne, by way of his covenant with Jonathan (1Sam. chapters 18-20) which was how David legitimately obtained the throne.
Many anti-missionaries try to attack Yeshua’s genealogy by claiming that the genealogies in Matthew and Luke contradict one another. In fact Matthew 1:1-18 gives Yeshua’s genealogy through his step-father/adopted father Joseph, while Luke 3:23-38 gives his genealogy through his mother Miriam. We know this because the genealogy in Luke begins with “Yosef, the son of Heli” (Luke 3:23) – The Jerusalem Talmud mentions a certain Miriam who, in context, appears to be the mother of Yeshua, who is said to be the daughter of “Eli” (j.Hag. 77d & j.San. 25c) The Aramaic “bar” like the Hebrew word “ben” normally means “son of” but is very ambiguous and can also refer to a “son in law a step son a servant a student or a follower.” as is the case here (Yosef was the son of Ya’akov see Mt. 1:16) (The Greek has only “of” which is why the KJV has “son of” in italics, thus the Greek can also refer to a son-in-law).
Matthew gives the genealogy of Yeshua through his “supposed” father (step father and adoptive father) Yosef, to establish Yeshua’s legal right to the throne of David, through Solomon. Luke, on the other hand, gives Yeshua’s genealogy through his mother Miram, showing Messiah to also be the “seed of David” through David’s son Nathan (Lk. 3:23-38).
This resolves the problem of the “curse of Jeconiah” (Jeremiah 22:24 – 29) though it may also be argued based on Hag. 2:23 that this curse had been reversed.
Tovia Singer and other anti-missionaries have claimed that the presence of Jeconiah in Yeshua’s genealogy disqualifies him from being Messiah due to the supposed “curse of Jeconiah” as we read in Jeremiah:
24 As I live, says YHWH, though Coniah the son of Yahuyakim king of Y’hudah were the signet upon My right hand, yet would I pluck you thence;
25 and I will give you into the hand of them that seek your life, and into the hand of them of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of N’vukhadretzar king of Bavel, and into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26 And I will cast you out, and your mother that bore you, into another country, where you were not born; and there shall you die.
27 But to the land whereunto they long to return, there shall they not return.
28 Is this man Coniah a despised, broken image? Is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? Wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into the land which they know not?
29 O land, land, land, hear the word of YHWH.
(Jer. 22:24-29)
However if we look in the Book of Haggai we find that Elohim appears to have reversed this curse:
23 In that day, says YHWH Tzva’ot, will I take you, O Z’rubavel, My servant, the son of Shealtiel, says YHWH, and will make you as a signet; for I have chosen you, says YHWH Tzva’ot.’
(Haggai 2:23)
Note the use of the term “signet ring” in each passage.
The Talmud seems to agree with this concept that the curse was reversed. It says:
Rab Judah said: Exile makes remission for three things, for it is written, Thus saith the Lord etc. He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword and by the famine and by the pestilence; but he that goeth out and falleth away to the Chaldeans who beseige you he shall live and his life shall be unto him for a prey. R. Johanan said: Exile atones for everything, for it is written, Thus saith the Lord, write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days, for no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David and ruling any more in Judah. Whereas after he [the king] was exiled, it is written, And the sons of Jechoniah, — the same is Assir — Shealtiel his son etc.33 [He was called] Assir,34 because his mother conceived him in prison. Shealtiel, because God did not plant him36 in the way that others are planted. We know by tradition that a woman cannot conceive in a standing position. [yet she did conceive standing. Another interpretation: Shealtiel, because God obtained [of the Heavenly court] absolution from His oath. Zerubbabel [was so called] because he was sown in Babylon. But [his real name was] Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah.
Footnotes:
33. I Ch. III, 17. Notwithstanding the curse that he should be childless and not prosper, after being exiled he was forgiven.
34. Which He had made, to punish Jechoniah with childlessness.”
(Sanhedrin 37b – 38a, Soncino Talmud Edition)
Also the Midrash Rabba says:
. . . they made the Calf and deserved to be exterminated, and I would have thought that He would curse and destroy them, yet, no sooner had they repented, than the danger was averted, And the Lord repented of the evil (ib. XXXII, 14).And so in many places. For example, He said about Jekoniah: For no man of his seed shall prosper (Jer. XXII, 30) and it says, I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations… In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, My servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the Lord, and will make thee as a signet (Hag. II, 22 f.). Thus was annulled that which He had said to his forefather, viz. As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim King of Judah were the signet upon My right hand, yet I would pluck thee thence (Jer. XXII, 24).
(Numbers Rabbah XX:20)
And Midrash Pesikta Rabbati says:
R. Joshua ben Levi, however, argued as follows: Repentance sets aside the entire decree, and prayer half the decree. You find that it was so with Jeconiah, king of Judah. For the Holy One, blessed be He, swore in His anger, As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakhim king of Judah were the signet on a hand, yet by My right – note, as R. Meir said, that is was by His right hand that God swore – I would pluck thee hence (Jer. 22:24). And what was decreed against Jeconiah? That he die childless. As is said Write ye this man childless (Jer. 22:40). But as soon as he avowed penitence, the Holy One, blessed be He, set aside the decree, as is shown by Scripture’s reference to The sons of Jeconiah – the same is Assir – Shealtiel his son, etc. (1 Chron 3:17). And Scripture says further: In that day . . . will I take thee, O Zerubbabel . . . the son of Shealtiel . . . and will make thee as a signet (Haggai 2:23). Behold, then, how penitence can set aside the entire decree!
(Pesikta Rabbati, Piska)
Anti-missionary Tovia Singer also attacks Yeshua’s genealogy in Matthew because three names are omitted in Matthew 1:8. In Matt. 1:8 we read “Y’horam begat Uziyahu” Here the names of three kings are omitted. These are added back in Old Syriac (c), however they are clearly not part of the original text of Matthew, since verse 17 in Old Syriac (c) still counts only fourteen names.
Once again Singer fails to use equal weights and measures, judging the Gospels by a stricter criteria than that which he applies to the Tanak. The truth is that it was not unusual for ancient Hebrew genealogies to be abbreviated and omit names. For example if we compare the genealogy of Ezra as given in Ezra 7:1-5 1 with that given in 1Chron. 6:4-15 we find that the later genealogy given in Ezra also has omitted names.
While anti-missionaries like Tovia Singer seek to attack Yeshua’s genealogy, the truth is that Yeshua was the heir to the throne of David through Solomon by way of his step father Joseph as we see in Matthew 1 and was also the physical descendant of David through Nathan by way of his mother Miriam. These genealogies demonstrate that Yeshua was in fact uniquely qualified as fulfilling the genealogical prophecies regarding the Messiah.
They have Pierced My Hands and My Feet
by
James Scott Trimm
In a recent article I discussed “How the Anti-Missionaries Misrepresent the Text”. In this article I will give a specific example. Psalm 22 is an amazingly prophetic Psalm which describes the crucifixion of Yeshua in great detail.
In Matt. 27:46 = Mk. 15:34 Yeshua recites Ps. 22:2(1) from the gallows. Matt. 27:39 alludes to Ps. 22:8(7) about on lookers shaking their heads at him. In Matt. 27:43 the people use the same phase as those in Ps. 22:9(8) (see also Luke 23:35) Luke 23:34 and John 19:24 (as well as the Hebrew text of Matt. 27:35) allude to Ps. 22:19(18) about the casting of lots to divide his clothes, and Hebrews 2:12 also quotes Ps. 22:23(22) as a reference to Yeshua as the Messiah.
It is not just the so-called NT that understand Psalm 22 as propheticly speaking of Messiah, the concept is also to be found in Midrash Pesikta Rabbati which applies verses from Psalm 22 to the Messiah ben Yosef, the Suffering Messiah also known as “Ephraim”:
During the seven-year period preceding the coming of the son of David, iron beams will be brought low and loaded upon his neck until the Messiah’s body is bent low. Then he will cry and weep, and his voice will rise to the very height of heaven, and he will say to God: Master of the universe, how much can my strength endure? How much can my spirit endure? How much my breath before it ceases? How much can my limbs suffer? Am I not flesh and blood?
It was because of the ordeal of the son of David that David wept, saying My strength is dried up like a potsherd (Ps. 22:16). During the ordeal of the son of David, the Holy One, blessed be He, will say to him: Ephraim, My true Messiah, long ago, ever since the six days of creation, thou didst take this ordeal upon thyself. At this moment, thy pain is like my pain . . .
At these words, the Messiah will reply: Now I am reconciled. The servant is content to be like his Master.
(Pesikta Rabbati, Piska 36.2, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 680-681)
It is taught, moreover, that in the month of Nisan the Patriarchs will arise and say to the Messiah: Ephraim, our true Messiah, even though we are thy forbears, thou art greater that we because thou didst suffer for the iniquities of our children, and terrible ordeals befell thee . . . for the sake of Israel thou didst become a laughingstock and a derision among the nations of the earth; and didst sit in darkness, in thick darkness, and thine eyes saw no light, and thy skin cleaved to thy bones, and thy body was as dry as a piece of wood; and thine eyes grew dim from fasting, and thy strength was dried up like a potsherd – all these afflictions on account of the iniquities of our children . . .
(Pesikta Rabbati 37.1, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 685-686)
Ephraim is a darling son to Me . . . My heart yearneth for him, in mercy I will have mercy upon him, saith the Lord (Jer. 31:20). Why does the verse speak twice of mercy: In mercy I will have mercy upon him? One mercy refers to the time when he will be shut up in prison, a time when the nations of the world will gnash their teeth at him every day, wink their eyes at one another in derision of him, nod their heads at him in contempt, open wide their lips to guffaw, as is said All they that see me laugh me to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head (Ps. 22:8); My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my throat; and thou layest me in the dust of death (Ps. 22:16). Moreover, they will roar over him like lions, as is said They open wide their mouth against me, as a ravening and roaring lion. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is become like wax; it is melted in mine inmost parts (Ps. 22:14-15).
(Pesikta Rabbati 37.1, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 686-687)
Perhaps the most amazingly prophetic verse of Psalm 22 is:
For dogs have encompassed me;
a company of evildoers have enclosed me:
they have pierced my hands and my feet.
(Ps. 22:17 (16))
In his series Let’s Get Biblical” Tovia Singer has made the claim that Christians changed Ps. 22:16 (17) to read “they have pierced” rather than “like a lion”.
Now let us seek the TRUTH on this matter:
In the Hebrew the difference between these two readings is only one letter.
KARU (KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV) “They have pierced”
(KAR means “pierced” and the -U means “they”)
KARI (KAF-ALEF-RESH-YUD) “Like a lion”
(K- means “like” and ARI means “lion”)
The difference between these two words is between a VAV and a YUD. The misreading of a VAV for a YUD or a YUD for a VAV is a frequent scribal error in Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts. A VAV is simply a YUD with a long tail. This scribal error is clearly not an intentional change but a common scribal error.
Now let us determine which was the original reading.
Now if we look up this passage in the BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). Here we find a footnote that reads:
“pc Mss Edd KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV, 2Mss Edd KAF-RESH-VAV cf G(S)…”
To transalate this note into lay terms it says:
“A few manuscripts read KARU (KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV) and two manuscripts read KARU (KAF-RESH-VAV)and the Greek Septuagint has [pierced]”
In other words while MOST Masoretic Text manuscripts read KARI (“like a lion”) SEVERAL read “they have pierced” (two possible spellings) as does the Greek Septuagint.
The Greek Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Tanak that was completed by about 200 to 160 BCE.
The Peshitta Aramaic Tanak also has “they have pierced” in this passage. According to the Encyclopedia Judaica article on “Bible” The Peshitta ARamaic was produced by Jews for Assyrian and Syrian converts to Judaism in the first century BCE.
Now lets look at the oldest extant Hebrew copy of this Psalm which was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. If we look in THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS BIBLE under Psalm 22 on pages 518-519 we read:
“They have pierced my hands and my feet.”
We are directed to footnote 41 which says:
“5/6HevPs MT(mss) LXX. Like a lion are MT.”
In layman’s terms this note means:
In the Dead Sea Scroll manuscript designated “5/6HevPs”, some
Masoretic Text manuscripts and the Septuagint the reading is “they
have pierced” while most Masoretic Text manuscripts read “like a
lion are”.
A header above this section of Psalm 22 reads:
“Psalm 22 is a favorite among Christians since it is often linked in
the New Testament with the suffering and death of Jesus. A well-
known and controversial reading is found in verse 16, where the
Masoretic Text reads “Like a lion are my hands and feet,” whereas
the Septuagint has “They have pierced my hands and feet.” Among the
scrolls the reading in question is found only in the Psalms scroll
found at Nahal Hever (abreviated 5/6HevPs), which reads “They have
pierced my hands and my feet”!”
Moreover the grammar does not work for “like a lion” since the phrase would lake a verb. Many insert additional words to MAKE the text read “Like a lion [they are at] my hands and my feet”. The understood verb of being does not work here because “Like a lion are my hand and my feet” makes about as much sense as “Like a pizza are my hands and my feet”.
OK lets review the facts:
1. Only the Masoretic Text (which originated in the 9th Century CE)
has “like a lion” and even then some copies have “they have pierced”.
2. ALL other versions INCLUDING the Greek Septuagent and Aramaic
Peshitta Tanak read “they have pierced”.
3. The error itself is an accidental scribal error and NOT an
intentional change.
4. By far the OLDEST Hebrew copy of the Psalm from the Dead Sea
Scrolls reads “they have pierced”
5. The reading “like a lion” does not fit the grammar.
6. Several copies and versions from BEFORE the life of Yeshua
have “they have pierced” and NO copy or version prior to the 9th
century CE has “like a lion.”
Tovia Singer’s claims, once again, are without merit. The reading “they have pierced” existed BEFORE Christianity existed, the scribal error in question was clearly NOT intentional and the textual evidence points STRONGLY to “they have pierced” as the original reading.
The truth is that Psalm 22 is a prophecy of the suffering of Messiah and verse 17(16) speaks specifically of the crucifixion of Messiah, having his hands and his feet pierced, pointing clearly to Yeshua as having fulfilled this amazingly clear prophecy.
Of Whom Does the Prophet Speak?
(Who is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53?)
By
James Scott Trimm
Tovia Singer and other anti-mssionaries argue that the “Suffering Servant” figure of Isaiah 53 is not a Messianic prophecy at all, and speaks instead only about Israel.
In fact the Suffering Servant Song (Is. 52:7-53:12) is the fourth of four “Servant Songs” in Isaiah. These four servant songs are to be found in:
Isaiah 42:1-9
Isaiah 49:1-12
Isaiah 50:4-11
and Isaiah 52:7-53:12
Now before we look at Is. 52:7-53:12 we should first look at the first three servant songs in Isaiah. Let us first look at Is. 42:1-9:
1 Behold My servant, whom I uphold; My chosen, in whom My soul delights:I have put
My spirit upon him; he shall make the right to go forth to the nations.
2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the dimly burning wick shall he not
quench: he shall make the right to go forth according to the truth.
4 He shall not fail nor be crushed, till he has set the right in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his Torah.
5 Thus says El YHWH, He that created the heavens and stretched them forth, He that spread forth the earth and that which comes out of it, He that gives breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
6 I YHWH have called you in righteousness, and have taken hold of your hand, and kept you, and set you for a covenant of the people, for a light of the nations.
7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
8 I am YHWH, that is My Name: and My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.
9 Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them.
(Is. 42:1-9 HRV)
Is. 42:1 says:
Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
my elect in whom my soul delights;
I have put my spirit upon him;
he shall bring forth judgement to the Gentiles.
This is a close parallel to another passage in Isaiah:
And the Spirit of YHWH shall rest upon him…
with righteousness shall he judge…
(Is. 11:2, 4)
Now EVERYONE agrees that Is. 11:1f speaks of the Messiah and it is clear that Is.
42:1 speaks of the same individual. (Also Is. 61:1 is parallel.)
Ok now lets look at Is. 49:1-12:
1 Listen, O isles, unto me: and hearken, you peoples, from far. YHWH has called me from the womb, from the innermost parts of my mother, has He made mention of my name.
2 And He has made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand has He hid me, and He has made me a polished shaft. In His quiver has He concealed me,
3 And He said unto me: You are My servant, Yisra’el, in whom I will be glorified.
4 But I said, I have labored in vain. I have spent my strength for nought and
vanity: yet surely my right is with YHWH, and my recompense with my Elohim.
5 And now, says YHWH, that formed me from the womb to be His servant; to bring Ya’akov back to Him, and that Yisra’el be gathered unto Him: for I am honorable in the eyes of YHWH, and my Elohim is become my strength.
6 Yes, He says: It is too light a thing, that you should be My servant to raise up the tribes of Ya’akov, and to restore the offspring of Yisra’el. I will also give you for a light of the nations, that My salvation may be unto the end of the earth.
7 Thus says YHWH, the Redeemer of Yisra’el, his Set-apart One, to him who is despised of men, to him who is abhorred of the nation, to a servant of rulers: kings shall see and arise; princes, and they shall prostrate themselves, because of YHWH that is faithful, even HaKadesh of Yisra’el, who has chosen you.
8 Thus says YHWH: In an acceptable time have I answered you, and in a day of salvation have I helped you, and I will preserve you, and give you for a covenant of the people: to raise up the land; to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9 Saying to the prisoners, Go forth. To them that are in darkness, Show yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and in all high hills shall be their pasture.
10 They shall not hunger nor thirst, neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for He that has compassion on them will lead them, even by the springs of water will He guide them.
11 And I will make all My mountains–a way–and My highways shall be raised on high.
12 Behold, these shall come from far, and behold, these from the north and from the west, and these from the land of Sinim.
(Is. 49:1-12 HRV)
It is the claim of the anti missionaries that 49:3 closes the case and clearly identifies the Servant as Israel. However in context that identification must be allegorical. In Is. 49:1-12 the servant is clearly NOT literally Israel because in verses 5 & 6 the servant brings Jacob (Israel) back to YHWH; raises up the tribes of Israel and restore the preserved of Israel. Clearly then the next two verses reveal that the servant is NOT Israel. So why does Is. 49:3 make that identification? Because their is an allegorical relationship Between Messiah and Israel. Both for example are the Son of Elohim. Both had miraculous births. Both were taken into Egypt to save them in their youth. Both were called out of Egypt. Rome tried to kill both of them. etc.
In verse 7 most translations state that a “nation” abhors the servant. However some Rabbinic translations (JPS and Sonicio) state that the “nations” abhor the servant. This makes a big difference. If the word is singular “nation” then by context the “nation” would be Israel. Thus proving once again that the servant is not Israel because Israel cannot abhor Israel. However if the reading is “nations” then this fits with the Rabbinic interpretation that the servant is Israel and that in Is. 53 Israel is being oppressed by the nations. So one must ask: who is being honest? This is pivotal. Is the word “nation(s)” in Is. 49:7 plural or singular? The word is in the Hebrew SINGULAR thus proving once again that the servant is NOT Israel. The Rabbinics have actually CHANGED the text of Is. 49:7 so as to make it fit with their theory.
4 The Adonai YHWH has given me the tongue of them that are taught, that I should know how to sustain with words, him that is weary. He wakens morning by morning. He wakens my ear to hear, as they that are taught.
5 The Adonai YHWH has opened my ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away backward.
6 I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.
7 For the Adonai YHWH will help me, therefore have I not been confounded. Therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed.
8 He is near that justifies me: who will contend with me? Let us stand up together: who is my adversary? Let him come near to me.
9 Behold, the Adonai YHWH will help me: who is he that shall condemn me? Behold, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up.
10 Who is among you that fears YHWH, that obeys the voice of His servant, though he walks in darkness, and has no light? Let him trust in the Name of YHWH, and stay upon his Elohim.
11 Behold, all you that kindle a fire; that gird yourselves with firebrands. Begone in the flame of your fire, and among the brands that you have kindled. This shall you have of My hand: you shall lie down in sorrow.
(Is. 50:4-11)
Finally lets look at Is. 52:7-53:12
7 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messengers of good tidings--that announces peace, the harbinger of good tidings; that announces salvation; that says unto Tziyon, Your Elohim reigns!
8 Hark! Your watchmen! They lift up the voice. Together do they sing, for they shall see eye to eye, YHWH returning to Tziyon.
9 Break forth into joy; sing together, you waste places of Yerushalayim: for YHWH has comforted His people; He has redeemed Yerushalayim.
10 YHWH has made bare, His Set-Apart arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our Elohim.
11 Depart you! Depart you! Go you out from thence. Touch no unclean thing; go you out of the midst of her. Be you clean, you that bear the vessels of YHWH.
12 For you shall not go out in haste, neither shall you go by flight: for YHWH will go before you, and the Elohim of Yisra’el will be your rearward.
13 Behold, My servant shall prosper: he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.
14 According as many were appalled at him,135 so marred was his visage unlike that of a man: and his form, unlike that of the sons of men.
15 So shall he sprinkle many nations: kings shall shut their mouths because of him, for that which had not been told them, shall they see, and that which they had not heard, shall they perceive.
1 Who would have believed our report? And to whom has the arm of YHWH been revealed?
2 For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of a dry ground. He had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him.
3 He was despised, and forsaken of men–a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4 Surely our diseases He did bear, and our pains He carried: whereas we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of Elohim, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced because of our transgressions; He was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon Him, and with His stripes, we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned every one to his own way, and YHWH has made to light on Him, the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, though He humbled Himself, and opened not His mouth. As a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb: yes, He opened not His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away, and with His generation who did reason? For He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
9 And He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich, His tomb: although He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased YHWH to crush Him. He has put Him to suffering to see if His soul would offer itself, as a guilt offering: that He might see His seed, prolong His days, and that the purpose of YHWH might prosper by His hand.
11 From the travail of His soul, He shall see light, and shall be satisfied in His understanding. My Righteous servant shall justify many, and their iniquities, He bears.
12 Therefore will I divide Him a portion among the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the mighty, because He bared His soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors: yet He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
(Is. 52:7-53:12 HRV)
The key questions are:
Who is the speaker?
Who is the servant?
Who is “we”?
Who is “he”?
OK who is the speaker?
Three answers have been proposed:
1. Isaiah
2. YHWH
3. The Gentile Kings of the Earth
We will examine number 1 last.
First: Is the speaker YHWH?
The speaker cannot be YHWH because the speaker has sins (53:6)
Second: Is the speaker The Gentile Kings of the Earth (As Tovia Singer claims) ?
The speaker cannot be the Gentile Kings because:
1. The chiastic structure in 52:7, 10; 53:1 reveals the speaker is the
same as the individual on the mountains in 52:7 which NO ONE claims is the Gentile Kings.
Is. 52:7
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him
that brings goodnews,
that publishes peace;
that brings goodnews of good,
that publishes salvation,
that says to Zion: “Your God reigns!”
Is. 52:10
A. YHWH
B. has made bare his holy arm
C. in the eyes of all the nations
C. and all the ends of the earth
B. shall see the salvation
A. of our God.
Is. 53:1
Who has believed our report?
And to whom is the arm of YHWH revealed?
Clearly the “arm of YHWH” in 53:1 is the “report” of 53:1
Clearly the “arm of YHWH” in 53:1 is “his holy arm” in 52:10
Clearly “see the salvation” of 52:10 is “bare his holy arm” of 52:10
Clearly the “publishes salvation” of 52:7 = “see the salvation” of 52:10
Therefore the “report” of 53:1f is being given by the figure on the mountains who is certainly NOT the Gentile Kings.
2. The text of 52:15 specificly tells us that the Gentile kings are silent they have nothing to say, they are NOT delivering a report. If it was important that we think that the speaker was the Gentile kings of 2:15 then why would YHWH have the text tell us they are silent. in fact the Targum actually states that the kings “shall be silent because of him”
The speaker is Isaiah. In fact there is no reason not to believe that the speaker is Isaiah.
Now who is the servant?
Is the servant Israel?
The servant cannot be Israel because:
1. The servant is a voluntary sufferer (Is. 53:7, 12b)
2. The servant is contrasted with the speaker who counts
himself with a group (Israel) saying “we” throughout.
(Is. 53:6) If “we” is Israel and “we” is being contrasted
with “he” then “he” the servant cannot be Israel.
3. The servant is an innocent sufferer (53:6, 9) but Israel
has guilt. Israel suffers BECAUSE we have sinned
(see Deut. 28-29 and Lev. 26)
53:10 says “he shall see his seed” and anti-missionaries make much of this. They say that zera cannot be used allegorically. Infact the word zera (seed) is used allegorically in Jewish literature to refer to the scattered tribes. In fact the Targum on this passage understands “seed” allegorically and paraphrases it “the Kingdom of their Messiah”. In fact then term seed is used allegorically in the very next chapter (Is. 54:1-3)
In the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text Isaiah 53:11 has a serious grammatical problem.
The Hebrew of the Masoretic Text reads literally:
From the travail of his soul he shall see ________
shall be satisfied in his understanding.
My Righteous servant shall justify many
and their iniquities he bears.
There is very clearly a missing word in the Hebrew resulting in two verbs in a row “shall see” and “shall be satisfied”. What shall he see? Now the missing word “light” DOES appear in the Septuagint and has also now turned up in two Hebrew copies of Isaiah found at Qumran.
The passage SHOULD read (as it does in the HRV):
From the travail of his soul he shall see light
and shall be satisfied in his understanding.
My Righteous servant shall justify many
and their iniquities he bears.
(Is. 53:11 HRV translation)
In fact the Targum Jonthan to Isaiah plainly proclaims the servant of the Suffering Servant Song in Isaiah to be the Messiah:
Behold, My Servant the Messiah shall prosper;
he shall be exalted and great and very powerful.
(Targum Jonathan on Is. 52:13)
It is the will of the Lord to purify and to acquit
as innocent the remnant of His people, to cleanse
their souls of sin, so that they may see the Kingdom
of their Messiah, have many sons and daughters,
enjoy long life, and observe the Torah of the Lord,
prospering according to his will.
(Targum Jonathan on Is. 53:10)
The Babylonian Talmud also applies this section of Isaiah as speaking of the Messiah:
The Rabanan say that that Messiah’s name is the Suffering
Scholar of Rabbi’s House (or the Leper Scholar) for it is
written, “Surely he has born our grief and carried our sorrows,
yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.”
(Is. 53:4)
(b.San. 98a)
The Messiah- what is his name?Š The House of Rabbi Judah the
Holy One says: The Sick OneŠ “Surely he has born our sicknesses”
(Is. 53:4)
(b.San. 98b)
Rabbi Joshua came upon the prophet Elijah as he was standing
at the entrance of Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai’s cave. He asked him:
“When is the Messiah coming?” The other replied: “Go and ask
him yourself.” “Where shall I find him?” “Before the gates
of Rome.” “By what sign shall I know him?” “He is sitting
among the poor people and covered with wounds.”(see Is. 53:5)
(b.San. 98a)
The same application is made in the Midrash Rabbah:
Rabbi Jose the Galilean says: Great is peace-for
at the hour the King Messiah reveals himself unto Israel,
he will begin in no other way than with “peace” as it is
written: “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of
the messenger of goodnews, that announces peace.” (Is. 52:7)
(Perek HaShalom in some Talmud editions and Numbers Rabbah XI, 16-20)
Rambam says:
Regarding the mission by which Messiah will present himself
Isaiah states, “He grew like a tender plant and as a root
out of dry land At him will kings shut their mouths,
for what had not been told unto them shall they see,
and what they never heard shall they understand.”
(Is. 52:15-53:2)
Perhaps most interesting is the application of Isaiah 53 to the Messiah in the Zohar:
In the Garden of Eden there is a hall that is called the
“hall of the afflicted.” Now it is into this hall that
the Messiah goes and summons all the afflictions and pains
and sufferings of Israel to come upon him. And so they all
come upon him. And had he not eased the children of Israel
of their sorrow, and taken their burden upon himself, there
would be none who could endure the suffering of Israel
in penalty of neglecting the Torah. Thus it is written:
“Surely our diseases he did bear and our pains he carried.”
(Is. 53:5) As long as the children of Israel dwelt in the
Holy Land, they averted all afflictions and sufferings from
the world by the service of the sanctuary and by sacrifice.
But now it is the Messiah who is averting them from the
habitants of the world.
(Zohar 2:212a)
The Messiah like the service of the sanctuary and the sacrifice has taken upon himself the sins of Israel. Messiah is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 52:7-53:12
3 He was despised, and forsaken of men–a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4 Surely our diseases He did bear, and our pains He carried: whereas we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of Elohim, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced because of our transgressions; He was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon Him, and with His stripes, we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned every one to his own way, and YHWH has made to light on Him, the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, though He humbled Himself, and opened not His mouth. As a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb: yes, He opened not His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away, and with His generation who did reason? For He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
(Isaiah 53:3-8 HRV)
In fact Yeshua is actually identified with his name actually encoded in the prophecy of Isaiah 53. If we start with the sixth to the last YOD in Isaiah 53:10 and count every 20th letter going from left to right, we spell YESHUA SHMI “Yeshua is my name”,
In the Zohar we read of Isaiah 53:13:
R. Simeon further discoursed on the text: Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high (Is. 52:13). ‘Happy is the portion of the righteous’, he said, ‘to whom the Holy One reveals the ways of the Torah that they may walk in them. This verse contains an esoteric meaning. When God created the world, He made the moon, and made her small, for she possesses no light of her own, but because she accepted her diminution she receives reflected light from the sun and from the other superior luminaries.
(Zohar 1:181a)
Now to fully understand Rabbi Simeon’s meaning here, we must look to another passage in the Zohar:
It is strange that the Messiah should be called “poor” [in Zech. 9:9]. R. Simeon explained that it is because he has nothing of his own, and he is compared to the holy moon above, which has no light save from the sun. This Messiah will have dominion and will be established in his place. Below he is “poor”, because he is of the side of the moon, and above he is poor, being a “mirror which does not radiate”, “the bread of poverty”. Yet withal he “rides upon an ass and upon a colt”, to overthrow the strength of the Gentiles; and God will keep him firm.
(Zohar 1:238a)
So we can see plainly that Rabbi Simeon in the Zohar is identifying the servant of Isaiah 52:13 as the Messiah.
Now as we continue to read our initial passage of the Zohar (1:181a) the passage immediately continues with:
Now, as long as the Temple existed, Israel were assiduous in bringing offerings, which together with all the other services performed by the priests, Levites, and Israelites had for their object to weave bonds of union and to cause luminaries to radiate.
(Zohar 1:181a)
This brings us to another passage in which the Zohar alludes to the “servant” of Isaiah 52 and 53 saying:
In the Garden of Eden there is a hall that is called the
“hall of the afflicted.” Now it is into this hall that
the Messiah goes and summons all the afflictions and pains
and sufferings of Israel to come upon him. And so they all
come upon him. And had he not eased the children of Israel
of their sorrow, and taken their burden upon himself, there
would be none who could endure the suffering of Israel
in penalty of neglecting the Torah. Thus it is written:
“Surely our diseases he did bear and our pains he carried.”
(Is. 53:5) As long as the children of Israel dwelt in the
Holy Land, they averted all afflictions and sufferings from
the world by the service of the sanctuary and by sacrifice.
But now it is the Messiah who is averting them from the
habitants of the world.
(Zohar 2:212a)
Our initial passage of Zohar (1:181a-b) continues:
But after the Temple was destroyed there was a darkening of the lights, the moon ceased to receive light from the sun, the latter having withdrawn himself from her, so that not a day passes but is full of grievous distress and afflictions. The time, however, will come for the moon to resume her primordial light, and in allusion to this it is written: “Behold, my servant will prosper.” That is to say, there will be a stirring in the upper realms as of one who catches a sweet odour and stands alert. “He shall be exalted”, from the side of the most exalted luminaries; “and lifted up”, from the side of Abraham; “and shall be high”, from the side of Isaac; “very”, from the side of Jacob. At that time, then, the Holy One will cause a stirring on high with the object of enabling the moon to shine with her full splendour, as we read: “Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of the seven days” (Ibid. XXX, 26). There will thus be added to the moon an exalted spirit whereby all the dead that are in the dust will be awakened. This is the esoteric meaning of “my servant”, viz. the one that has in his hand the key of his Master.
(Zohar 1:181a-181b)
The Zohar tells us that the revealing of Messiah is like the revealing of the moon. Initially the moon cannot be seen, however in time the moon is gradually restored to its full light. So it is with Messiah, and when the Messiah is fully revealed, the resurrection will take place.
We read in Matthew:
38 Behold, your house is forsaken; to you desolate.
39 And I tell you, that you will not see Me here after,
until you say,
Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!
(Matt. 23:38-39)
Of course this is quoting Ps. 118:26:
“Blessed be he that comes in the Name of YHWH; we bless you out of the House of YHWH.” (Ps. 118:26).
Above this is the phrase “the stone the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone” (Ps. 118:22)
Now we read in the Zohar concerning the stone that the builders rejected:
David, indeed, was king in this world and will be king in the time to come; hence “the stone the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone”. For, when the sun turns away his face from the moon, and does not shine upon her, she has no light whatever and so does not shine, but is poverty-stricken and dark on all sides; but when the sun turns towards her and radiates his light upon her, then her face is illumined and she adorns herself for him as a woman for a man. She thus is then invested with the dominion of the world. So David adorned himself after this very manner. Now he would appear poor and dejected, but then again he would be revelling in riches. Hence David’s declaration, “I am small and despised, yet have I not forgotten thy precepts.” It behoves, indeed, every man to follow this example and to humble himself in every respect so as to become a vessel in which the Holy One, blessed be He, may find delight. This lesson has also been expounded in connection with the phrase, “with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit’ (Isa. LVII, 15).’
(Zohar 2:232b)
The Zohar says that when this stone is rejected “the sun turns away his face from the moon, and does not shine upon her.”
Earlier the Zohar says:
So it says: AND HIS HAND HAD HOLD ON ESAU’S HEEL , i.e he put his hand on Esau’s heel in order thereby to force him down. According to another explanation, the words “and his hand had hold” imply that he could not escape him entirely, but his hand was still clinging to his brother’s heel. Esoterically speaking, the moon was obscured through the heel of Esau; hence it was necessary to deal with him cunningly, so as to thrust him downwards and make him adhere to the region assigned to him.’
(Zohar 1:138a)
The moon is obscured “through the heel of Esau”, and therefore the stone is rejected “through the heel of Esau” because the sun “turns away his face”.
And to whom does the sun refer:
Moses asked: ‘ Shall they remain in pledge for ever?’ God replied: ‘No, only Until the sun appears’ that is, till the coming of the Messiah; for it says, But unto you that fear My name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing in its wings (Mal.3:20).
(Midrash Rabba Ex. 31:10)
So what does this mean?
It points us to Gen. 25:26 which reads:
And after that, came forth his brother. And his hand had hold on Esav’s heel, and his name was called Ya’akov. And Yitz’chak was threescore years old when she bore them.
If we take the first letter of each word (a process called Notarikon) starting with the name Ya’akov (Jacob) and ending with Esav (Esau) going backwards we spell the name YESHUA, and if we continue through the next two words we read “Yeshua comes.”
So the moon is obscured in shining the light of Messiah by the heal of Esau.
Now the last letter in YESHUA in the Hebrew is an AYIN and that is the initial letter of the name ESAU in “Esau’s heel”. So if the heal of “Esau” is taken from YESHUA we have “YESHU”.
“Yeshu” is a name used in Rabbinic Judaism which refers to the anathema Rabbinic Judaism associates with Yeshua.
For Rabbinic Jews is is a acronym for a curse on the name of Yeshua meaning “may the name be blotted out forever”.
But Yeshua said:
38 Behold, your house is forsaken; to you desolate.
39 And I tell you, that you will not see Me here after,
until you say,
Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!
(Matt. 23:38-39)
They will say “Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!” (Ps. 118:26) when they accept the “stone that the builder rejected” (Ps. 118:22). This happens when the AYIN is restored to the name YESHUA, the reversal of the anathema, thus the Messiah, the Sun of Righteousness, will shine his light on the moon, which was obscured by the “heel of Esau”. And when the “heel of Esau” no longer obscures the “Sun of Righteousness” and YESHU is restored to YESHUA, then we can clearly see that “Yeshua comes”!
Our original Zohar passage continues:
So, too, in the verse: “And Abraham said unto his servant, etc.” (Gen. 24:2), the servant is an allusion to the moon as already explained. Also, the servant is identical with Metatron, who is the servant and messenger of his Master, and who was, as we read further, the elder of his house, the same who is alluded to in the text: “I have been young, and now am old” (Ps. 37:25). “That ruled over all that he had”; this applies to the same Metatron by reason of his displaying the three colours, green, white, and red. “Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh”; this is symbolic of the foundation of the world, for this servant was destined to bring to life again the dwellers in the dust, and to be made the messenger by the spirit from on high to restore the spirits and souls to their places, to the bodies that were decomposed underneath the dust.
(Zohar 1:181b)
The Zohar also identifies the Metatron as the “Middle Pillar”
The Middle Pillar [of the Godhead] is Metatron,
Who has accomplished peace above,
according to the glorious state there.
(Zohar 3:227)
And according to the Zohar the Middle Pillar is the Son of Yah:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead,
which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
And what is the Middle Pillar? The Zohar says:
Concerning this, too, it is written: “Let there be light, and there was light” (Gen. I, 3). Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right. The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And Elohim separated between the light and between the darkness” (Ibid.).
(Zohar 2:167a)
And:
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
Lowly, and Riding Upon an Ass
By
James Scott Trimm
In the book of Zechariah we read the following prophecy:
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Tziyon!
Shout, O daughter of Yerushalayim!
Behold, your king comes unto you:
He is triumphant, and victorious, lowly,
and riding upon an ass—
even upon a colt, the foal of an ass.
(Zech. 9:9 HRV)
Both Matthew and Yochanan (John) cite this verse as a Messianic prophecy fulfilled by Yeshua (Matt. 21:1-7; Jn. 12:14-15). Matthew cites the passage as follows:
1 And when they came near to Yerushalayim, and had come to Beit Pagey, to the mount of Olives, then sent Yeshua two talmidim,
2 And said to them: Go to the enclosure which is before you. And right away you will find there an ass tied, and a foal by her side: loose and bring [them] to Me.
3 And if any man say anything to you, you will say that, My Master has need of them: and immediately he will let them go.
4 And this was to establish what was spoken by the prophet, who said,
5 Say to the daughter of Zion, Behold your king comes to you: poor, and riding upon an ass–even upon a foal, the offspring of an ass. (Zech. 9:9)
6 And the talmidim went, and did as Yeshua commanded them:
7 And brought the ass, and the foal, and they put upon them their garments, and mounted Him thereon.
(Matt. 21:1-7 HRV)
Zech. 9:9 is also cited as a Messianic prophecy in the Talmud:
R. Alexandri said: Rabbi Joshua opposed two verses:
Is is written: And behold, one like the son of man
came with the clouds of heaven. (Dan. 7:13)
Whilst it is written: [behold, your king comes to you...]
lowely, and riding upon an ass! (Zech. 9:9)
(b.San. 98a)
As well as in the Midrash Rabba:
AND I HAVE AN OX, AND AN ASS, etc. (Gen. 32:6)….
ASS refers to the royal Messiah, for it says of him,
Lowly, and riding upon an ass (Zech. 9:9);
(Genesis Rabbah LXXXV:6)
The early “Church Father” Justin Martyr recounts the story with some added detail. Since Justin Martyr elsewhere recounts a story with added detail drawn from the Goodnews according to the Hebrews (but without citing that Gospel) (see notes to Mt. 3:16 for example) it has been proposed that the following citation may also have drawn details from the Goodnews according to the Hebrews:
The prophecy, “binding his foal to the vine, and washing his
robe in the blood of the grape” (Gen. 49:11), was a significant
symbol of the things that were to happen to Messiah, and what
he was to do. For the foal of an ass stood bound to a vine at
the entrance of a village, and he ordered his acquaintances to
bring it to him then; and when it was brought, he mounted and
sat upon it, and entered Jerusalem.
(Justin Martyr; Apol. 32)
Notice this account also ties the same account to a fulfillment of “binding his foal to the vine, and washing his robe in the blood of the grape” (Gen. 49:11).
The Midrash Rabbah also ties these same verses (Zech. 9:9 & Gen. 49:11) together as Messianic Prophecy:
BINDING HIS FOAL (‘IRO) UNTO THE VINE (Gen. 49:11)…. R. Nehemiah interpreted: BINDING ‘IRO UNTO THE VINE means: He [God] binds to the vine [sc. Israel] ‘iro, which alludes to, ‘the city (ha-’ir) which I have chosen. AND BENI ATHONO UNTO THE CHOICE VINE means: [morally] strong sons (banim ethanim) will spring from him. The Rabbis interpreted: ‘I,’ [said God], ‘am bound to the vine and the choice vine [Israel]. HIS FOAL AND HIS COLT intimate: when he will come of whom it is written, Lowly, and riding upon an ass, even upon a colt the foal of an ass (Zech. 9:9). HE WASHETH HIS GARMENTS IN WINE, intimates that he [the Messiah] will compose for them words of Torah; AND HIS VESTURE IN THE BLOOD OF GRAPES-that he will restore to them their errors.
(Genesis Rabbah XCVIII:9)
The Zohar also ties these same verses (Zech. 9:9 & Gen. 49:11) together as Messianic Prophecy:
Binding his foal unto the vine. (Gen. 49:11)
The vine is the community of Israel, so called also in the verse:
“You did remove a vine from Egypt” (Ps. 80:9).
By “his foal” is meant the Messiah, …
Hence it is written of him that he will be
“poor and riding on an ass and on
a young ass’s colt” (Zech. 9:9)
“Colt” and “ass” are two crowns by virtue of which the
Gentiles have dominion….
he rides upon an ass and upon a colt, to overthrow
the strength of the Gentiles…
(Zohar 1:238a)
Anti-missionary Singer insists that the Gospels misinterpret this verse by understanding “an ass— even upon a colt, the foal of an ass” as two animals while Singer insists that they can only be understood as one animal being described twice. However the Zohar clearly understands these as two animals as well saying “‘Colt’ and ‘ass’ are two crowns” (Zohar 1:238a).
The Zohar also ties Gen. 49:11 to “You did remove a vine from Egypt” (Ps. 80:9). This is a reference back to Torah which says:
22 Yosef is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain; its branches run over the wall.
23 The archers have dealt bitterly with him, and shot at him, and hated him,
24 But his bow abode firm. And the arms of his hands were made supple by the hands of the Mighty One of Ya’akov; from there, from the Shepherd–the Stone of Yisra’el.
25 Even by the El of your father who shall help you, and by Shaddai, who shall bless you with blessings of heaven above: blessings of the deep that couches beneath; blessings of the breasts, and of the womb.
26 The blessings of your father are mighty, beyond the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills. They shall be They shall be on the head of Yosef, and on the crown of the head of the prince, among his brothers.
(Gen. 49:22-26 HRV))
Now just a few verses above this we read:
9 Y’hudah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, you are gone up. He stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as a lioness: who shall rouse him up?
10 The scepter shall not depart from Y’hudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes. And unto him, shall the obedience of the peoples be.
11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine, he washes his garments in wine, and his vesture in the blood of grapes.
12 His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.
(Gen. 49:9-12 HRV)
Who is this “Shiloh”?
This Gemara also asks “What is Messiah’s name?” Rabbi Shila offers the answer: “His name is Shiloh, for it is written, ‘until Shiloh comes.” (b.San. 98b)
This Gemara is citing Genesis 49:10:
The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
nor the staff from between his feet,
until Shiloh comes;
and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
The Targums (Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and Yerushalmi) all have “until Messiah comes” in place of “until Shiloh comes”.
The word “Shiloh” has a gematria (numerical value) of 345 which is the same as the value of “HaShem” (“the name”) and El Shaddai. The phrase “Shiloh comes” has a gematria of 358 which is the same as the gematria for “Messiah and “Moses” (because the Messiah is “the prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:18). This is because “the name” of Messiah is imbedded in the phrase “until Shiloh comes.”
The Zohar says of Gen. 49:10:
…”the scepter” referring to the Messiah of the House of Judah,
and “the staff” to the Messiah of the House of Joseph.
“Until Shiloh comes”, this is Moses, the gematria of Shiloh
and Moses being the same [358].
(Zohar 1:25)
The word Shiloh, here, is spelt with both a yod and a he,
to allude to the holy supernal name, Yah,
by which the Shekinah shall rise…
(Zohar 1:237)
Thus the Zohar teaches us that in Genesis 49:10 we have the two Messiahs (or the two comings of Messiah) represented as a “scepter” and a “staff” which are one “Shiloh” and that the one “Shiloh” has Yah within him.
Now if we look at the Hebrew of the phrase “…Shiloh comes and…” (in the Hebrew it is literally “…comes Shiloh and…”) the first letter from each word in the Hebrew spells “Yeshu” which is the Aramaic and Galilean pronunciation of “Yeshua” (later Rabbis lampooned this fact by making another acronym from YESHU meaning “may his name be blotted out forever”).
You may notice a parallel between the “scepter” and “staff” of the two Messiah’s and the “two sticks” of the two houses of Israel in Ezekiel 37.
Note the fact that the figure called Shiloh binds his foal upon a vine, clearly the vine is Yosef mentioned just a few verses later that grows over the wall (Gen. 49:22) or as we read in Psalm 80:8, 11, the “sea”:
9 (80:8) You did pluck up a vine out of Egypt, You did drive out the nations, and did plant it.
10 (80:9) You did clear a place before it, and it took deep root, and filled the land.
11 (80:10) The mountains were covered with the shadow of it, and the mighty cedars with the boughs thereof.
12 (80:11) She sent out her branches unto the sea, and her shoots unto the River.
(Ps. 80:9-12(8-11))
Notice that we have the two primary tribes of the two Houses of Israel here, representing the two comings of Messiah. Here we also have represented the two comings of Messiah, as they parallel the Rabbinic Two Messiah Theory.
KISS THE SON
THE DECEPTION OF TOVIA SINGER
By
James Scott Trimm
In Psalm 2 we read:
The kings of the earth stand up,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against YHWH, and against His Messiah:…
I will tell of the decree:
YHWH said to me: “You are My Son,”
This day have I begotten you….
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry…
(Ps. 2:2, 7, 12)
Now in his deceptive anti-Missionary tape set titled (wrongly) “Lets Get Biblical” Tovia Singer refers to Psalm 2:12 saying “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.”
Tovia goes on to say:
“What we do is we look at all the other places where the word BAR exists and what I did for you is I did you a favor. I showed you every single place where the word BAR appears in the Book of Psalms and you will notice that isn’t it odd that the King James Bible everywhere that the word appears in all its forms is always translated cleanliness or purity? Why if that word truly means son or sonship why isn’t it translated that way in other places?”
Notice here that Singer plays a shell game. He starts out suggesting “we look at all the other places where the word BAR exists” then he leads you to believe that he has done this for you, but he has played a switch on you for what he actually has done instead is “showed you every single place where the word BAR appears in the Book of Psalms”. Then he switches back claiming to have shown that “everywhere that the word appears in all its forms is always translated cleanliness or purity”. And then poses the question “Why if that word truly means son or sonship why isn’t it translated that way in other places?”.
So he begins by telling you that we need to look at EVERY passage where the word appears, he then shows you ONLY the passages where the word appears in Psalms, then he CLAIMS to have proven that BAR is always translated “cleanliness or purity” and never as “son”.
The reason for this deception is that Singer knows full well that if we were to enlarge the search by even looking at the neighboring book of Proverbs we would find Proverbs 31:2 where we read:
“What, my son? And what, O son of my womb? And what, O son of my vows?”
(Proverbs 31:2 Jewish Publication Society version)
Every translation I have ever seen, be it Jewish, Christian or Secular renders BAR as “son” in this verse. So now you see why Singer plays the shell game. He has to tell you that he is showing you “all the other places where the word BAR exists” while he really only looks at the book of Psalms, and then he pretends to have shown you “everywhere where the word appears” for the sole purpose of deceiving you, because he cannot honestly look at all of the passages, or even to the neighboring book of Proverbs or you could plainly see that the word BAR can be and is translated from Hebrew as “son”, even in Jewish sources.
In fact Jewish sources attest to “son” as a meaning of BAR in Hebrew even though Singer claims “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.” In the Student’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary to the Old Testament by Alexander Harkavy published by the Hebrew Publishing Company in 1914 (and currently available in reprint in our bookstore at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds) we read “In Heb. BAR [as Aramaic for "son"] occurs only in poetry Pr. 31,2.”
(p. 68 column 8). The reader may notice that Psalms is also poetry, so Singer is plain wrong when he declares “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.”.
In fact the tenth century Jewish scholar Abraham Ibn ‘Ezra writes in his commentary on this very passage:
“Serve YHWH” (Ps. 2:7) refers to YHWH’ and “kiss the son (BAR)” (Ps. 2:12) refers to His Messiah; and behold the presence of BAR, is like that of “What, my son (BAR)…”
(Prov. 31:2)”
Notice Ibn ‘Ezra not only understands BAR here to mean “son” but identifies this “son:” as the Messiah!
BAR in Psalm 2:12 is also understood to mean “son” in the Zohar:
We may also translate, “he who withholds blessings from the Son”, whom the Father and Mother have crowned and blessed with many blessings, and concerning whom they commanded, “Kiss the son lest he be angry” (Ps. II, 12), since he is invested both with judgement (gevurah) and with mercy (chesed).
(Zohar 3:191b)
This “son” referenced in the Zohar is the Middle Pillar of the Godhead which the Zohar identifies as “The Son of Yah”. The Zohar describes the three pillars of the Godhead as follows:
Then Elohim said, “Let thee be light; and there was light.
And Elohim saw that the light was good…
Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and it is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right.
The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And God separated between the light and between the darkness.”…
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
The right and left pillars are assigned as Mother and Father, the middle pillar, which balances the feminine and masculine characteristics from the male and female sides, is identified in the Zohar as “the Son of Yah”. The Zohar says:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead, which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
In another Passage the Zohar has:
The Holy One, blessed be He, has a son, whose glory (tifret) shines from one end of the world to another. He is a great and mighty tree, whose head reaches heaven, and whose roots are set in the holy ground, and his name is “Mispar” and his place is in the uppermost heaven… as it is written, “The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God” (Ps. 19:1). Were it not for this “Mispar” there would be neither hosts nor offspring in any of the worlds.
(Zohar 2:105a)
This is intended to point the reader back to a familiar passage from the Bahir:
Why are they called Sephirot?
Because it is written (Psalm 19:2),
“The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God.”
(Bahir 125)
Tovia Singer’s argument is deceptive and dishonest. When the Psalm says “Kiss the Son (BAR), lest he be angry…” (Ps. 2:12) the word BAR definitely means “son”. Moreover the “son” in this verse refers to the Messiah and to the figure called in the Zohar “the Son of Yah” who is the “Middle Pillar” of the Godhead.
He Says Concerning Himself
“I am the Son of Elohim”
by
James Scott Trimm
It has been said that there are over three hundred Messianic prophecies in the Tanak. This article is, however, about an important Messianic prophecy you may never have heard of, found in the Wisdom of Solomon, a book found among those known as the Apocrypha. These are books which are considered canonical cy all pre-Protestant Christian churches. They are cited by authors of the so-called “New Testament” frequently, and quoted by the so-called “Church Fathers” right along side the others.
(For more information see The Clear Truth about the Apocrypha http://www.wnae.org/apocryphatruth.htm )
Wisdom of Solomon claims to be a book written by Solomon (Wisdom 9:7-8). Even skeptics date the book in the first or second century BCE. Over a hundred years before the life of Yeshua.
According to Melito in the second century CE, the Wisdom of Solomon was then considered canonical by both Jews and Christians. The Hebrew version of the Wisdom of Solomon is also mentioned by Ramban (1194-1270 CE) in the preface to his commentary on the Torah. He also quotes from the book.
Not only was the Wisdom of Solomon originally written in Hebrew but the original Hebrew survived until at least 1611. The original 1611 edition of the King James Version has a marginal note to the word “pricked” in Wisdom of Solomon 16:11 which says “Hebr. stung.”
Now the Greek of Wisdom 16:11 has enekentronto “they were pricked” (KJV, Brenton)
or “they were bitten” (RSV, NEB) (the NAB has “they were stung”). Now this word can be translated “stung” (as in the NAB) but it can also be translated “pricked” as the KJV translators chose to translate in the main text. The footnote indicates that that original Hebrew does in fact have a word meaning “sting” and not “prick” here. The KJV footnote would indicate that the original Hebrew word was PARASH (Strong’s 6567) the only Hebrew word for “sting” (as we see it in Prov. 23:32).
The Aramaic Peshitta translator must have misread PARASH (Strong’s 6567) “sting” as PARASH (Strong’s 6566) “to break in pieces”. The Aramaic Peshitta translator thus wrongly translated PATZAIT “split, opened”.
The Aramaic has mistranslated the original Hebrew word, and therefore could not have been translated from the Greek. This means that our Aramaic Peshitta version is an Aramaic translation made directly from the Hebrew. Since these are cognate languages with much vocabulary and grammar in common, the Aramaic translation gives us a much better witness as to the original Hebrew than does the Greek. And were it not for this one marginal note made by the original 1611 KJV translators, we would not have this proof that the Aramaic was translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek.
Conversely the mistranslation of this word in the Aramaic Peshitta proves the veracity of the KJV marginal note.
Now there is an amazing Messianic Prophecy found in The Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 which reads as follows:
12: Therefore let us trouble the Righteous One; because he is not pleasant to us, and he stands up against our doings: and he reviles us for our transgression of the Torah, and records against us the trespasses of our audacity.
13: He professes that the knowledge of Elohim is his: and he says concerning himself “I am the Son of Elohim”
14: He is a rebuker of our thoughts.
15: He is heavy upon us even to behold: because his way of life is not like others, his ways are different.
16: We are esteemed by him as impure: he abstained from our ways like from impurity: he blesses the ways and the end of the righteous, and he boasts that Elohim is his father.
17: Let us see if his words are true: and let us test him by his departure.
18: For if the Righteous One is the Son of Elohim, he will receive him, and deliver him from the hand of those who rise up against him.
19: With despitefulness and with torment let us examine him, that we may know the concern of his humility, and be harmful to him.
20: To a shameful death let us condemn him: we shall be upon him and shall question his words.
21: These insipid things they did think, and were deceived: because their own wickedness has blinded them.
22: And they did not know the mysteries of Elohim, neither hoped they for the reward of the pure, and they did not discern an old soul without blemish.
(Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 – from my ongoing work on the HRV Apocrypha- Translated from the Peshitta Aramaic)
Now lets look at this prophecy in detail. We begin with:
12: Therefore let us trouble the Righteous One; because he is not pleasant to us, and he stands up against our doings: and he reviles us for our transgression of the Torah, and records against us the trespasses of our audacity.
(Wisdom 2:12 HRV)
These verses gives a remarkable prophecy of the way Yeshua stood up against Torah transgression:
1 Then came near to Him scribes and P’rushim from Yerushalayim, saying,
2 Why do your talmidim transgress the decrees of the elders? For they clean not their hands when they eat bread.
3 But He answered them and said: And why do you transgress the commandments of Elohim–by means of your decrees?
(Matt. 15:1-3 HRV)
The Prophecy continues:
13: He professes that the knowledge of Elohim is his: and he says concerning himself “I am the Son of Elohim”
(Wisdom 2:13 HRV)
In fact both Matthew and Yochanan (John) quote Yeshua as angering many by saying “I am the Son of Elohim/Eloah”:
41 And likewise, the Chief Cohenim reviled Him, with the scribes and elders,
42 Saying, He saved others, but Himself He cannot save. If He is the king of Yisrael, let Him now come down from this gallows, and we will believe in Him.
43 He believed in Elohim, let Him deliver Him now, if He delight [in Him]: for He said, I am the Son of Elohim.
44 And so likewise the robbers, which were crucified with Him, reproached Him.
(Mt. 27:41-44 HRV)
36 To Him whom the Father sanctified and sent to the world, do you say, You blaspheme … because I told you that I am the Son of Eloah?
37 Though I do the works of My Father, you do not believe Me.
38 But if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works: that you might know and believe that My Father is in Me, and I am in My Father.
39 And they wanted to seize Him again, but He escaped from their hands.
(Jn. 10:36-39 HRV)
The prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon continues:
14: He is a rebuker of our thoughts.
(Wisdom 1:14 HRV)
This was also fulfilled by Yeshua as we read in Matthew:
4 And when Yeshua perceived their thoughts, He said: Why think you evil in your hearts?
(Mt. 9:4 HRV)
The Wisdom of Solomon continues:
15: He is heavy upon us even to behold: because his way of life is not like others, his ways are different.
16: We are esteemed by him as impure: he abstained from our ways like from impurity: he blesses the ways and the end of the righteous, and he boasts that Elohim is his father.
17: Let us see if his words are true: and let us test him by his departure.
(Wisdom 2:15-17 HRV)
This actually recalls an account in the Torah concerning the life of Joseph. When his brothers cast Joseph into the pit we read:
20 Come now therefore and let us slay him, and cast him into one of the pits. And we will say, An evil beast has devoured him. And we shall see what will become of his dreams.
(Gen. 37:20 HRV)
There is great Messianic significance to this account. Joseph’s life was a type of the first coming of Messiah which parallels the Rabbinical Messiah ben Yoseph. The Suffering Messiah is called Messiah ben Yoseph because his brothers were redeemed by his suffering.
Like Joseph the Patriarch, Yeshua was betrayed by his own for a few pieces of silver (Gen. 37:28) he was cast into “the pit” (death) and raised back up so that he might redeem his brothers, Like Joseph, Yeshua’s teaching and revelation angered his brothers, who sought to put his claims to the test by casting him into the pit (of death).
The Wisdom of Solomon continues:
18: For if the Righteous One is the Son of Elohim, he will receive him, and deliver him from the hand of those who rise up against him.
(Wisdom 2:18 HRV)
This strongly parallels a Messianic prophecy found in Psalm 22:
9 (22:8) Let him commit himself unto YHWH; let Him rescue him; let Him deliver him: seeing He delights in him.
(Ps. 22:9 (8) HRV)
And both were fulfilled by Yeshua as we read in Matthew and in Yochanan (John):
43 He believed in Elohim, let Him deliver Him now, if He delight [in Him]: for He said, I am the Son of Elohim.
(Mt. 27:43 HRV)
18 And because of this, the Judeans all the more sought to kill Him; not only because He had loosed the Sabbath, but also because He had spoken about Eloah–that He was His Father, and made His nefesh equal with Eloah.
(Jn. 5:18 HRV)
The prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon continues:
19: With despitefulness and with torment let us examine him, that we may know the concern of his humility, and be harmful to him.
20: To a shameful death let us condemn him: we shall be upon him and shall question his words.
21: These insipid things they did think, and were deceived: because their own wickedness has blinded them.
22: And they did not know the mysteries of Elohim, neither hoped they for the reward of the pure, and they did not discern an old soul without blemish.
(Wisdom 2:19-22 HRV)
This was also fulfilled by Yeshua as Ya’akov wrote:
6 You have condemned and killed the just, and he did not stand against you.
(Ya’akov (James) 5:6 HRV)
The Messianic Prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 fits well right along side of prophecies like Ps. 22 and Isaiah 53 as a profound prophecy of Messiah’s role as the suffering servant Messiah ben Yoseph as fulfilled by Yeshua of Nazareth.
The Genealogy of Messiah
By
James Scott Trimm
There have been a number of teachings going around, which allege that the genealogies of Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are both those of Yosef (Joseph), and in some versions of the teaching, that Miriam (Mary) was a Levite.
This teaching came up at our Sukkot gathering this last year, and I have seen it come up recently in the archive of our NazareneSpace chat room.
It is a simple matter to show that the two genealogies given of Yeshua in Matthew and Luke cannot be through the same parent (or step parent).
A quick look at the genealogy shows that the names are the same until we get to King David, then they diverge completely:
Matt. 1 Luke 3
Abraham Abraham
Isaac Isaac
Jacob Jacob
Judas Juda
Phares Phares
Esrom Esrom
Aram Aram
Aminadab Aminadab
Naasson Naasson
Salmon Salmon
Boaz Boaz
Obed Obed
Jesse Jesse
David David
Solomon Nathan
Roboam Mattatha
Abia Menan
Asa Melea
Josaphat Eliakim
Joram Jonan
Ozias Joseph
Joatham Juda
This shows clearly that one genealogy follows a line that passes from David to his son Solomon and then to the line of kings. The other line passes through another of David’s sons: Nathan. Both genealogies cannot be for the same parent, and both trace back to the Tribe of Judah.
Anti-missionaries like Tovia Singer love to attack the genealogy of Yeshua. The reason is that the genealogy of the Messiah is critical, and Yeshua fit these criteria perfectly.
The Tanak gives the following criteria for the genealogy of Messiah.
First off Messiah must be “seed” of Abraham:
19 And Elohim said: Nay, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Yitz’chak. And I will establish My covenant with him, for an everlasting covenant for his seed after him.
(Gen. 17:19)
And he must descend from Isaac:
17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. There shall step forth a star out of Ya’akov, and a scepter shall rise out of Yisra’el, and shall smite through the corners of Mo’av, and break down all the sons of Shet.
(Num. 24:17)
And he must be of the Tribe of Judah:
10 The scepter shall not depart from Y’hudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes. And unto him, shall the obedience of the peoples be.
(Gen. 49:10)
Who is this “Shiloh”?
This Gemara also asks “What is Messiah’s name?” Rabbi Shila offers the answer: “His name is Shiloh, for it is written, ‘until Shiloh comes.” (b.San. 98b)
The Targums (Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and Yerushalmi) all have “until Messiah comes” in place of “until Shiloh comes”.
The word “Shiloh” has a gematria (numerical value) of 345 which is the same as the value of “HaShem” (“the name”) and El Shaddai. The phrase “Shiloh comes” has a gematria of 358 which is the same as the gematria for “Messiah and “Moses” (because the Messiah is “the prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:18) (see my recent article A Prophet Like Moses http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/a-prophet-like-moses ). This is because “the name” of Messiah is imbedded in the phrase “until Shiloh comes.”
The Zohar says of Gen. 49:10:
…”the scepter” referring to the Messiah of the House of Judah,
and “the staff” to the Messiah of the House of Joseph.
“Until Shiloh comes”, this is Moses, the gematria of Shiloh
and Moses being the same [358].
(Zohar 1:25)
The word Shiloh, here, is spelt with both a yod and a he,
to allude to the holy supernal name, Yah,
by which the Shekinah shall rise…
(Zohar 1:237)
Thus the Zohar teaches us that in Genesis 49:10 we have the two Messiahs (or the two comings of Messiah) represented as a “scepter” and a “staff” which are one “Shiloh” and that the one “Shiloh” has Yah within him.
In my recent article “Lowly and Riding Upon an Ass” (http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/lowly-and-riding-upon-an-ass) I show how all of this also connects to Messianic Prophecies in Gen. 49:11 and Zech. 9:9.
Messiah must also be heir to David’s throne:
5 (9:6) For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us, and the government is upon His shoulder: and His Name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty El, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
6 (9:7) That the government may be increased, and of peace there be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom: to establish it and to uphold it, through justice and through righteousness, from henceforth even forever. The zeal of YHWH Tzva’ot does perform this.
(Is. 9:5-6 (6-7))
In my recent article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect” (http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/unto-us-a-child-is-born-isa…) I demonstrated that this is also a Messianic prophecy.
Anti-missionaries have argued that Yeshua was not heir to David’s throne if he was not actually Joseph’s son (of course the claim of the Gospels is that Yeshua was born to Miriam without any earthly father). This is actually a false claim, the throne can very clearly be passed by inheritance regardless of physical blood line. In fact David himself inherited the throne from Saul without being of Saul’s bloodline. David was the legitimate heir to Saul’s throne, by way of his covenant with Jonathan (1Sam. chapters 18-20) which was how David legitimately obtained the throne.
Many anti-missionaries try to attack Yeshua’s genealogy by claiming that the genealogies in Matthew and Luke contradict one another. In fact Matthew 1:1-18 gives Yeshua’s genealogy through his step-father/adopted father Joseph, while Luke 3:23-38 gives his genealogy through his mother Miriam. We know this because the genealogy in Luke begins with “Yosef, the son of Heli” (Luke 3:23) – The Jerusalem Talmud mentions a certain Miriam who, in context, appears to be the mother of Yeshua, who is said to be the daughter of “Eli” (j.Hag. 77d & j.San. 25c) The Aramaic “bar” like the Hebrew word “ben” normally means “son of” but is very ambiguous and can also refer to a “son in law a step son a servant a student or a follower.” as is the case here (Yosef was the son of Ya’akov see Mt. 1:16) (The Greek has only “of” which is why the KJV has “son of” in italics, thus the Greek can also refer to a son-in-law).
Matthew gives the genealogy of Yeshua through his “supposed” father (step father and adoptive father) Yosef, to establish Yeshua’s legal right to the throne of David, through Solomon. Luke, on the other hand, gives Yeshua’s genealogy through his mother Miram, showing Messiah to also be the “seed of David” through David’s son Nathan (Lk. 3:23-38).
This resolves the problem of the “curse of Jeconiah” (Jeremiah 22:24 – 29) though it may also be argued based on Hag. 2:23 that this curse had been reversed.
Tovia Singer and other anti-missionaries have claimed that the presence of Jeconiah in Yeshua’s genealogy disqualifies him from being Messiah due to the supposed “curse of Jeconiah” as we read in Jeremiah:
24 As I live, says YHWH, though Coniah the son of Yahuyakim king of Y’hudah were the signet upon My right hand, yet would I pluck you thence;
25 and I will give you into the hand of them that seek your life, and into the hand of them of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of N’vukhadretzar king of Bavel, and into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26 And I will cast you out, and your mother that bore you, into another country, where you were not born; and there shall you die.
27 But to the land whereunto they long to return, there shall they not return.
28 Is this man Coniah a despised, broken image? Is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? Wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into the land which they know not?
29 O land, land, land, hear the word of YHWH.
(Jer. 22:24-29)
However if we look in the Book of Haggai we find that Elohim appears to have reversed this curse:
23 In that day, says YHWH Tzva’ot, will I take you, O Z’rubavel, My servant, the son of Shealtiel, says YHWH, and will make you as a signet; for I have chosen you, says YHWH Tzva’ot.’
(Haggai 2:23)
Note the use of the term “signet ring” in each passage.
The Talmud seems to agree with this concept that the curse was reversed. It says:
Rab Judah said: Exile makes remission for three things, for it is written, Thus saith the Lord etc. He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword and by the famine and by the pestilence; but he that goeth out and falleth away to the Chaldeans who beseige you he shall live and his life shall be unto him for a prey. R. Johanan said: Exile atones for everything, for it is written, Thus saith the Lord, write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days, for no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David and ruling any more in Judah. Whereas after he [the king] was exiled, it is written, And the sons of Jechoniah, — the same is Assir — Shealtiel his son etc.33 [He was called] Assir,34 because his mother conceived him in prison. Shealtiel, because God did not plant him36 in the way that others are planted. We know by tradition that a woman cannot conceive in a standing position. [yet she did conceive standing. Another interpretation: Shealtiel, because God obtained [of the Heavenly court] absolution from His oath. Zerubbabel [was so called] because he was sown in Babylon. But [his real name was] Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah.
Footnotes:
33. I Ch. III, 17. Notwithstanding the curse that he should be childless and not prosper, after being exiled he was forgiven.
34. Which He had made, to punish Jechoniah with childlessness.”
(Sanhedrin 37b – 38a, Soncino Talmud Edition)
Also the Midrash Rabba says:
. . . they made the Calf and deserved to be exterminated, and I would have thought that He would curse and destroy them, yet, no sooner had they repented, than the danger was averted, And the Lord repented of the evil (ib. XXXII, 14).And so in many places. For example, He said about Jekoniah: For no man of his seed shall prosper (Jer. XXII, 30) and it says, I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations… In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, My servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the Lord, and will make thee as a signet (Hag. II, 22 f.). Thus was annulled that which He had said to his forefather, viz. As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim King of Judah were the signet upon My right hand, yet I would pluck thee thence (Jer. XXII, 24).
(Numbers Rabbah XX:20)
And Midrash Pesikta Rabbati says:
R. Joshua ben Levi, however, argued as follows: Repentance sets aside the entire decree, and prayer half the decree. You find that it was so with Jeconiah, king of Judah. For the Holy One, blessed be He, swore in His anger, As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakhim king of Judah were the signet on a hand, yet by My right – note, as R. Meir said, that is was by His right hand that God swore – I would pluck thee hence (Jer. 22:24). And what was decreed against Jeconiah? That he die childless. As is said Write ye this man childless (Jer. 22:40). But as soon as he avowed penitence, the Holy One, blessed be He, set aside the decree, as is shown by Scripture’s reference to The sons of Jeconiah – the same is Assir – Shealtiel his son, etc. (1 Chron 3:17). And Scripture says further: In that day . . . will I take thee, O Zerubbabel . . . the son of Shealtiel . . . and will make thee as a signet (Haggai 2:23). Behold, then, how penitence can set aside the entire decree!
(Pesikta Rabbati, Piska)
Anti-missionary Tovia Singer also attacks Yeshua’s genealogy in Matthew because three names are omitted in Matthew 1:8. In Matt. 1:8 we read “Y’horam begat Uziyahu” Here the names of three kings are omitted. These are added back in Old Syriac (c), however they are clearly not part of the original text of Matthew, since verse 17 in Old Syriac (c) still counts only fourteen names.
Once again Singer fails to use equal weights and measures, judging the Gospels by a stricter criteria than that which he applies to the Tanak. The truth is that it was not unusual for ancient Hebrew genealogies to be abbreviated and omit names. For example if we compare the genealogy of Ezra as given in Ezra 7:1-5 1 with that given in 1Chron. 6:4-15 we find that the later genealogy given in Ezra also has omitted names.
While anti-missionaries like Tovia Singer seek to attack Yeshua’s genealogy, the truth is that Yeshua was the heir to the throne of David through Solomon by way of his step father Joseph as we see in Matthew 1 and was also the physical descendant of David through Nathan by way of his mother Miriam. These genealogies demonstrate that Yeshua was in fact uniquely qualified as fulfilling the genealogical prophecies regarding the Messiah.
They have Pierced My Hands and My Feet
by
James Scott Trimm
In a recent article I discussed “How the Anti-Missionaries Misrepresent the Text”. In this article I will give a specific example. Psalm 22 is an amazingly prophetic Psalm which describes the crucifixion of Yeshua in great detail.
In Matt. 27:46 = Mk. 15:34 Yeshua recites Ps. 22:2(1) from the gallows. Matt. 27:39 alludes to Ps. 22:8(7) about on lookers shaking their heads at him. In Matt. 27:43 the people use the same phase as those in Ps. 22:9(8) (see also Luke 23:35) Luke 23:34 and John 19:24 (as well as the Hebrew text of Matt. 27:35) allude to Ps. 22:19(18) about the casting of lots to divide his clothes, and Hebrews 2:12 also quotes Ps. 22:23(22) as a reference to Yeshua as the Messiah.
It is not just the so-called NT that understand Psalm 22 as propheticly speaking of Messiah, the concept is also to be found in Midrash Pesikta Rabbati which applies verses from Psalm 22 to the Messiah ben Yosef, the Suffering Messiah also known as “Ephraim”:
During the seven-year period preceding the coming of the son of David, iron beams will be brought low and loaded upon his neck until the Messiah’s body is bent low. Then he will cry and weep, and his voice will rise to the very height of heaven, and he will say to God: Master of the universe, how much can my strength endure? How much can my spirit endure? How much my breath before it ceases? How much can my limbs suffer? Am I not flesh and blood?
It was because of the ordeal of the son of David that David wept, saying My strength is dried up like a potsherd (Ps. 22:16). During the ordeal of the son of David, the Holy One, blessed be He, will say to him: Ephraim, My true Messiah, long ago, ever since the six days of creation, thou didst take this ordeal upon thyself. At this moment, thy pain is like my pain . . .
At these words, the Messiah will reply: Now I am reconciled. The servant is content to be like his Master.
(Pesikta Rabbati, Piska 36.2, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 680-681)
It is taught, moreover, that in the month of Nisan the Patriarchs will arise and say to the Messiah: Ephraim, our true Messiah, even though we are thy forbears, thou art greater that we because thou didst suffer for the iniquities of our children, and terrible ordeals befell thee . . . for the sake of Israel thou didst become a laughingstock and a derision among the nations of the earth; and didst sit in darkness, in thick darkness, and thine eyes saw no light, and thy skin cleaved to thy bones, and thy body was as dry as a piece of wood; and thine eyes grew dim from fasting, and thy strength was dried up like a potsherd – all these afflictions on account of the iniquities of our children . . .
(Pesikta Rabbati 37.1, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 685-686)
Ephraim is a darling son to Me . . . My heart yearneth for him, in mercy I will have mercy upon him, saith the Lord (Jer. 31:20). Why does the verse speak twice of mercy: In mercy I will have mercy upon him? One mercy refers to the time when he will be shut up in prison, a time when the nations of the world will gnash their teeth at him every day, wink their eyes at one another in derision of him, nod their heads at him in contempt, open wide their lips to guffaw, as is said All they that see me laugh me to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head (Ps. 22:8); My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my throat; and thou layest me in the dust of death (Ps. 22:16). Moreover, they will roar over him like lions, as is said They open wide their mouth against me, as a ravening and roaring lion. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is become like wax; it is melted in mine inmost parts (Ps. 22:14-15).
(Pesikta Rabbati 37.1, translated by William G. Braude, Yale University Press, pg. 686-687)
Perhaps the most amazingly prophetic verse of Psalm 22 is:
For dogs have encompassed me;
a company of evildoers have enclosed me:
they have pierced my hands and my feet.
(Ps. 22:17 (16))
In his series Let’s Get Biblical” Tovia Singer has made the claim that Christians changed Ps. 22:16 (17) to read “they have pierced” rather than “like a lion”.
Now let us seek the TRUTH on this matter:
In the Hebrew the difference between these two readings is only one letter.
KARU (KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV) “They have pierced”
(KAR means “pierced” and the -U means “they”)
KARI (KAF-ALEF-RESH-YUD) “Like a lion”
(K- means “like” and ARI means “lion”)
The difference between these two words is between a VAV and a YUD. The misreading of a VAV for a YUD or a YUD for a VAV is a frequent scribal error in Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts. A VAV is simply a YUD with a long tail. This scribal error is clearly not an intentional change but a common scribal error.
Now let us determine which was the original reading.
Now if we look up this passage in the BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). Here we find a footnote that reads:
“pc Mss Edd KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV, 2Mss Edd KAF-RESH-VAV cf G(S)…”
To transalate this note into lay terms it says:
“A few manuscripts read KARU (KAF-ALEF-RESH-VAV) and two manuscripts read KARU (KAF-RESH-VAV)and the Greek Septuagint has [pierced]”
In other words while MOST Masoretic Text manuscripts read KARI (“like a lion”) SEVERAL read “they have pierced” (two possible spellings) as does the Greek Septuagint.
The Greek Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Tanak that was completed by about 200 to 160 BCE.
The Peshitta Aramaic Tanak also has “they have pierced” in this passage. According to the Encyclopedia Judaica article on “Bible” The Peshitta ARamaic was produced by Jews for Assyrian and Syrian converts to Judaism in the first century BCE.
Now lets look at the oldest extant Hebrew copy of this Psalm which was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. If we look in THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS BIBLE under Psalm 22 on pages 518-519 we read:
“They have pierced my hands and my feet.”
We are directed to footnote 41 which says:
“5/6HevPs MT(mss) LXX. Like a lion are MT.”
In layman’s terms this note means:
In the Dead Sea Scroll manuscript designated “5/6HevPs”, some
Masoretic Text manuscripts and the Septuagint the reading is “they
have pierced” while most Masoretic Text manuscripts read “like a
lion are”.
A header above this section of Psalm 22 reads:
“Psalm 22 is a favorite among Christians since it is often linked in
the New Testament with the suffering and death of Jesus. A well-
known and controversial reading is found in verse 16, where the
Masoretic Text reads “Like a lion are my hands and feet,” whereas
the Septuagint has “They have pierced my hands and feet.” Among the
scrolls the reading in question is found only in the Psalms scroll
found at Nahal Hever (abreviated 5/6HevPs), which reads “They have
pierced my hands and my feet”!”
Moreover the grammar does not work for “like a lion” since the phrase would lake a verb. Many insert additional words to MAKE the text read “Like a lion [they are at] my hands and my feet”. The understood verb of being does not work here because “Like a lion are my hand and my feet” makes about as much sense as “Like a pizza are my hands and my feet”.
OK lets review the facts:
1. Only the Masoretic Text (which originated in the 9th Century CE)
has “like a lion” and even then some copies have “they have pierced”.
2. ALL other versions INCLUDING the Greek Septuagent and Aramaic
Peshitta Tanak read “they have pierced”.
3. The error itself is an accidental scribal error and NOT an
intentional change.
4. By far the OLDEST Hebrew copy of the Psalm from the Dead Sea
Scrolls reads “they have pierced”
5. The reading “like a lion” does not fit the grammar.
6. Several copies and versions from BEFORE the life of Yeshua
have “they have pierced” and NO copy or version prior to the 9th
century CE has “like a lion.”
Tovia Singer’s claims, once again, are without merit. The reading “they have pierced” existed BEFORE Christianity existed, the scribal error in question was clearly NOT intentional and the textual evidence points STRONGLY to “they have pierced” as the original reading.
The truth is that Psalm 22 is a prophecy of the suffering of Messiah and verse 17(16) speaks specifically of the crucifixion of Messiah, having his hands and his feet pierced, pointing clearly to Yeshua as having fulfilled this amazingly clear prophecy.
Of Whom Does the Prophet Speak?
(Who is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53?)
By
James Scott Trimm
Tovia Singer and other anti-mssionaries argue that the “Suffering Servant” figure of Isaiah 53 is not a Messianic prophecy at all, and speaks instead only about Israel.
In fact the Suffering Servant Song (Is. 52:7-53:12) is the fourth of four “Servant Songs” in Isaiah. These four servant songs are to be found in:
Isaiah 42:1-9
Isaiah 49:1-12
Isaiah 50:4-11
and Isaiah 52:7-53:12
Now before we look at Is. 52:7-53:12 we should first look at the first three servant songs in Isaiah. Let us first look at Is. 42:1-9:
1 Behold My servant, whom I uphold; My chosen, in whom My soul delights:I have put
My spirit upon him; he shall make the right to go forth to the nations.
2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the dimly burning wick shall he not
quench: he shall make the right to go forth according to the truth.
4 He shall not fail nor be crushed, till he has set the right in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his Torah.
5 Thus says El YHWH, He that created the heavens and stretched them forth, He that spread forth the earth and that which comes out of it, He that gives breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
6 I YHWH have called you in righteousness, and have taken hold of your hand, and kept you, and set you for a covenant of the people, for a light of the nations.
7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
8 I am YHWH, that is My Name: and My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.
9 Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them.
(Is. 42:1-9 HRV)
Is. 42:1 says:
Behold my servant, whom I uphold;
my elect in whom my soul delights;
I have put my spirit upon him;
he shall bring forth judgement to the Gentiles.
This is a close parallel to another passage in Isaiah:
And the Spirit of YHWH shall rest upon him…
with righteousness shall he judge…
(Is. 11:2, 4)
Now EVERYONE agrees that Is. 11:1f speaks of the Messiah and it is clear that Is.
42:1 speaks of the same individual. (Also Is. 61:1 is parallel.)
Ok now lets look at Is. 49:1-12:
1 Listen, O isles, unto me: and hearken, you peoples, from far. YHWH has called me from the womb, from the innermost parts of my mother, has He made mention of my name.
2 And He has made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand has He hid me, and He has made me a polished shaft. In His quiver has He concealed me,
3 And He said unto me: You are My servant, Yisra’el, in whom I will be glorified.
4 But I said, I have labored in vain. I have spent my strength for nought and
vanity: yet surely my right is with YHWH, and my recompense with my Elohim.
5 And now, says YHWH, that formed me from the womb to be His servant; to bring Ya’akov back to Him, and that Yisra’el be gathered unto Him: for I am honorable in the eyes of YHWH, and my Elohim is become my strength.
6 Yes, He says: It is too light a thing, that you should be My servant to raise up the tribes of Ya’akov, and to restore the offspring of Yisra’el. I will also give you for a light of the nations, that My salvation may be unto the end of the earth.
7 Thus says YHWH, the Redeemer of Yisra’el, his Set-apart One, to him who is despised of men, to him who is abhorred of the nation, to a servant of rulers: kings shall see and arise; princes, and they shall prostrate themselves, because of YHWH that is faithful, even HaKadesh of Yisra’el, who has chosen you.
8 Thus says YHWH: In an acceptable time have I answered you, and in a day of salvation have I helped you, and I will preserve you, and give you for a covenant of the people: to raise up the land; to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9 Saying to the prisoners, Go forth. To them that are in darkness, Show yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and in all high hills shall be their pasture.
10 They shall not hunger nor thirst, neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for He that has compassion on them will lead them, even by the springs of water will He guide them.
11 And I will make all My mountains–a way–and My highways shall be raised on high.
12 Behold, these shall come from far, and behold, these from the north and from the west, and these from the land of Sinim.
(Is. 49:1-12 HRV)
It is the claim of the anti missionaries that 49:3 closes the case and clearly identifies the Servant as Israel. However in context that identification must be allegorical. In Is. 49:1-12 the servant is clearly NOT literally Israel because in verses 5 & 6 the servant brings Jacob (Israel) back to YHWH; raises up the tribes of Israel and restore the preserved of Israel. Clearly then the next two verses reveal that the servant is NOT Israel. So why does Is. 49:3 make that identification? Because their is an allegorical relationship Between Messiah and Israel. Both for example are the Son of Elohim. Both had miraculous births. Both were taken into Egypt to save them in their youth. Both were called out of Egypt. Rome tried to kill both of them. etc.
In verse 7 most translations state that a “nation” abhors the servant. However some Rabbinic translations (JPS and Sonicio) state that the “nations” abhor the servant. This makes a big difference. If the word is singular “nation” then by context the “nation” would be Israel. Thus proving once again that the servant is not Israel because Israel cannot abhor Israel. However if the reading is “nations” then this fits with the Rabbinic interpretation that the servant is Israel and that in Is. 53 Israel is being oppressed by the nations. So one must ask: who is being honest? This is pivotal. Is the word “nation(s)” in Is. 49:7 plural or singular? The word is in the Hebrew SINGULAR thus proving once again that the servant is NOT Israel. The Rabbinics have actually CHANGED the text of Is. 49:7 so as to make it fit with their theory.
4 The Adonai YHWH has given me the tongue of them that are taught, that I should know how to sustain with words, him that is weary. He wakens morning by morning. He wakens my ear to hear, as they that are taught.
5 The Adonai YHWH has opened my ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away backward.
6 I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.
7 For the Adonai YHWH will help me, therefore have I not been confounded. Therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed.
8 He is near that justifies me: who will contend with me? Let us stand up together: who is my adversary? Let him come near to me.
9 Behold, the Adonai YHWH will help me: who is he that shall condemn me? Behold, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up.
10 Who is among you that fears YHWH, that obeys the voice of His servant, though he walks in darkness, and has no light? Let him trust in the Name of YHWH, and stay upon his Elohim.
11 Behold, all you that kindle a fire; that gird yourselves with firebrands. Begone in the flame of your fire, and among the brands that you have kindled. This shall you have of My hand: you shall lie down in sorrow.
(Is. 50:4-11)
Finally lets look at Is. 52:7-53:12
7 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messengers of good tidings--that announces peace, the harbinger of good tidings; that announces salvation; that says unto Tziyon, Your Elohim reigns!
8 Hark! Your watchmen! They lift up the voice. Together do they sing, for they shall see eye to eye, YHWH returning to Tziyon.
9 Break forth into joy; sing together, you waste places of Yerushalayim: for YHWH has comforted His people; He has redeemed Yerushalayim.
10 YHWH has made bare, His Set-Apart arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our Elohim.
11 Depart you! Depart you! Go you out from thence. Touch no unclean thing; go you out of the midst of her. Be you clean, you that bear the vessels of YHWH.
12 For you shall not go out in haste, neither shall you go by flight: for YHWH will go before you, and the Elohim of Yisra’el will be your rearward.
13 Behold, My servant shall prosper: he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.
14 According as many were appalled at him,135 so marred was his visage unlike that of a man: and his form, unlike that of the sons of men.
15 So shall he sprinkle many nations: kings shall shut their mouths because of him, for that which had not been told them, shall they see, and that which they had not heard, shall they perceive.
1 Who would have believed our report? And to whom has the arm of YHWH been revealed?
2 For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of a dry ground. He had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him.
3 He was despised, and forsaken of men–a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4 Surely our diseases He did bear, and our pains He carried: whereas we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of Elohim, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced because of our transgressions; He was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon Him, and with His stripes, we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned every one to his own way, and YHWH has made to light on Him, the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, though He humbled Himself, and opened not His mouth. As a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb: yes, He opened not His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away, and with His generation who did reason? For He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
9 And He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich, His tomb: although He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased YHWH to crush Him. He has put Him to suffering to see if His soul would offer itself, as a guilt offering: that He might see His seed, prolong His days, and that the purpose of YHWH might prosper by His hand.
11 From the travail of His soul, He shall see light, and shall be satisfied in His understanding. My Righteous servant shall justify many, and their iniquities, He bears.
12 Therefore will I divide Him a portion among the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the mighty, because He bared His soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors: yet He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
(Is. 52:7-53:12 HRV)
The key questions are:
Who is the speaker?
Who is the servant?
Who is “we”?
Who is “he”?
OK who is the speaker?
Three answers have been proposed:
1. Isaiah
2. YHWH
3. The Gentile Kings of the Earth
We will examine number 1 last.
First: Is the speaker YHWH?
The speaker cannot be YHWH because the speaker has sins (53:6)
Second: Is the speaker The Gentile Kings of the Earth (As Tovia Singer claims) ?
The speaker cannot be the Gentile Kings because:
1. The chiastic structure in 52:7, 10; 53:1 reveals the speaker is the
same as the individual on the mountains in 52:7 which NO ONE claims is the Gentile Kings.
Is. 52:7
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him
that brings goodnews,
that publishes peace;
that brings goodnews of good,
that publishes salvation,
that says to Zion: “Your God reigns!”
Is. 52:10
A. YHWH
B. has made bare his holy arm
C. in the eyes of all the nations
C. and all the ends of the earth
B. shall see the salvation
A. of our God.
Is. 53:1
Who has believed our report?
And to whom is the arm of YHWH revealed?
Clearly the “arm of YHWH” in 53:1 is the “report” of 53:1
Clearly the “arm of YHWH” in 53:1 is “his holy arm” in 52:10
Clearly “see the salvation” of 52:10 is “bare his holy arm” of 52:10
Clearly the “publishes salvation” of 52:7 = “see the salvation” of 52:10
Therefore the “report” of 53:1f is being given by the figure on the mountains who is certainly NOT the Gentile Kings.
2. The text of 52:15 specificly tells us that the Gentile kings are silent they have nothing to say, they are NOT delivering a report. If it was important that we think that the speaker was the Gentile kings of 2:15 then why would YHWH have the text tell us they are silent. in fact the Targum actually states that the kings “shall be silent because of him”
The speaker is Isaiah. In fact there is no reason not to believe that the speaker is Isaiah.
Now who is the servant?
Is the servant Israel?
The servant cannot be Israel because:
1. The servant is a voluntary sufferer (Is. 53:7, 12b)
2. The servant is contrasted with the speaker who counts
himself with a group (Israel) saying “we” throughout.
(Is. 53:6) If “we” is Israel and “we” is being contrasted
with “he” then “he” the servant cannot be Israel.
3. The servant is an innocent sufferer (53:6, 9) but Israel
has guilt. Israel suffers BECAUSE we have sinned
(see Deut. 28-29 and Lev. 26)
53:10 says “he shall see his seed” and anti-missionaries make much of this. They say that zera cannot be used allegorically. Infact the word zera (seed) is used allegorically in Jewish literature to refer to the scattered tribes. In fact the Targum on this passage understands “seed” allegorically and paraphrases it “the Kingdom of their Messiah”. In fact then term seed is used allegorically in the very next chapter (Is. 54:1-3)
In the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text Isaiah 53:11 has a serious grammatical problem.
The Hebrew of the Masoretic Text reads literally:
From the travail of his soul he shall see ________
shall be satisfied in his understanding.
My Righteous servant shall justify many
and their iniquities he bears.
There is very clearly a missing word in the Hebrew resulting in two verbs in a row “shall see” and “shall be satisfied”. What shall he see? Now the missing word “light” DOES appear in the Septuagint and has also now turned up in two Hebrew copies of Isaiah found at Qumran.
The passage SHOULD read (as it does in the HRV):
From the travail of his soul he shall see light
and shall be satisfied in his understanding.
My Righteous servant shall justify many
and their iniquities he bears.
(Is. 53:11 HRV translation)
In fact the Targum Jonthan to Isaiah plainly proclaims the servant of the Suffering Servant Song in Isaiah to be the Messiah:
Behold, My Servant the Messiah shall prosper;
he shall be exalted and great and very powerful.
(Targum Jonathan on Is. 52:13)
It is the will of the Lord to purify and to acquit
as innocent the remnant of His people, to cleanse
their souls of sin, so that they may see the Kingdom
of their Messiah, have many sons and daughters,
enjoy long life, and observe the Torah of the Lord,
prospering according to his will.
(Targum Jonathan on Is. 53:10)
The Babylonian Talmud also applies this section of Isaiah as speaking of the Messiah:
The Rabanan say that that Messiah’s name is the Suffering
Scholar of Rabbi’s House (or the Leper Scholar) for it is
written, “Surely he has born our grief and carried our sorrows,
yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.”
(Is. 53:4)
(b.San. 98a)
The Messiah- what is his name?Š The House of Rabbi Judah the
Holy One says: The Sick OneŠ “Surely he has born our sicknesses”
(Is. 53:4)
(b.San. 98b)
Rabbi Joshua came upon the prophet Elijah as he was standing
at the entrance of Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai’s cave. He asked him:
“When is the Messiah coming?” The other replied: “Go and ask
him yourself.” “Where shall I find him?” “Before the gates
of Rome.” “By what sign shall I know him?” “He is sitting
among the poor people and covered with wounds.”(see Is. 53:5)
(b.San. 98a)
The same application is made in the Midrash Rabbah:
Rabbi Jose the Galilean says: Great is peace-for
at the hour the King Messiah reveals himself unto Israel,
he will begin in no other way than with “peace” as it is
written: “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of
the messenger of goodnews, that announces peace.” (Is. 52:7)
(Perek HaShalom in some Talmud editions and Numbers Rabbah XI, 16-20)
Rambam says:
Regarding the mission by which Messiah will present himself
Isaiah states, “He grew like a tender plant and as a root
out of dry land At him will kings shut their mouths,
for what had not been told unto them shall they see,
and what they never heard shall they understand.”
(Is. 52:15-53:2)
Perhaps most interesting is the application of Isaiah 53 to the Messiah in the Zohar:
In the Garden of Eden there is a hall that is called the
“hall of the afflicted.” Now it is into this hall that
the Messiah goes and summons all the afflictions and pains
and sufferings of Israel to come upon him. And so they all
come upon him. And had he not eased the children of Israel
of their sorrow, and taken their burden upon himself, there
would be none who could endure the suffering of Israel
in penalty of neglecting the Torah. Thus it is written:
“Surely our diseases he did bear and our pains he carried.”
(Is. 53:5) As long as the children of Israel dwelt in the
Holy Land, they averted all afflictions and sufferings from
the world by the service of the sanctuary and by sacrifice.
But now it is the Messiah who is averting them from the
habitants of the world.
(Zohar 2:212a)
The Messiah like the service of the sanctuary and the sacrifice has taken upon himself the sins of Israel. Messiah is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 52:7-53:12
3 He was despised, and forsaken of men–a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4 Surely our diseases He did bear, and our pains He carried: whereas we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of Elohim, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced because of our transgressions; He was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon Him, and with His stripes, we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned every one to his own way, and YHWH has made to light on Him, the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, though He humbled Himself, and opened not His mouth. As a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb: yes, He opened not His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away, and with His generation who did reason? For He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
(Isaiah 53:3-8 HRV)
In fact Yeshua is actually identified with his name actually encoded in the prophecy of Isaiah 53. If we start with the sixth to the last YOD in Isaiah 53:10 and count every 20th letter going from left to right, we spell YESHUA SHMI “Yeshua is my name”,
In the Zohar we read of Isaiah 53:13:
R. Simeon further discoursed on the text: Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high (Is. 52:13). ‘Happy is the portion of the righteous’, he said, ‘to whom the Holy One reveals the ways of the Torah that they may walk in them. This verse contains an esoteric meaning. When God created the world, He made the moon, and made her small, for she possesses no light of her own, but because she accepted her diminution she receives reflected light from the sun and from the other superior luminaries.
(Zohar 1:181a)
Now to fully understand Rabbi Simeon’s meaning here, we must look to another passage in the Zohar:
It is strange that the Messiah should be called “poor” [in Zech. 9:9]. R. Simeon explained that it is because he has nothing of his own, and he is compared to the holy moon above, which has no light save from the sun. This Messiah will have dominion and will be established in his place. Below he is “poor”, because he is of the side of the moon, and above he is poor, being a “mirror which does not radiate”, “the bread of poverty”. Yet withal he “rides upon an ass and upon a colt”, to overthrow the strength of the Gentiles; and God will keep him firm.
(Zohar 1:238a)
So we can see plainly that Rabbi Simeon in the Zohar is identifying the servant of Isaiah 52:13 as the Messiah.
Now as we continue to read our initial passage of the Zohar (1:181a) the passage immediately continues with:
Now, as long as the Temple existed, Israel were assiduous in bringing offerings, which together with all the other services performed by the priests, Levites, and Israelites had for their object to weave bonds of union and to cause luminaries to radiate.
(Zohar 1:181a)
This brings us to another passage in which the Zohar alludes to the “servant” of Isaiah 52 and 53 saying:
In the Garden of Eden there is a hall that is called the
“hall of the afflicted.” Now it is into this hall that
the Messiah goes and summons all the afflictions and pains
and sufferings of Israel to come upon him. And so they all
come upon him. And had he not eased the children of Israel
of their sorrow, and taken their burden upon himself, there
would be none who could endure the suffering of Israel
in penalty of neglecting the Torah. Thus it is written:
“Surely our diseases he did bear and our pains he carried.”
(Is. 53:5) As long as the children of Israel dwelt in the
Holy Land, they averted all afflictions and sufferings from
the world by the service of the sanctuary and by sacrifice.
But now it is the Messiah who is averting them from the
habitants of the world.
(Zohar 2:212a)
Our initial passage of Zohar (1:181a-b) continues:
But after the Temple was destroyed there was a darkening of the lights, the moon ceased to receive light from the sun, the latter having withdrawn himself from her, so that not a day passes but is full of grievous distress and afflictions. The time, however, will come for the moon to resume her primordial light, and in allusion to this it is written: “Behold, my servant will prosper.” That is to say, there will be a stirring in the upper realms as of one who catches a sweet odour and stands alert. “He shall be exalted”, from the side of the most exalted luminaries; “and lifted up”, from the side of Abraham; “and shall be high”, from the side of Isaac; “very”, from the side of Jacob. At that time, then, the Holy One will cause a stirring on high with the object of enabling the moon to shine with her full splendour, as we read: “Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of the seven days” (Ibid. XXX, 26). There will thus be added to the moon an exalted spirit whereby all the dead that are in the dust will be awakened. This is the esoteric meaning of “my servant”, viz. the one that has in his hand the key of his Master.
(Zohar 1:181a-181b)
The Zohar tells us that the revealing of Messiah is like the revealing of the moon. Initially the moon cannot be seen, however in time the moon is gradually restored to its full light. So it is with Messiah, and when the Messiah is fully revealed, the resurrection will take place.
We read in Matthew:
38 Behold, your house is forsaken; to you desolate.
39 And I tell you, that you will not see Me here after,
until you say,
Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!
(Matt. 23:38-39)
Of course this is quoting Ps. 118:26:
“Blessed be he that comes in the Name of YHWH; we bless you out of the House of YHWH.” (Ps. 118:26).
Above this is the phrase “the stone the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone” (Ps. 118:22)
Now we read in the Zohar concerning the stone that the builders rejected:
David, indeed, was king in this world and will be king in the time to come; hence “the stone the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone”. For, when the sun turns away his face from the moon, and does not shine upon her, she has no light whatever and so does not shine, but is poverty-stricken and dark on all sides; but when the sun turns towards her and radiates his light upon her, then her face is illumined and she adorns herself for him as a woman for a man. She thus is then invested with the dominion of the world. So David adorned himself after this very manner. Now he would appear poor and dejected, but then again he would be revelling in riches. Hence David’s declaration, “I am small and despised, yet have I not forgotten thy precepts.” It behoves, indeed, every man to follow this example and to humble himself in every respect so as to become a vessel in which the Holy One, blessed be He, may find delight. This lesson has also been expounded in connection with the phrase, “with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit’ (Isa. LVII, 15).’
(Zohar 2:232b)
The Zohar says that when this stone is rejected “the sun turns away his face from the moon, and does not shine upon her.”
Earlier the Zohar says:
So it says: AND HIS HAND HAD HOLD ON ESAU’S HEEL , i.e he put his hand on Esau’s heel in order thereby to force him down. According to another explanation, the words “and his hand had hold” imply that he could not escape him entirely, but his hand was still clinging to his brother’s heel. Esoterically speaking, the moon was obscured through the heel of Esau; hence it was necessary to deal with him cunningly, so as to thrust him downwards and make him adhere to the region assigned to him.’
(Zohar 1:138a)
The moon is obscured “through the heel of Esau”, and therefore the stone is rejected “through the heel of Esau” because the sun “turns away his face”.
And to whom does the sun refer:
Moses asked: ‘ Shall they remain in pledge for ever?’ God replied: ‘No, only Until the sun appears’ that is, till the coming of the Messiah; for it says, But unto you that fear My name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing in its wings (Mal.3:20).
(Midrash Rabba Ex. 31:10)
So what does this mean?
It points us to Gen. 25:26 which reads:
And after that, came forth his brother. And his hand had hold on Esav’s heel, and his name was called Ya’akov. And Yitz’chak was threescore years old when she bore them.
If we take the first letter of each word (a process called Notarikon) starting with the name Ya’akov (Jacob) and ending with Esav (Esau) going backwards we spell the name YESHUA, and if we continue through the next two words we read “Yeshua comes.”
So the moon is obscured in shining the light of Messiah by the heal of Esau.
Now the last letter in YESHUA in the Hebrew is an AYIN and that is the initial letter of the name ESAU in “Esau’s heel”. So if the heal of “Esau” is taken from YESHUA we have “YESHU”.
“Yeshu” is a name used in Rabbinic Judaism which refers to the anathema Rabbinic Judaism associates with Yeshua.
For Rabbinic Jews is is a acronym for a curse on the name of Yeshua meaning “may the name be blotted out forever”.
But Yeshua said:
38 Behold, your house is forsaken; to you desolate.
39 And I tell you, that you will not see Me here after,
until you say,
Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!
(Matt. 23:38-39)
They will say “Blessed is He that comes in the Name of YHWH!” (Ps. 118:26) when they accept the “stone that the builder rejected” (Ps. 118:22). This happens when the AYIN is restored to the name YESHUA, the reversal of the anathema, thus the Messiah, the Sun of Righteousness, will shine his light on the moon, which was obscured by the “heel of Esau”. And when the “heel of Esau” no longer obscures the “Sun of Righteousness” and YESHU is restored to YESHUA, then we can clearly see that “Yeshua comes”!
Our original Zohar passage continues:
So, too, in the verse: “And Abraham said unto his servant, etc.” (Gen. 24:2), the servant is an allusion to the moon as already explained. Also, the servant is identical with Metatron, who is the servant and messenger of his Master, and who was, as we read further, the elder of his house, the same who is alluded to in the text: “I have been young, and now am old” (Ps. 37:25). “That ruled over all that he had”; this applies to the same Metatron by reason of his displaying the three colours, green, white, and red. “Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh”; this is symbolic of the foundation of the world, for this servant was destined to bring to life again the dwellers in the dust, and to be made the messenger by the spirit from on high to restore the spirits and souls to their places, to the bodies that were decomposed underneath the dust.
(Zohar 1:181b)
The Zohar also identifies the Metatron as the “Middle Pillar”
The Middle Pillar [of the Godhead] is Metatron,
Who has accomplished peace above,
according to the glorious state there.
(Zohar 3:227)
And according to the Zohar the Middle Pillar is the Son of Yah:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead,
which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
And what is the Middle Pillar? The Zohar says:
Concerning this, too, it is written: “Let there be light, and there was light” (Gen. I, 3). Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right. The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And Elohim separated between the light and between the darkness” (Ibid.).
(Zohar 2:167a)
And:
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
Lowly, and Riding Upon an Ass
By
James Scott Trimm
In the book of Zechariah we read the following prophecy:
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Tziyon!
Shout, O daughter of Yerushalayim!
Behold, your king comes unto you:
He is triumphant, and victorious, lowly,
and riding upon an ass—
even upon a colt, the foal of an ass.
(Zech. 9:9 HRV)
Both Matthew and Yochanan (John) cite this verse as a Messianic prophecy fulfilled by Yeshua (Matt. 21:1-7; Jn. 12:14-15). Matthew cites the passage as follows:
1 And when they came near to Yerushalayim, and had come to Beit Pagey, to the mount of Olives, then sent Yeshua two talmidim,
2 And said to them: Go to the enclosure which is before you. And right away you will find there an ass tied, and a foal by her side: loose and bring [them] to Me.
3 And if any man say anything to you, you will say that, My Master has need of them: and immediately he will let them go.
4 And this was to establish what was spoken by the prophet, who said,
5 Say to the daughter of Zion, Behold your king comes to you: poor, and riding upon an ass–even upon a foal, the offspring of an ass. (Zech. 9:9)
6 And the talmidim went, and did as Yeshua commanded them:
7 And brought the ass, and the foal, and they put upon them their garments, and mounted Him thereon.
(Matt. 21:1-7 HRV)
Zech. 9:9 is also cited as a Messianic prophecy in the Talmud:
R. Alexandri said: Rabbi Joshua opposed two verses:
Is is written: And behold, one like the son of man
came with the clouds of heaven. (Dan. 7:13)
Whilst it is written: [behold, your king comes to you...]
lowely, and riding upon an ass! (Zech. 9:9)
(b.San. 98a)
As well as in the Midrash Rabba:
AND I HAVE AN OX, AND AN ASS, etc. (Gen. 32:6)….
ASS refers to the royal Messiah, for it says of him,
Lowly, and riding upon an ass (Zech. 9:9);
(Genesis Rabbah LXXXV:6)
The early “Church Father” Justin Martyr recounts the story with some added detail. Since Justin Martyr elsewhere recounts a story with added detail drawn from the Goodnews according to the Hebrews (but without citing that Gospel) (see notes to Mt. 3:16 for example) it has been proposed that the following citation may also have drawn details from the Goodnews according to the Hebrews:
The prophecy, “binding his foal to the vine, and washing his
robe in the blood of the grape” (Gen. 49:11), was a significant
symbol of the things that were to happen to Messiah, and what
he was to do. For the foal of an ass stood bound to a vine at
the entrance of a village, and he ordered his acquaintances to
bring it to him then; and when it was brought, he mounted and
sat upon it, and entered Jerusalem.
(Justin Martyr; Apol. 32)
Notice this account also ties the same account to a fulfillment of “binding his foal to the vine, and washing his robe in the blood of the grape” (Gen. 49:11).
The Midrash Rabbah also ties these same verses (Zech. 9:9 & Gen. 49:11) together as Messianic Prophecy:
BINDING HIS FOAL (‘IRO) UNTO THE VINE (Gen. 49:11)…. R. Nehemiah interpreted: BINDING ‘IRO UNTO THE VINE means: He [God] binds to the vine [sc. Israel] ‘iro, which alludes to, ‘the city (ha-’ir) which I have chosen. AND BENI ATHONO UNTO THE CHOICE VINE means: [morally] strong sons (banim ethanim) will spring from him. The Rabbis interpreted: ‘I,’ [said God], ‘am bound to the vine and the choice vine [Israel]. HIS FOAL AND HIS COLT intimate: when he will come of whom it is written, Lowly, and riding upon an ass, even upon a colt the foal of an ass (Zech. 9:9). HE WASHETH HIS GARMENTS IN WINE, intimates that he [the Messiah] will compose for them words of Torah; AND HIS VESTURE IN THE BLOOD OF GRAPES-that he will restore to them their errors.
(Genesis Rabbah XCVIII:9)
The Zohar also ties these same verses (Zech. 9:9 & Gen. 49:11) together as Messianic Prophecy:
Binding his foal unto the vine. (Gen. 49:11)
The vine is the community of Israel, so called also in the verse:
“You did remove a vine from Egypt” (Ps. 80:9).
By “his foal” is meant the Messiah, …
Hence it is written of him that he will be
“poor and riding on an ass and on
a young ass’s colt” (Zech. 9:9)
“Colt” and “ass” are two crowns by virtue of which the
Gentiles have dominion….
he rides upon an ass and upon a colt, to overthrow
the strength of the Gentiles…
(Zohar 1:238a)
Anti-missionary Singer insists that the Gospels misinterpret this verse by understanding “an ass— even upon a colt, the foal of an ass” as two animals while Singer insists that they can only be understood as one animal being described twice. However the Zohar clearly understands these as two animals as well saying “‘Colt’ and ‘ass’ are two crowns” (Zohar 1:238a).
The Zohar also ties Gen. 49:11 to “You did remove a vine from Egypt” (Ps. 80:9). This is a reference back to Torah which says:
22 Yosef is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain; its branches run over the wall.
23 The archers have dealt bitterly with him, and shot at him, and hated him,
24 But his bow abode firm. And the arms of his hands were made supple by the hands of the Mighty One of Ya’akov; from there, from the Shepherd–the Stone of Yisra’el.
25 Even by the El of your father who shall help you, and by Shaddai, who shall bless you with blessings of heaven above: blessings of the deep that couches beneath; blessings of the breasts, and of the womb.
26 The blessings of your father are mighty, beyond the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills. They shall be They shall be on the head of Yosef, and on the crown of the head of the prince, among his brothers.
(Gen. 49:22-26 HRV))
Now just a few verses above this we read:
9 Y’hudah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, you are gone up. He stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as a lioness: who shall rouse him up?
10 The scepter shall not depart from Y’hudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes. And unto him, shall the obedience of the peoples be.
11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine, he washes his garments in wine, and his vesture in the blood of grapes.
12 His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.
(Gen. 49:9-12 HRV)
Who is this “Shiloh”?
This Gemara also asks “What is Messiah’s name?” Rabbi Shila offers the answer: “His name is Shiloh, for it is written, ‘until Shiloh comes.” (b.San. 98b)
This Gemara is citing Genesis 49:10:
The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
nor the staff from between his feet,
until Shiloh comes;
and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
The Targums (Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and Yerushalmi) all have “until Messiah comes” in place of “until Shiloh comes”.
The word “Shiloh” has a gematria (numerical value) of 345 which is the same as the value of “HaShem” (“the name”) and El Shaddai. The phrase “Shiloh comes” has a gematria of 358 which is the same as the gematria for “Messiah and “Moses” (because the Messiah is “the prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:18). This is because “the name” of Messiah is imbedded in the phrase “until Shiloh comes.”
The Zohar says of Gen. 49:10:
…”the scepter” referring to the Messiah of the House of Judah,
and “the staff” to the Messiah of the House of Joseph.
“Until Shiloh comes”, this is Moses, the gematria of Shiloh
and Moses being the same [358].
(Zohar 1:25)
The word Shiloh, here, is spelt with both a yod and a he,
to allude to the holy supernal name, Yah,
by which the Shekinah shall rise…
(Zohar 1:237)
Thus the Zohar teaches us that in Genesis 49:10 we have the two Messiahs (or the two comings of Messiah) represented as a “scepter” and a “staff” which are one “Shiloh” and that the one “Shiloh” has Yah within him.
Now if we look at the Hebrew of the phrase “…Shiloh comes and…” (in the Hebrew it is literally “…comes Shiloh and…”) the first letter from each word in the Hebrew spells “Yeshu” which is the Aramaic and Galilean pronunciation of “Yeshua” (later Rabbis lampooned this fact by making another acronym from YESHU meaning “may his name be blotted out forever”).
You may notice a parallel between the “scepter” and “staff” of the two Messiah’s and the “two sticks” of the two houses of Israel in Ezekiel 37.
Note the fact that the figure called Shiloh binds his foal upon a vine, clearly the vine is Yosef mentioned just a few verses later that grows over the wall (Gen. 49:22) or as we read in Psalm 80:8, 11, the “sea”:
9 (80:8) You did pluck up a vine out of Egypt, You did drive out the nations, and did plant it.
10 (80:9) You did clear a place before it, and it took deep root, and filled the land.
11 (80:10) The mountains were covered with the shadow of it, and the mighty cedars with the boughs thereof.
12 (80:11) She sent out her branches unto the sea, and her shoots unto the River.
(Ps. 80:9-12(8-11))
Notice that we have the two primary tribes of the two Houses of Israel here, representing the two comings of Messiah. Here we also have represented the two comings of Messiah, as they parallel the Rabbinic Two Messiah Theory.
KISS THE SON
THE DECEPTION OF TOVIA SINGER
By
James Scott Trimm
In Psalm 2 we read:
The kings of the earth stand up,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against YHWH, and against His Messiah:…
I will tell of the decree:
YHWH said to me: “You are My Son,”
This day have I begotten you….
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry…
(Ps. 2:2, 7, 12)
Now in his deceptive anti-Missionary tape set titled (wrongly) “Lets Get Biblical” Tovia Singer refers to Psalm 2:12 saying “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.”
Tovia goes on to say:
“What we do is we look at all the other places where the word BAR exists and what I did for you is I did you a favor. I showed you every single place where the word BAR appears in the Book of Psalms and you will notice that isn’t it odd that the King James Bible everywhere that the word appears in all its forms is always translated cleanliness or purity? Why if that word truly means son or sonship why isn’t it translated that way in other places?”
Notice here that Singer plays a shell game. He starts out suggesting “we look at all the other places where the word BAR exists” then he leads you to believe that he has done this for you, but he has played a switch on you for what he actually has done instead is “showed you every single place where the word BAR appears in the Book of Psalms”. Then he switches back claiming to have shown that “everywhere that the word appears in all its forms is always translated cleanliness or purity”. And then poses the question “Why if that word truly means son or sonship why isn’t it translated that way in other places?”.
So he begins by telling you that we need to look at EVERY passage where the word appears, he then shows you ONLY the passages where the word appears in Psalms, then he CLAIMS to have proven that BAR is always translated “cleanliness or purity” and never as “son”.
The reason for this deception is that Singer knows full well that if we were to enlarge the search by even looking at the neighboring book of Proverbs we would find Proverbs 31:2 where we read:
“What, my son? And what, O son of my womb? And what, O son of my vows?”
(Proverbs 31:2 Jewish Publication Society version)
Every translation I have ever seen, be it Jewish, Christian or Secular renders BAR as “son” in this verse. So now you see why Singer plays the shell game. He has to tell you that he is showing you “all the other places where the word BAR exists” while he really only looks at the book of Psalms, and then he pretends to have shown you “everywhere where the word appears” for the sole purpose of deceiving you, because he cannot honestly look at all of the passages, or even to the neighboring book of Proverbs or you could plainly see that the word BAR can be and is translated from Hebrew as “son”, even in Jewish sources.
In fact Jewish sources attest to “son” as a meaning of BAR in Hebrew even though Singer claims “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.” In the Student’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary to the Old Testament by Alexander Harkavy published by the Hebrew Publishing Company in 1914 (and currently available in reprint in our bookstore at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds) we read “In Heb. BAR [as Aramaic for "son"] occurs only in poetry Pr. 31,2.”
(p. 68 column 8). The reader may notice that Psalms is also poetry, so Singer is plain wrong when he declares “The word BAR in Hebrew does not quite mean ‘son’.”.
In fact the tenth century Jewish scholar Abraham Ibn ‘Ezra writes in his commentary on this very passage:
“Serve YHWH” (Ps. 2:7) refers to YHWH’ and “kiss the son (BAR)” (Ps. 2:12) refers to His Messiah; and behold the presence of BAR, is like that of “What, my son (BAR)…”
(Prov. 31:2)”
Notice Ibn ‘Ezra not only understands BAR here to mean “son” but identifies this “son:” as the Messiah!
BAR in Psalm 2:12 is also understood to mean “son” in the Zohar:
We may also translate, “he who withholds blessings from the Son”, whom the Father and Mother have crowned and blessed with many blessings, and concerning whom they commanded, “Kiss the son lest he be angry” (Ps. II, 12), since he is invested both with judgement (gevurah) and with mercy (chesed).
(Zohar 3:191b)
This “son” referenced in the Zohar is the Middle Pillar of the Godhead which the Zohar identifies as “The Son of Yah”. The Zohar describes the three pillars of the Godhead as follows:
Then Elohim said, “Let thee be light; and there was light.
And Elohim saw that the light was good…
Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and it is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right.
The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And God separated between the light and between the darkness.”…
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
The right and left pillars are assigned as Mother and Father, the middle pillar, which balances the feminine and masculine characteristics from the male and female sides, is identified in the Zohar as “the Son of Yah”. The Zohar says:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead, which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
In another Passage the Zohar has:
The Holy One, blessed be He, has a son, whose glory (tifret) shines from one end of the world to another. He is a great and mighty tree, whose head reaches heaven, and whose roots are set in the holy ground, and his name is “Mispar” and his place is in the uppermost heaven… as it is written, “The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God” (Ps. 19:1). Were it not for this “Mispar” there would be neither hosts nor offspring in any of the worlds.
(Zohar 2:105a)
This is intended to point the reader back to a familiar passage from the Bahir:
Why are they called Sephirot?
Because it is written (Psalm 19:2),
“The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God.”
(Bahir 125)
Tovia Singer’s argument is deceptive and dishonest. When the Psalm says “Kiss the Son (BAR), lest he be angry…” (Ps. 2:12) the word BAR definitely means “son”. Moreover the “son” in this verse refers to the Messiah and to the figure called in the Zohar “the Son of Yah” who is the “Middle Pillar” of the Godhead.
He Says Concerning Himself
“I am the Son of Elohim”
by
James Scott Trimm
It has been said that there are over three hundred Messianic prophecies in the Tanak. This article is, however, about an important Messianic prophecy you may never have heard of, found in the Wisdom of Solomon, a book found among those known as the Apocrypha. These are books which are considered canonical cy all pre-Protestant Christian churches. They are cited by authors of the so-called “New Testament” frequently, and quoted by the so-called “Church Fathers” right along side the others.
(For more information see The Clear Truth about the Apocrypha http://www.wnae.org/apocryphatruth.htm )
Wisdom of Solomon claims to be a book written by Solomon (Wisdom 9:7-8). Even skeptics date the book in the first or second century BCE. Over a hundred years before the life of Yeshua.
According to Melito in the second century CE, the Wisdom of Solomon was then considered canonical by both Jews and Christians. The Hebrew version of the Wisdom of Solomon is also mentioned by Ramban (1194-1270 CE) in the preface to his commentary on the Torah. He also quotes from the book.
Not only was the Wisdom of Solomon originally written in Hebrew but the original Hebrew survived until at least 1611. The original 1611 edition of the King James Version has a marginal note to the word “pricked” in Wisdom of Solomon 16:11 which says “Hebr. stung.”
Now the Greek of Wisdom 16:11 has enekentronto “they were pricked” (KJV, Brenton)
or “they were bitten” (RSV, NEB) (the NAB has “they were stung”). Now this word can be translated “stung” (as in the NAB) but it can also be translated “pricked” as the KJV translators chose to translate in the main text. The footnote indicates that that original Hebrew does in fact have a word meaning “sting” and not “prick” here. The KJV footnote would indicate that the original Hebrew word was PARASH (Strong’s 6567) the only Hebrew word for “sting” (as we see it in Prov. 23:32).
The Aramaic Peshitta translator must have misread PARASH (Strong’s 6567) “sting” as PARASH (Strong’s 6566) “to break in pieces”. The Aramaic Peshitta translator thus wrongly translated PATZAIT “split, opened”.
The Aramaic has mistranslated the original Hebrew word, and therefore could not have been translated from the Greek. This means that our Aramaic Peshitta version is an Aramaic translation made directly from the Hebrew. Since these are cognate languages with much vocabulary and grammar in common, the Aramaic translation gives us a much better witness as to the original Hebrew than does the Greek. And were it not for this one marginal note made by the original 1611 KJV translators, we would not have this proof that the Aramaic was translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek.
Conversely the mistranslation of this word in the Aramaic Peshitta proves the veracity of the KJV marginal note.
Now there is an amazing Messianic Prophecy found in The Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 which reads as follows:
12: Therefore let us trouble the Righteous One; because he is not pleasant to us, and he stands up against our doings: and he reviles us for our transgression of the Torah, and records against us the trespasses of our audacity.
13: He professes that the knowledge of Elohim is his: and he says concerning himself “I am the Son of Elohim”
14: He is a rebuker of our thoughts.
15: He is heavy upon us even to behold: because his way of life is not like others, his ways are different.
16: We are esteemed by him as impure: he abstained from our ways like from impurity: he blesses the ways and the end of the righteous, and he boasts that Elohim is his father.
17: Let us see if his words are true: and let us test him by his departure.
18: For if the Righteous One is the Son of Elohim, he will receive him, and deliver him from the hand of those who rise up against him.
19: With despitefulness and with torment let us examine him, that we may know the concern of his humility, and be harmful to him.
20: To a shameful death let us condemn him: we shall be upon him and shall question his words.
21: These insipid things they did think, and were deceived: because their own wickedness has blinded them.
22: And they did not know the mysteries of Elohim, neither hoped they for the reward of the pure, and they did not discern an old soul without blemish.
(Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 – from my ongoing work on the HRV Apocrypha- Translated from the Peshitta Aramaic)
Now lets look at this prophecy in detail. We begin with:
12: Therefore let us trouble the Righteous One; because he is not pleasant to us, and he stands up against our doings: and he reviles us for our transgression of the Torah, and records against us the trespasses of our audacity.
(Wisdom 2:12 HRV)
These verses gives a remarkable prophecy of the way Yeshua stood up against Torah transgression:
1 Then came near to Him scribes and P’rushim from Yerushalayim, saying,
2 Why do your talmidim transgress the decrees of the elders? For they clean not their hands when they eat bread.
3 But He answered them and said: And why do you transgress the commandments of Elohim–by means of your decrees?
(Matt. 15:1-3 HRV)
The Prophecy continues:
13: He professes that the knowledge of Elohim is his: and he says concerning himself “I am the Son of Elohim”
(Wisdom 2:13 HRV)
In fact both Matthew and Yochanan (John) quote Yeshua as angering many by saying “I am the Son of Elohim/Eloah”:
41 And likewise, the Chief Cohenim reviled Him, with the scribes and elders,
42 Saying, He saved others, but Himself He cannot save. If He is the king of Yisrael, let Him now come down from this gallows, and we will believe in Him.
43 He believed in Elohim, let Him deliver Him now, if He delight [in Him]: for He said, I am the Son of Elohim.
44 And so likewise the robbers, which were crucified with Him, reproached Him.
(Mt. 27:41-44 HRV)
36 To Him whom the Father sanctified and sent to the world, do you say, You blaspheme … because I told you that I am the Son of Eloah?
37 Though I do the works of My Father, you do not believe Me.
38 But if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works: that you might know and believe that My Father is in Me, and I am in My Father.
39 And they wanted to seize Him again, but He escaped from their hands.
(Jn. 10:36-39 HRV)
The prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon continues:
14: He is a rebuker of our thoughts.
(Wisdom 1:14 HRV)
This was also fulfilled by Yeshua as we read in Matthew:
4 And when Yeshua perceived their thoughts, He said: Why think you evil in your hearts?
(Mt. 9:4 HRV)
The Wisdom of Solomon continues:
15: He is heavy upon us even to behold: because his way of life is not like others, his ways are different.
16: We are esteemed by him as impure: he abstained from our ways like from impurity: he blesses the ways and the end of the righteous, and he boasts that Elohim is his father.
17: Let us see if his words are true: and let us test him by his departure.
(Wisdom 2:15-17 HRV)
This actually recalls an account in the Torah concerning the life of Joseph. When his brothers cast Joseph into the pit we read:
20 Come now therefore and let us slay him, and cast him into one of the pits. And we will say, An evil beast has devoured him. And we shall see what will become of his dreams.
(Gen. 37:20 HRV)
There is great Messianic significance to this account. Joseph’s life was a type of the first coming of Messiah which parallels the Rabbinical Messiah ben Yoseph. The Suffering Messiah is called Messiah ben Yoseph because his brothers were redeemed by his suffering.
Like Joseph the Patriarch, Yeshua was betrayed by his own for a few pieces of silver (Gen. 37:28) he was cast into “the pit” (death) and raised back up so that he might redeem his brothers, Like Joseph, Yeshua’s teaching and revelation angered his brothers, who sought to put his claims to the test by casting him into the pit (of death).
The Wisdom of Solomon continues:
18: For if the Righteous One is the Son of Elohim, he will receive him, and deliver him from the hand of those who rise up against him.
(Wisdom 2:18 HRV)
This strongly parallels a Messianic prophecy found in Psalm 22:
9 (22:8) Let him commit himself unto YHWH; let Him rescue him; let Him deliver him: seeing He delights in him.
(Ps. 22:9 (8) HRV)
And both were fulfilled by Yeshua as we read in Matthew and in Yochanan (John):
43 He believed in Elohim, let Him deliver Him now, if He delight [in Him]: for He said, I am the Son of Elohim.
(Mt. 27:43 HRV)
18 And because of this, the Judeans all the more sought to kill Him; not only because He had loosed the Sabbath, but also because He had spoken about Eloah–that He was His Father, and made His nefesh equal with Eloah.
(Jn. 5:18 HRV)
The prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon continues:
19: With despitefulness and with torment let us examine him, that we may know the concern of his humility, and be harmful to him.
20: To a shameful death let us condemn him: we shall be upon him and shall question his words.
21: These insipid things they did think, and were deceived: because their own wickedness has blinded them.
22: And they did not know the mysteries of Elohim, neither hoped they for the reward of the pure, and they did not discern an old soul without blemish.
(Wisdom 2:19-22 HRV)
This was also fulfilled by Yeshua as Ya’akov wrote:
6 You have condemned and killed the just, and he did not stand against you.
(Ya’akov (James) 5:6 HRV)
The Messianic Prophecy of Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-22 fits well right along side of prophecies like Ps. 22 and Isaiah 53 as a profound prophecy of Messiah’s role as the suffering servant Messiah ben Yoseph as fulfilled by Yeshua of Nazareth.
Yeshua's 2 1/2 Year Ministry Timeline
By
James Scott Trimm
Days of Repentance?
By
James Scott Trimm
Days of Repentance?
There are many hints that Yeshua's ministry began during the Days of Repentance.
This is implied in the fact that Yochanan was calling people to repentance and ritual immersion.
It is further implied by the fact that Yeshua spent forty days in the wilderness, which parallels the forty days of repentance which precede Yom Kippur.
It is further implied by the fact that Yeshua spent forty days in the wilderness, which parallels the forty days of repentance which precede Yom Kippur.
The Shem Tob Hebrew text of Matthew 3:11 we are told that Yochanan baptized in the "days of repentance" rather than in the "waters of repentance".
1st Passover (6 months)
John 2:23
An Unidentified Feast
(Purim?... Sukkot?...)
John 5:1
(Purim?... Sukkot?...)
John 5:1
2nd Passover (1 year and 6 months)
John 6:4
Mt. 14:13-15
John 6:4
Mt. 14:13-15
(John 6:4 This may be the one that Rood claims the scribes added... it is lacking in ms. 472 (a thirteenth Century Greek manuscript) and in a small minority of late Greek manuscripts. However itr appears in the earliest copies, it appears in the majority of late manucsripts, and it appears in both the Old Syriac and the Peshitta Aramaic texts)
Sukkot (2 years)
John 7:1-2
Channukah
John 10:22
John 10:22
Mt. 16:13-28 (Caesarea Phillipi)
(six days – Mt. 17:1)
Mt. 17:1-21 (Mount of transfiguration)
Mt. 17:22-23 (in Gallil)
Adar 15 (Day of the collection of Temple Tax)
Mt. 17:24-27
Mt. 18:1-35
Mt. 17:24-27
Mt. 18:1-35
Mt. 19:1-20:16 “coasts of Judea beyond Jordon”
Mt. 20:17-28 (Jericho?)
Mt. 20:29-34
3rd Passover (End of 2 1/2 Years)
John 11:55-57
(Nisan 9?)
Mt. 21:1-5
John 11:55-57
(Nisan 9?)
Mt. 21:1-5
YESHUA’S BIRTH: The Untold Story
By
Keith W. Stump
(Originally Published in Plain Truth Magazine Nov-Dec 1985 –
“Jesus” has been changed to “Yeshua” throughout.)
Read here the eye-opening facts about the time of Yeshua’s birth.
By
Keith W. Stump
(Originally Published in Plain Truth Magazine Nov-Dec 1985 –
“Jesus” has been changed to “Yeshua” throughout.)
Read here the eye-opening facts about the time of Yeshua’s birth.
Was Yeshua born in December? If not, when was he born? And in what year? Anyway, what difference does it make? These are questions often asked. It is time they were answered!
A Visit to Bethlehem
In late December of each year, thousands of tourists flock into the small town of Bethlehem in the Judean Hills south of Jerusalem to participate in annual Christmas celebrations there.
Some make the 6-mile journey from Jerusalem on foot. Upon arrival, they crowd with silent awe into the paved expanse of Manger Square in front of the revered Church of the Nativity, built over the traditional site of Yeshua’s birth. Inevitably, some of these tourists arrive in Israel unprepared. They have not thoroughly studied their guidebooks.
As they step off their plane, they receive a real shock! November through early March is "winter" in Israel! The weather gets cold, especially at night. Often it rains--or even snows! Yet many arrive in Israel carrying luggage bulging with summer attire, reasoning that it is always hot and arid in the Middle East. So they hurriedly purchase coats and sweaters in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem for their pilgrimage down to Bethlehem.
Nevertheless, most of those who stand in Manger Square on December 25 each year--prepared and unprepared alike--fail to perceive the message being proclaimed by the very weather around them!
Notice this plain testimony of your Bible: On the day of Yeshua’s birth "there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night" (Luke 2:8). The shepherds were living out in the open fields, tending their flock through the night.
The point? Ask any biblical scholar, or any modern Israeli: This never could have occurred in Judea in the month of December--nor even in November, or late October for that matter! In ancient times as today, shepherds brought their flocks in from the fields and penned them in shelters not later than the middle of October! This was necessary to protect them from the cold, rainy season that usually followed that date. (The Bible itself makes it clear that winter in Israel is a rainy season; see Ezra 10:9, 13; Song of Solomon 2:11.)
Yet Luke 2:8 tells us that at the time of Yeshua’s birth, the shepherds were yet abiding in the fields--by night, at that! They had not yet brought their flocks home to the sheepfolds. Clearly the cold, rainy season had not yet commenced. Thus, on the basis of Luke's testimony alone, we see that Yeshua could have been born no later than mid-October--when the weather is still pleasant at Bethlehem. A December 25 nativity is too late!
More Proof
Additional biblical evidence lends further support to the foregoing conclusion. Luke 1:24-38 informs us that the virgin Mary miraculously became pregnant with Yeshua when her cousin Elizabeth was six months pregnant with a child who would later be known as John the Baptist.
Yeshua, then, would have been born six months after John. If we could know the time of John's birth, we could then simply add six months and know the time of Yeshua’s birth. Does the Bible reveal the general time of John's birth?
Notice: Elizabeth's husband Zacharias was a priest at the temple in Jerusalem. Luke 1:5 records that Zacharias was "of the course of Abia [in Hebrew, Abijah]." In the days of King David of ancient Israel (10th century B.C.), the number of priests had so increased that they had to be divided into 24 courses or shifts, which would take turns in performing the priestly duties (I Chron. 24).
Each course served one week at a time, beginning and ending on a weekly Sabbath day (II Chron. 23:8). The course of Abijah was the eighth course or shift in the rotation (I Chron. 24:10). The Talmud (collection of Jewish civil and religious laws and commentaries) records that the first course performed its duties in the first week of the first month of the Hebrew calendar. This month (called Abib or Nisan) begins about the start of spring in the Northern Hemisphere. The second course worked the second week. The third week--being the annual festival season of Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread--found all 24 courses serving together, sharing the heavy duties of that special time. The third shift then took its turn during the fourth week of the year.
Projecting forward, the eighth course--the course of Abijah, in which Zacharias served--worked the ninth week of the year. But Zacharias' course then stayed on at the temple to serve the 10th week also--the week of the annual Pentecost festival--along with all the other courses. It was during that two-week period of work--near the end of spring-- that the announcement by the archangel Gabriel came to Zacharias regarding his wife's imminent conception (Luke 1:8-20). When his two weeks'service was completed, Zacharias and Elizabeth went back to their home and Elizabeth conceived (verses 23-24)--sometime late in June or early July.
The rest is a matter of biology and arithmetic. Elizabeth's sixth month of pregnancy would have been in December. She would have given birth three months later--in late March or early April of the following year. Six months after that, Yeshua would have been born, in late September or early October--before the sheep were brought in from the fields, as we have seen!
Clearly, Yeshua was not born in December. Late September or early October was also the time of year that taxes were customarily paid--in the fall, at the end of the harvest. Joseph and Mary, it will be remembered, had journeyed to Bethlehem to be taxed (Luke 2:3-5).
The fact that there was "no room for them in the inn" (Luke 2:7) also suggests the time of the autumn harvest, because the annual fall festivals occurring at that time attracted multitudes of Jews to Jerusalem and nearby towns, filling all available accommodations.
Yeshua Born "Before Christ"?
An even more frequent question received from readers concerns the year of Yeshua’s birth. Few subjects are fraught with so much confusion and misunderstanding.
This immediately brings up a preliminary question: How could Yeshua have been born in a year "B.C."--Before Christ--as most authorities suggest? It would seem to be a contradiction in terms!
First, understand that the manner of reckoning time according to B.C. and A.D. was devised hundreds of years after Yeshua’s birth. It was invented in the sixth century A.D. by a monk in Italy name Dionysius Exiguus. This Dionysius misunderstood the time of the reign of Herod the Great, king of Judea. So he reckoned the birth of Yeshua to have occurred in December of the year 753 AUC (ab urbe condita--"from the foundation of the city [of Rome]").
In past ages, time was often reckoned using the founding of Rome as the starting point for counting. Thus, in Dionysius' new system, January 1, 754 AUC, became January 1,-- A.D. 1 (anno Domini, "in the year of the Lord"). That is, he assumed Yeshua was born on December 25, just a week before January 1, A.D. 1.
Error Later Discovered
Later, it was discovered that Dionysius had been incorrect in his reckoning of the reign of Herod and hence of the commencement of the Christian era. Yeshua had been born some years earlier than Dionysius had thought. But by then, the new chronology was in general use and it was too late to change! It has continued in use throughout most of the world to the present day.
With that understanding, we can now proceed to determine the year of Yeshua’s birth. There are several ways of doing so. Notice, first, this ancient prophecy from the book of Daniel: "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build from Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks..." (Dan. 9:25).
The commandment or decree to restore and build Jerusalem was made in the seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes I, king of ancient Persia (see Ezra 7:8)--according to the autumn-to-autumn reckoning of the Jews, in 457 B.C. The archangel Gabriel told Daniel that there would be a total of 69 prophetic weeks from that time until the public appearance of the Messiah.
Sixty-nine weeks is equivalent to 483 days (69 x 7). A day of prophetic fulfillment is a year in actual time (Num. 14:34; Ezek. 4:6). So 483 prophetic days (69 prophetic weeks) is 483 years. Simple arithmetic now takes over. Four-hundred-eighty-three years from 457 B.C. (the year of the decree) brings us to A.D. 27--the year when Yeshua, the Messiah, began his public ministry. (In calculating this, be aware that you must add 1 to compensate for the fact that there is no year zero.)
Now consider further: It is generally understood that Yeshua entered upon his ministry in the autumn of the year, immediately after his baptism. (His ministry lasted 3 1/2 years, ending in the spring, at Passover time.) In Luke 3:23 we learn that Yeshua was "about thirty years of age" when he began his ministry.
If he was about 30 years old in the autumn of A.D. 27, then he must have been born in the end of summer or early autumn and in 4 B.C.! (remember, there is no year zero.) It thus stands clearly revealed from Daniel's prophecy that Yeshua was born in 4 B.C. But there is yet further proof!
Herod's Eclipse
Students of the Bible recognize that Yeshua was born before the death of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:15, 19). When did Herod die?
The first century A.D. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, in Antiquities of the Jews (book XVII, chapter vi), tells of an eclipse of the moon late in Herod's reign. I have before me, as I write, the authoritative Solar and Lunar Eclipses of the Ancient Near East by Kudlek and Mickler. Its tables reveal that the lunar eclipse in question occurred on March 13, 4 B.C.
Continuing with Josephus' account, we discover that sometime after the eclipse, Herod--afflicted with a painful and loathsome disease--went beyond the river Jordan to bathe himself in hot springs there. The cures he undertook were unsuccessful. His condition worsened and he returned to Jericho. There, in a wild rage, he plotted the deaths of many prominent Jews. He also ordered his own son, Antipater, slain. All these events required some months.
Josephus further reveals (chapter ix) that Herod's death occurred sometime before a spring Passover. This Passover would have been 13 months after the eclipse, or the Passover of April, 3 B.C. This confirms our previously calculated 4 B.C. birthdate for Yeshua.
Further corroborating this, Josephus also records (XVII, viii, 1) that at his death, Herod had reigned 37 years since he had been declared king by the Romans. That had occurred in 40 B.C., a fact that Dionysius overlooked. Herod's death therefore took place late in 4 B.C.--more specifically, according to a Jewish tradition, on the seventh day of the lunar month Kislev in the Hebrew calendar (equivalent to November/December on the Roman calendar)--shortly after Yeshua’s birth in the early autumn of 4 B.C. This is the only date that is consistent with all the provable facts!
The "Star" of Bethlehem
A word is necessary at this point about the celebrated "Star of Bethlehem" (Matt. 2) that guided the wise men (Greek, Magi) across the deserts of the East to Bethlehem. The Plain Truth receives many letters about this each December. Scholars have tried to pinpoint the date of Yeshua’s birth by means of astronomical calculations related to the appearance of this mysterious "star."
For centuries, theologians and astronomers have debated this perplexing question. Dozens of theories exist purporting to explain what this "star" actually was and when it appeared. Some hold it was a comet. Others postulate a nova (exploding star). Still others say it was a meteor, or a planet, or a conjunction of two or more planets. (A conjunction takes place when planets appear, from our earthly viewpoint, to briefly become a single bright object as their paths cross the sky.)
Dates for proposed celestial phenomena usually range from 7 B.C. to 2 B.C. But the heart and core of the star controversy goes beyond matters of astronomy. To one who believes that the Bible is the Word of God and is to be taken at face value, the account of the star in Matthew's gospel can have only one explanation.
It was clearly and incontrovertibly a miracle, of supernatural, not natural origin! What natural phenomenon in the heavens--whether comet, meteor, exploding star or planet--could "go before" the Magi and "stand over" a specific house to precisely pinpoint it (Matt. 2:9-11)?
And if it was attributable to a nonmiraculous agency, how can we account that it appeared and reappeared to the Magi and apparently went generally unnoticed by others? Natural explanations are sheer astronomical foolishness! If the biblical account cannot be accepted in all its details, why should anyone believe it has any merit at all?
The star was clearly a special miracle of God, of divine origin defying all the proposed natural explanations of liberal scholarship.
It is quite possible that the Star of Bethlehem was simply an angel sent to lead the Magi to Yeshua, since the Bible often symbolically uses stars to signify angels (Job 38:7; Jude 13; Rev. 1:20; 9:1; 12:4; et al.).
In Yeshua’s Name?
We have seen the proof that Yeshua was born in the early autumn, not in the winter. But, some will ask, what difference does it make? Is it not the thought that counts? What is wrong with celebrating a day--any day--in honor of Yeshua’s birth?
Each December, articles inevitably appear in newspapers and magazines pointing out the ancient origins of today's Christmas customs. All authorities agree that the customs surrounding Christmas--the Christmas tree, mistletoe, holly wreaths, yule logs, stockings on the hearth, exchanging gifts and so on--were practiced in connection with pagan religious celebrations centuries before the birth of Yeshua. None are of Christian origin!
Anciently, December 25 was the date of the pagan Roman Brumalia, the final day of the popular weeklong Saturnalia celebration, celebrated in honor of the god Saturn. It was the day of the "invincible sun"--a winter solstice festival. "Christmas" was not among the earliest festivals of the Church.
It was not until the mid-fourth century that Pope Julius I decreed December 25 to be Christmas ("Christ-Mass") Day. He sought to overshadow the popular Brumalia by imparting "Christian" connotations to the day. But again, some will ask: What is so wrong with borrowing some of those early customs and using them to honor Yeshua? May we not continue to celebrate December 25, as long as we do it in Yeshua’s name? Can pagan practices be "Christianized" in this way?
More than 34 centuries ago, the rebellious children of Israel fashioned a pagan idol--a golden calf--in the wilderness (Ex. 32). It was the god Apis, the sacred Egyptian bull deity worshiped at Memphis on the Nile. Aaron declared that the pagan, Egyptian rites by which the Israelites worshiped the calf were "a feast to the Lord" (verse 5).
Did God feel honored? Did he approve of their using pagan customs to worship him? Absolutely not! It was a great sin (verse 21), and 3,000 paid with their lives (verse 28)! They had deceived themselves that what they were doing was right.
We are commanded not to seek to worship God with customs borrowed from other religions (Deut. 12:29-32). "Learn not the way of the heathen," God declares (Jer. 10:2).
True Christians never meet paganism half way. Pagan worship--whether "in Yeshua’s name" or not--remains pagan worship! Christianity mixed with paganism is not Christianity at all. Righteousness has no fellowship with unrighteousness (II Cor. 6:14). God simply will not accept that type of false "worship."
If God had wanted us to observe Christ's birthday, he would have given us the exact date and specific instructions on how to observe it. But he has not! Christmas is an invention of man, issuing from pagan worship.
Appendix:
Birth of Yeshua at Sukkot Luke 2:1-7
By James Trimm
Appendix:
Birth of Yeshua at Sukkot Luke 2:1-7
By James Trimm
2:1-2 And it happened that in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the Land should be enrolled. This enrollment first happened during the governorship of Quirinius in Syria. –
that all the Land should be enrolled - “all the Land” The Old Syriac Aramaic has )(r) hlwk which is ambiguous in Aramaic. ERA (Strong's #772) is the Aramaic equivalent of Hebrew ERETZ (Strong's 776). This word can mean "world" (as in Prov. 19:4) "earth" (as in Dan. 2:35) or "land" (as in Dan. 9:15) and is often used as a euphemism for "The Land of Israel" (as in Dan. 9:6). The Greek translator mistook the word to mean “world” here causing scholars to mistakenly think that Luke was speaking of one of the three empire-wide censuses which were in 28 B.C., 8 B.C., and 14 A.D. None of these dates fits well with the time of the birth of Messiah. However we learn from the Aramaic text that Luke actually refers a much smaller local census and not one of these empire-wide censuses at all. This is supported by the fact that Luke uses the phrase “this enrollment first happened” so as to contrast this enrollment by another ordered by Quirinius in 6 C.E. which Luke mentions in his second book (Acts 5:37). That census was a local census of Judah and so it stands to reason that this census was also a local census of Judah or “Ha-Eretz” “The Land” as well.
during the governorship of Quirinius in Syria - This is the reading of the Peshitta. The Old Syriac Aramaic says “in the years of Quirinius governor of Syria” .
His full name was Publius Sulpicius Quirinius. Skeptics have made much of the fact that Quirinius is known to have become Governor of Syria in 6 C.E. (several years to late to fit the time of Yeshua’s birth). However there are two very workable solutions to this apparent problem.
The first is that Quirinius may have served as governor of Syria once before, perhaps as a military governor, prior to his installation in 6 C.E.. A Latin inscription has been found recording the career of a distinguished Roman officer who, when he became imperial legate of Syria entered upon that office ‘for the second time’ (Lat. iterum). This Roman officer could very well be Quirinius.
The second is that “the years of Quirinius” actually began before he actually became governor of Syria. Quirinius was governing in Syria as a Roman Senator in charge of being the assessor of property in Syria as well as Judea (which the Romans regarded as part of Syria). His name was also mentioned in "Res Gestae - The Deeds of Augustus by Augustus" which was found in the city of Antioch Pisidia placing him as consul as early as 12 B.C.. The Greek geographer and historian Strabo (circa 63 B.C. - circa A.D. 23), seems to indicate Quirinius may have been in Syria with a special commission for military operations between 10 and 7 B.C. Moreover the Roman historian Tacitus mentions that Quirinius was appointed by Augustus to be an advisor to his young son Caius Caesar in Armenia. Caius was sent to administer Syria in 1 C.E. with Quirininus as his advisor. So there is good evidence that “the years of Quirinius” in Syria began several years before his installation as governor in 6 C.E..
2:7 and laid him in a manger – Or a Sukkah booth.
There is evidence that Yeshua was born at Sukkot. The key to calculating the date of the birth of Messiah is Luke 1:5 where we learn that Zechariah the father of Yochanan was a priest of the course of Abijah.
The priests became to numerous to all serve at the Temple all the time, so they were divided into 24 courses (1Chron. 24). Each course served for two weeks each year, once in the former rain (first half of the year) and once in the latter rain (second half of the year). There were also three weeks in which all the priests were required to serve, these
were the three pilgrimage festivals (Dt. 16:16). 24 times 2 is 48 plus three is 51. 51 weeks is 357 days fitting nicely within the 360 day lunar year.
were the three pilgrimage festivals (Dt. 16:16). 24 times 2 is 48 plus three is 51. 51 weeks is 357 days fitting nicely within the 360 day lunar year.
The course of Abijah is the eighth course (1Chron. 24:10) which serves the tenth week during the former rain portion of the year (this is because during Passover and Shavuot (Pentecost) all for the priests serve together Dt. 16:16). Zechariah had his vision while serving in the course of Abijah in the tenth week (It will become apparent that he
was serving his first course not his second as the timing will show as we progress). Thus Zechariah's vision took place during the 10th week of the year (The religious year beginning at Nisan/Abib around 14 days before Passover). We must add two additional weeks before Yochanon (John) could be conceived, due to the purity laws (Lev. 12:5; 15:19, 25). So Yochanon was concieved in the 12th week of the year. He was born about 40 weeks later during the 52nd week of the year (12 + 40 = 52) which brings us to Passover. Thus Yochanon was born at Passover, the very time that Elijah was, according to Jewish tradition, supposed to appear.
was serving his first course not his second as the timing will show as we progress). Thus Zechariah's vision took place during the 10th week of the year (The religious year beginning at Nisan/Abib around 14 days before Passover). We must add two additional weeks before Yochanon (John) could be conceived, due to the purity laws (Lev. 12:5; 15:19, 25). So Yochanon was concieved in the 12th week of the year. He was born about 40 weeks later during the 52nd week of the year (12 + 40 = 52) which brings us to Passover. Thus Yochanon was born at Passover, the very time that Elijah was, according to Jewish tradition, supposed to appear.
Yeshua was conceived 6 months (about 25 weeks) after Yochanon's conception. This means Yeshua was conceived around the 37th week around Chanukah. This would mean the light of the world was conceived during the festival of lights.
Yeshua was born 40 weeks later (around week 77 that is week 25 of the following year) this brings us to the time of the fall feasts.
There are several clues that Yeshua was born at Sukkot:
1. Bethleham was "booked solid." This would not have been due census which would have taken place over the period of a year. Every Jew was required to come to Jerusalem for Sukkot (Dt. 16:16) this would have over run Jerusalem as well as Bethleham just five miles away.
2. Yeshua was born in a “manger” or stable. The Hebrew word for "stable" is "sukkah" (as in Gen. 33:17) so it is likely that Yeshua was born in a Sukkah/booth.
3. If Yeshua was born on the first day of Sukkot then he would have been circumcised on the "eighth great day" a festival following Sukkot. This day was the original "Simchat Torah" (Rejoicing in the Torah) which is now held the following day in Rabbinic Judaism. So Yeshua would have entered the covenant on the day of "rejoicing
in the Torah."
in the Torah."
4. When the angels appeared to the shepherds they made a statement which closely echoes the ancient Sukkot liturgy "...behold, we have come to declare to you glad tidings of great joy." (Lk. 2:10-11)
5. Sukkot is symbolic of Elohim dwelling in a "tabernacle" (body?) with us
WNAE Statement of Faith
I. YHWH
We believe that YHWH is Echad (one). We believe that YHWH reveals Himself in the K’numeh or Gaunin of Avi/Abba (Father/Daddy), the Memra (Word), and the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit).
II. BIBLE
We believe that the Bible, which includes both the Tanakh [Old Testament] and the Ketuvim Netzarim (New Testament) is the divinely inspired, infallible Word of Elohim in its original texts and manuscripts.
III. MESSIAH
We believe that Y’shua HaMashiach has come and with great joy we anticipate his return, and even though he may delay, nevertheless we endeavor to think about his return every day. We believe that the Messiah is the Word made flesh. We believe he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life in accordance with the Torah, performed miracles, was crucified for the atonement of his people in accordance with the Scriptures, was bodily resurrected on the third day. ascended to heaven and currently sits at the right hand of YHWH. He will return at the end of this age to usher in the Kingdom of Elohim on earth and will rule the world from Jerusalem with his people Israel for one thousand years. We also believe that the Messiah Yeshua is the Torah incarnate. Just as the Torah is the way, the truth and the light, the Messiah is also the way, the truth and the light.
IV. SALVATION
We believe that through the death of Messiah, because of his blood covenant with us, we receive salvation by way of inheritance. This salvation comes by faith through grace alone and is not earned by Torah observance.
V. TORAH
The Torah of Truth the Almighty gave to His people, Israel, through Moshe. He will not exchange it nor discard it for another until heaven and earth pass away. We believe that Torah observance is man’s moral obligation and expression of love to YHWH. The Torah is freedom and not bondage. The Torah is the way, the truth and the light and is for all of our generations forever.
VI. THE ONE FAITH
We believe that there is one faith which was once and for all delivered to the set-apart-ones. We believe that Messiah did not come to create a new religion but to be the Messiah of Judaism, the one faith that was once delivered to the set-apart-ones. We believe that Nazarene Judaism is the only expression of the one true faith. We do not accept any other religion as a non-Jewish cultural expression of the one true faith.
The first believers in Yeshua were a Jewish sect known as “Nazarenes” or in Hebrew “Netzarim” (Acts 24:5). The “church father” Jerome (4th Cent.) described these Nazarenes as those “…who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.” (Jerome; On. Is. 8:14).
Elsewhere he writes:
Today there still exists among the Jews in all the synagogues of the East a heresy which is called that of the Minæans (1), and which is still condemned by the Pharisees; [its followers] are ordinarily called ‘Nazarenes’; they believe that Messiah, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Miriam, and they hold him to be the one who suffered under Pontius Pilate and ascended to heaven, and in whom we also believe.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
The fourth century “church father” Epiphanius gives a more detailed description:
But these sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but “Nazarenes,” … However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do… They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that G-d is one, and that his son is Yeshua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the… Writings… are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians…. they are nothing but Jews…. They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
(1) “Minæans” apparently Latinized from Hebrew MINIM (singular is MIN) a word which in modern Hebrew means “apostates” but was originally an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
“Authentic” Netzarim
Ten Historical Characteristics of the “Authentic” Netzarim
By James Scott Trimm
There are many organizations now claiming an identification with the ancient Sect of the Netzarim/Nazarenes. One even claims to be the only “authentic” representation of Netzarim Judaism. Many of these organizations differ substantially with what we know historically about the ancient sect of the Nazarenes. The purpose of this article is to outline some of the historical characteristics which we know the ancient Nazarenes had, which many of these pseudo-Nazarene organizations lack. Beware of so-called “authentic” Nazarene/Netzarim Judaism that does not have these characteristics. There is nothing historically “authentic” about these groups.
1. Did not call themselves “Christians”
“These sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but ‘Nazarenes,’…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
2. Accepted Yeshua as Messiah
“The Nazarenes… accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.”
(Jerome; On. Is. 8:14)
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, … They disagree with [other] Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah.”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
3. Were Torah Observant
“The Nazarenes… accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.”
(Jerome; On. Is. 8:14)
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
4. Used both the Tanak (“Old Testament”) and the “New Testament”
“They use not only the New Testament’ but the ‘Old Testament’ as well, as the Jews do…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
5. Used Hebrew and Aramaic NT source texts.
“They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
“And he [Heggesippus the Nazarene] quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and from ‘The Syriac’ [the Aramaic], and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
6. Believed in the Virgin Birth of Yeshua.
“They believe that Messiah, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Miriam.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
7. Accepted the diety of Messiah… teaching that Elohim is ECHAD but that there are “many (more than two) ‘powers’ in heaven” including the Messiah.
“They…declare that God is one [ECHAD]…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
The Mishna states that the MINIM taught:
“There are many `powers’ in heaven”
(m.San. 4:5)
Clearly the MINIM in this portion of the Mishna were Nazarenes (1) and not Ebionites, since Ebionites clearly rejected the deity of Messiah.
In the Gemara to this portion of Mishna (b.San. 38b) the Talmud discusses various proof texts that the MINIM used to support their teaching of “many powers in heaven” including the Messiah.
R. Johanan said:
“In all the passages which the Minim have taken [as grounds] for their heresy, their refutation is found near at hand.
Thus: Let us make man in our image, (Gen. 1:26)
And God created [sing.] man in His own image; (Gen. 1:27)
Come, let us go down and there confound their language, (Gen. 11:7)
And the Lord came down [sing.] to see the city and the tower; (Gen. 11:5)
Because there were revealed [plur.] to him God, (Gen. 35:7)
Unto God who answereth [sing.] me in the day of my distress; (Gen. 35:3)
For what great nation is there that hath God so nigh [plur.] unto it, as the Lord our God is [unto us] whensoever we call upon Him [sing.]; (Deut. 4:7)
And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, [like] Israel, whom God went [plur.] to redeem for a people unto himself [sing.], (2Sam. 7:23)
Till thrones were placed and one that was ancient did sit. (Dan. 7:9)
Why were these [plurals] necessary? To teach R. Johanan’s dictum; viz.: The Holy One, blessed be He, does nothing without consulting His Heavenly Court (literally “Family”) , for it is written, The matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the sentence by the word of the Holy Ones. (Dan. 4:14)
Now, that is satisfactory for all [the other verses], but how explain Till thrones were placed? (Dan. 7:9)
One [throne] was for Himself and one for David [Messiah]. Even as it has been taught: One was for Himself and one for David: this is R. Akiba’s view.
R. Jose protested to him: Akiba, how long will thou profane the Sh’kinah?
Rather, one [throne] for justice, and the other for mercy.
Did he accept [this answer] from him or not? Come and hear!
For it has been taught: One is for justice and the other for charity; this is R. Akiba’s view. Said R. Eleazar b. Azariah to him: Akiba, what hast thou to do with Aggada? Confine thyself to [the study of] Nega’im and Ohaloth [civil issues]. But one was a throne, the other a footstool: a throne for a seat and a footstool in support of His feet (Is. 66:1).”
This section of Talmud tells us that the MINIM used Tanak passages in which Elohim was referenced in a plural form as proof texts for their teaching of “many powers in the heavens”. Among their proof texts were Gen. 1:26; 11:7; 35:7; Deut. 4:7; Sam. 7:23 & Dan. 7:9). The Rabbinic Jews dismissed these as examples of Elohim speaking to “His Heavenly Court” (literally “Heavenly Family”) i.e. the “watchers” of Dan. 4:14.
8. Accepted “Jewish Tradition” but not Rabbinic Halachah
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
“And he [Heggesippus the Nazarene] quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and from “The Syriac” [the Aramaic], and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
There are preserved for us five fragments from an ancient Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah in which the fourth century Nazarene writer makes it clear that Nazarenes of the fourth century were not following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah. The following is taken from the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:14:
” ‘And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel…’ The Nazarenes explain the two houses as the two houses of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees… [they Pharisees] scattered and defiled the precepts of the Torah by traditions and mishna. And these two houses did not accept the Savior…”
9. Accepted Paul as an emissary to the Ephraimites and Gentiles.
“The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above, try to explain this passage in the following way: ‘When Messiah came and his proclaiming shone out, the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the proclaiming became more dominant, that means the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul who was the last of all the emissaries. And the goodnews of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the goodnews.”
(Jerome on Is. 9:1-4)
10. They wore Head Coverings
“…false teachers, who, seeing that none of the emissaries any longer survived, at length attempted with bare and uplifted head to oppose the proclaiming of the truth…”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist.)
Footnotes
(1) It is important to define an important Talmudic term MIN (singular) / MINIM (plural).
The fourth century “Church Father” Jerome writes of the Nazarenes and Ebionites:
“What shall I say of the Ebionites who pretend to be Christians? Today there still exists among the Jews in all the synagogues of the East a heresy which is called that of the Minæans, and which is still condemned by the Pharisees; [its followers] are ordinarily called ‘Nazarenes’; they believe that Christ, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Mary, and they hold him to be the one who suffered under Pontius Pilate and ascended to heaven, and in whom we also believe.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
Now Ebionites and Nazarenes were two distinct groups with varying beliefs (the Ebionites split off from the Nazarenes round 70 C.E.) but both of these groups were known by Rabbinic Jews as ” Minim” or as Jerome calls them in Latin “Mineans”.
According to the Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Babli, Yerushalami and Midrashic Literature, Marcus Jastrow defines MIN “…sectarian, infidel… a Jewish infidel, mostly applied to Jew Christians”. Jastrow uses the term “Jew-Christians” to refer to Ebionites and Nazarenes although these groups did not call themselves “Christians”.
Many scholars believe that the term MIN began as an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
The purpose of this presentation is threefold. First to give us a brief history of who we were in the early centuries and what it is we are trying to reconstruct. The second is to give us a positive identity and last, to suggest a foundational program from which we can grow and expand according to the will of YHVH. As I present this I do so as a single man with whom Elohim has given a vision of Torah and Messiah bound together in the life of the redeemed. I do not do so as a representative of the Society for the Advancement of Nazarene Judaism or the International Nazarene Beit Din for we are a community and without their consent and approval I cannot speak for them and the vision they have, although it is obviously similar. I submit the following as a beginning point of discussion from which we as a community can develop a cohesive vision, identity and program.
The challenge that lies before us in Natzrim Judaism is enormous. In some ways it is analogous the the recreation of the state of Israel after almost two millennia. The Israelis needed to resurrect institutions, ideas and even a language that had not been used for centuries. Nazarene Judaism is embarking on an even more ambitious project. We are attempting to recreate a paradigm of theology, philosophy, belief and practice that has not existed since the second century. The early community of Yahushua’s followers, led by Ya’akov His brother, was a community within the community of Israel who’s belief and practice was very similar to their fellow Jews except that they were no longer waiting for Elohim’s anointed. They believed He had come, lived, died, was resurrected and now sat at the right hand of YHVH awaiting the “Day of the Lord” which they believed was right around the corner. They believed the ‘Renewed Covenant’ about which Jeremiah had prophesied was inaugurated through Yahushua, that Torah was now written on their hearts and atonement for the people had finally been accomplished once and for all. They worshipped at the Temple and attended synagogue, they studied Torah and were zealous in their obedience to the commandments. They loved their people and sought both their spiritual completion and their material blessing. Gentiles came into this community and were encouraged to develop the same love for Messiah, Torah and people that their natural born brothers had.
Unfortunately, the socio-political events of the first century conspired against this community. The anti-Judaic feelings endemic to Roman culture made Gentiles less willing to adopt the religio-cultural context of which the Messiah was a part, particularly after the war with Rome. And the Jewish leadership, followed by the majority of the populace, did not believe that the man crucified by the Romans was the Messiah. Soon there were two new religions that sprung up out of the ashes of the Temple. One rejected Torah and Judaism while recasting Israel’s Messiah in a Greek mold. Christianity was the result of this development. The Rabbis of Yavneh took an ancient religion centered on a temple, priesthood and sacrifice and recast it, out of necessity, as a spiritual religion of works, ritual purity, philosophy and introspection, of which one of the fundamental tenants was that Yahushua was not the Messiah. The Nazarenes were ignored by both groups in their evolution because they came to be viewed as a small eccentric or heretical minority. They could have been a bridge of understanding and enriched both religions as the complete package of Elohim’s plan but they passed from the scene with hardly a mention.
The interactions between the two majority groups over the past two thousand years further complicate things. Those who have claimed the Messiah of Israel and wrenched Him from His proper context of people, culture and understanding subjected His people Israel, the Jewish people, to the most severe forms of persecution in the name of their reinterpreted ‘Christ’. Naturally, this resulted in a strong reaction on the part of the Jewish people against the idea that the historical person, Yahushua, who was the raw material from which the church formed Jesus, the anti-Torah, anti-Jew, mangod, could ever have been the Promised One of Moshe and the Prophets. Reactionary theology developed from both sides making real communication about the central issues of covenant, peoplehood, Torah, chosenness and the Messiah nearly impossible.
So the task we have before us is this. We need to take a messianic idea which has been twisted and corrupted horribly for nineteen hundred years by a man made, anti-Jewish religion of persecutors, remove all the junk, clutter and additions to get down to the truth of Who He was and what He taught. We also need to remove nineteen hundred years of superstition, anti-messianic ideas and reactionary theology from what we know as Judaism to discover what YHVH really wants His people to live like and believe. And in order for either task to be accomplished we need to uncover the history of a small group within a small people on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean which neither of the majority groups want to acknowledge. Christians don’t want to remember the Nazarenes because the foundation of their religion is anti-Judaic and these people were Torah loving Jews who believed in the same Messiah they claim to. To admit that ‘St. James’, ‘St. Peter’ and even the beloved ‘St. Paul’, whose example they were encouraged to follow, were Torah observant Jews their whole lives and even beyond that, taught Torah and loved the Jewish people, would be tantamount to pulling the foundation out from under their religion and cast doubt on everything they have been taught to do and believe. The Jewish people don’t want to acknowledge the Nazarenes because they have gladly accepted the Christian’s claim that Judaism and the Messiah are mutually exclusive. Once one believes in the messiah the church claims, one is no longer a Jew but a ‘Christian’. To admit the Nazarenes were Torah observant Jews would be a direct challenge to that assumption and force them to look at the claims of Yahushua anew, not in a Christian context, but in a Jewish one.
But God has been at work for almost two hundred years to restore what was lost, Torah centered messianic faith. The Sabbaterians, the Hebrew Christians and the Messianic Jews have been rediscovering Torah from the Christian side, there has been a recent move among Reform Jews to reestablish Torah observance and, among a small number of orthodox Jews, an honest reevaluation of the claims of Yahushua as the Messiah of Israel. All this has pointed to the reestablishment of a truly Jewish community of Torah observant people who believe in the Messiahship of Yahushua as it existed in the first century. We are on the crest of that wave.
So the first question that must be answered is ‘What was the Natzrim community like?’ How did they live, what did they believe, how did they understand the fulfillment of the hopes of their people? To answer that question we shall take a brief look at the life and teachings of Yahushua Himself and then look at those who comprised the Natzrim community after His death and resurrection.
There is little debate anymore, either in Jewish or Christian circles, about the fact that Yahushua was a good, observant Jew. He came into the first century, he lived in Israel, he walked among the Jewish people, he lived according to their law and taught as many of the rabbis at that time did. We know that in order for His sacrifice to be acceptable, it would have to be ‘without blemish’, or in His case, sinless. Sinless according to Elohim’s standard, Torah. Yochannan states in his account that Yahushua was the ‘Word of Elohim’. He was Torah in the flesh. Torah was His very nature and His life and teaching constantly reflected that fact.
The accounts of His life are replete with instances of His Torah observance. He obeyed the Sabbath and celebrated the festivals, He ate the right foods and wore the signs of the covenant, He exemplified the true, righteous and holy Jew of His time and all time. And He taught the same.
He said that Torah would not pass away before the heavens and the Earth. He stated that all the commandments, the least to the greatest, the moral and the religious, the ethical and the ritual, all of them were important and adherence to them would make one great in Elohim’s sight. And not only that but the commandments were to be obeyed even more meticulously than the Pharisees and the spirit had to be pure and holy as well, with no hypocrisy (Matt 5). The righteousness of those who followed Him and would claim His name in the future should be unquestionable. They should be known as the most pious, righteous people in the world, according to the standard of Torah.
Yahushua actually pointed to Torah as the way to eternal life. This is an idea that does not get much airtime but it is there for anyone who has the chutzpah to look. When the rich man came and asked, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life’, he asked the question that everyone wants to know the answer to. Here it is, the big one. And what was Yahushua’s response? ‘Believe in me and be saved’? ‘Accept me in your heart’? ‘Pray this little prayer’? None of the above! He asked the man what was written in the Torah! And the man answered with two central passages in the Torah, passages that had been, and still are, central to Judaism. And then what did Yahushua say? Do this and you will live! Not ‘think this’ or ‘believe this’ but do this. Do what? The two commands in Torah that sum up the rest of it, the ones that represent the whole. So where does He then fit into that equation? He is the Torah made flesh, He embodies it and it speaks of Him (Lk 24:44). He is the reason there is life in Torah.
Yahushua supported the Temple cult as well, which included all the sacrifices prescribed by the Levitical code. (Matt 8:4) Even amid the corruption that had become part of the Temple administration since the time of the Hasmoneans, and in His day, with the buying and selling of the High Priesthood to the Romans, He did not take the position of the Eseenes and label it hopeless, nor did He disregard the system as a whole (by this I mean the levitical and priestly rituals and sacrifices and the idea of a Temple itself), corrupt or pure, as pointless and without value. His followers would continue to participate in Temple life until it’s destruction.
He expected that His followers would continue in many of the traditions that had already been developed in Israel. He warned them against making a show of their covenantal obedience, ‘do not make your Tzitzit long or your Tefillin broad like the Pharisees’, (Matt 23:5) but he expected that these things, as they had developed up to that point would continue. His disagreements with the Pharisees, to whom he was closest and among whom his followers would gain the most adherents, stemmed largely from two areas. First, was that some equated meticulous observance of the commandments to righteousness of the heart. As He pointed out, one can be very exacting in one’s Torah obedience and still be a rotten person. He reprimanded the Pharisees (who were well aware of the hypocrites in three midst) that they would tithe even their spices but had ignored justice and mercy in their dealings with their fellow men (Matt 23:23). Yahushua told them they should concentrate on the latter, that is justice and mercy, while not neglecting the former, the tithe. Their second mistaken assumption was that the priestly rituals and purity laws should be applied to every Jew all the time. The washing of the hands, for example, came from the priests who washed themselves before they offered sacrifices. Now, in the mind of a Pharisee, he was the priest of his home and his table was his altar therefore it was proper for him to ritually wash his hands. Now while it may be acceptable to take on more Torah than applies to you, to upbraid someone who does not as a sinner is improper. This idea of maintaining priestly ritual purity would again rear it’s ugly head when it came time to expand the mission to the Goyim.
He also accepted the authority of the Pharisees to interpret the Law. They sat in Moshe’s seat and he told his followers to listen to them (Matt 23:2). Overall, this would point to His acceptance of Jewish tradition, the Oral Law, as it had developed up to that point according to the judgements of the Sanhedrin and judges of Israel. He rejected the view of the Sadducees and the Karites of a later time, that the Oral Law is not a valuable resource in teaching the community Torah. The leaders of the community placed there by Elohim formulated it according to His command, it had Elohim’s stamp of authority. This is not to say that the Sanhedrin and the judges were never wrong, the Torah itself makes provision for their errors, but that would be the exception rather than the rule. As Yahushua Himself stated, tradition cannot contradict the written word of Elohim (Mk 7:9-13) And recognizing that His presence would change some things, He authorized His followers to develop their own case law in addition to and not in place of what had already been established and it would have the authority of Elohim behind it.
After the death and resurrection of Yahushua, things continued along the same lines. In response the events of Shava’ut, and Kefa’s preaching which placed Yahushua and the Nazarenes right in the middle of prophetic fulfillment, a vibrant community was formed. They were taught by the Talmidim, who were a group of observant Jews from Galilee, they met in the Temple, they ate together and said ‘the prayers’ which, no doubt, is a reference to the regular prayers of the synagogue and Temple which would eventually form the core of the Siddur.
While the fact that they preached the Messiah made the Sanhedrin nervous because of it’s political implications, they enjoyed the favor of the people (Acts 2:47) and many of them were the personification of pious, Torah-observant Jews. There was no new religion here. Yahushua had come to call sinners to repentance and adherence to the covenant. He was the fulfillment of the prophetic hope and a sign that the Day of the Lord was near. He was the ‘second Moshe’, the Prophet foretold by Moshe himself (Acts 3:22, 23). His followers had repented and embraced that truth and sought to convince the rest of their people of that fact. They were just another sect of Judaism, probably a sect within a sect since they were primarily in the pharasaic tradition.
But Messianism scared the Sanhedrin, that was why Yahushua was put to death in the first place. When Kefa and Yochannan stood before them, they were not charged with a crime against the Torah or even the traditions. In that case they could have easily been punished. The Sanhedrin just wanted the messianism to go away before it caused trouble with the Romans. Their decision of tolerance, reccomentded by Rabban Gamaliel, (Acts 5:38, 39) for the Nazarenes is a decision that must stand to this day because there is no comparable authority to reverse it.
The community continued to expand and were highly regarded among the people. Soon there were a group of hellenists attached to this orthodox bunch. Hellenists were less torah-observant by definition and this gave the Sanhedrin it’s first real opportunity to come against this sect. Stephen, a hellenist, was seized and brought before the council. Witnesses falsely accused him of speaking against the Temple and the Law. There is no evidence that he did any such thing but because he was a hellenist, the charges were believable. He was stoned and the rest of the hellenists were routed from the city. The Talmidim stayed, however, because they could not be accused as easily and they enjoyed the support of the populace.
The main perpetrator of this persecution is Rabbi Sha’ul, a Pharisee of Pharisees, blameless in his obedience to the law. He meets Yahushua on the way to Damascus and is healed by a talmid named Ananias whom Sha’ul describes as a devout observer of the Law (Acts 22:12). He said this in defense of himself and the Nazarenes and he mentioned it to make the point to the people of Yerushalyim that they were just as devout and Torah-observant as anyone, and even moreso. They were good, traditional Jews who had realized the hope of their people in Yahushua.
In the second decade after the death and resurrection of Yahushua the mission had expanded to the Samaritans, the Diaspora and geyrim; the Elohim fearers, gentiles who had attached themselves to the Synagogue, had adapted much of the Jewish lifestyle excepting circumcision. Eventually the question came up, what is the process by which a Gentile becomes part of remnant Israel in the Messianic age? Some insisted on circumcision, that nothing had changed as far as conversion was concerned. Kefa and Sha’ul had seen Elohim place His stamp of approval on these converts through His spirit without this ritual. They understood that Elohim had circumcised their heart and placed His Torah within them as promised by Jeremiah. They were full fledged members of the community by repenting and being immersed. This was a difficult idea to swallow, particularly for the Pharisees because circumcision was central to their understanding of Israel’s covenant relationship with Elohim.
The issue was debated and resolved at the famous Jerusalem council. They decided that Sha’ul and Kefa were right, entrance to the community was by profession and immersion and circumcision was not required for gentiles. As those who were not already Elohim fearers came out of their pagan culture, there were a few preliminary things that would be necessary if they had not already adopted these basic features of Jewish life. They needed to stay clear of idolatry, from sexual immorality, from eating blood and other non-ritually slaughtered meat and from blood or murder. These are the basics of righteousness required for everyone who wants to start on the road to covenant relationship with Elohim. They assumed, as Ya’akov added at the end of the discussion, that they would read and learn Torah as they were integrated into the community. That these geyrim would continue in the synagogues and learn what it means to be a member of the covenant community of Israel. They would eventually internalize the values, theology, and practice of the nation they had applied for citizenship in.
Did this happen? We can see by the evidence of the literature of the Brit Chadasha that they did. It formed the framework of their understanding of religion, Messiah, time, distance and Elohim. Allow me to illustrate some examples. Luke is possibly the only Gentile from the early community whose writings have come down to us, and he appears to be writing to another gentile. The language he uses shows that both had been immersed in Jewish life and culture and adopted it as their own. When he describes distance, he uses the term ‘Sabbath day’s journey’ rather than the Roman measure or stadia (Acts 1:12). When he describes the time of Sha’ul’s journey to Rome, he describes their voyage as taking place ‘after the fast’, that is Yom Kippor’ (Acts 27:9), which also shows they accepted halachah (oral law) up to that point. Sha’ul, when talking to the Corinthians, who by most people’s understanding were the most unregenerate Gentiles described in the Brit Chadashah, used the term ‘cup of thanksgiving’, the name of the first cup of wine drunk at the Passover Seder. This was a congregation Sha’ul founded. Who do you think taught them about Pesach? When he was arguing with the Galatians about Torah, what did he use to support his arguments? Tenach! It would not make sense for him to use an authority he regarded as passe to support his point. The Galatians obviously valued Torah and the prophets as an authority. Who taught them that? The phrase ‘lamb of Elohim’ means nothing outside of Torah. The Gentiles to whom the leaders of the Nazarene community wrote had an intimate understanding of Torah and halachah. How did a bunch of Gentiles learn all this stuff about Judaism and then make it part of themselves so that everyone was speaking the same language? Either they knew it from being part of the synagogue already or the Talmidim who introduced them to the messianic idea taught it to them. Isn’t that a scandal. ‘St. Paul’ teaching Torah and tradition to Gentiles!
Over the next two decades the message continued to spread from Yerushalyim and the original Talmidim continued to be the authority. When Sha’ul comes back to Yerushalyim thirteen years after the council, he finds a vibrant Nazarene community ‘zealous for Torah’ (Acts 21:20). After his arrest, he vehemently denies not only that he never did anything contrary to Torah, but he continued to live as a Pharisee according to the traditions to that very day (Acts 26:5). The leadership in Yerushalyim under Ya’akov ha Tzaddik, and including Sha’ul, set the tone by adhering to the normative Judaism of their day, primarily according to the pharisaic tradition. That all changed with the revolt. Many of the Nazarenes fled Yerushalyim and those that remained suffered the same fate as the rest of the Jews in the city. The leadership was further decimated by the Romans as they tried to eradicate the davidic line, from whom the Nazarenes had drawn the successors of Ya’akov. The talmidim died off in the years before and after the revolt and there was no comparable authority to reign in the divergent practices among the Jews, hellenists and gentiles of the sect. Jewish religious practices were proscribed to various degrees by the Romans in the decades that followed which made the Jewish lifestyle even less appealing to the average Gentile. The Gentiles and the hellenists became selective in their halachah and without a strong authority in Yerushalyim to steer the movement in the right way, many of the communities moved away from strict Torah observance and halachah. The farther one went from Yerushalyim, the less Torah was followed. Antioch, Rome and Alexandria, centers of gnosticism and mystery religions, now became centers for the followers of Yahushua as well and they filled the vacuum in authority created by the razing of Yerushalyim. A few Nazarene communities remained in Judea but as the minority both in Judaism and the newly forming Christianity, they had little impact on either group in the decades and centuries that followed.
These Nazarenes were still around in the fifth century, although by then they were an insignificant heresy to the Christians. Epiphanius has this to say about them;
“We shall now especially consider heretics who call themselves Nazarenes; they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way the Old Testament of the Jews. For they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets and the Writings…so that they are approved of by the Jews, from whom the Nazarenes do not differ in anything, and they do profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and the customs of the Jews, except they believe in Messiah. They preach that there is but One God and His Son Yahushua. They are learned in the Hebrew language, for they, like the Jews, read the whole Law, then the Prophets…They differ from the Jews because they believe in Messiah, and from the Christians in that they are to this day bound to the Jewish rites such as circumcision, the Sabbath and other ceremonies..”
They continued to exist in small pockets into the second millenium, even being subject to the inquisition for their judaizing. They were know as the Pasaginians then, a name of Latin origin that describes them as wanderers, much like the other Jews of the Middle Ages.
This tells us a lot about our ancestors. To briefly sum it all up, the following is a basic description of the Nazarenes based on all the previous information, a description of what we are trying to reestablish at the end on the second millenium. Epiphanius also tells us that most of them lived in the Land, they valued the promise of it to Avraham. They were zealous for Torah and followed the Tenach as well as the writings of the Brit Chadashah. They followed the Law and the customs of the Jews, from whom they differed in nothing save the fulfillment of the Messianic hope. They knew Hebrew and they followed the traditional Torah and haftorah readings. They followed, for the most part, pharisaic halachah. And because of all this they were approved of by the Jews.
That is the goal. To equate Yahushua with Torah rightoeusness and lifestyle. A believer in Yahushua should be a pious Jew by definition. Not a Christian who follows Torah or a Jew that believes in ‘Jesus’ but an individual whose belief in the Messiahship of Yahushua naturally expresses itself in Torah piety. In the first century, when someone claimed to be a Natzrim, that person was a Tzaddik, by definition. We should seek to be similarly defined.
Now that we have a basic understanding of what the original Nazarenes were like and what happened to them, we can take a look at several of the important issues involved in reconstructing their community two millennia later. The concerns are many and correct understanding and implementation will make the difference between success and failure, between a comprehensive, unified community and a disorganized, confused movement. Some have sought to go where we are heading and have gotten lost and bewildered along the way. In reality, the difficulties are not in understanding the history. The facts are rather straightforward for anyone willing to put aside their preconceived ideas and assumptions and look at them honestly. The real issue is whether are not we are willing to examine some of our most dearly held beliefs and their underlying assumptions and cast them aside if they are not in line with the Scriptures. And then to adopt a system of understanding and a way of life that makes one stand out in the crowd, that makes one part of an historically persecuted minority. It is an issue of sacrifice. Of self, of ego, of family, of time, of possessions, of life. Not an easy thing but it is only when we sacrifice our life with all it’s baggage and truly seek to become the men and women Elohim desires that we will succeed.
I believe the central issue that we need to address is one of identity. With whom do we identify, or, as I have heard it poignantly stated before, with whom will we be persecuted? Many people who hear of us and what we are doing will identify us with the Messianic Jewish Movement (I have experienced this many times) and by doing so they place us under the heading of ‘Christianity’. Both Jews and Christians who are knowledgeable enough usually make this identification. We need to ask ourselves whether this is the banner under which we want to develop our identity.
Let’s look at the Messianic Jewish Movement for a moment. Many of us are familiar with it and some of us are still involved with it to some degree. The following discussion is about the popular notion of what the Messianic Jewish movement is all about and how it describes and understands itself as exemplified by the Messianic Jewish Alliance, The Messianic Union, related organizations and their leaders. Regardless of what may be their deepest desire, which is to be regarded as a valid expression of Judaism, just as the Orthodox or Reform movements are, they are not and they never will be. Because in their attempt to do so, they have kept one foot firmly planted within the Christian community. A large part of their theology and worldview come from Christianity. While they do reject replacement theology and so make room for themselves as Jews within the Christian community, they have not, in most cases, developed practices and institutions endemic to Judaism. As such there are some fundamental problems with the Messianic Jewish Movement’s understanding of things and this results in confusion and disunity.
One of the first areas of confusion is that of religious expression. First, allow me to say that there is a wide spectrum of religious practice among Messianic Jews and their congregations, which, in itself, is a problem. Some congregations are adopting Orthodox or Hasidic practices and others have kept mainstream church worship traditions. Ultimately, in the Messianic Jewish point of view, there are no standards because there is no right and wrong in religious expression. Allow me to explain how I can come to such a conclusion. While many Messianic Jews and even some Christians know that Passover and Yom Kippor are Scriptural and Christmas and Easter are not, there can be no authoritative correction (although the Christians will sometimes accuse those who follow Scriptural religious traditions of being legalists and Judaizers!). This is because Messianic Jews see themselves as part of the ‘church’ and they look at Christians as their brothers and because of this they accept, to a greater or lesser degree, the Christian interpretation of Scripture. They are all part of the ‘body’, the Messianic Community, the universal Church. The result of this is the practical understanding that Elohim does not really care that most of ‘the body’ are worshipping Him according to the practices of the pagans (Deut 12) or the ‘Traditions of men’ and while He may be pleased that some are worshipping Him according to Torah, it was really only meant for ‘ethnic’ or ‘natural’ Israel. In the great scheme of things it doesn’t really matter because ‘we’re all saved’, which is the ultimate goal of both groups. I have read this described as the ‘One faith, one baptism, two expressions’ theory. One cannot do enough Scriptural gymnastics to support such an idea. To do so is to ignore all the warnings of Moshe and the Prophets about the adoption of pagan practices and of the corruption of the pure religion YHVH had given to the people of Israel. It supports the spoken and unspoken assumption of the ‘church’ that the ‘Old Testament’ isn’t relevant to them. It is also to embrace the absurd idea that Shimon Kefa and that great Pharisee Rav Sha’ul accepted Gentiles into the community of Israel while allowing them to continue to practice paganism. That they allowed pagans to rename pagan practices and celebrate them with equal validity alongside the festivals of YHVH and see nothing wrong with it. That Gentiles could come into covenant relationship with the Elohim of Israel while thumbing their noses at all the things those who had gone before held dear. That they believed the Messiah had come to give ready acceptance to both Jews and Gentiles in the small, unique community of Remnant Israel, regardless of their behavior or the forms of their religious expression. Anyone who wants to become part of the commonwealth of Israel through the Messiah does so in the context of covenant. And covenants have stipulations that are meant to be adhered to and if they are not, there are negative consequences. For Messianic Jews to look at and accept Christians as equally acceptable brothers ‘in the Lord’ and as legitimate ‘converts’ into the commonwealth of Israel is to destroy the basis for the covenant relationship Elohim has always had with His people.
This brings us to another problem with Messianic Judaism. They don’t know what to do with the Gentiles. The confusion again results from having one foot in either camp. On the one hand, they want to see themselves as a legitimate branch of Judaism and to this end, they have set up many institutions in which the leadership and policy bodies are made up of ethnic Jews (although in Messianic Judaism the definition of an ‘ethnic Jew’ does not usually follow ‘traditional’ halachah). However, many Gentiles have become attracted to Judaism, as has been the case throughout history, and a brand of Judaism that allows them to maintain their belief in their Messiah is particularly attractive. Many Christians have come to see the value in understanding the jewishness of their original faith and some have even been motivated to adopt some Jewish practices. And others, like many of us, have seen the value of Torah as the correct way of life for the redeemed person and have sought to apply it all to the best of our knowledge and understanding. But when a Gentile comes into Messianic Judaism they find out that their participation is limited to the perimeter. In the MJAA they are not allowed full membership. They are not ordained as Rabbis. There is no mechanism or procedure to allow a Gentile’s full participation in the institutions of Messianic Judaism.
In Non-Messianic Judaism, this is accomplished through the conversion process. After a Gentile has gone through this process they are members of the House of Israel, no different than their natural born counterparts, with all the same privileges and responsibilities. Messianic Judaism, on the other hand, does not see the need for conversion. The Gentile Christians are already their brothers, fellow heirs in the body of Messiah. Why would they need to convert? In many Messianic synagogues, Jews and Gentiles alike are encouraged to pray the ‘sinners prayer’ at which time they enter the ‘Church’. The Jew and the Gentile take divergent paths from there, however. Once they come into the ‘Church’ they have different responsibilities and duties. In the Messianic synagogue, Judaism is practiced to some degree. The Gentile is sent to a church with different practices. He can visit the synagogue but it not really there for him, regardless of what he thinks. So the Gentile on whom Elohim has impressed the importance of Torah and Judaism finds himself in limbo. While the Messianic Jews see him as a ‘brother in Messiah’ he is held at arms length due to an accident of birth. It seems as though the Messianic Jewish ‘denomination’ is a ‘Jews only’ club.
Another problem is Messianic Judaism is ambivalent about Torah. Since it seems as though Messianic Judaism is another Christian denomination of sorts, they have sought to pour the wine of Christianity into the wineskin of Judaism. Outwardly, many of their practices are Jewish. They wear tallit when they worship and they worship on Shabbat. They celebrate many of the festivals and they wear kippot. Some synagogues even have Torah scrolls and a few of the congregants can read it. But inwardly, most of their theology and belief is Christian. Their creeds, their understanding of the Messiah, the nature of God, salvation and especially their attitude and understanding of the Mosaic covenant come from Christianity. They don’t know how important it is. On one hand, they’re Jewish so they know, at some level, it is important to them. On the other hand, their brothers, the Christians, don’t obey the mosaic covenant at all. In fact, they have adopted many practices of the pagans, something the terms of the covenant prohibit. But they are ‘saved’ just the same. Yet, both the Messiah and His Talmidim taught about the importance of Torah and lived it out in their lives. And these are the acknowledged founders of the ‘church’. But the ‘church’ has taught for almost two thousand years that Torah is not essential for salvation, it is not important in a believer’s life and may even be an impediment to the Christian drawing closer to Elohim. So if it’s not essential to salvation, Messianic Judaism cannot, with any real authority, require, or even strongly encourage, Torah obedience among it’s adherents. Christian understanding says Torah is not important so as long as Messianic Judaism remains in the Christian camp, Torah obedience will just be one option of acceptable Christian religious expression among many. It will be a means to an evangelistic end and will continued to be looked at with suspicion (and rightly so) by non-messianic Jews.
So what am I saying here. I’ve thrown out a a lot of terms here; salvation, Torah, Israel, Messiah, Church, Jew, Christian and others common in our religious debate. The definition of these terms is something that we need to discuss as well. Messianic Judaism has adopted, for the most part, a Christian understanding of these terms and many of us, having been brought up in a Christian environment, still think that way as well. As such, it would be easy to conclude from my statements that I believe Torah, the Law, is essential for salvation and all the Christians are going to hell. Taking salvation, Israel and Torah, understanding them in the common Christian sense and combining them as I have, it would be easy to come to that conclusion. Nothing could be farther form the truth however. One does not have to be part of the ‘commonwealth of Israel’, remember the Sabbath, abstain from pork or celebrate the festivals to receive a place in the world to come (See Israel, the Goyim and the Eternal Destiny of Man for more info here). That is another issue completely but it illustrates the point that if we are going to understand Scripture in a consistent matter, we cannot blindly accept Christianity’s definition of these terms for they have a different meaning in Judaism.
Ultimately, the question which we must have the courage to face and answer is, ‘are Christianity and Judaism compatible at all?’ Messianic Judaism has said yes and attempted to make the marriage work and we have looked at the results. I believe there are fundamental differences between Judaism and Christianity in theology, practice and in the religious communities themselves which require a negative answer to the question. Christianity evolved as a reaction against Judaism and the Jewish people around the period of the first Jewish war with Rome. It proscribed Jewish practices more vehemently than did the Roman government. It began to understand the Scriptures through the eyes of Plato and Aristotle instead of Moshe and the prophets. They stole the Sacred Scriptures and made them simply a preface to their own and then redacted themselves into them to create a sense of legitimacy. They changed the Messiah from a Torah obedient Jewish man Who loved His people to a universal, anti-Torah demigod. And once they had the machinery of the state at their disposal, they rigorously persecuted the true people of Elohim, something that continues to this day. Judaism is a triad of Torah, people and land put together by Elohim Himself never to be forsaken or replaced. Christianity has proscribed the Torah for it’s adherents, persecuted the people and moved the promised land to the heavenlies. How can there be any perceived continuity between the two? Judaism holds dear everything Christianity abhors. Christianity is a man made religion, a combination of Roman and Babylonian religion, Greek philosophy and some basic Jewish ethics (although with all the murder and mayhem perpetuated in the name of ‘Christ’, the last point could certainly be disputed). Christianity has taken some basic truths and ideas, removed their foundation and created a new religion. To put Judaism back into Christianity is to put a square peg in a round hole. When we present Nazarene Judaism to Christians, we are not educating them about the roots of their faith, we are showing them the truths of the Scriptures they claim. Christianity is not a form of Judaism, it doesn’t even spring from the same well.
What is the well from which Christianity sprung? It was the well of Roman and Alexandrine anti-Semitism (used in the modern sense of the word), it was the well of gnosticism and the dualism endemic to Greek philosophy, it was the well of Babylonian and Roman religious practice and culture. Let’s take a brief look at all of these.
Hatred of the Jewish people has been around since there was a Jewish people. Pharaoh hated them and killed their sons. Nebuchadnezzar besieged their cities and destroyed their Temple. Haman wanted to eliminate them from the face of the earth. Why? Because they “keep themselves separate. Their customs are different from those of all other people..” (Est 3:8) They seemed to have nothing in common with other peoples. The Jewish people were different and they are different because that is what Elohim wants them to be. Their light would not shine if they were like all other nations. YHVH has called them out, He has chosen them, which means the other nations were not. This creates resentment among other peoples, it bothers them because the Jews are the conscience of the world. Their existence says “our way is Elohim’s way” which means their way is not.
In the period leading up to the time of Messiah, the first true evidence of anti-Semitism (as we understand it today) in the ancient world, in the third century BCE, was in Egypt in reaction to an effective campaign of conversion on the part of the Jewish population. Of course we cannot fail to mention how Antiochus Epiphanies felt about the Jews and tried to proscribe Jewish practice in the second century, leading to the revolt of the Maccabees. In the first century BCE another, wider wave of anti-Semitism swept the ancient world. It began in Alexandria and Antioch, which, along with Rome, became the centers of Christian understanding after the destruction of Yerushalyim. The instigators, Apion, Poscidonios and Molon, said that the Jews were a race of shameful origins, a race of lepers who had been cast out of Egypt at the time of Moshe. Dietary laws and circumcision were corruptions of Moshe’s ‘ideal’ religion. They said Jewish separation had it’s roots in the hatred of mankind and of the gods, they undermined all other religions, they worshipped a golden ass’s head, practiced ritual murder against the Greeks and that Jewish civilization was sterile and had produced nothing useful. For those of you familiar with the history of the church in the middle ages, much of this sounds very familiar.
Apion took his anti-Jewish feeling to Rome where he found a ready ear among the many who opposed Caeser’s pro-Jewish policies. In the first century CE Sejanus, the man behind Tiberius Caesar, banished Jews from Rome and had an anti-Jewish campaign planned before his execution. Tactius stated that “the Jews regard as profane all we hold sacred and permit all we abhor”. In 40 CE Caligula planned to have a statue of himself erected in the Temple. After the rebellion in 66CE, much of Jewish practice was proscribed, and even more harshly in the time of Hadrian and the second Jewish war in 132 CE. Most Gentiles in the Roman world did not have a very positive view of the Jews.
Gnosticism had it origins in Alexandria, that great melting pot of religious ideas in the ancient world. It was secretive in the sense that it’s adherents believed they has a knowledge (gnosis) that other people did not have. The Gnostics believed in a incomprehensible, unapproachable god who had no contact with the material world. The world was created by a series of demi-urges which made matter evil because it had nothing to do with god. The Gnostics believed they had the knowledge to break free of this evil, material world and unite with the divine. They interpreted religious texts, including the Tenach, allegorically, they worshipped images, embraced Greek philosophy, they were sun worshippers and they were anti-Jewish. Many of the church fathers; Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Clement and Origen came from Alexandria and their writings belie the influence gnosticism had on their Christianity.
Barnabas (not the companion of Sha’ul) was known for his allegorizing of the Sabbath and anti-Torah sentiment. Justin believed that Jewish religion was forced upon Israel as punishment by Elohim. Clement believed that the Christian was the true Gnostic and that while there was one river of truth, many streams fall into on either side. Origen’s opinion of Torah was that the literal application of it’s laws was never it’s intent and that one had to leave these things behind and turn the mind to the good, true and spiritual law of Elohim.
In Antioch, Ignatius (the authenticity of whose letters is in question) said that if we live in accordance with Judaism, we admit we have not received grace. In Rome, Marcion, a ‘Christian Gnostic said that the Jewish Elohim was the demi-urge and since the Torah was the work of this inferior Elohim it should be ignored. He also believed in fasting on Shabbat to show contempt for it, a practice already common in the Roman ‘church’ by his time.
During the second and third centuries, Roman and Babylonian religious practices were adopted to fill the vacuum created by the abandonment of Judaism, the facts of which most of us are aware. Sunday worship, Easter, image worship, Christmass, a celibate priesthood, and ideas such as the exclusive fraternity of the church for salvation, the authority of the bishop of Rome, the trinity, the evil nature of the flesh and the world and other Greek philosophical ideas. Often these inventions were not adopted through reasoned debate but through all out war in which forgery, slander, murder and rebellion were accepted practice.
In the fourth century John Chrysostom denounced the Jews as carnal, lascivious, demonic and accursed. They were deicides and they worshipped the devil. St Jerome said about the synagogue ‘If you call it a brothel, a den of vice, the devil’s refuge, Satan’s fortress a place to deprave the soul, an abyss of every conceivable disaster or whatever else you will, you are still saying less that it deserves’. Synagogues were burnt to the ground at the instigation of the church bishops. This was the time of Augustine, who, more than any other individual, dominated Christian thought for a thousand years, and whose influence is still felt today. The concept of original sin and the idea that salvation was only to be found in the church were his inventions. He was a strong proponent of using the sword to enforce orthodoxy, bring about conversion and punish heretics and Jews. He divided the world into Christians, who were the only saved ones, and everyone else, all of whom were going to hell because of their inherent wickedness. The Jews were to be kept in perpetual slavery to bear witness to the triumph of the church. There is a direct line from the ‘church fathers’ to the atrocities of the crusades, the inquisition, the pogroms and the holocaust. Yahushua said ‘by their fruits you will know them’. The fruit of Christianity shows that it does not come from the root of Israel or Israel’s Messiah. It is not in any way represenative of the Messiah of Israel or those who folowed Him.
This brief look at the facts should show that Christianity has much more in common with the religions and philosophies of the ancient world that it does with Judaism. The Gentiles (and hellenized Jews) thought the idea of being Elohim’s chosen and going to heaven through someone else’s work (Yahushua’s) was a good one but tying it to the Judaism many of them had been taught to abhor and which was proscribed by the empire was not. So they took the Jew Yahushua and transformed him into a demi-god, placed him in Greek clothes and put him in their religious and philosophical context. Beyond the externals of a messianic idea and some basic ethics, Judaism and Christianity have little in common. Their theology, philosophy, world-view, ways of thinking and religious practices are on opposite ends of the spectrum. They cannot be combined in a way that is truly meaningful and consistent.
If we have the courage to face and accept that truth and accept the consequences of that truth, most of our confusion and uncertainty will go away. What are the consequences of that truth? First, the Jewish community will continue to be very skeptical of us and it is going to take a lot of time and consistency on our part to allay their fears and concerns. The Jewish community is suspicious by nature of anything they perceive as foreign because of their history. There will continue to be a ‘knee-jerk’ rejection of us because of their preconceived ideas about us and the labels they will continue to try to force on us. We will continue to be labeled as ‘Jews for Jesus’ and ‘Messianic Jews’ or ‘Jewish Christians’. But we must patiently continue to explain our purpose and mission, carving out a new niche and placing a new label on ourselves that will accurately describe who we are and what we’re about. And there are rays of hope. Particularly in the orthodox community where Torah obedience is valued almost above all else, there has been some positive movement. As we continue to put value on the same things and consistently, through word and action demonstrate in whose camp we are, the walls will slowly come down. Again, it will be a slow process. Keep in mind that the acceptance of the Chasidim into the mainstream Jewish fold took nearly four generations.
Those reactions, many of us are used to. The reaction from the Christian community will be different. We must always keep in the front our thinking that it is pleasing Elohim that is the most important thing. Many of us have gotten used to the help of Christians and the churches, we have operated under their blessing, we have met in their buildings and have drawn many visitors and even some adherents from their ranks. The label of ‘Messianic Jewish’ many of us have accepted either actively or passively has allowed this free flow of people and assistance between us and the church. This will eventually come to a stop; it must if we desire to place both feet in the camp of Israel. The Jewish community is not going to believe anything we say about ourselves when we meet in a church building and belt out ‘Amazing Grace’ during worship. As we consistently declare we are not Christians, that we do not accept their theology and interpretation of the Scriptures, that we are not their intimate brothers and ‘co-heirs’ with their messiah, they will reject us and look at us with suspicion. This is not to say that we will cease to cooperate with Christians in encouraging righteousness among all peoples and working towards common goals, just as the Jewish and Christian communities do today. But cooperation in ‘evangelism’ or other such things will no longer be possible. We are not preaching the same messiah and our idea of discipleship will be completely different. Eventually, if they haven’t already, they will label us a cult, which in an interesting phenomenon. ‘Cults’, according to Christianity, are groups that operate outside of accepted ‘orthodoxy’. And how is orthodoxy defined? By majority consensus, and, in the past, by ‘bigger guns’. It is not defined by a consistent, honest interpretation of the Scriptures. If it was, Christianity would be the largest and most successful cult of all. Of course, no one will look at it that way. We will be the ones so labeled and it will be much more difficult to draw people to us from Christian circles.
So, are we slitting our own wrists? Are we in reality taking ourselves out of both communities and ensuring our own demise? No, we are not because we have the Truth and we have the promise of Elohim that the community He created would overpower even the gates of Hell. Israel stands on three things. First, is the land promised to Avraham, Yitzak, Ya’akov and their descendants and all who would join them. Second is the Torah, the truth of Elohim, the truth many of us have worked so hard to uncover and understand and then apply. In many ways we have emphasized this more than anything else. But I will say this, and this is essential. While it is true that we are presently the most Scripturally accurate expression of Elohim’s community and it is true that we have recovered and developed many wonderful ideas and a consistent framework from which to understand an apply the Scriptures, that is not what is going to draw most people to us. While Judaism has many beautiful rituals and forms of religious expression that reflect the mind of Elohim, that is not what is going to draw most people to us. The thing that will draw people in and keep them as they grow in understanding is the third thing in the triad; community, Am Yisra’el, the people of Israel. Before we were in the Land, before Elohim gave us Torah, Israel was a people, a community. Because Israel is more than a religion, more than a political entitiy, more than a world view, it is a people. If we focus on the truth that the world will know we belong to God because of the love that we have for one another, our growth will take care of itself. If we show love and acceptance when others will not, we will grow. If we preach truth and let the Ruach haKodesh take care of the conviction or even the condemnation, we will grow. If we place our emphasis on living right instead of believing correctly, many people whom Elohim has touched or who are earnestly seeking Him will find a place of encouragement where they can work out their relationship with Elohim on their own terms while being surrounded with love and truth. We need to be inclusive, rather than exclusive, while at the same time, maintaining the integrity of the community. Truth is on our side, therefore time is as well. We can be confident that when either a Jew or a Christian asks us why, we will have the most Scripturally consistent and accurate answer available. And for those among either group that value their relationship with Elohim, the Scriptures and the truth, they will seek and they will find. And they will find us.
So since we have established that we are firmly in the camp of Israel and Judaism, what now? How do we interact with this community, particularly since they are not really fond of us nor do they, in most cases, even acknowledge our validity. And how do we come back into the stream of Judaism after such a protracted absence during which tradition and halachah continued to develop in the Diaspora, in a world far removed from the Temple and the land, a world of persecution and ghettos, of superstition and Greek enlightenment, and often in reaction against messianic belief, however defined. These are issues that need to be resolved if we are to speak and act with one voice in the larger community of Israel.
The first thing we must all do, some to a greater extent than others, is to unlearn much of what we know. We are pouring new wine into new wineskins. Much of our task is the creation of those wineskins into which Elohim can pour new wine. We cannot create our wineskins with a patchwork of Pentecostalism, Chassidism, Calvinism, Platonism, Rabbinism, and anything else that may suit you or you have in your closet. I have already mentioned the importance of redefining some basic theological terms, as in so doing, we will develop a new theological and philosophic framework in which to understand Scripture, our relationship with our Creator and His plan for this world. That will involve a discovery and reeducation for many of us in the intricacies of Semitic thought, in contrast to our western, Greek way of thinking. And while we will leave many questions unanswered, many of which should remain so, there needs to be a free exchange of ideas among all of us so we can develop a paradigm that is authentically Jewish yet uniquely Nazarene while being consistent, realistic and faithful to Scripture. We need to educate ourselves in rabbinic ways of thought so we can understand some parts of the culture and people the Messiah came to and so we can communicate intelligently with the other Judaisms of our day. We need to break cleanly from our past in the way we use terms, (such as referring to the ‘church’ as part of the body of Messiah’ and the equation of ‘Yahushua’ and ‘Jesus’) and the identity we hold (Jewish, not Christian). This will require work on our part such as immersion in Jewish literature, philosophy and theology to help us understand and develop an identity with Israel and the Jewish people. It will require interaction with the Jewish community and support of Jewish institutions. And along with all that, we must also face the challenge of how we should then live, what the halachah of our community should be.
As we reenter this community (like it or not, here we come!) and hold to Torah as the way of life, we must ask how we are to obey Torah. Do we take the words as they are written and start over? Some seventh day Adventists, the Worldwide Church of Elohim, the Assemblies of Yahweh and lots of other small church groups have attempted this route. But they have not sought to establish continuity with the historic people of Israel. Do we just jump in to the Orthodox stream as it exists today, simply adding our messianic belief? The answer lies somewhere in between reinventing the wheel and adopting the status quo. We cannot accept Orthodox Judaism as is because it rejects our messianic belief and some of it’s traditions and theological understanding have evolved in opposition to that belief. We cannot understand or evaluate the first century Nazarenes exclusively through the eyes of present day Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism developed in response to the Diaspora and Christian persecution. It embraced the superstitions of the dark ages and the thought of the Greek philosophers. The result, as was the case even in Yahushua’s time, was that some of the reasoning and assumptions behind their halacha was flawed and resulted in practices that were not reflective of the will of Elohim or consistent with the rest of Torah. Such practices and ideas can have no place of real value in our halachic system. But most of what is historically consistent in Judaism is valuable and meaningful. Most of the traditions, many of which we take for granted, are beautiful and are filled with both obvious and intricate meaning and they help us develop our relationship with Elohim and our expression of Torah obedience. And if we truly desire to be recognized among the greater commonwealth of Israel, we must respect the community’s authority to establish halachah, historically and presently. And by the community, I mean the larger community of Israel who have taken the covenant seriously whether they be reform, conservative or orthodox as well as the historical consensus that bridges the gap even between Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jewry. Our disagreements with their judgements must be undertaken with the utmost seriousness. We must show respect to the history and the development of the people with whom we seek identity. Keep in mind that the common divisions of Reform, Orthodox and Conservative did not even exist two hundred years ago. Before that one was either an observant Jew who took his covenant realtionship with Elohim seriously or he was not. So while the divsions and their consequent religious and political relaities exist and we have to deal with them as such, attempting to fit into a catagory that did not even exist until recently is not something we should be preoccupied with. It is the seriousness with which we take our covenant responsibilities that matters.
Therefore, we do not do things only to seek the approval of Orthodox (or any other form) Judaism. While it may be a consideration and a sign of respect to give heed to the institutions and traditions they have developed, their acceptance of us is not something we have any control over. Individually, we may participate in some of those traditions because we find value in them or to specifically to relate to the Orthodox or Chasidim. But as a community, it would not be proper to blindly enforce a body of tradition that has developed without messianic consideration or Nazarenes. Ultimately, we must obey Elohim rather than men. Some of our disagreements are in areas we cannot compromise, our messianic belief, for example. There will be other areas of Torah and tradition that were part of the Judaisms of the first century that were discarded and we are trying to revive which will put us at odds with the present Judaisms. There will be things we should embrace that we find inconvenient or pointless. And there are beautiful traditions we embrace because they are right. The challenge for us as a community is to know which traditions fit in which category for we cannot be, as many Messianics are, selective in our Torah obedience and our halacha, arbitrarily doing what we personally find meaningful and ignoring the rest. This is a task that must be taken up with the utmost seriousness, founded on biblical integrity and historical accuracy and with a keen understanding of present application.
Beyond recapturing the practices and traditions of the first century community, I would propose the following as a starting point for evaluation and embracing Jewish tradition in general. There are traditions that are part of Judaism in general, traditions that span the divisions of Orthodox, Conservative and Reform, Ashkenazic and Sephardic. These traditions, such as the seder, the siddur, the prohibition of milk and meat, and the division of the Torah portions, for example, are ones that are understood by all of Judaism to be normative. That is not to say that all of the Judaisms practice such things but they all recognize that if one were to be a ‘good Jew’, one would adhere to such traditions. These are traditions we should embrace. And this is the reason why. If we are seeking to be part of the larger community of Israel, the recognized people of Elohim, we must respect the consensus of that community in matters of faith and practice, as long as those things do not directly contradict the Scriptures. Elohim has given the community the authority to interpret Torah and we must show our loyalty to the community by respecting those interpretations that have become part of the historical fabric and identity of the Jewish people. We have seen that Yahushua had this same attitude toward tradition. The Pharisees did not ask Him why he was harvesting on Shabbat (Matt 12) or why He didn’t wash His hands (Matt 15). Their accusations were all directed at the Talmidim, not at Him. Could that be because He observed these traditions to show Himself to be above reproach in the eyes of the community. Certainly the neglect of such traditions cannot usually be construed as sinful. However, Yahushua apparently agreed with the idea that the community, at least those who take Torah and covenant seriously, who were in His day the Pharisees, have the authority to determine what is normative in the practice of Torah, to determine what makes one pious. Throughout Israel’s history, righteous men who took their covenant responsibility seriously have developed traditions to assist them in fulfilling those responsibilities. Some of those traditions have spanned the continents and the centuries. It is those traditions and Torah interpretations we need to embrace to show ourselves as part of the larger community of Israel.
The development of our community should be one of the first things on our list. And it is something we need to work at because of the nature of our development up to this point. Our development has been primarily in the larger community of cyberspace which is probably a first in itself. It has allowed a degree of connectedness and development that would have been impossible a decade ago. The work of the Beit Din, the congregational affiliations, the information published by various people and the sharing of ideas among ourselves are all made possible by this medium. But along with that comes the impersonal nature that is part of the internet. The sense of intimate community and connectedness are difficult to maintain solely through e-mail.
Because of this, the development of local congregations and their affiliation to the whole is essential. It is the local congregations that are going to meet the real needs of people. Anyone can read a paper on the internet, many of us have written important works that bring truth to anyone who wants to look. But we must be much more than just a repository of Elohim’s truth. We must be a community. I know Dr. Trimm is currently working on a program to ‘plant’ new congregations based on the model they have used successfully in Colorado. Leaders extant in various locales need to learn this program and implement it in their areas. There may even be individuals Elohim will call to do this work regularly.
But in order for it to be successful, there needs to be a support structure in place to assist new congregations in their development. This will begin on the local level with the closest congregation(s) providing people, material, training and teaching to develop a strong foundation from which the new seed will grow. There also needs to be an international organization that will provide additional resources and a basic mold in which a congregation can develop. The Society for the Advancement of Nazarene Judaism has filled this role up to this point but to be truly effective, our support of it needs to increase considerably. Yes, I’m talking about money. If SANJ is going to be the organization that will plant and develop local congregations, support the work of scholars to define and defend our community and do whatever necessary to get the truth to as many people as we can, resources are essential. Literature needs to be developed, people need to be trained and sent to various locations. I would propose regional conferences like this to encourage connectedness among people and congregations in a larger geographical area. If we really want to ensure success, and by that I mean the replication of spiritually mature, Torah obedient, Messiah loving individuals and congregations that are going to fulfill the mission that Elohim has for Remnant Israel, then we need to gladly sacrifice our time and money to the larger community. For a true community is one that not only shares the bonds of love and friendship but also has shared ideas, lifestyle and when necessary, resources. The development of a strong sense of community and community responsibility is essential to our success.
We need to address this concern at this early juncture. For we have already been growing at a phenomenal rate because there have so many people who have been previously disconnected to whom Elohim has shown the truth of Torah and Mashiyach have finally found a label with which they can identify. This is a great opportunity but also a problem. The problem is this. How to take people that are by nature, rather individualistic, who are responding to this great move of Elohim, and develop a community rather than a movement. We have seen the disunity that results in a ‘movement’. The divergent views of faith and practice, the ambiguity that results from people from all kinds of backgrounds appropriating a label that has not been clearly defined. The challenge is to define the label in terms that are general enough not to be authoritarian yet specific enough to provide unity, community and some sense of standardization from which we can speak as one voice to both the Christian and Jewish communities.
The International Nazarene Beit Din is a crucial part of the community’s success and, if done properly, will ensure we avoid the pitfalls of the Messianic Movement. Unlike Messianic Judaism, Nazarene Judaism is not a ‘do it yourself’ Judaism. In Messianic Judaism, each individual or congregation adopts the mitzvot and traditions they find valuable or meaningful and ignore the rest. The results are very diverse and divergent beliefs and practices with each one ‘doing what is right in his own eyes’ although it will be rationalized in Christian lingo about conviction or the ‘leading of the Spirit’. We can not be so disorganized if we are ever to be taken seriously.
Therefore the work of the Beit Din is crucial to the formation of a cohesive community. They will answer the questions posed about tradition earlier. They will respond to halachic concerns in our modern time that have not been adequately addressed by the other Judaisms. They will formulate a basic paradigm from which to understand the important topics of Scripture, faith and practice.
They must do so with several things in mind. First, they need to be true to written Torah above all else. We do not want to be condemned for setting aside the command of Elohim for the sake of our tradition. Halacha must be consistent with Torah, Tenach and the teaching of the Messiah and His Talmidim. The Word of Elohim must come first, no matter what.
Second is a healthy respect for and understanding of the traditions and halachic rulings as they have come down to the present age. And I would council that, where possible, and assuming the other criteria are met, orthodox halacha be respected, adapted when necessary and adopted as our own. For if we lean in the orthodox direction, we will find find more acceptance among the other Judaisms because in most cases even the secular Jew knows in his heart that in general terms, orthodoxy is right.
Third, they need to be realistic. We need to look at our present day circumstances and fit our lives into Torah in a way that makes sense and enables us to perform the mitzvot accurately and consistently. That means we will have to make compromises with the modern life we live and and with things that we do not have the ability to control. We need to carefully balance the integrity of Torah with the realities of 20th century life outside Eretz Israel.
Fourth, they must stick to the very basic issues and allow for individuals and communities to express themselves and their relationship with Elohim in their particular situation while remaining under the umbrella of general Natzrim halacha. They cannot seek to micro manage for that would only create resentment and the result would be an erosion of the authority they are seeking to establish. What they need to do is create general principles and halacha that the individual communities and their local beit dins can adapt to their own particular situations. This is all done within the boundaries of Torah, of course, and there needs to be some well defined boundaries. But the local communities must be given the freedom to develop and adapt tradition so it is meaningful to them and respond to situations that are unique to their environment. It would be a good idea to have a clearinghouse to catalogue the rulings from the local beit dins so we can all benefit from the wisdom they apply to their situations. You never know when it may happen in your community.
Finally the last basic issue we need to deal with is maintaining the integrity of the community. This is an essential thing because much of what is contained in Torah is there for that purpose. Israel’s mission, and ours by extension, is to be a light to all the world. We are to be salt, we are to be the consciences of the world. And we understand that Elohim is not going to choose anyone else for the job. Therefore, He has everything, including his honor, staked on us. We have a very serious responsibility because when people see us, they are seeing Elohim’s representatives here on earth. We are the priests of the world and as remnant Israel, we are the ones that make the whole holy. We are held to the highest standard and we need to hold one another to those standards. The integrity of the community is essential to our mission and will enable us to speak and operate as a true community.
What, specifically, am I talking about? I’m talking about each one of us and each one of those who claim to be Nazarene Jews out there being proper representatives of Elohim and Nazarene Judaism. Proper in character and knowledge and spirit. Let’s look at leadership first for that is where it all starts. If leadership is not united around common goals and ideas, there is no way that those whom Elohim has placed under their care are going to generate a common bond and understanding with Nazarenes everywhere else.
The unification of leadership is going to be around the Beit Din. Therefore, let’s start with them. The men (and possibly women) seated in this crucial body must truly be men beyond reproach. As a group, they are really speaking for Elohim to the community. That is a very heavy responsibility and there can be no place given to ulterior motives, juvenile politics or hot heads. The prayerful and informed discussion engaged in to seek the mind of Elohim for the community is a job for those who have spiritual maturity, impeccable character, a working knowledge of Scripture and tradition and an absolute commitment to the community as a whole. Their views and understanding which should have a relatively long and consistent track record, need to show agreement with the primary tenets of Nazarene Judaism as they have been developed to this point. This means that the addition of members to the Beit Din will be done only after careful consideration and evaluation. We are developing something new here and it will be successful to the extent the foundation on which it stands is strong and stable. That foundation is leadership and the basis of leadership and authority is the Beit Din. The work done and decisions made will determine the direction of the community. Therefore, their work needs to be done deliberately and with caution. And while there will be disagreements and not all the votes will be unanimous, all members must respect the body enough to abide by the decisions made and encourage those under their care to do so as well.
Which brings us to those who have leadership positions in local congregations who have affiliated themselves with SANJ and placed themselves under the authority of the Beit Din. Affiliations should be accepted with care and those who seek affiliation should be evaluated by scriptural principles by those bodies they seek to be a part of. These bodies need to be assured that these men and women are going to represent Nazarene Judaism honorably and consistently. They need to abide by the rulings of the Beit Din and be an example to those whom Elohim has placed in their charge. They need to be knowledgeable enough to train others and have the temperament and maturity to do so. They need to be mature people who have developed their understanding of Torah and Messiah over the course of years, not weeks or months. They must have a good understanding of Judaism and should have been living the Jewish lifestyle consistently for some time. At some point an application should be developed by which an applicant for affiliation can be thoroughly evaluated and some type of certification given to the congregation.
Which brings us finally to the people who make up all the local congregations. How do we establish a basic consensus of belief and understanding among a group of people from very varied backgrounds and who are, by nature, rather independently minded. We will do it the same way it has been done in Judaism for years, through the conversion process. This will be a process by which halachicly recognized Jews and Gentiles will develop a basic agreement of belief and practice and become part of the community of remnant Israel. It will be a process of education in theology and practice that should last at least a few months during which the prospect will demonstrate his or her willingness to adopt a Torah observant lifestyle as determined by the Beit Din and the larger community of Israel and his or her commitment to the community by their allocation of time and resources. At the at the end of this time, the local Beit Din will evaluate the prospect and after that, the convert will be immersed. This process is essential for a couple of reasons. First, is the previously mentioned goal of creating a cohesive community based on common belief and practice. Second, it will protect the community from those who would appropriate our label without accepting our values, understanding and authority structures. This is especially true by the nature of our larger community which has evolved on the internet. The third is that it allows gentiles to become full participants in the life of the community because they will have the same basic knowledge, lifestyle and values as do observant halachic Jews. Finally, it is a witness to the larger community of Israel. By developing a conversion process that shows respect for their halacha, teaches people to place value on the same things Jewish people always have, and creating educated students of Torah who are filled with the Spirit of Elohim, will will show ourselves to be true children of Avraham regardless of our birth.
The secret to all of this is maintaining balance. This talk about authority may have made some of you uncomfortable. This talk of standardization and consensus. But the consensus that I am talking about is the one that held the Jewish community together through most of their history. While they may have differed in some of their theology, no one questioned Torah as the way of life, their commitment to the community was impeccable and they all respected the authority of the leading rabbis to develop halachic understanding. They had developed a responsible authority that was respected and and avoided the authoritarian use of power. That is the balance between respecting the individuals relationship with Elohim and his ability to be led by the Spirit and maintaining the integrity of the community and it’s standard according to the Word of Elohim. It is the balance of respecting the ability of local communities to develop wisdom and understanding in their particular situation while maintaining a basic understanding of faith that creates a feeling of community between congregations all over the world. It is the balance between acceptance of an individual’s rate of growth in faith while never lowering the expectations Elohim has of every redeemed person. If we follow such guidelines with maturity and work them out with council among godly men and women, we will develop a vibrant community of individuals who will hold to the highest standards of Scripture, allow the spirit free reign in their lives and are committed to their fellow Nazarenes and Jews all over the world.
The opportunity that is before us is enormous and fraught with peril. Elohim is doing a great and awesome work all over the world. He is bringing Jews and Gentiles to an understanding of redemption that includes both Torah and Mashiyakh. The ‘Church will not hear of Torah, The Jews will not look at Mashiyakh and Messianic Judaism will not accept Gentiles. These people whom Elohim has called to Torah and Messiah will need to find someplace to belong because they know community is essential in Elohim’s plan. We can be that community if we are willing to make it happen. If we are willing to put our time, energy and money into this community we know as Nazarene Judaism nothing will be out of our reach. We are on the ground floor. If we take the time and take what we are doing seriously, we will build a beautiful work. Because truth is our foundation and because as we build on and live that truth the Spirit of Elohim will do things with us and through us that have not been seen since the first decades of the Yerushalyim community.
Rav Mikha’el
Netzarim’ 99 Conference
June 1999
How the Church Fathers Invented Christianity
By
James Scott Trimm
What many Christians do not know, is that the Church Fathers admitted that the original followers of Yeshua as Messiah, including Paul, were Jews of the sect of the Nazarenes, and that Gentile Christianity was their own invention.
Of course the New Testament tells us Paul was a “ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5). The so-called church fathers tell us quite a bit about these “Nazarenes”.
The fourth century “church father” Epiphanius gives a detailed description:
But these sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but “Nazarenes,” … However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do… They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that God is one, and that his son is Yeshua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the… Writings… are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians…. they are nothing but Jews…. They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
The “church father” Jerome (4th Cent.) described these Nazarenes as those “…who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.” (Jerome; On. Is. 8:14).
But in a letter to Augustine, Jerome makes an amazing admission concerning the Nazarenes:
“The matter in debate, therefore, or I should rather say your opinion regarding it, is summed up in this: that since the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the law, i.e. in offering sacrifices as Paul did, in circumcising their children, as Paul did in the case of Timothy, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath, as all the Jews have been accustomed to do. If this be true, we fall into the heresy… [of those who] though believing in Christ, were anathematized by the fathers for this one error, that they mixed up the ceremonies of the law with the gospel of Christ, and professed their faith in that which was new, without letting go what was old. …In our own day there exists a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East, which is called the sect of the Minæans, and is even now condemned by the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe. But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither the one nor the other. I therefore beseech you, who think that you are called upon to heal my slight wound, which is no more, so to speak, than a prick or scratch from a needle, to devote your skill in the healing art to this grievous wound, which has been opened by a spear driven home with the impetus of a javelin. For there is surely no proportion between the culpability of him who exhibits the various opinions held by the fathers in a commentary on Scripture, and the guilt of him who reintroduces within the Church a most pestilential heresy. If, however, there is for us no alternative but to receive the Jews into the Church, along with the usages prescribed by their law; if, in short, it shall be declared lawful for them to continue in the Churches of Christ what they have been accustomed to practice in the synagogues of Satan, I will tell you my opinion of the matter: they will not become Christians, but they will make us Jews.
(Jerome; Letter 75)
(1) “Minæans” apparently Latinized from Hebrew MINIM (singular is MIN) a word which in modern Hebrew means “apostates” but was originally an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
Jerome repeats Augustine, saying of the Nazarenes: “since the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the law, i.e. in offering sacrifices as Paul did, in circumcising their children, as Paul did in the case of Timothy, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath, as all the Jews have been accustomed to do.” (Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
Jerome responds saying of the Nazarenes “though believing in Christ, [they] were anathematized by the [church] fathers for this one error, that they mixed up the ceremonies of the law with the gospel of Christ, and professed their faith in that which was new, without letting go what was old.” (ibid)
In other words Augustine and Jerome tell us that the Nazarene doctrine that the Torah should still be observed began with “the preaching of Christ” and was the doctrine kept by Paul, but that the church “fathers” of Christianity declared this to be an error and a heresy.
Ignatius Invents Anti-Nomian Christianity
Up until the time of Ignatius (in the late first century), matters of dispute that arose at Antioch were ultimately referred to the Jerusalem Council (as in Acts 14:26-15:2). Ignatius usurped the authority of the Jerusalem council, declaring himself as the local bishop as the ultimate authority over the assembly of which he was bishop, and likewise declaring the same as true of all other bishops and their local assemblies. Ignatius writes:
…being subject to your bishop…
…run together according to the will of God.
Jesus… is sent by the will of the Father;
As the bishops… are by the will of Jesus Christ.
(Eph. 1:9, 11)
…your bishop…I think you happy who are so joined to him,
as the church is to Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ is to the Father…
Let us take heed therefore, that we not set ourselves
against the bishop, that we may be subject to God….
We ought to look upon the bishop, even as we would
upon the Lord himself.
(Eph. 2:1-4)
…obey your bishop…
(Mag. 1:7)
Your bishop presiding in the place of God…
…be you united to your bishop…
(Mag. 2:5, 7)
…he… that does anything without the bishop…
is not pure in his conscience…
(Tral. 2:5)
…Do nothing without the bishop.
(Phil. 2:14)
See that you all follow your bishop,
As Jesus Christ, the Father…
(Smy. 3:1)
By exalting the power of the office of bishop (overseer) and demanding the absolute authority of the bishop over the assembly, Ignatius was actually making a power grab by thus taking absolute authority over the assembly at Antioch and encouraging other Gentile overseers to follow suite.
Moreover Ignatius drew men away from Torah and declared the Torah to have been abolished, not only at Antioch but at other Gentile assemblies to which he wrote:
Be not deceived with strange doctrines;
nor with old fables which are unprofitable.
For if we still continue to live according to the Jewish Law,
we do confess ourselves not to have received grace…
(Mag. 3:1)
But if any one shall preach the Jewish law unto you,
hearken not unto him…
(Phil. 2:6)
It is also Ignatius who first replaces the Seventh Day Sabbath with Sunday worship, writing:
“…no longer observing sabbaths, but keeping the Lord’s day
in which also our life is sprung up by him, and through
his death…”
(Magnesians 3:3)
Having seceded from the authority of Jerusalem, declared the Torah abolished and replacing the Sabbath with Sunday, Ignatius had created a new religion. Ignatius coins a new term, never before used, for this new religion which he calls “Christianity” and which he makes clear is new and district religion from Judaism. He writes:
…let us learn to live according to the rules of Christianity,
for whosoever is called by any other name
besides this, he is not of God….
It is absurd to name Jesus Christ, and to Judaize.
For the Christian religion did not embrace the Jewish.
But the Jewish the Christian…
(Mag. 3:8, 11)
Conclusion
By the end of the first century Ignatius of Antioch had declared that the Nazarene doctrine that the Torah should still be observed which Augustine admitted began with “the preaching of Christ” and was the doctrine kept by Paul to be an error and a heresy.
He seceded from Judaism and founded a new religion which he called “Christianity”. A religion which rejected the Torah, and replaced the Seventh Day Sabbath with Sunday Worship.
Yeshua did not come to create a new religion, he came to be the Messiah of Judaism. The original followers of Yeshua as the Messiah were a sect of Judaism called the sect of the Nazarenes (Acts 24:5).
IN DEFENSE OF THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
By
James Scott Trimm
In recent years the Letter to the Hebrews has come under attack in some quarters of the Hebraic Roots movement. Among those better known Messianic leaders to question the validity of the Letter to the Hebrews is Monte Judah. The following is a response to some of the things Monte Judah has said about this very important book of the Scriptures.
THE HEBREW ORIGIN OF HEBREWS
Monte Judah starts with a completely false premise saying:
The book [Hebrews] is really an epistle (a letter) entitled to the Hebrews, but… the writing and logic is Greek. It was written in Greek, quoting from Greek copies of the Scriptures, and using Greek definitions to explain and teach Hebraic things.
WNAE Statement of Faith
I. YHWH
We believe that YHWH is Echad (one). We believe that YHWH reveals Himself in the K’numeh or Gaunin of Avi/Abba (Father/Daddy), the Memra (Word), and the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit).
II. BIBLE
We believe that the Bible, which includes both the Tanakh [Old Testament] and the Ketuvim Netzarim (New Testament) is the divinely inspired, infallible Word of Elohim in its original texts and manuscripts.
III. MESSIAH
We believe that Y’shua HaMashiach has come and with great joy we anticipate his return, and even though he may delay, nevertheless we endeavor to think about his return every day. We believe that the Messiah is the Word made flesh. We believe he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life in accordance with the Torah, performed miracles, was crucified for the atonement of his people in accordance with the Scriptures, was bodily resurrected on the third day. ascended to heaven and currently sits at the right hand of YHWH. He will return at the end of this age to usher in the Kingdom of Elohim on earth and will rule the world from Jerusalem with his people Israel for one thousand years. We also believe that the Messiah Yeshua is the Torah incarnate. Just as the Torah is the way, the truth and the light, the Messiah is also the way, the truth and the light.
IV. SALVATION
We believe that through the death of Messiah, because of his blood covenant with us, we receive salvation by way of inheritance. This salvation comes by faith through grace alone and is not earned by Torah observance.
V. TORAH
The Torah of Truth the Almighty gave to His people, Israel, through Moshe. He will not exchange it nor discard it for another until heaven and earth pass away. We believe that Torah observance is man’s moral obligation and expression of love to YHWH. The Torah is freedom and not bondage. The Torah is the way, the truth and the light and is for all of our generations forever.
VI. THE ONE FAITH
We believe that there is one faith which was once and for all delivered to the set-apart-ones. We believe that Messiah did not come to create a new religion but to be the Messiah of Judaism, the one faith that was once delivered to the set-apart-ones. We believe that Nazarene Judaism is the only expression of the one true faith. We do not accept any other religion as a non-Jewish cultural expression of the one true faith.
The first believers in Yeshua were a Jewish sect known as “Nazarenes” or in Hebrew “Netzarim” (Acts 24:5). The “church father” Jerome (4th Cent.) described these Nazarenes as those “…who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.” (Jerome; On. Is. 8:14).
Elsewhere he writes:
Today there still exists among the Jews in all the synagogues of the East a heresy which is called that of the Minæans (1), and which is still condemned by the Pharisees; [its followers] are ordinarily called ‘Nazarenes’; they believe that Messiah, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Miriam, and they hold him to be the one who suffered under Pontius Pilate and ascended to heaven, and in whom we also believe.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
The fourth century “church father” Epiphanius gives a more detailed description:
But these sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but “Nazarenes,” … However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do… They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that G-d is one, and that his son is Yeshua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the… Writings… are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians…. they are nothing but Jews…. They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
(1) “Minæans” apparently Latinized from Hebrew MINIM (singular is MIN) a word which in modern Hebrew means “apostates” but was originally an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
“Authentic” Netzarim
Ten Historical Characteristics of the “Authentic” Netzarim
By James Scott Trimm
There are many organizations now claiming an identification with the ancient Sect of the Netzarim/Nazarenes. One even claims to be the only “authentic” representation of Netzarim Judaism. Many of these organizations differ substantially with what we know historically about the ancient sect of the Nazarenes. The purpose of this article is to outline some of the historical characteristics which we know the ancient Nazarenes had, which many of these pseudo-Nazarene organizations lack. Beware of so-called “authentic” Nazarene/Netzarim Judaism that does not have these characteristics. There is nothing historically “authentic” about these groups.
1. Did not call themselves “Christians”
“These sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but ‘Nazarenes,’…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
2. Accepted Yeshua as Messiah
“The Nazarenes… accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.”
(Jerome; On. Is. 8:14)
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, … They disagree with [other] Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah.”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
3. Were Torah Observant
“The Nazarenes… accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.”
(Jerome; On. Is. 8:14)
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
4. Used both the Tanak (“Old Testament”) and the “New Testament”
“They use not only the New Testament’ but the ‘Old Testament’ as well, as the Jews do…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
5. Used Hebrew and Aramaic NT source texts.
“They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
“And he [Heggesippus the Nazarene] quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and from ‘The Syriac’ [the Aramaic], and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
6. Believed in the Virgin Birth of Yeshua.
“They believe that Messiah, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Miriam.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
7. Accepted the diety of Messiah… teaching that Elohim is ECHAD but that there are “many (more than two) ‘powers’ in heaven” including the Messiah.
“They…declare that God is one [ECHAD]…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
The Mishna states that the MINIM taught:
“There are many `powers’ in heaven”
(m.San. 4:5)
Clearly the MINIM in this portion of the Mishna were Nazarenes (1) and not Ebionites, since Ebionites clearly rejected the deity of Messiah.
In the Gemara to this portion of Mishna (b.San. 38b) the Talmud discusses various proof texts that the MINIM used to support their teaching of “many powers in heaven” including the Messiah.
R. Johanan said:
“In all the passages which the Minim have taken [as grounds] for their heresy, their refutation is found near at hand.
Thus: Let us make man in our image, (Gen. 1:26)
And God created [sing.] man in His own image; (Gen. 1:27)
Come, let us go down and there confound their language, (Gen. 11:7)
And the Lord came down [sing.] to see the city and the tower; (Gen. 11:5)
Because there were revealed [plur.] to him God, (Gen. 35:7)
Unto God who answereth [sing.] me in the day of my distress; (Gen. 35:3)
For what great nation is there that hath God so nigh [plur.] unto it, as the Lord our God is [unto us] whensoever we call upon Him [sing.]; (Deut. 4:7)
And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, [like] Israel, whom God went [plur.] to redeem for a people unto himself [sing.], (2Sam. 7:23)
Till thrones were placed and one that was ancient did sit. (Dan. 7:9)
Why were these [plurals] necessary? To teach R. Johanan’s dictum; viz.: The Holy One, blessed be He, does nothing without consulting His Heavenly Court (literally “Family”) , for it is written, The matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the sentence by the word of the Holy Ones. (Dan. 4:14)
Now, that is satisfactory for all [the other verses], but how explain Till thrones were placed? (Dan. 7:9)
One [throne] was for Himself and one for David [Messiah]. Even as it has been taught: One was for Himself and one for David: this is R. Akiba’s view.
R. Jose protested to him: Akiba, how long will thou profane the Sh’kinah?
Rather, one [throne] for justice, and the other for mercy.
Did he accept [this answer] from him or not? Come and hear!
For it has been taught: One is for justice and the other for charity; this is R. Akiba’s view. Said R. Eleazar b. Azariah to him: Akiba, what hast thou to do with Aggada? Confine thyself to [the study of] Nega’im and Ohaloth [civil issues]. But one was a throne, the other a footstool: a throne for a seat and a footstool in support of His feet (Is. 66:1).”
This section of Talmud tells us that the MINIM used Tanak passages in which Elohim was referenced in a plural form as proof texts for their teaching of “many powers in the heavens”. Among their proof texts were Gen. 1:26; 11:7; 35:7; Deut. 4:7; Sam. 7:23 & Dan. 7:9). The Rabbinic Jews dismissed these as examples of Elohim speaking to “His Heavenly Court” (literally “Heavenly Family”) i.e. the “watchers” of Dan. 4:14.
8. Accepted “Jewish Tradition” but not Rabbinic Halachah
“They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion…”
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
“And he [Heggesippus the Nazarene] quotes some passages from The Gospel according to the Hebrews and from “The Syriac” [the Aramaic], and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition of the Jews.”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
There are preserved for us five fragments from an ancient Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah in which the fourth century Nazarene writer makes it clear that Nazarenes of the fourth century were not following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah. The following is taken from the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:14:
” ‘And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel…’ The Nazarenes explain the two houses as the two houses of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees… [they Pharisees] scattered and defiled the precepts of the Torah by traditions and mishna. And these two houses did not accept the Savior…”
9. Accepted Paul as an emissary to the Ephraimites and Gentiles.
“The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above, try to explain this passage in the following way: ‘When Messiah came and his proclaiming shone out, the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the proclaiming became more dominant, that means the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul who was the last of all the emissaries. And the goodnews of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the goodnews.”
(Jerome on Is. 9:1-4)
10. They wore Head Coverings
“…false teachers, who, seeing that none of the emissaries any longer survived, at length attempted with bare and uplifted head to oppose the proclaiming of the truth…”
(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist.)
Footnotes
(1) It is important to define an important Talmudic term MIN (singular) / MINIM (plural).
The fourth century “Church Father” Jerome writes of the Nazarenes and Ebionites:
“What shall I say of the Ebionites who pretend to be Christians? Today there still exists among the Jews in all the synagogues of the East a heresy which is called that of the Minæans, and which is still condemned by the Pharisees; [its followers] are ordinarily called ‘Nazarenes’; they believe that Christ, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Mary, and they hold him to be the one who suffered under Pontius Pilate and ascended to heaven, and in whom we also believe.”
(Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
Now Ebionites and Nazarenes were two distinct groups with varying beliefs (the Ebionites split off from the Nazarenes round 70 C.E.) but both of these groups were known by Rabbinic Jews as ” Minim” or as Jerome calls them in Latin “Mineans”.
According to the Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Babli, Yerushalami and Midrashic Literature, Marcus Jastrow defines MIN “…sectarian, infidel… a Jewish infidel, mostly applied to Jew Christians”. Jastrow uses the term “Jew-Christians” to refer to Ebionites and Nazarenes although these groups did not call themselves “Christians”.
Many scholars believe that the term MIN began as an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
The purpose of this presentation is threefold. First to give us a brief history of who we were in the early centuries and what it is we are trying to reconstruct. The second is to give us a positive identity and last, to suggest a foundational program from which we can grow and expand according to the will of YHVH. As I present this I do so as a single man with whom Elohim has given a vision of Torah and Messiah bound together in the life of the redeemed. I do not do so as a representative of the Society for the Advancement of Nazarene Judaism or the International Nazarene Beit Din for we are a community and without their consent and approval I cannot speak for them and the vision they have, although it is obviously similar. I submit the following as a beginning point of discussion from which we as a community can develop a cohesive vision, identity and program.
The challenge that lies before us in Natzrim Judaism is enormous. In some ways it is analogous the the recreation of the state of Israel after almost two millennia. The Israelis needed to resurrect institutions, ideas and even a language that had not been used for centuries. Nazarene Judaism is embarking on an even more ambitious project. We are attempting to recreate a paradigm of theology, philosophy, belief and practice that has not existed since the second century. The early community of Yahushua’s followers, led by Ya’akov His brother, was a community within the community of Israel who’s belief and practice was very similar to their fellow Jews except that they were no longer waiting for Elohim’s anointed. They believed He had come, lived, died, was resurrected and now sat at the right hand of YHVH awaiting the “Day of the Lord” which they believed was right around the corner. They believed the ‘Renewed Covenant’ about which Jeremiah had prophesied was inaugurated through Yahushua, that Torah was now written on their hearts and atonement for the people had finally been accomplished once and for all. They worshipped at the Temple and attended synagogue, they studied Torah and were zealous in their obedience to the commandments. They loved their people and sought both their spiritual completion and their material blessing. Gentiles came into this community and were encouraged to develop the same love for Messiah, Torah and people that their natural born brothers had.
Unfortunately, the socio-political events of the first century conspired against this community. The anti-Judaic feelings endemic to Roman culture made Gentiles less willing to adopt the religio-cultural context of which the Messiah was a part, particularly after the war with Rome. And the Jewish leadership, followed by the majority of the populace, did not believe that the man crucified by the Romans was the Messiah. Soon there were two new religions that sprung up out of the ashes of the Temple. One rejected Torah and Judaism while recasting Israel’s Messiah in a Greek mold. Christianity was the result of this development. The Rabbis of Yavneh took an ancient religion centered on a temple, priesthood and sacrifice and recast it, out of necessity, as a spiritual religion of works, ritual purity, philosophy and introspection, of which one of the fundamental tenants was that Yahushua was not the Messiah. The Nazarenes were ignored by both groups in their evolution because they came to be viewed as a small eccentric or heretical minority. They could have been a bridge of understanding and enriched both religions as the complete package of Elohim’s plan but they passed from the scene with hardly a mention.
The interactions between the two majority groups over the past two thousand years further complicate things. Those who have claimed the Messiah of Israel and wrenched Him from His proper context of people, culture and understanding subjected His people Israel, the Jewish people, to the most severe forms of persecution in the name of their reinterpreted ‘Christ’. Naturally, this resulted in a strong reaction on the part of the Jewish people against the idea that the historical person, Yahushua, who was the raw material from which the church formed Jesus, the anti-Torah, anti-Jew, mangod, could ever have been the Promised One of Moshe and the Prophets. Reactionary theology developed from both sides making real communication about the central issues of covenant, peoplehood, Torah, chosenness and the Messiah nearly impossible.
So the task we have before us is this. We need to take a messianic idea which has been twisted and corrupted horribly for nineteen hundred years by a man made, anti-Jewish religion of persecutors, remove all the junk, clutter and additions to get down to the truth of Who He was and what He taught. We also need to remove nineteen hundred years of superstition, anti-messianic ideas and reactionary theology from what we know as Judaism to discover what YHVH really wants His people to live like and believe. And in order for either task to be accomplished we need to uncover the history of a small group within a small people on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean which neither of the majority groups want to acknowledge. Christians don’t want to remember the Nazarenes because the foundation of their religion is anti-Judaic and these people were Torah loving Jews who believed in the same Messiah they claim to. To admit that ‘St. James’, ‘St. Peter’ and even the beloved ‘St. Paul’, whose example they were encouraged to follow, were Torah observant Jews their whole lives and even beyond that, taught Torah and loved the Jewish people, would be tantamount to pulling the foundation out from under their religion and cast doubt on everything they have been taught to do and believe. The Jewish people don’t want to acknowledge the Nazarenes because they have gladly accepted the Christian’s claim that Judaism and the Messiah are mutually exclusive. Once one believes in the messiah the church claims, one is no longer a Jew but a ‘Christian’. To admit the Nazarenes were Torah observant Jews would be a direct challenge to that assumption and force them to look at the claims of Yahushua anew, not in a Christian context, but in a Jewish one.
But God has been at work for almost two hundred years to restore what was lost, Torah centered messianic faith. The Sabbaterians, the Hebrew Christians and the Messianic Jews have been rediscovering Torah from the Christian side, there has been a recent move among Reform Jews to reestablish Torah observance and, among a small number of orthodox Jews, an honest reevaluation of the claims of Yahushua as the Messiah of Israel. All this has pointed to the reestablishment of a truly Jewish community of Torah observant people who believe in the Messiahship of Yahushua as it existed in the first century. We are on the crest of that wave.
So the first question that must be answered is ‘What was the Natzrim community like?’ How did they live, what did they believe, how did they understand the fulfillment of the hopes of their people? To answer that question we shall take a brief look at the life and teachings of Yahushua Himself and then look at those who comprised the Natzrim community after His death and resurrection.
There is little debate anymore, either in Jewish or Christian circles, about the fact that Yahushua was a good, observant Jew. He came into the first century, he lived in Israel, he walked among the Jewish people, he lived according to their law and taught as many of the rabbis at that time did. We know that in order for His sacrifice to be acceptable, it would have to be ‘without blemish’, or in His case, sinless. Sinless according to Elohim’s standard, Torah. Yochannan states in his account that Yahushua was the ‘Word of Elohim’. He was Torah in the flesh. Torah was His very nature and His life and teaching constantly reflected that fact.
The accounts of His life are replete with instances of His Torah observance. He obeyed the Sabbath and celebrated the festivals, He ate the right foods and wore the signs of the covenant, He exemplified the true, righteous and holy Jew of His time and all time. And He taught the same.
He said that Torah would not pass away before the heavens and the Earth. He stated that all the commandments, the least to the greatest, the moral and the religious, the ethical and the ritual, all of them were important and adherence to them would make one great in Elohim’s sight. And not only that but the commandments were to be obeyed even more meticulously than the Pharisees and the spirit had to be pure and holy as well, with no hypocrisy (Matt 5). The righteousness of those who followed Him and would claim His name in the future should be unquestionable. They should be known as the most pious, righteous people in the world, according to the standard of Torah.
Yahushua actually pointed to Torah as the way to eternal life. This is an idea that does not get much airtime but it is there for anyone who has the chutzpah to look. When the rich man came and asked, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life’, he asked the question that everyone wants to know the answer to. Here it is, the big one. And what was Yahushua’s response? ‘Believe in me and be saved’? ‘Accept me in your heart’? ‘Pray this little prayer’? None of the above! He asked the man what was written in the Torah! And the man answered with two central passages in the Torah, passages that had been, and still are, central to Judaism. And then what did Yahushua say? Do this and you will live! Not ‘think this’ or ‘believe this’ but do this. Do what? The two commands in Torah that sum up the rest of it, the ones that represent the whole. So where does He then fit into that equation? He is the Torah made flesh, He embodies it and it speaks of Him (Lk 24:44). He is the reason there is life in Torah.
Yahushua supported the Temple cult as well, which included all the sacrifices prescribed by the Levitical code. (Matt 8:4) Even amid the corruption that had become part of the Temple administration since the time of the Hasmoneans, and in His day, with the buying and selling of the High Priesthood to the Romans, He did not take the position of the Eseenes and label it hopeless, nor did He disregard the system as a whole (by this I mean the levitical and priestly rituals and sacrifices and the idea of a Temple itself), corrupt or pure, as pointless and without value. His followers would continue to participate in Temple life until it’s destruction.
He expected that His followers would continue in many of the traditions that had already been developed in Israel. He warned them against making a show of their covenantal obedience, ‘do not make your Tzitzit long or your Tefillin broad like the Pharisees’, (Matt 23:5) but he expected that these things, as they had developed up to that point would continue. His disagreements with the Pharisees, to whom he was closest and among whom his followers would gain the most adherents, stemmed largely from two areas. First, was that some equated meticulous observance of the commandments to righteousness of the heart. As He pointed out, one can be very exacting in one’s Torah obedience and still be a rotten person. He reprimanded the Pharisees (who were well aware of the hypocrites in three midst) that they would tithe even their spices but had ignored justice and mercy in their dealings with their fellow men (Matt 23:23). Yahushua told them they should concentrate on the latter, that is justice and mercy, while not neglecting the former, the tithe. Their second mistaken assumption was that the priestly rituals and purity laws should be applied to every Jew all the time. The washing of the hands, for example, came from the priests who washed themselves before they offered sacrifices. Now, in the mind of a Pharisee, he was the priest of his home and his table was his altar therefore it was proper for him to ritually wash his hands. Now while it may be acceptable to take on more Torah than applies to you, to upbraid someone who does not as a sinner is improper. This idea of maintaining priestly ritual purity would again rear it’s ugly head when it came time to expand the mission to the Goyim.
He also accepted the authority of the Pharisees to interpret the Law. They sat in Moshe’s seat and he told his followers to listen to them (Matt 23:2). Overall, this would point to His acceptance of Jewish tradition, the Oral Law, as it had developed up to that point according to the judgements of the Sanhedrin and judges of Israel. He rejected the view of the Sadducees and the Karites of a later time, that the Oral Law is not a valuable resource in teaching the community Torah. The leaders of the community placed there by Elohim formulated it according to His command, it had Elohim’s stamp of authority. This is not to say that the Sanhedrin and the judges were never wrong, the Torah itself makes provision for their errors, but that would be the exception rather than the rule. As Yahushua Himself stated, tradition cannot contradict the written word of Elohim (Mk 7:9-13) And recognizing that His presence would change some things, He authorized His followers to develop their own case law in addition to and not in place of what had already been established and it would have the authority of Elohim behind it.
After the death and resurrection of Yahushua, things continued along the same lines. In response the events of Shava’ut, and Kefa’s preaching which placed Yahushua and the Nazarenes right in the middle of prophetic fulfillment, a vibrant community was formed. They were taught by the Talmidim, who were a group of observant Jews from Galilee, they met in the Temple, they ate together and said ‘the prayers’ which, no doubt, is a reference to the regular prayers of the synagogue and Temple which would eventually form the core of the Siddur.
While the fact that they preached the Messiah made the Sanhedrin nervous because of it’s political implications, they enjoyed the favor of the people (Acts 2:47) and many of them were the personification of pious, Torah-observant Jews. There was no new religion here. Yahushua had come to call sinners to repentance and adherence to the covenant. He was the fulfillment of the prophetic hope and a sign that the Day of the Lord was near. He was the ‘second Moshe’, the Prophet foretold by Moshe himself (Acts 3:22, 23). His followers had repented and embraced that truth and sought to convince the rest of their people of that fact. They were just another sect of Judaism, probably a sect within a sect since they were primarily in the pharasaic tradition.
But Messianism scared the Sanhedrin, that was why Yahushua was put to death in the first place. When Kefa and Yochannan stood before them, they were not charged with a crime against the Torah or even the traditions. In that case they could have easily been punished. The Sanhedrin just wanted the messianism to go away before it caused trouble with the Romans. Their decision of tolerance, reccomentded by Rabban Gamaliel, (Acts 5:38, 39) for the Nazarenes is a decision that must stand to this day because there is no comparable authority to reverse it.
The community continued to expand and were highly regarded among the people. Soon there were a group of hellenists attached to this orthodox bunch. Hellenists were less torah-observant by definition and this gave the Sanhedrin it’s first real opportunity to come against this sect. Stephen, a hellenist, was seized and brought before the council. Witnesses falsely accused him of speaking against the Temple and the Law. There is no evidence that he did any such thing but because he was a hellenist, the charges were believable. He was stoned and the rest of the hellenists were routed from the city. The Talmidim stayed, however, because they could not be accused as easily and they enjoyed the support of the populace.
The main perpetrator of this persecution is Rabbi Sha’ul, a Pharisee of Pharisees, blameless in his obedience to the law. He meets Yahushua on the way to Damascus and is healed by a talmid named Ananias whom Sha’ul describes as a devout observer of the Law (Acts 22:12). He said this in defense of himself and the Nazarenes and he mentioned it to make the point to the people of Yerushalyim that they were just as devout and Torah-observant as anyone, and even moreso. They were good, traditional Jews who had realized the hope of their people in Yahushua.
In the second decade after the death and resurrection of Yahushua the mission had expanded to the Samaritans, the Diaspora and geyrim; the Elohim fearers, gentiles who had attached themselves to the Synagogue, had adapted much of the Jewish lifestyle excepting circumcision. Eventually the question came up, what is the process by which a Gentile becomes part of remnant Israel in the Messianic age? Some insisted on circumcision, that nothing had changed as far as conversion was concerned. Kefa and Sha’ul had seen Elohim place His stamp of approval on these converts through His spirit without this ritual. They understood that Elohim had circumcised their heart and placed His Torah within them as promised by Jeremiah. They were full fledged members of the community by repenting and being immersed. This was a difficult idea to swallow, particularly for the Pharisees because circumcision was central to their understanding of Israel’s covenant relationship with Elohim.
The issue was debated and resolved at the famous Jerusalem council. They decided that Sha’ul and Kefa were right, entrance to the community was by profession and immersion and circumcision was not required for gentiles. As those who were not already Elohim fearers came out of their pagan culture, there were a few preliminary things that would be necessary if they had not already adopted these basic features of Jewish life. They needed to stay clear of idolatry, from sexual immorality, from eating blood and other non-ritually slaughtered meat and from blood or murder. These are the basics of righteousness required for everyone who wants to start on the road to covenant relationship with Elohim. They assumed, as Ya’akov added at the end of the discussion, that they would read and learn Torah as they were integrated into the community. That these geyrim would continue in the synagogues and learn what it means to be a member of the covenant community of Israel. They would eventually internalize the values, theology, and practice of the nation they had applied for citizenship in.
Did this happen? We can see by the evidence of the literature of the Brit Chadasha that they did. It formed the framework of their understanding of religion, Messiah, time, distance and Elohim. Allow me to illustrate some examples. Luke is possibly the only Gentile from the early community whose writings have come down to us, and he appears to be writing to another gentile. The language he uses shows that both had been immersed in Jewish life and culture and adopted it as their own. When he describes distance, he uses the term ‘Sabbath day’s journey’ rather than the Roman measure or stadia (Acts 1:12). When he describes the time of Sha’ul’s journey to Rome, he describes their voyage as taking place ‘after the fast’, that is Yom Kippor’ (Acts 27:9), which also shows they accepted halachah (oral law) up to that point. Sha’ul, when talking to the Corinthians, who by most people’s understanding were the most unregenerate Gentiles described in the Brit Chadashah, used the term ‘cup of thanksgiving’, the name of the first cup of wine drunk at the Passover Seder. This was a congregation Sha’ul founded. Who do you think taught them about Pesach? When he was arguing with the Galatians about Torah, what did he use to support his arguments? Tenach! It would not make sense for him to use an authority he regarded as passe to support his point. The Galatians obviously valued Torah and the prophets as an authority. Who taught them that? The phrase ‘lamb of Elohim’ means nothing outside of Torah. The Gentiles to whom the leaders of the Nazarene community wrote had an intimate understanding of Torah and halachah. How did a bunch of Gentiles learn all this stuff about Judaism and then make it part of themselves so that everyone was speaking the same language? Either they knew it from being part of the synagogue already or the Talmidim who introduced them to the messianic idea taught it to them. Isn’t that a scandal. ‘St. Paul’ teaching Torah and tradition to Gentiles!
Over the next two decades the message continued to spread from Yerushalyim and the original Talmidim continued to be the authority. When Sha’ul comes back to Yerushalyim thirteen years after the council, he finds a vibrant Nazarene community ‘zealous for Torah’ (Acts 21:20). After his arrest, he vehemently denies not only that he never did anything contrary to Torah, but he continued to live as a Pharisee according to the traditions to that very day (Acts 26:5). The leadership in Yerushalyim under Ya’akov ha Tzaddik, and including Sha’ul, set the tone by adhering to the normative Judaism of their day, primarily according to the pharisaic tradition. That all changed with the revolt. Many of the Nazarenes fled Yerushalyim and those that remained suffered the same fate as the rest of the Jews in the city. The leadership was further decimated by the Romans as they tried to eradicate the davidic line, from whom the Nazarenes had drawn the successors of Ya’akov. The talmidim died off in the years before and after the revolt and there was no comparable authority to reign in the divergent practices among the Jews, hellenists and gentiles of the sect. Jewish religious practices were proscribed to various degrees by the Romans in the decades that followed which made the Jewish lifestyle even less appealing to the average Gentile. The Gentiles and the hellenists became selective in their halachah and without a strong authority in Yerushalyim to steer the movement in the right way, many of the communities moved away from strict Torah observance and halachah. The farther one went from Yerushalyim, the less Torah was followed. Antioch, Rome and Alexandria, centers of gnosticism and mystery religions, now became centers for the followers of Yahushua as well and they filled the vacuum in authority created by the razing of Yerushalyim. A few Nazarene communities remained in Judea but as the minority both in Judaism and the newly forming Christianity, they had little impact on either group in the decades and centuries that followed.
These Nazarenes were still around in the fifth century, although by then they were an insignificant heresy to the Christians. Epiphanius has this to say about them;
“We shall now especially consider heretics who call themselves Nazarenes; they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way the Old Testament of the Jews. For they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets and the Writings…so that they are approved of by the Jews, from whom the Nazarenes do not differ in anything, and they do profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and the customs of the Jews, except they believe in Messiah. They preach that there is but One God and His Son Yahushua. They are learned in the Hebrew language, for they, like the Jews, read the whole Law, then the Prophets…They differ from the Jews because they believe in Messiah, and from the Christians in that they are to this day bound to the Jewish rites such as circumcision, the Sabbath and other ceremonies..”
They continued to exist in small pockets into the second millenium, even being subject to the inquisition for their judaizing. They were know as the Pasaginians then, a name of Latin origin that describes them as wanderers, much like the other Jews of the Middle Ages.
This tells us a lot about our ancestors. To briefly sum it all up, the following is a basic description of the Nazarenes based on all the previous information, a description of what we are trying to reestablish at the end on the second millenium. Epiphanius also tells us that most of them lived in the Land, they valued the promise of it to Avraham. They were zealous for Torah and followed the Tenach as well as the writings of the Brit Chadashah. They followed the Law and the customs of the Jews, from whom they differed in nothing save the fulfillment of the Messianic hope. They knew Hebrew and they followed the traditional Torah and haftorah readings. They followed, for the most part, pharisaic halachah. And because of all this they were approved of by the Jews.
That is the goal. To equate Yahushua with Torah rightoeusness and lifestyle. A believer in Yahushua should be a pious Jew by definition. Not a Christian who follows Torah or a Jew that believes in ‘Jesus’ but an individual whose belief in the Messiahship of Yahushua naturally expresses itself in Torah piety. In the first century, when someone claimed to be a Natzrim, that person was a Tzaddik, by definition. We should seek to be similarly defined.
Now that we have a basic understanding of what the original Nazarenes were like and what happened to them, we can take a look at several of the important issues involved in reconstructing their community two millennia later. The concerns are many and correct understanding and implementation will make the difference between success and failure, between a comprehensive, unified community and a disorganized, confused movement. Some have sought to go where we are heading and have gotten lost and bewildered along the way. In reality, the difficulties are not in understanding the history. The facts are rather straightforward for anyone willing to put aside their preconceived ideas and assumptions and look at them honestly. The real issue is whether are not we are willing to examine some of our most dearly held beliefs and their underlying assumptions and cast them aside if they are not in line with the Scriptures. And then to adopt a system of understanding and a way of life that makes one stand out in the crowd, that makes one part of an historically persecuted minority. It is an issue of sacrifice. Of self, of ego, of family, of time, of possessions, of life. Not an easy thing but it is only when we sacrifice our life with all it’s baggage and truly seek to become the men and women Elohim desires that we will succeed.
I believe the central issue that we need to address is one of identity. With whom do we identify, or, as I have heard it poignantly stated before, with whom will we be persecuted? Many people who hear of us and what we are doing will identify us with the Messianic Jewish Movement (I have experienced this many times) and by doing so they place us under the heading of ‘Christianity’. Both Jews and Christians who are knowledgeable enough usually make this identification. We need to ask ourselves whether this is the banner under which we want to develop our identity.
Let’s look at the Messianic Jewish Movement for a moment. Many of us are familiar with it and some of us are still involved with it to some degree. The following discussion is about the popular notion of what the Messianic Jewish movement is all about and how it describes and understands itself as exemplified by the Messianic Jewish Alliance, The Messianic Union, related organizations and their leaders. Regardless of what may be their deepest desire, which is to be regarded as a valid expression of Judaism, just as the Orthodox or Reform movements are, they are not and they never will be. Because in their attempt to do so, they have kept one foot firmly planted within the Christian community. A large part of their theology and worldview come from Christianity. While they do reject replacement theology and so make room for themselves as Jews within the Christian community, they have not, in most cases, developed practices and institutions endemic to Judaism. As such there are some fundamental problems with the Messianic Jewish Movement’s understanding of things and this results in confusion and disunity.
One of the first areas of confusion is that of religious expression. First, allow me to say that there is a wide spectrum of religious practice among Messianic Jews and their congregations, which, in itself, is a problem. Some congregations are adopting Orthodox or Hasidic practices and others have kept mainstream church worship traditions. Ultimately, in the Messianic Jewish point of view, there are no standards because there is no right and wrong in religious expression. Allow me to explain how I can come to such a conclusion. While many Messianic Jews and even some Christians know that Passover and Yom Kippor are Scriptural and Christmas and Easter are not, there can be no authoritative correction (although the Christians will sometimes accuse those who follow Scriptural religious traditions of being legalists and Judaizers!). This is because Messianic Jews see themselves as part of the ‘church’ and they look at Christians as their brothers and because of this they accept, to a greater or lesser degree, the Christian interpretation of Scripture. They are all part of the ‘body’, the Messianic Community, the universal Church. The result of this is the practical understanding that Elohim does not really care that most of ‘the body’ are worshipping Him according to the practices of the pagans (Deut 12) or the ‘Traditions of men’ and while He may be pleased that some are worshipping Him according to Torah, it was really only meant for ‘ethnic’ or ‘natural’ Israel. In the great scheme of things it doesn’t really matter because ‘we’re all saved’, which is the ultimate goal of both groups. I have read this described as the ‘One faith, one baptism, two expressions’ theory. One cannot do enough Scriptural gymnastics to support such an idea. To do so is to ignore all the warnings of Moshe and the Prophets about the adoption of pagan practices and of the corruption of the pure religion YHVH had given to the people of Israel. It supports the spoken and unspoken assumption of the ‘church’ that the ‘Old Testament’ isn’t relevant to them. It is also to embrace the absurd idea that Shimon Kefa and that great Pharisee Rav Sha’ul accepted Gentiles into the community of Israel while allowing them to continue to practice paganism. That they allowed pagans to rename pagan practices and celebrate them with equal validity alongside the festivals of YHVH and see nothing wrong with it. That Gentiles could come into covenant relationship with the Elohim of Israel while thumbing their noses at all the things those who had gone before held dear. That they believed the Messiah had come to give ready acceptance to both Jews and Gentiles in the small, unique community of Remnant Israel, regardless of their behavior or the forms of their religious expression. Anyone who wants to become part of the commonwealth of Israel through the Messiah does so in the context of covenant. And covenants have stipulations that are meant to be adhered to and if they are not, there are negative consequences. For Messianic Jews to look at and accept Christians as equally acceptable brothers ‘in the Lord’ and as legitimate ‘converts’ into the commonwealth of Israel is to destroy the basis for the covenant relationship Elohim has always had with His people.
This brings us to another problem with Messianic Judaism. They don’t know what to do with the Gentiles. The confusion again results from having one foot in either camp. On the one hand, they want to see themselves as a legitimate branch of Judaism and to this end, they have set up many institutions in which the leadership and policy bodies are made up of ethnic Jews (although in Messianic Judaism the definition of an ‘ethnic Jew’ does not usually follow ‘traditional’ halachah). However, many Gentiles have become attracted to Judaism, as has been the case throughout history, and a brand of Judaism that allows them to maintain their belief in their Messiah is particularly attractive. Many Christians have come to see the value in understanding the jewishness of their original faith and some have even been motivated to adopt some Jewish practices. And others, like many of us, have seen the value of Torah as the correct way of life for the redeemed person and have sought to apply it all to the best of our knowledge and understanding. But when a Gentile comes into Messianic Judaism they find out that their participation is limited to the perimeter. In the MJAA they are not allowed full membership. They are not ordained as Rabbis. There is no mechanism or procedure to allow a Gentile’s full participation in the institutions of Messianic Judaism.
In Non-Messianic Judaism, this is accomplished through the conversion process. After a Gentile has gone through this process they are members of the House of Israel, no different than their natural born counterparts, with all the same privileges and responsibilities. Messianic Judaism, on the other hand, does not see the need for conversion. The Gentile Christians are already their brothers, fellow heirs in the body of Messiah. Why would they need to convert? In many Messianic synagogues, Jews and Gentiles alike are encouraged to pray the ‘sinners prayer’ at which time they enter the ‘Church’. The Jew and the Gentile take divergent paths from there, however. Once they come into the ‘Church’ they have different responsibilities and duties. In the Messianic synagogue, Judaism is practiced to some degree. The Gentile is sent to a church with different practices. He can visit the synagogue but it not really there for him, regardless of what he thinks. So the Gentile on whom Elohim has impressed the importance of Torah and Judaism finds himself in limbo. While the Messianic Jews see him as a ‘brother in Messiah’ he is held at arms length due to an accident of birth. It seems as though the Messianic Jewish ‘denomination’ is a ‘Jews only’ club.
Another problem is Messianic Judaism is ambivalent about Torah. Since it seems as though Messianic Judaism is another Christian denomination of sorts, they have sought to pour the wine of Christianity into the wineskin of Judaism. Outwardly, many of their practices are Jewish. They wear tallit when they worship and they worship on Shabbat. They celebrate many of the festivals and they wear kippot. Some synagogues even have Torah scrolls and a few of the congregants can read it. But inwardly, most of their theology and belief is Christian. Their creeds, their understanding of the Messiah, the nature of God, salvation and especially their attitude and understanding of the Mosaic covenant come from Christianity. They don’t know how important it is. On one hand, they’re Jewish so they know, at some level, it is important to them. On the other hand, their brothers, the Christians, don’t obey the mosaic covenant at all. In fact, they have adopted many practices of the pagans, something the terms of the covenant prohibit. But they are ‘saved’ just the same. Yet, both the Messiah and His Talmidim taught about the importance of Torah and lived it out in their lives. And these are the acknowledged founders of the ‘church’. But the ‘church’ has taught for almost two thousand years that Torah is not essential for salvation, it is not important in a believer’s life and may even be an impediment to the Christian drawing closer to Elohim. So if it’s not essential to salvation, Messianic Judaism cannot, with any real authority, require, or even strongly encourage, Torah obedience among it’s adherents. Christian understanding says Torah is not important so as long as Messianic Judaism remains in the Christian camp, Torah obedience will just be one option of acceptable Christian religious expression among many. It will be a means to an evangelistic end and will continued to be looked at with suspicion (and rightly so) by non-messianic Jews.
So what am I saying here. I’ve thrown out a a lot of terms here; salvation, Torah, Israel, Messiah, Church, Jew, Christian and others common in our religious debate. The definition of these terms is something that we need to discuss as well. Messianic Judaism has adopted, for the most part, a Christian understanding of these terms and many of us, having been brought up in a Christian environment, still think that way as well. As such, it would be easy to conclude from my statements that I believe Torah, the Law, is essential for salvation and all the Christians are going to hell. Taking salvation, Israel and Torah, understanding them in the common Christian sense and combining them as I have, it would be easy to come to that conclusion. Nothing could be farther form the truth however. One does not have to be part of the ‘commonwealth of Israel’, remember the Sabbath, abstain from pork or celebrate the festivals to receive a place in the world to come (See Israel, the Goyim and the Eternal Destiny of Man for more info here). That is another issue completely but it illustrates the point that if we are going to understand Scripture in a consistent matter, we cannot blindly accept Christianity’s definition of these terms for they have a different meaning in Judaism.
Ultimately, the question which we must have the courage to face and answer is, ‘are Christianity and Judaism compatible at all?’ Messianic Judaism has said yes and attempted to make the marriage work and we have looked at the results. I believe there are fundamental differences between Judaism and Christianity in theology, practice and in the religious communities themselves which require a negative answer to the question. Christianity evolved as a reaction against Judaism and the Jewish people around the period of the first Jewish war with Rome. It proscribed Jewish practices more vehemently than did the Roman government. It began to understand the Scriptures through the eyes of Plato and Aristotle instead of Moshe and the prophets. They stole the Sacred Scriptures and made them simply a preface to their own and then redacted themselves into them to create a sense of legitimacy. They changed the Messiah from a Torah obedient Jewish man Who loved His people to a universal, anti-Torah demigod. And once they had the machinery of the state at their disposal, they rigorously persecuted the true people of Elohim, something that continues to this day. Judaism is a triad of Torah, people and land put together by Elohim Himself never to be forsaken or replaced. Christianity has proscribed the Torah for it’s adherents, persecuted the people and moved the promised land to the heavenlies. How can there be any perceived continuity between the two? Judaism holds dear everything Christianity abhors. Christianity is a man made religion, a combination of Roman and Babylonian religion, Greek philosophy and some basic Jewish ethics (although with all the murder and mayhem perpetuated in the name of ‘Christ’, the last point could certainly be disputed). Christianity has taken some basic truths and ideas, removed their foundation and created a new religion. To put Judaism back into Christianity is to put a square peg in a round hole. When we present Nazarene Judaism to Christians, we are not educating them about the roots of their faith, we are showing them the truths of the Scriptures they claim. Christianity is not a form of Judaism, it doesn’t even spring from the same well.
What is the well from which Christianity sprung? It was the well of Roman and Alexandrine anti-Semitism (used in the modern sense of the word), it was the well of gnosticism and the dualism endemic to Greek philosophy, it was the well of Babylonian and Roman religious practice and culture. Let’s take a brief look at all of these.
Hatred of the Jewish people has been around since there was a Jewish people. Pharaoh hated them and killed their sons. Nebuchadnezzar besieged their cities and destroyed their Temple. Haman wanted to eliminate them from the face of the earth. Why? Because they “keep themselves separate. Their customs are different from those of all other people..” (Est 3:8) They seemed to have nothing in common with other peoples. The Jewish people were different and they are different because that is what Elohim wants them to be. Their light would not shine if they were like all other nations. YHVH has called them out, He has chosen them, which means the other nations were not. This creates resentment among other peoples, it bothers them because the Jews are the conscience of the world. Their existence says “our way is Elohim’s way” which means their way is not.
In the period leading up to the time of Messiah, the first true evidence of anti-Semitism (as we understand it today) in the ancient world, in the third century BCE, was in Egypt in reaction to an effective campaign of conversion on the part of the Jewish population. Of course we cannot fail to mention how Antiochus Epiphanies felt about the Jews and tried to proscribe Jewish practice in the second century, leading to the revolt of the Maccabees. In the first century BCE another, wider wave of anti-Semitism swept the ancient world. It began in Alexandria and Antioch, which, along with Rome, became the centers of Christian understanding after the destruction of Yerushalyim. The instigators, Apion, Poscidonios and Molon, said that the Jews were a race of shameful origins, a race of lepers who had been cast out of Egypt at the time of Moshe. Dietary laws and circumcision were corruptions of Moshe’s ‘ideal’ religion. They said Jewish separation had it’s roots in the hatred of mankind and of the gods, they undermined all other religions, they worshipped a golden ass’s head, practiced ritual murder against the Greeks and that Jewish civilization was sterile and had produced nothing useful. For those of you familiar with the history of the church in the middle ages, much of this sounds very familiar.
Apion took his anti-Jewish feeling to Rome where he found a ready ear among the many who opposed Caeser’s pro-Jewish policies. In the first century CE Sejanus, the man behind Tiberius Caesar, banished Jews from Rome and had an anti-Jewish campaign planned before his execution. Tactius stated that “the Jews regard as profane all we hold sacred and permit all we abhor”. In 40 CE Caligula planned to have a statue of himself erected in the Temple. After the rebellion in 66CE, much of Jewish practice was proscribed, and even more harshly in the time of Hadrian and the second Jewish war in 132 CE. Most Gentiles in the Roman world did not have a very positive view of the Jews.
Gnosticism had it origins in Alexandria, that great melting pot of religious ideas in the ancient world. It was secretive in the sense that it’s adherents believed they has a knowledge (gnosis) that other people did not have. The Gnostics believed in a incomprehensible, unapproachable god who had no contact with the material world. The world was created by a series of demi-urges which made matter evil because it had nothing to do with god. The Gnostics believed they had the knowledge to break free of this evil, material world and unite with the divine. They interpreted religious texts, including the Tenach, allegorically, they worshipped images, embraced Greek philosophy, they were sun worshippers and they were anti-Jewish. Many of the church fathers; Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Clement and Origen came from Alexandria and their writings belie the influence gnosticism had on their Christianity.
Barnabas (not the companion of Sha’ul) was known for his allegorizing of the Sabbath and anti-Torah sentiment. Justin believed that Jewish religion was forced upon Israel as punishment by Elohim. Clement believed that the Christian was the true Gnostic and that while there was one river of truth, many streams fall into on either side. Origen’s opinion of Torah was that the literal application of it’s laws was never it’s intent and that one had to leave these things behind and turn the mind to the good, true and spiritual law of Elohim.
In Antioch, Ignatius (the authenticity of whose letters is in question) said that if we live in accordance with Judaism, we admit we have not received grace. In Rome, Marcion, a ‘Christian Gnostic said that the Jewish Elohim was the demi-urge and since the Torah was the work of this inferior Elohim it should be ignored. He also believed in fasting on Shabbat to show contempt for it, a practice already common in the Roman ‘church’ by his time.
During the second and third centuries, Roman and Babylonian religious practices were adopted to fill the vacuum created by the abandonment of Judaism, the facts of which most of us are aware. Sunday worship, Easter, image worship, Christmass, a celibate priesthood, and ideas such as the exclusive fraternity of the church for salvation, the authority of the bishop of Rome, the trinity, the evil nature of the flesh and the world and other Greek philosophical ideas. Often these inventions were not adopted through reasoned debate but through all out war in which forgery, slander, murder and rebellion were accepted practice.
In the fourth century John Chrysostom denounced the Jews as carnal, lascivious, demonic and accursed. They were deicides and they worshipped the devil. St Jerome said about the synagogue ‘If you call it a brothel, a den of vice, the devil’s refuge, Satan’s fortress a place to deprave the soul, an abyss of every conceivable disaster or whatever else you will, you are still saying less that it deserves’. Synagogues were burnt to the ground at the instigation of the church bishops. This was the time of Augustine, who, more than any other individual, dominated Christian thought for a thousand years, and whose influence is still felt today. The concept of original sin and the idea that salvation was only to be found in the church were his inventions. He was a strong proponent of using the sword to enforce orthodoxy, bring about conversion and punish heretics and Jews. He divided the world into Christians, who were the only saved ones, and everyone else, all of whom were going to hell because of their inherent wickedness. The Jews were to be kept in perpetual slavery to bear witness to the triumph of the church. There is a direct line from the ‘church fathers’ to the atrocities of the crusades, the inquisition, the pogroms and the holocaust. Yahushua said ‘by their fruits you will know them’. The fruit of Christianity shows that it does not come from the root of Israel or Israel’s Messiah. It is not in any way represenative of the Messiah of Israel or those who folowed Him.
This brief look at the facts should show that Christianity has much more in common with the religions and philosophies of the ancient world that it does with Judaism. The Gentiles (and hellenized Jews) thought the idea of being Elohim’s chosen and going to heaven through someone else’s work (Yahushua’s) was a good one but tying it to the Judaism many of them had been taught to abhor and which was proscribed by the empire was not. So they took the Jew Yahushua and transformed him into a demi-god, placed him in Greek clothes and put him in their religious and philosophical context. Beyond the externals of a messianic idea and some basic ethics, Judaism and Christianity have little in common. Their theology, philosophy, world-view, ways of thinking and religious practices are on opposite ends of the spectrum. They cannot be combined in a way that is truly meaningful and consistent.
If we have the courage to face and accept that truth and accept the consequences of that truth, most of our confusion and uncertainty will go away. What are the consequences of that truth? First, the Jewish community will continue to be very skeptical of us and it is going to take a lot of time and consistency on our part to allay their fears and concerns. The Jewish community is suspicious by nature of anything they perceive as foreign because of their history. There will continue to be a ‘knee-jerk’ rejection of us because of their preconceived ideas about us and the labels they will continue to try to force on us. We will continue to be labeled as ‘Jews for Jesus’ and ‘Messianic Jews’ or ‘Jewish Christians’. But we must patiently continue to explain our purpose and mission, carving out a new niche and placing a new label on ourselves that will accurately describe who we are and what we’re about. And there are rays of hope. Particularly in the orthodox community where Torah obedience is valued almost above all else, there has been some positive movement. As we continue to put value on the same things and consistently, through word and action demonstrate in whose camp we are, the walls will slowly come down. Again, it will be a slow process. Keep in mind that the acceptance of the Chasidim into the mainstream Jewish fold took nearly four generations.
Those reactions, many of us are used to. The reaction from the Christian community will be different. We must always keep in the front our thinking that it is pleasing Elohim that is the most important thing. Many of us have gotten used to the help of Christians and the churches, we have operated under their blessing, we have met in their buildings and have drawn many visitors and even some adherents from their ranks. The label of ‘Messianic Jewish’ many of us have accepted either actively or passively has allowed this free flow of people and assistance between us and the church. This will eventually come to a stop; it must if we desire to place both feet in the camp of Israel. The Jewish community is not going to believe anything we say about ourselves when we meet in a church building and belt out ‘Amazing Grace’ during worship. As we consistently declare we are not Christians, that we do not accept their theology and interpretation of the Scriptures, that we are not their intimate brothers and ‘co-heirs’ with their messiah, they will reject us and look at us with suspicion. This is not to say that we will cease to cooperate with Christians in encouraging righteousness among all peoples and working towards common goals, just as the Jewish and Christian communities do today. But cooperation in ‘evangelism’ or other such things will no longer be possible. We are not preaching the same messiah and our idea of discipleship will be completely different. Eventually, if they haven’t already, they will label us a cult, which in an interesting phenomenon. ‘Cults’, according to Christianity, are groups that operate outside of accepted ‘orthodoxy’. And how is orthodoxy defined? By majority consensus, and, in the past, by ‘bigger guns’. It is not defined by a consistent, honest interpretation of the Scriptures. If it was, Christianity would be the largest and most successful cult of all. Of course, no one will look at it that way. We will be the ones so labeled and it will be much more difficult to draw people to us from Christian circles.
So, are we slitting our own wrists? Are we in reality taking ourselves out of both communities and ensuring our own demise? No, we are not because we have the Truth and we have the promise of Elohim that the community He created would overpower even the gates of Hell. Israel stands on three things. First, is the land promised to Avraham, Yitzak, Ya’akov and their descendants and all who would join them. Second is the Torah, the truth of Elohim, the truth many of us have worked so hard to uncover and understand and then apply. In many ways we have emphasized this more than anything else. But I will say this, and this is essential. While it is true that we are presently the most Scripturally accurate expression of Elohim’s community and it is true that we have recovered and developed many wonderful ideas and a consistent framework from which to understand an apply the Scriptures, that is not what is going to draw most people to us. While Judaism has many beautiful rituals and forms of religious expression that reflect the mind of Elohim, that is not what is going to draw most people to us. The thing that will draw people in and keep them as they grow in understanding is the third thing in the triad; community, Am Yisra’el, the people of Israel. Before we were in the Land, before Elohim gave us Torah, Israel was a people, a community. Because Israel is more than a religion, more than a political entitiy, more than a world view, it is a people. If we focus on the truth that the world will know we belong to God because of the love that we have for one another, our growth will take care of itself. If we show love and acceptance when others will not, we will grow. If we preach truth and let the Ruach haKodesh take care of the conviction or even the condemnation, we will grow. If we place our emphasis on living right instead of believing correctly, many people whom Elohim has touched or who are earnestly seeking Him will find a place of encouragement where they can work out their relationship with Elohim on their own terms while being surrounded with love and truth. We need to be inclusive, rather than exclusive, while at the same time, maintaining the integrity of the community. Truth is on our side, therefore time is as well. We can be confident that when either a Jew or a Christian asks us why, we will have the most Scripturally consistent and accurate answer available. And for those among either group that value their relationship with Elohim, the Scriptures and the truth, they will seek and they will find. And they will find us.
So since we have established that we are firmly in the camp of Israel and Judaism, what now? How do we interact with this community, particularly since they are not really fond of us nor do they, in most cases, even acknowledge our validity. And how do we come back into the stream of Judaism after such a protracted absence during which tradition and halachah continued to develop in the Diaspora, in a world far removed from the Temple and the land, a world of persecution and ghettos, of superstition and Greek enlightenment, and often in reaction against messianic belief, however defined. These are issues that need to be resolved if we are to speak and act with one voice in the larger community of Israel.
The first thing we must all do, some to a greater extent than others, is to unlearn much of what we know. We are pouring new wine into new wineskins. Much of our task is the creation of those wineskins into which Elohim can pour new wine. We cannot create our wineskins with a patchwork of Pentecostalism, Chassidism, Calvinism, Platonism, Rabbinism, and anything else that may suit you or you have in your closet. I have already mentioned the importance of redefining some basic theological terms, as in so doing, we will develop a new theological and philosophic framework in which to understand Scripture, our relationship with our Creator and His plan for this world. That will involve a discovery and reeducation for many of us in the intricacies of Semitic thought, in contrast to our western, Greek way of thinking. And while we will leave many questions unanswered, many of which should remain so, there needs to be a free exchange of ideas among all of us so we can develop a paradigm that is authentically Jewish yet uniquely Nazarene while being consistent, realistic and faithful to Scripture. We need to educate ourselves in rabbinic ways of thought so we can understand some parts of the culture and people the Messiah came to and so we can communicate intelligently with the other Judaisms of our day. We need to break cleanly from our past in the way we use terms, (such as referring to the ‘church’ as part of the body of Messiah’ and the equation of ‘Yahushua’ and ‘Jesus’) and the identity we hold (Jewish, not Christian). This will require work on our part such as immersion in Jewish literature, philosophy and theology to help us understand and develop an identity with Israel and the Jewish people. It will require interaction with the Jewish community and support of Jewish institutions. And along with all that, we must also face the challenge of how we should then live, what the halachah of our community should be.
As we reenter this community (like it or not, here we come!) and hold to Torah as the way of life, we must ask how we are to obey Torah. Do we take the words as they are written and start over? Some seventh day Adventists, the Worldwide Church of Elohim, the Assemblies of Yahweh and lots of other small church groups have attempted this route. But they have not sought to establish continuity with the historic people of Israel. Do we just jump in to the Orthodox stream as it exists today, simply adding our messianic belief? The answer lies somewhere in between reinventing the wheel and adopting the status quo. We cannot accept Orthodox Judaism as is because it rejects our messianic belief and some of it’s traditions and theological understanding have evolved in opposition to that belief. We cannot understand or evaluate the first century Nazarenes exclusively through the eyes of present day Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism developed in response to the Diaspora and Christian persecution. It embraced the superstitions of the dark ages and the thought of the Greek philosophers. The result, as was the case even in Yahushua’s time, was that some of the reasoning and assumptions behind their halacha was flawed and resulted in practices that were not reflective of the will of Elohim or consistent with the rest of Torah. Such practices and ideas can have no place of real value in our halachic system. But most of what is historically consistent in Judaism is valuable and meaningful. Most of the traditions, many of which we take for granted, are beautiful and are filled with both obvious and intricate meaning and they help us develop our relationship with Elohim and our expression of Torah obedience. And if we truly desire to be recognized among the greater commonwealth of Israel, we must respect the community’s authority to establish halachah, historically and presently. And by the community, I mean the larger community of Israel who have taken the covenant seriously whether they be reform, conservative or orthodox as well as the historical consensus that bridges the gap even between Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jewry. Our disagreements with their judgements must be undertaken with the utmost seriousness. We must show respect to the history and the development of the people with whom we seek identity. Keep in mind that the common divisions of Reform, Orthodox and Conservative did not even exist two hundred years ago. Before that one was either an observant Jew who took his covenant realtionship with Elohim seriously or he was not. So while the divsions and their consequent religious and political relaities exist and we have to deal with them as such, attempting to fit into a catagory that did not even exist until recently is not something we should be preoccupied with. It is the seriousness with which we take our covenant responsibilities that matters.
Therefore, we do not do things only to seek the approval of Orthodox (or any other form) Judaism. While it may be a consideration and a sign of respect to give heed to the institutions and traditions they have developed, their acceptance of us is not something we have any control over. Individually, we may participate in some of those traditions because we find value in them or to specifically to relate to the Orthodox or Chasidim. But as a community, it would not be proper to blindly enforce a body of tradition that has developed without messianic consideration or Nazarenes. Ultimately, we must obey Elohim rather than men. Some of our disagreements are in areas we cannot compromise, our messianic belief, for example. There will be other areas of Torah and tradition that were part of the Judaisms of the first century that were discarded and we are trying to revive which will put us at odds with the present Judaisms. There will be things we should embrace that we find inconvenient or pointless. And there are beautiful traditions we embrace because they are right. The challenge for us as a community is to know which traditions fit in which category for we cannot be, as many Messianics are, selective in our Torah obedience and our halacha, arbitrarily doing what we personally find meaningful and ignoring the rest. This is a task that must be taken up with the utmost seriousness, founded on biblical integrity and historical accuracy and with a keen understanding of present application.
Beyond recapturing the practices and traditions of the first century community, I would propose the following as a starting point for evaluation and embracing Jewish tradition in general. There are traditions that are part of Judaism in general, traditions that span the divisions of Orthodox, Conservative and Reform, Ashkenazic and Sephardic. These traditions, such as the seder, the siddur, the prohibition of milk and meat, and the division of the Torah portions, for example, are ones that are understood by all of Judaism to be normative. That is not to say that all of the Judaisms practice such things but they all recognize that if one were to be a ‘good Jew’, one would adhere to such traditions. These are traditions we should embrace. And this is the reason why. If we are seeking to be part of the larger community of Israel, the recognized people of Elohim, we must respect the consensus of that community in matters of faith and practice, as long as those things do not directly contradict the Scriptures. Elohim has given the community the authority to interpret Torah and we must show our loyalty to the community by respecting those interpretations that have become part of the historical fabric and identity of the Jewish people. We have seen that Yahushua had this same attitude toward tradition. The Pharisees did not ask Him why he was harvesting on Shabbat (Matt 12) or why He didn’t wash His hands (Matt 15). Their accusations were all directed at the Talmidim, not at Him. Could that be because He observed these traditions to show Himself to be above reproach in the eyes of the community. Certainly the neglect of such traditions cannot usually be construed as sinful. However, Yahushua apparently agreed with the idea that the community, at least those who take Torah and covenant seriously, who were in His day the Pharisees, have the authority to determine what is normative in the practice of Torah, to determine what makes one pious. Throughout Israel’s history, righteous men who took their covenant responsibility seriously have developed traditions to assist them in fulfilling those responsibilities. Some of those traditions have spanned the continents and the centuries. It is those traditions and Torah interpretations we need to embrace to show ourselves as part of the larger community of Israel.
The development of our community should be one of the first things on our list. And it is something we need to work at because of the nature of our development up to this point. Our development has been primarily in the larger community of cyberspace which is probably a first in itself. It has allowed a degree of connectedness and development that would have been impossible a decade ago. The work of the Beit Din, the congregational affiliations, the information published by various people and the sharing of ideas among ourselves are all made possible by this medium. But along with that comes the impersonal nature that is part of the internet. The sense of intimate community and connectedness are difficult to maintain solely through e-mail.
Because of this, the development of local congregations and their affiliation to the whole is essential. It is the local congregations that are going to meet the real needs of people. Anyone can read a paper on the internet, many of us have written important works that bring truth to anyone who wants to look. But we must be much more than just a repository of Elohim’s truth. We must be a community. I know Dr. Trimm is currently working on a program to ‘plant’ new congregations based on the model they have used successfully in Colorado. Leaders extant in various locales need to learn this program and implement it in their areas. There may even be individuals Elohim will call to do this work regularly.
But in order for it to be successful, there needs to be a support structure in place to assist new congregations in their development. This will begin on the local level with the closest congregation(s) providing people, material, training and teaching to develop a strong foundation from which the new seed will grow. There also needs to be an international organization that will provide additional resources and a basic mold in which a congregation can develop. The Society for the Advancement of Nazarene Judaism has filled this role up to this point but to be truly effective, our support of it needs to increase considerably. Yes, I’m talking about money. If SANJ is going to be the organization that will plant and develop local congregations, support the work of scholars to define and defend our community and do whatever necessary to get the truth to as many people as we can, resources are essential. Literature needs to be developed, people need to be trained and sent to various locations. I would propose regional conferences like this to encourage connectedness among people and congregations in a larger geographical area. If we really want to ensure success, and by that I mean the replication of spiritually mature, Torah obedient, Messiah loving individuals and congregations that are going to fulfill the mission that Elohim has for Remnant Israel, then we need to gladly sacrifice our time and money to the larger community. For a true community is one that not only shares the bonds of love and friendship but also has shared ideas, lifestyle and when necessary, resources. The development of a strong sense of community and community responsibility is essential to our success.
We need to address this concern at this early juncture. For we have already been growing at a phenomenal rate because there have so many people who have been previously disconnected to whom Elohim has shown the truth of Torah and Mashiyach have finally found a label with which they can identify. This is a great opportunity but also a problem. The problem is this. How to take people that are by nature, rather individualistic, who are responding to this great move of Elohim, and develop a community rather than a movement. We have seen the disunity that results in a ‘movement’. The divergent views of faith and practice, the ambiguity that results from people from all kinds of backgrounds appropriating a label that has not been clearly defined. The challenge is to define the label in terms that are general enough not to be authoritarian yet specific enough to provide unity, community and some sense of standardization from which we can speak as one voice to both the Christian and Jewish communities.
The International Nazarene Beit Din is a crucial part of the community’s success and, if done properly, will ensure we avoid the pitfalls of the Messianic Movement. Unlike Messianic Judaism, Nazarene Judaism is not a ‘do it yourself’ Judaism. In Messianic Judaism, each individual or congregation adopts the mitzvot and traditions they find valuable or meaningful and ignore the rest. The results are very diverse and divergent beliefs and practices with each one ‘doing what is right in his own eyes’ although it will be rationalized in Christian lingo about conviction or the ‘leading of the Spirit’. We can not be so disorganized if we are ever to be taken seriously.
Therefore the work of the Beit Din is crucial to the formation of a cohesive community. They will answer the questions posed about tradition earlier. They will respond to halachic concerns in our modern time that have not been adequately addressed by the other Judaisms. They will formulate a basic paradigm from which to understand the important topics of Scripture, faith and practice.
They must do so with several things in mind. First, they need to be true to written Torah above all else. We do not want to be condemned for setting aside the command of Elohim for the sake of our tradition. Halacha must be consistent with Torah, Tenach and the teaching of the Messiah and His Talmidim. The Word of Elohim must come first, no matter what.
Second is a healthy respect for and understanding of the traditions and halachic rulings as they have come down to the present age. And I would council that, where possible, and assuming the other criteria are met, orthodox halacha be respected, adapted when necessary and adopted as our own. For if we lean in the orthodox direction, we will find find more acceptance among the other Judaisms because in most cases even the secular Jew knows in his heart that in general terms, orthodoxy is right.
Third, they need to be realistic. We need to look at our present day circumstances and fit our lives into Torah in a way that makes sense and enables us to perform the mitzvot accurately and consistently. That means we will have to make compromises with the modern life we live and and with things that we do not have the ability to control. We need to carefully balance the integrity of Torah with the realities of 20th century life outside Eretz Israel.
Fourth, they must stick to the very basic issues and allow for individuals and communities to express themselves and their relationship with Elohim in their particular situation while remaining under the umbrella of general Natzrim halacha. They cannot seek to micro manage for that would only create resentment and the result would be an erosion of the authority they are seeking to establish. What they need to do is create general principles and halacha that the individual communities and their local beit dins can adapt to their own particular situations. This is all done within the boundaries of Torah, of course, and there needs to be some well defined boundaries. But the local communities must be given the freedom to develop and adapt tradition so it is meaningful to them and respond to situations that are unique to their environment. It would be a good idea to have a clearinghouse to catalogue the rulings from the local beit dins so we can all benefit from the wisdom they apply to their situations. You never know when it may happen in your community.
Finally the last basic issue we need to deal with is maintaining the integrity of the community. This is an essential thing because much of what is contained in Torah is there for that purpose. Israel’s mission, and ours by extension, is to be a light to all the world. We are to be salt, we are to be the consciences of the world. And we understand that Elohim is not going to choose anyone else for the job. Therefore, He has everything, including his honor, staked on us. We have a very serious responsibility because when people see us, they are seeing Elohim’s representatives here on earth. We are the priests of the world and as remnant Israel, we are the ones that make the whole holy. We are held to the highest standard and we need to hold one another to those standards. The integrity of the community is essential to our mission and will enable us to speak and operate as a true community.
What, specifically, am I talking about? I’m talking about each one of us and each one of those who claim to be Nazarene Jews out there being proper representatives of Elohim and Nazarene Judaism. Proper in character and knowledge and spirit. Let’s look at leadership first for that is where it all starts. If leadership is not united around common goals and ideas, there is no way that those whom Elohim has placed under their care are going to generate a common bond and understanding with Nazarenes everywhere else.
The unification of leadership is going to be around the Beit Din. Therefore, let’s start with them. The men (and possibly women) seated in this crucial body must truly be men beyond reproach. As a group, they are really speaking for Elohim to the community. That is a very heavy responsibility and there can be no place given to ulterior motives, juvenile politics or hot heads. The prayerful and informed discussion engaged in to seek the mind of Elohim for the community is a job for those who have spiritual maturity, impeccable character, a working knowledge of Scripture and tradition and an absolute commitment to the community as a whole. Their views and understanding which should have a relatively long and consistent track record, need to show agreement with the primary tenets of Nazarene Judaism as they have been developed to this point. This means that the addition of members to the Beit Din will be done only after careful consideration and evaluation. We are developing something new here and it will be successful to the extent the foundation on which it stands is strong and stable. That foundation is leadership and the basis of leadership and authority is the Beit Din. The work done and decisions made will determine the direction of the community. Therefore, their work needs to be done deliberately and with caution. And while there will be disagreements and not all the votes will be unanimous, all members must respect the body enough to abide by the decisions made and encourage those under their care to do so as well.
Which brings us to those who have leadership positions in local congregations who have affiliated themselves with SANJ and placed themselves under the authority of the Beit Din. Affiliations should be accepted with care and those who seek affiliation should be evaluated by scriptural principles by those bodies they seek to be a part of. These bodies need to be assured that these men and women are going to represent Nazarene Judaism honorably and consistently. They need to abide by the rulings of the Beit Din and be an example to those whom Elohim has placed in their charge. They need to be knowledgeable enough to train others and have the temperament and maturity to do so. They need to be mature people who have developed their understanding of Torah and Messiah over the course of years, not weeks or months. They must have a good understanding of Judaism and should have been living the Jewish lifestyle consistently for some time. At some point an application should be developed by which an applicant for affiliation can be thoroughly evaluated and some type of certification given to the congregation.
Which brings us finally to the people who make up all the local congregations. How do we establish a basic consensus of belief and understanding among a group of people from very varied backgrounds and who are, by nature, rather independently minded. We will do it the same way it has been done in Judaism for years, through the conversion process. This will be a process by which halachicly recognized Jews and Gentiles will develop a basic agreement of belief and practice and become part of the community of remnant Israel. It will be a process of education in theology and practice that should last at least a few months during which the prospect will demonstrate his or her willingness to adopt a Torah observant lifestyle as determined by the Beit Din and the larger community of Israel and his or her commitment to the community by their allocation of time and resources. At the at the end of this time, the local Beit Din will evaluate the prospect and after that, the convert will be immersed. This process is essential for a couple of reasons. First, is the previously mentioned goal of creating a cohesive community based on common belief and practice. Second, it will protect the community from those who would appropriate our label without accepting our values, understanding and authority structures. This is especially true by the nature of our larger community which has evolved on the internet. The third is that it allows gentiles to become full participants in the life of the community because they will have the same basic knowledge, lifestyle and values as do observant halachic Jews. Finally, it is a witness to the larger community of Israel. By developing a conversion process that shows respect for their halacha, teaches people to place value on the same things Jewish people always have, and creating educated students of Torah who are filled with the Spirit of Elohim, will will show ourselves to be true children of Avraham regardless of our birth.
The secret to all of this is maintaining balance. This talk about authority may have made some of you uncomfortable. This talk of standardization and consensus. But the consensus that I am talking about is the one that held the Jewish community together through most of their history. While they may have differed in some of their theology, no one questioned Torah as the way of life, their commitment to the community was impeccable and they all respected the authority of the leading rabbis to develop halachic understanding. They had developed a responsible authority that was respected and and avoided the authoritarian use of power. That is the balance between respecting the individuals relationship with Elohim and his ability to be led by the Spirit and maintaining the integrity of the community and it’s standard according to the Word of Elohim. It is the balance of respecting the ability of local communities to develop wisdom and understanding in their particular situation while maintaining a basic understanding of faith that creates a feeling of community between congregations all over the world. It is the balance between acceptance of an individual’s rate of growth in faith while never lowering the expectations Elohim has of every redeemed person. If we follow such guidelines with maturity and work them out with council among godly men and women, we will develop a vibrant community of individuals who will hold to the highest standards of Scripture, allow the spirit free reign in their lives and are committed to their fellow Nazarenes and Jews all over the world.
The opportunity that is before us is enormous and fraught with peril. Elohim is doing a great and awesome work all over the world. He is bringing Jews and Gentiles to an understanding of redemption that includes both Torah and Mashiyakh. The ‘Church will not hear of Torah, The Jews will not look at Mashiyakh and Messianic Judaism will not accept Gentiles. These people whom Elohim has called to Torah and Messiah will need to find someplace to belong because they know community is essential in Elohim’s plan. We can be that community if we are willing to make it happen. If we are willing to put our time, energy and money into this community we know as Nazarene Judaism nothing will be out of our reach. We are on the ground floor. If we take the time and take what we are doing seriously, we will build a beautiful work. Because truth is our foundation and because as we build on and live that truth the Spirit of Elohim will do things with us and through us that have not been seen since the first decades of the Yerushalyim community.
Rav Mikha’el
Netzarim’ 99 Conference
June 1999
How the Church Fathers Invented Christianity
By
James Scott Trimm
What many Christians do not know, is that the Church Fathers admitted that the original followers of Yeshua as Messiah, including Paul, were Jews of the sect of the Nazarenes, and that Gentile Christianity was their own invention.
Of course the New Testament tells us Paul was a “ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5). The so-called church fathers tell us quite a bit about these “Nazarenes”.
The fourth century “church father” Epiphanius gives a detailed description:
But these sectarians… did not call themselves Christians–but “Nazarenes,” … However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do… They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion– except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that God is one, and that his son is Yeshua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the… Writings… are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law–circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest– they are not in accord with Christians…. they are nothing but Jews…. They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
The “church father” Jerome (4th Cent.) described these Nazarenes as those “…who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.” (Jerome; On. Is. 8:14).
But in a letter to Augustine, Jerome makes an amazing admission concerning the Nazarenes:
“The matter in debate, therefore, or I should rather say your opinion regarding it, is summed up in this: that since the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the law, i.e. in offering sacrifices as Paul did, in circumcising their children, as Paul did in the case of Timothy, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath, as all the Jews have been accustomed to do. If this be true, we fall into the heresy… [of those who] though believing in Christ, were anathematized by the fathers for this one error, that they mixed up the ceremonies of the law with the gospel of Christ, and professed their faith in that which was new, without letting go what was old. …In our own day there exists a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East, which is called the sect of the Minæans, and is even now condemned by the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe. But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither the one nor the other. I therefore beseech you, who think that you are called upon to heal my slight wound, which is no more, so to speak, than a prick or scratch from a needle, to devote your skill in the healing art to this grievous wound, which has been opened by a spear driven home with the impetus of a javelin. For there is surely no proportion between the culpability of him who exhibits the various opinions held by the fathers in a commentary on Scripture, and the guilt of him who reintroduces within the Church a most pestilential heresy. If, however, there is for us no alternative but to receive the Jews into the Church, along with the usages prescribed by their law; if, in short, it shall be declared lawful for them to continue in the Churches of Christ what they have been accustomed to practice in the synagogues of Satan, I will tell you my opinion of the matter: they will not become Christians, but they will make us Jews.
(Jerome; Letter 75)
(1) “Minæans” apparently Latinized from Hebrew MINIM (singular is MIN) a word which in modern Hebrew means “apostates” but was originally an acronym for a Hebrew phrase meaning “Believers in Yeshua the Nazarene”.
Jerome repeats Augustine, saying of the Nazarenes: “since the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the law, i.e. in offering sacrifices as Paul did, in circumcising their children, as Paul did in the case of Timothy, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath, as all the Jews have been accustomed to do.” (Jerome; Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine)
Jerome responds saying of the Nazarenes “though believing in Christ, [they] were anathematized by the [church] fathers for this one error, that they mixed up the ceremonies of the law with the gospel of Christ, and professed their faith in that which was new, without letting go what was old.” (ibid)
In other words Augustine and Jerome tell us that the Nazarene doctrine that the Torah should still be observed began with “the preaching of Christ” and was the doctrine kept by Paul, but that the church “fathers” of Christianity declared this to be an error and a heresy.
Ignatius Invents Anti-Nomian Christianity
Up until the time of Ignatius (in the late first century), matters of dispute that arose at Antioch were ultimately referred to the Jerusalem Council (as in Acts 14:26-15:2). Ignatius usurped the authority of the Jerusalem council, declaring himself as the local bishop as the ultimate authority over the assembly of which he was bishop, and likewise declaring the same as true of all other bishops and their local assemblies. Ignatius writes:
…being subject to your bishop…
…run together according to the will of God.
Jesus… is sent by the will of the Father;
As the bishops… are by the will of Jesus Christ.
(Eph. 1:9, 11)
…your bishop…I think you happy who are so joined to him,
as the church is to Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ is to the Father…
Let us take heed therefore, that we not set ourselves
against the bishop, that we may be subject to God….
We ought to look upon the bishop, even as we would
upon the Lord himself.
(Eph. 2:1-4)
…obey your bishop…
(Mag. 1:7)
Your bishop presiding in the place of God…
…be you united to your bishop…
(Mag. 2:5, 7)
…he… that does anything without the bishop…
is not pure in his conscience…
(Tral. 2:5)
…Do nothing without the bishop.
(Phil. 2:14)
See that you all follow your bishop,
As Jesus Christ, the Father…
(Smy. 3:1)
By exalting the power of the office of bishop (overseer) and demanding the absolute authority of the bishop over the assembly, Ignatius was actually making a power grab by thus taking absolute authority over the assembly at Antioch and encouraging other Gentile overseers to follow suite.
Moreover Ignatius drew men away from Torah and declared the Torah to have been abolished, not only at Antioch but at other Gentile assemblies to which he wrote:
Be not deceived with strange doctrines;
nor with old fables which are unprofitable.
For if we still continue to live according to the Jewish Law,
we do confess ourselves not to have received grace…
(Mag. 3:1)
But if any one shall preach the Jewish law unto you,
hearken not unto him…
(Phil. 2:6)
It is also Ignatius who first replaces the Seventh Day Sabbath with Sunday worship, writing:
“…no longer observing sabbaths, but keeping the Lord’s day
in which also our life is sprung up by him, and through
his death…”
(Magnesians 3:3)
Having seceded from the authority of Jerusalem, declared the Torah abolished and replacing the Sabbath with Sunday, Ignatius had created a new religion. Ignatius coins a new term, never before used, for this new religion which he calls “Christianity” and which he makes clear is new and district religion from Judaism. He writes:
…let us learn to live according to the rules of Christianity,
for whosoever is called by any other name
besides this, he is not of God….
It is absurd to name Jesus Christ, and to Judaize.
For the Christian religion did not embrace the Jewish.
But the Jewish the Christian…
(Mag. 3:8, 11)
Conclusion
By the end of the first century Ignatius of Antioch had declared that the Nazarene doctrine that the Torah should still be observed which Augustine admitted began with “the preaching of Christ” and was the doctrine kept by Paul to be an error and a heresy.
He seceded from Judaism and founded a new religion which he called “Christianity”. A religion which rejected the Torah, and replaced the Seventh Day Sabbath with Sunday Worship.
Yeshua did not come to create a new religion, he came to be the Messiah of Judaism. The original followers of Yeshua as the Messiah were a sect of Judaism called the sect of the Nazarenes (Acts 24:5).
IN DEFENSE OF THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
By
James Scott Trimm
In recent years the Letter to the Hebrews has come under attack in some quarters of the Hebraic Roots movement. Among those better known Messianic leaders to question the validity of the Letter to the Hebrews is Monte Judah. The following is a response to some of the things Monte Judah has said about this very important book of the Scriptures.
THE HEBREW ORIGIN OF HEBREWS
Monte Judah starts with a completely false premise saying:
The book [Hebrews] is really an epistle (a letter) entitled to the Hebrews, but… the writing and logic is Greek. It was written in Greek, quoting from Greek copies of the Scriptures, and using Greek definitions to explain and teach Hebraic things.
First of all the Book of Hebrews was originally written in Hebrew not in Greek.
Although the Greek version of the Epistle to the Hebrews has become the standard text used in Christendom, the “Church Fathers” of Christendom openly admitted that the Letter to the Hebrews had been originally written in Hebrew and was later translated into Greek.
Eusebius in the fourth century referred to a now lost writing by Clement of Alexandria written around the year 200 C.E. which Eusebius cites as follows:
In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up
the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria]
has given us the abridged accounts of all
the canonical Scriptures, the Epistle to the Hebrews he
asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews,
in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully
translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks.
(Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes (c. 200 CE)
referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist. 6:14:2)
And Eusebius himself testified:
For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews
in the language of his country; some say
that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement,
translated the epistle.
(Eusebius (4th Cent.); Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)
Finally Jerome wrote of Hebrews:
He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew,
that is, his own tongue and most fluently
while things which were eloquently written
in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek.
(Jerome (4th Cent.); Lives of Illustrious Men, Book V)
In 1537 Munster published Hebrew Matthew which he had obtained from the Jews (this Hebrew text was very similar to the Hebrew Matthew published in 1553 by Jean DuTillet). Twenty years later, in 1557, a second edition of Munster’s Hebrew Matthew was printed, this time also containing the complete Hebrew text of the Letter to the Hebrews in an appendix. This second edition went largely unnoticed and was soon forgotten. It has since been printed in parallel columns with an English translation and is available at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds
It is important to note that the criticism that the Book of Hebrews has recently received has been aimed at the Greek text of Hebrews and not at the original Hebrew text of the book.
IS HEBREWS ANTI-NOMIAN?
Monte Judah writes:
Let’s conduct our own examination of the book of Hebrews to see if the author was “pro-Torah” using just a few clips of the writer’s presentation…. He wrote that there must be changes to the Law of Moses (Heb 7:12) because the priesthood has changed from Levite to Melchizedek….let’s ask some fundamental questions at this point.
These are the questions that should cause you to pause and question whether this book is consistent with the rest of the Scriptures. … Do we believe that some of the commandments given in the Torah should be changed?
He basis this on the Greek version of Hebrews 7:12 which reads:
For the priesthood being changed,
there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
- Heb. 7:12 KJV (from the Greek)
However the word for “change/changed” here in the Hebrew is SHENISHTANA from the verb root SH-N-H (Strong’s 8138) meaning “to repeat, to do a second time” thus the Hebraic Roots Version reads:
It is saying that according to which there is a repetition of the
office of the priesthood, of necessity it is saying there is a repetition of the Torah.
- Heb. 7:12 HRV
In the original Hebrew there is no indication that the Torah or any of its commandments are changed, only that they are repeated. This repetition is all part of the renewal of Torah which is a primary paradigm of the Book of Hebrews in the original Hebrew.
Monte Judah also keys in on Hebrews 7:18:
For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
Heb. 7:18 KJV from the Greek
However the Hebrew actually reads:
To me in this there was a carrying away of the first by a weak work and by drunkeness and that which is not worthy for use.
-Heb. 7:18 HRV from the Hebrew
The Hebrew word for “carrying away” is GISTAL’KAH. Jeremiah uses a form of this same word to describe the Babylonian captivity (Jer. 29:1, 4, 16, 20, 31; 46:19; 48:7, 11; 49:3). The “carrying away” here is that of the Babylonian captivity and the curse which has come upon Israel for having failed collectively to observe Toarh as a people (see Deut. 28-29 and Lev. 26). The Torah promises that if after this curse comes upon us, we repent and turn back to Elohim as a people, he will regather us and renew the covenant with us (Deut. 30 and Jer. 31:31f). Hebrews is saying that a “carrying away” resulted from our failure to observe the Torah thus creating the need for a repetition of the Torah through a repetition of the priesthood.
Monte Judah however sees these passages of Hebrews as leading up to
a renouncing of Torah in Hebrews 8:13 where the Greek has:
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
- Heb. 8:13 KJV from the Greek
Judah writes:
All of these statements were put forth by the writer to support hism conclusion that the Old Covenant was “obsolete,” “becoming obsolete,” “growing old,” and “ready to disappear” (Heb 8:13).
However this is not at all what the Hebrew text of Hebrews says here. It reads:
And according to that which he said ‘renewed covenant’ he has
antiquated the first to that which has put on antiquity and in
coming days behold he offers that which is longed for.
- Heb. 8:13 HRV from the Hebrew
In the Hebrew text the idea here is that Israel has (by violating Torah) antiquated the Torah but that the days are coming when the the renewal of Torah that had been longed for would come.
The Hebrew word for “longed for” here is SHEY’KAMAH (Strong’s 3642) meaning “to long for”; “to become pale” or “to vanish away”. The Greek translator misunderstood this word as meaning “to vanish away” but in the Hebrew it clearly means that the renewal of the Torah was “longed for”.
INCENSE IN THE HOLY OF HOLIES
Monte Judah maintains that there are mistakes in the Book of Hebrews. One passage which he maintains is a mistake is Hebrews 9:3- 4 of which he writes:
There is a problem with this passage. … ‘And behind the second veil, there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, having a golden altar of incense…’ [(Heb. 9:3-4)] This part is not correct as written. The altar of incense is in the first sanctuary with the lampstand and table, not in the Holy of Holies with the Ark of the Covenant.
While it is true that the “golden alter of incense” is outside the veil, the context here is that of the Day of Atonement (as we see in Heb. 8 where the High Priest is in the Holy of Holies). On the day of atonement the High Priest would take incense from the golden alter of incense and place it in the Holy of Holies (Lev. 16:12-13) so that Hebrews, in telling us that the Holy of Holies “had” the golden alter of incense because it was being filled with incense from that alter.
BLOOD OF THE COVENANT
Monte Judah also finds fault with Hebrews 9:19-21 saying:
His [the author of Hebrews] description sounds authoritative and precisely detailed. But it is not accurate when compared to the Scriptures he seems to be referring to. And more confusion is created in the minds of those who would take the time to review the facts. Actually, there are two events being spoken of here, not one as the writer is suggesting. The first event was when Moses came down from the mountain, recounting the Torah. The second was approximately a year later, after the tabernacle was set up at its inauguration. … these were two different events, even though they are improperly combined by the writer, … The writer says that Moses used the blood of calves and goats. He used water, scarlet wool, and hyssop. He sprinkled the book and the people. He goes on to say that Moses also sprinkled the tabernacle and its vessels with blood. … The writer of Hebrews has made a much bigger mistake here than the placement of the altar of incense in the Holy of Holies we described earlier. Moses did not use the blood of goats; he used only the blood of bulls (calves). Moses did not use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop. Moses did not sprinkle the book; he read the book to the people and he sprinkled the altar and then he sprinkled the people. … The writer also wrote that Moses also sprinkled with blood the tabernacle when it was established. So he makes another
mistake.
Now let us examine each of these “mistakes”:
First Judah complains that the author of Hebrews has “improperly combined” two events. Now the passage in question begins with the phrase “For IN THE DAY which Moses wrote to the people the words of YHWH in the Torah…” (Heb. 9:1 HRV). This passage is very similar to Jer. 31:32 “…the covenant which I made with their fathers IN THE DAY that I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt…”. By Monte Judah’s logic one could also argue that Jeremiah “improperly combined” the exodus from Egypt with the giving of Torah some fifty days later. These were two separate events. The Hebrew word YOM which is normally translated “day” can also have a much broader meaning referring to periods of time other than just 24 hours. This is the case in Jer. 31:32 and it is also the case in Heb. 9:1.
Secondly Judah complains that Hebrews mentions goats being offered while Exodus only mentions bulls being offered. While it is true that the KJV and some other versions mention goats in this passage, the original text of Hebrews made no such mention of goats. The Hebrew text of Hebrews and the Aramaic Peshitta and CPA texts of
Hebrews all lack the phrase “and goats” in Heb. 9:19. The phrase is also lacking in the oldest copy of Hebrews (P46) as well as many other Greek copies ()c; K; L 181; 1241; 1739).
Monte Judah’s third objection is that Exodus 24 only mentions blood, not water, scarlet wool or hyssop. Judah seems to believe that any detail included in Hebrews that is not recorded in the Torah must be a mistake. However there are many places where the books of the “New Testament” mention details of Torah events which are lacking in the written Torah itself. For example 1Cor. 10:4 states that the rock in the wilderness followed Israel. This detail is lacking in the written Torah but is found in the Midrash (B’midbar Parshat Chukkat (Num. 20:16-2a)). 2Tim. 3:8 includes the detail of the names of Pharaoh’s magicians. These names are not found in Exodus but are found in the Targum, the Talmud and the Book of Jasher. Jude 1:9 records a conflict between the angel Michael and HaSatan over the body of Moshe, while the Torah records no such conflict. Even the other books of the Tanak record details of Torah events which are not found in the written Torah. The Psalms record that Joseph was kept in fetters while imprisoned in Egypt (Ps. 105:17-18) a detail lacking in the Torah. Therefore why should it be a problem for Hebrews to include details in Torah events that are lacking in the written Torah?
In fact the Talmud records a tradition that the sprinkling with blood at Sinai was accompanied by a sprinkling of the waters of purification:
R. Johanan said to Resh Lakish: It is right according to me who infer from the Consecration; for this agrees with what we are taught: `On both of them [the Priests] we sprinkle throughout the seven days [water] from all the sin-offerings that were there’; but according to you who infer from Sinai, was there any sprinkling done on Sinai? — But according to your own reasoning, it would not be right either, for in the consecration [ceremony the sprinkling was done with] blood, whereas here with water? — That is no difficulty. For R. Hiyya taught: `The water takes the place of blood’, but
according to you, was there any sprinkling on Sinai? — He answered: It was a mere additional provision.
(b.Yoma 4a)
This tradition is recorded in a section of Talmud which discusses the use of these waters to purify the High Priest before the Day of Atonement ceremony. This water was a special water which had added to it the ashes of the red heifer (see Num. 19). These were the ashes of a red heifer burned with hyssop and scarlet wool (Num. 19:6).
Moreover Josephus records a tradition that Moses sprinkled the people with the waters of purification at the funeral of Miriam:
Moses purified the people after this manner: He brought a heifer that had never been used to the plough or to husbandry, that was complete in all its parts, and entirely of a red color, at a little distance from the camp, into
a place perfectly clean. This heifer was slain by the high priest, and her blood sprinkled with his finger seven times before the tabernacle of God; after this, the entire heifer was burnt in that state, together with its skin and entrails; and they threw cedar-wood, and hyssop, and scarlet wool, into the midst of the fire; then a clean man gathered all her ashes together, and laid them in a place perfectly clean. When therefore any persons were defiled by a dead body, they put a little of these ashes into spring water, with hyssop, and, dipping part of these ashes in it, they sprinkled them with it, both on the third day, and on the seventh, and after that they were clean. This he enjoined them to do also when the tribes should come into their own land.
(Josephus, Antiquities, 4:4:6)
Monte Judah’s fourth objection is that Exodus 24 does not mention any sprinkling of the book.
Again we should repeat, it is not a problem for Hebrews to include details of Torah events which are not to be found in the written Torah.
There is in fact a basis in the Hebrew to conclude that both the people and the book were sprinkled.
The Torah says:
And Moshe took half of the blood, and put it in basins;
and half of the blood he dashed upon the alter.
And he took the book of the covenant,
and read in the hearing of the people;
and they said: ‘All that YHWH has spoken will we do, and obey.’
And Moshe took the blood, and sprinkled it upon the people,
and said: ‘Behold the blood of the covenant,
which YHWH has made with you in agreement with
all these words.
(Ex. 24:6-8)
The phrase translated “in agreement with all these words” may also be translated “upon all these words”. Moreover the first rule of Eliezer tells us that the Hebrew particles AF, GAM and ET indicate an inclusion or amplification. The Hebrew word ET has no parallel in English (it points to the next word as a direct object) but if we were to include it in the English it would read as follows:
And Moshe took half of the blood, and put it in basins;
and half of the blood he dashed upon the alter.
And he took the book of the covenant,
and read in the hearing of the people;
and they said: ‘All that YHWH has spoken will we do, and obey.’
And Moshe took ET the blood, and sprinkled it upon the people, and said: ‘Behold the blood of the covenant,
which YHWH has made with you upon
all these words.
(Ex. 24:6-8)
Since the word ET indicates an inclusion, the parallel phrases “upon the alter”; “upon the people” and “upon all these words” would imply that the blood was upon all three of these.
THE JEWISH PARADIGM IN THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
Monte Judah writes:
…the writing and logic [of Hebrews] is Greek. It was written in Greek, quoting from Greek copies of the Scriptures, and using Greek definitions to explain and teach Hebraic things.
Now we have already demonstrated that the Book of Hebrews was written in Hebrew and that the Greek version is only a translation from the original Hebrew.
In addition the logic of Hebrews is very Hebraic and not at all Greek. This book, more than any other, uses Jewish Hermeneutics and forms of Midrashic Exegesis to formulate its arguments.
In fact the entire Book of Hebrews is an extended Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 110. This extended midrash is made up of five sub-midrashim. Each of these midrashim are in a special form of midrash known as a proem homiletic midrash. This is a form of Midrashic exegesis which utilizes Hillel’s second rule (g’zara sheva -equivalence of expressions) to tie together two passages, present a drash (exposition) and then close by quoting a third verse which also ties through a phrase and which helps summarize the results of the exegesis.
These five proem homiletic midrashim which make up the Book of
Hebrews are as follows:
I. THE MESSIAH HUMBLED AND EXALTED (1:1-3:6)
(YHWH said to my Adonai, sit at my right hand. Ps. 110:1a)
A. Initial texts: (Heb. 1:5-13)(Ps. 2:7; 2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:46/Ps.
97:7; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; Ps. 102:25-27; Ps. 110:1)
B. Exposition (1:14-2:5)
C. Second Text: (2:6-8a) (Ps. 8:4-6)
D. Exposition: (2:8b-3:6)
II. THE WORLD YET TO BE SUBJECT TO HIM (3:6-4:13)
(until your enimies are made your footstool Ps. 110:1b)
A. Initial text:(3:7-3:11) (Ps. 95:7-11)
B. Exposition (3:12-4:3)
C. Second text (4:4) (Gen. 2:2)
D. Exposition (4:5-14)
III. A MIDRASH ON MELCHIZADEK (4:14-7:28)
(A priest forever after the order of Melchizadek Ps. 110:4)
A. Introductory exposition (4:14-5:5)
B. Initial text: (5:6) (Ps. 110:4)
C. Exposition (5:7-11)
D. Parenthetical (5:12-6:12)
E. Second text (6:13-14) (Gen. 22:17)
F. Exposition (6:15-7:28)
IV. THE PRIEST AT THE RIGHT HAND OF YHWH (8:1-9:28)
(Ps. 110:1 and Ps. 110:4 brought together)
A. Introductory exposition (8:1-7)
B. Initial text (8:8-12) (Jer. 31:31-34)
C. Exposition (8:13-9:19)
D. Second text (9:20) (Ex. 24:8)
E. Exposition (9:21-9:28)
V. IN DEFENSE OF THE TEMPLE CEREMONIES (10:1-11:40)
A. Introductory exposition (10:1-4)
B. Initial text (10:5-7) (Ps. 40:6-8)
C. Exposition (10:8-14)
D. Second text (10:15-17) (Jer. 31:33-34)
E. Exposition (10:18-35)
F. Third text (10:36-38) (Hab. 2:3-4)
G. Exposition (10:39-11:40)
In this first section Paul begins his commentary on Ps. 110:1 by showing that the Messiah was exalted and therefore was first in a humbled state. Paul begins with a very complex Proem Homiletic exegesis. He begins by citing six passages (2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:43/Ps. 97:7/Neh. 9:6; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6-7; Ps. 102:25-27 and Ps. 110:1) which he uses the fourth rule of Hillel: Binyan av mish’bey k’tuvim “Building of the father [that is a rule] from two (or more) texts” to build a rule that The Messiah is of a higher order than angels (Heb. 1:4-14). Paul then gives an exposition using the first rule of Hillel (shown below in the commentary). Next Paul links these texts to Psalms 8:4-6 with Hillel’s second rule (g’zara sheva “equivelence of expresions”) using the key phrases: “angels” and “the works of your hands” as well as the concepts “crowned” and “you have put all things in subjection under his feet.” Paul then gives a concluding exposition.
In his second midrash Paul gives a Proem Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 95:7-11 and Gen. 2:2 in Hebrews 3:7-4:10 (using the keywords “day”; “works”; and “rest”) which is launched by the phrase if we hold fast the boldness and the boasting of his hope until the end correlating it with Psalm 95:8. Using g’zara sheva (Hillel’s second rule) in this Proem Homiletic Midrashic Exegesis, Paul ties God’s “works” in Ps. 95:9 with his “works” in Gen. 2:2 and his “rest” in Ps. 95:11 with his rest in Gen. 2:2. Paul also ties “today” (Lit. Heb. “the day”) in Ps. 95:7 with “day” Gen. 2:2. The sabbath “rest” that is yet to come is the time which Ps. 110:1 says “till I make Your enemies your footstool.” In other words, Paul has made a case that the Messiah’s current position is at the right hand of the throne, and that he will remain there until the time of the Millennial Kingdom. This is important because Paul wants to address the issue of what the Messiah is actually doing at the throne until the Kingdom comes.
In his third midrash Paul introduces Ps. 110:4 to his discussion. He creates another Homiletic Midrash on Ps. 110:4 (Heb. 5:6; 7:17, 21) ; Gen. 22:16-17 (Heb. 6:13-14) and Gen. 14:17-20 (Heb. 7:1-2) using the keywords “swear”, “Melchizadek”, “priest”, and “bless.”
Paul argues Melchizadek is greater than Levitical Priests because he blessed Abraham and the better always blesses the lesser (7:1, 7). Also, he argues, Abraham, who was Levi’s great-grandfather (and therefore his elder) paid tithes to Melchizadek (7:1, 5, 9). Paul also indicates that both the Levites (through the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants) and Melchizadek, are priests because of Elohim’s making an oath. Thus he argues that Yeshua can be a priest after the order of Melchizadek without being a Levite (7:13-15).
In his fourth midrash Paul ties the ideas of Ps. 110:1 and 110:4 together. The Priest in the Holy of Holies implies the Day of Atonement (the only time the High Priest ever enters the Holy of Holies). With the Day of Atonement ceremony as the setting (Lev. 16), Paul presents a Homiletic Midrash on Jer. 31:31-34 (Heb. 8:8-11); Ex. 24:8 (Heb. 9:20) and Is. 53:12 (Heb. 9:28) using the keywords: “sins” and “covenant.” The keyword “swore” in the previous Midrash referred in Heb. 6:13-14 = Gen. 22:16-17 to the Abrahamic covenant. Paul had noted that the oath of Elohim in Ps. 110:4 also therefore implied a covenant as well (7:20-22). Since Ps. 110:1, 4 implies the Day of Atonement ceremony (since they place the priest in the throne room) and since it speaks of a time when the Messiah’s enemies are made his footstool (the Kingdom), Paul keys this oath with the New Covenant of Jer. 31:31-34 in which sins are forgiven and the Kingdom is established. He cites Ex. 24:8 = Heb. 9:20 using the keyword covenant to argue that such a covenant must be sealed with blood. Citing Is. 52:12 (in Heb. 9:28) with the key word “sins”, he argues that since the Messiah bears these sins it is his blood which seals the New Covenant.
In his fifth midrash Paul, having just made use of the Day of Atonement Temple ceremony, speaks out in favor of the Temple ceremonies. He does this by giving a Proem Homiletic Midrash on Ps. 40:6-8 (Heb. 10:5-9); Jer. 31:33-34(Heb. 10:16-17) and Hab. 2:3-4 (Heb. 10:37-38) using the keywords “pleasure/will”; “come”; “Law in the heart” “sin” and “[no] offering.” Paul begins this midrash by quoting Ps. 40:6-8 (Heb. 10:5-10). Paul ties this passage to Jer. 31:34 (Heb. 10:16-18) based on the key words SIN and IN THEIR HEARTS (which appears in Ps. 40 but is truncated off in Paul’s quote) and [no] OFFERING. Finally, Paul concludes by quoting Hab. 2:3-4 (Heb. 10:37-38) through the key words HE WHO IS COMING and HAS NO PLEASURE. I believe Paul’s source here is the Aramaic of the Peshitta Tenach, for it is only here that the word “pleasure/will” is the same in Ps. 40 and Hab. 2:4 and the LXX does not agree with the wording of Hab. 2:3-4 = Heb. 10:37-38.
The context of Heb. 10 is that Paul has just discussed Yeshua in relation to the Yom Kippur ceremony in Heb. 8 thru 9. Then in Heb. 10:1-3, Paul argues that the sacrifices continue as a remembrance. Paul then opposes those who oppose the Temple and encourages Temple attendance (Heb. 10:25). The keywords tell us what Paul’s subject is: The offerings, and what is and is not pleasing to Elohim. Paul argues that the end of offerings for sin in Ps. 40:6-8 and the placing of the law in the heart (Ps. 40:8) tie Psalm 40:6-8 to the New Covenant in Jer. 31:34 which has yet to occur. To Paul, Ps. 40 describes a time when sin offerings will not be offered because sin will not be remembered, all of this because Elohim does not have pleasure in sin offerings because they result from sin which he will, when the New Covenant is fully realized, forget. Thus the offerings will end with the coming of the New Covenant (Heb. 11:18 see also Heb. 8:13). Paul closes by citing Hab. 2:3-4 (giving what seems a polemic against the interpretation given in the Hab. commentary at Qumran) All of this Paul ties to the [second] coming of the Messiah and the establishing of the New Covenant.
The Blood Covenant Paradigm in Hebrews
Monte Judah writes:
By introducing the death of the one who made it into this paragraph, the writer of Hebrews has just defined the New Covenant as being a last will and testament rather than being an agreement between God and man. But the New Covenant described by Jeremiah (31:31-33) using the word brit is not a testament or will left by a dead person. It is an agreement, a covenant between God and His chosen one people. The writer has switched the meanings to make a Hebrew covenant into a Greek will and testament.
Like many others, Monte Judah has completely misunderstood Hebrews 9:16-17 and the overall paradigm of the Book of Hebrews.
Judah wrongly believes that the topic of Hebrews 9:16-17 is that of a “last will and testament”. However the concept of basing inheritance on such a document is a hellenistic idea. In Jewish law inheritance is divided evenly among the sons, except for the firstborn who gets a double portion. It has nothing to do with what someone writes on a piece of paper.
Hebrews does not refer to a last will and testament, but to the inheritance rules related to the ancient Jewish custom of making a blood covenant.
When two people entered into a blood covenant they became members of each others house including heirship rights. There are two good examples of the making of such a covenant in the Tanak. The first is to be found in Gen. 31:43-54 (between Ya’akov and Lavan) and 1Sam. 18:1-4 (Between David and Jonathan). It was through his blood covenant with Jonathan that David inherited the throne of Saul. David had a covenant with Jonathan making him Jonathan’s joint heir, when Saul and Jonathan died in the same battle, David inherited the throne. In the same way we have a covenant with the Son of the King, when the son of the king died, we were his joint heirs.
This inheritance is the theme of the Book of Hebrews. Paul’s topic is the Blood Covenant and Inheritance. He shows that the Messiah was “made heir of all things” (1:2, 4) and the “firstborn” (1:6;12:23) (an inheritance term, see note to 12:23). He shows that the oath which made Abraham’s seed the chosen people was a covenant (6:13-14), and that the oath which makes the Messiah a priest after the order of Melchizadek (7:20-22) is the renewal of the Covenant (Heb. 7:22; 8:6-13). He also shows that this is a blood covenant sealed with the Messiah’s blood (Heb. 8 & 9). Paul argues that because of this covenant relationship, we have an inheritance (9:11-22). Since we are blood covenantors with the Messiah who is heir of all things (i.e. the Kingdom (1:13; 2:5-9) we inherit with him (1:14; 2:10-18; 9:11-22; 12:23). To Paul this inheritance is the “rest” of Ps. 95:7-11 (Heb. 4:9). A rest which has not yet been entered (4:9-10), an inheritance covenant promise like that of the Abrahmic Covenant (6:13-20) but with its promise yet to be received (11:39-40).
CONCLUSION
The Book of Hebrews was written in Hebrew according to the Hebraic Paradign. In this book Paul makes use of Jewish rules of Hermeneutics in order to interpret the Hebrew Tanak as it had come down to him. This book is a most valuable writing among those of the books of the Ketuvin Netzarim (known commonly today as the “New Testament”.
-James Trimm
[All quotes from Monte Judah taken from YAVOH Vol. 11 No. 11; Nov. 2005 "The Paradigm of the Book of Hebrews"]
A New Translation of the Book of Enoch
Most translations of the Book of Enoch available today are taken
from the ancient Ethiopic version of the text, which is the only
language in which the book was passed down in its complete form.
However in more recent years seven fragmentary Aramaic copies of the Book of Enoch have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. In
addition several fragments of the ancient Greek version of the Book
of Enoch have also come to light.
This new edition of the Book of Enoch is the first Messianic, Sacred
Name version of the Book of Enoch.
Unlike most versions of the Book of Enoch this edition is translated,
wherever possible, from the remains of the ancient Aramaic version
of the book. Wherever the Aramaic is lacking I have consulted the
Greek fragments of Enoch and I have followed the Ethiopic wherever
the Aramaic and Greek fragments are both lacking any witnesses to
the text. Unlike many other versions of 1Enoch I have always sought
to reach behind the Aramaic, Greek and Ethiopic to the original
Hebrew of 1Enoch.
This edition ALSO INCLUDES a new and fresh version of 2Enoch, also
known as “The Secrets of Enoch” as well. Although 2Enoch has only
survived in Old Slavonic manuscripts, this new version reaches
behind the Slavonic to the original Hebrew of 2Enoch.
Why is this Book of Enoch different?
Because I have sought to restore the original text by reaching to the
original Hebrew behind the Aramaic, Greek and Ethiopic texts while
making as much use as possible of the Aramaic (which is a language
very closely related to Hebrew).
For example in 1Enoch 20:7:
Richard Laurence:
Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who presides over Ikisat, over
paradise, and over the cherubim.
R. H. Charles:
Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is over Paradise and the
serpents and the Cherubim.
E. Isaac (Old Test. Pseud. vol. 1)
Gabriel, one of the holy angels who oversee the Garden of Eden, and
the serpents, and the Cherubim.
Now none of Chapter 20 has survived in the Aramaic, but it has
survived in Ethiopic and in Greek. Now the word I want to look at
here is this word “serpents” which does not seem to belong. The
word for “Serpents” in the Ethiopic is IKISAT which Laurance has
transliterated. The Greek version has DRAKONTON which also
means “serpents”. Now these Greek and Ethipic words clearly point
to an underlying Hebrew word of SEFARIM or SEPHARIM (Strong’s 8314) which can mean “serpents” but can also mean “Seraphim” (a class of angelic beings as found in Is. 6).
Clearly the Greek translator misunderstood the Hebrew word SERAPHIM and translated it DRAKONTON (serpents) and the Ethiopic translator, therefore, probably worked from the Greek translating the word in Ethiopic as IKISAT (serpents).
This new version of 1st Enoch has:
Gavri’el, one of the set-apart angels, who is over Pardes and the
Seraphim and the Cherubim.
You will also note that in the Laurance, Charles and Isaac
translations this is the last verse in Chapter 20, with the chapter
only having listed six angels. In fact the Ethiopic text is lacking
verse 8 and one of our Greek manuscripts also lacks verse 8, but one
Greek fragment has survived which includes the 8th verse which lists
the name of the seventh of the seven angels listed in this Chapter.
This new edition on the Book of Enoch includes the previously lost
8th verse with the name and function of the seventh angel.
In addition the Book of Enoch gives a list of names of twenty
leaders of the fallen angels (1En. 6 & 69). But the list of these
angels as given in most editions follows the couurpt list of names
given in the Ethiopic.
For example the leader is called:
Laurance: Samyaza
Charles: Semjaza
Isaac: Semyaz
The correct name is preserved in the Aramaic fragments found among
the Dead Sea Scrolls so that this new edition has this name as
SHEMIKHAZAH (which means “my name has seen”). This is just one of the many corrupted angelic names in most other editions of the Books of Enoch.
There are also many improvements to 2Enoch. For example the Morphil version most are familiar with has in 2Eno. 12:1:
“And I looked and saw other flying elements of the sun, whose names
are Phoenixes and Chalkydri…”
Now CHALKYDRI are “Serpents” and the PHOENIX was a Greek-Egyptian pagan mythical creature never found elsewher in the plural.
Now from context it appears that these are two names for the same
class of beings. Since the word CHALKYDRI means “serpents” and
since there are many parallels (beyond the scope of this post)
between the SERAPHIM and the pagan concept of the PHOENIX, it
appears that the SLAVONIC translator (or perhaps an earlier Greek
translator) attempted to translate the Hebrew word SERAPHIM with two words, one meaning “Serpent” and the other offerring a Parallel in the Greek mind to the SERAPHIM.
Thus this new edition of 2Enoch restores the reading to SERAPHIM and then has a detailed footnote explaining the reason for the revision and correction:
“And I looked and saw other flying elements of the sun, whose names
are Seraphim…”
The above are just a sample of the improvements made in this new and better edition of both 1st and 2nd Enoch.
Outline of the Book of Enoch
I. THE BOOK OF WATCHERS (1-36)
A. Last Things (1:1-5:10)
1. Tribulation (1:1-2)
2. YHWH Comes to Judge the Earth (1:3-9)
3. Nature Obeys YHWH, Man Rebels (2:1-5:4)
4. The Wicked Cursed (5:5-7)
5. The Kingdom to Come (5:8-10)
B. The Fallen Angels (6:1-8:3)
1. Angels Fall (6:1-7:1)
2. Birth of Giants (7:2-6)
3. Functions of Fallen Angels (8:1-3)
C. Elohim’s Judgment on Fallen Angels (8:4-14:7)
1. Elohim Hears Cries (8:4-9:11)
2. Elohim’s Judgment (10:1-11:2)
3. Enoch Delivers Judgment (12:1-13:3)
4. Enoch Intercedes for Fallen Angels (13:4-14:7)
D. Enoch’s First Vision (14:8-19:3)
1. Enoch Enters Heaven (14:8-15)
2. The Throne Room (14:16-25)
3. Judgment on the Fallen Angels (15:1-16:3)
4. The Ends of Heaven and Earth (17:1-19:3)
E. The Arch-Angels (20:1-7)
1. Uriel (20:2)
2. Raphael (20:3)
3. Rau’el (20:4)
4. Michael (20:5)
5. Sariel (20:6)
6. Gabriel (20:7)
7. Remiel (20:8)
F. Enoch’s Second Vision (21:1-36:4)
1. Temporary Prison for Angels (21:1-6)
2. Permanent Prison for Angels (21:7-10)
3. Temporary Prison for Human Souls (22:1-14)
4. Luminaries in Heaven (23:1-4)
5. Seven Mountains and a Tree (24:1-25:7)
6. The Environs of Jerusalem (26:1-6)
7. Gey Hinnom (27:1-5)
8. East (28:1-33:4)
9. North (34:1-3)
10. West (35:1)
11. South (36:1-4)
II. The Book of Parables
Three Things Imparted to Enoch (37:1-5)
A. The First Thing (38:1-44:1)
1. Judgment of the wicked (38:1-6)
2. The Dwelling Place of the Holy Ones (39:1-14)
3. The Four Arch-Angels (40:1-10)
a. Michael (40:9)
b. Raphael (40:9)
c. Gabriel (40:9)
d. Phanuel (40:9)
4. The End of Earthly Kingdoms (41:1-2)
5. Cosmic Secrets (41:3-9)
6. Wisdom Personified (42:1-3)
7. More Cosmic Secrets (43:1-44:1)
B. The Second Thing (45:1-57:3)
1. The lot of the wicked (45:2)
2. Throne of Judgment (45:3)
3. Transformed Heavens and Earth (45:4-6)
4. Triumph of the Son of Man (46:1-8)
5. Prayers of Martyrs (47:1-2)
6. The Ancient of Days (47:3-4)
7. The Dwelling Place of the Holy Ones (48:1)
8. The Triumph of the Son of Man (48:2-49:4)
9. The Son of Man’s Judgment (50:1-5)
10. The Resurrection (51:1-5)
11. Six Mountains of Metal Melt in the West (52:1-9)
12. The End of the Tribulation (53:1-7)
13. Judgment of the Fallen Angels (54:1-6)
14. The Flood (54:7-55:2)
15. The Fallen Angel’s Punished (55:3-56:4)
16. The Last Battle (56:5-57:3)
C. The Third Thing (58:1-71:17)
1. The lot of the Righteous (58:1-6)
2. Lightning and Thunder (59:1-3)
3. The Ancient of Days on His Throne (60:1-4)
4. The Tribulation (60:5-25)
5. The Garden of Eden (61:1-13)
6. The Judgment (62:1-64:2)
a. The Upper Class Judged (62:1-13)
b. The Reward of the Righteous (62:14-16)
c. The Upper Class Judged (63:1-12)
d. The Fallen Angels Judged (64:1-2)
7. The Flood (65:1-68:5)
a. Enoch’s Prophecy of the Flood (65:1-12)
b. Angels of the Flood (66:1-2)
c. Noah warned of the Flood (67:1-13)
d. Michael and Raphael Discuss the Flood (68:1-69:1)
8. The Fallen Angels (69:1-29)
a. Their Names (69:1-3)
b. The Five Satans (69:4-14)
c. The Oath that Binds Them (69:14-26)
d. Judgment of Fallen Angels (69:27-29)
D. Enoch Taken into Heaven (70:1-71:17)
1. Translation of Enoch (70:1-4)
2. Cosmic Secrets (71:1-4)
3. Throne Room (71:5-9)
4. The Ancient of Days (71:10-17)
III. THE ASTRONOMICAL BOOK
(72-82)
A. The Sun (72)
B. The Moon and its Phases (73)
C. The Lunar Year (74)
D. The Twelve “Winds” and their Portals (75-76)
E. The Four Quarters (77)
F. The Sun and Moon and the Phases of the Moon (78)
G. Overview of Astronomical Laws (79-80:1)
H. Sin and the Perversion of the Laws (80:2-8)
I. Enoch’s Mission and the Heavenly Tablets (81)
J. Enoch’s Comission (82)
IV. THE BOOK OF DREAM VISIONS (83-90)
A. The First Deam Vision (83-84)
B. The Animal Apocalypse (85-90)
1. The Fall of the Angels and the Demoralization of Mankind. (86)
2. The Seven Archangels. (87)
3. The Punishment of the Fallen Angels by the Archangels. (88)
4. The Deluge and the Deliverance of Noah. (89:1-9)
5. From the Death of Noah to the Exodus. (89:10-27)
6. Israel in the Desert, the Giving of the Law, the Entrance into Canaan. (89:28-40)
7. From the Time of the Judges to the Building of the Temple. (89:41-50)
8. The Two Kingdoms of Israel and Judah to the Destruction of Jerusalem. (89:51-67)
9. First Period of the Angelic Rulers -from the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Return from Captivity. (89:68-71)
10. Second Period -from the Time of Cyrus to that of Alexander the Great. (89:72-77)
11. Third Period -from Alexander the Great to the Graeco-Syrian Domination. (90:1-5)
12. Fourth Period Graeco-Syrian Domination to the Maccabean Revolt (debated). (90:6-12)
13. The last Assault of the Gentiles on the Jews (where vv. 13-15 and 16-18 are doublets). (90:13-19)
14. Judgement of the Fallen Angels, the Shepherds, and the Apostates. (90:20-27)
15. The New Jerusalem, the Conversion of the surviving Gentiles, the Resurrection of the Righteous, the Messiah. Enoch awakes and weeps. (90:28-42)
V. THE EPISTLE OF ENOCH
(91-107)
The Message of the Book of Enoch
FOR WHOM DID ENOCH WRITE?
The Book of Enoch is especially given for the benefit of those
believers in the last days who are Torah Observant:
The words of the blessing with which Enoch
blessed the chosen and righteous,
who will be living in the day of tribulation,
when all the wicked and godless are to be removed.
(1Enoch 1:1)
Another book which Enoch wrote for his son Methuselah
and for those who will come after him,
and observe the Torah in the last days.
(1Enoch 108:1)
MESSAGE OF THE BOOK OF ENOCH
Yeshua warned that the last days would be like the days of Noach (Mt.
24:37-38 – HRV) And this is a major theme of the Book of Enoch.
Enoch forewarns of the coming judgement of the flood, and parallels
this with the judgement of the last days. The Book of Enoch even
prophecies that in the last days:
“women shall become pregnant and abort their babies
and cast them out from their midst”
(1En. 99:5).
The Book of Enoch tells of how 200 fallen angels led by Shemikhazah
and Azazel “saw and lusted after” human females and copulated with
them producing a race of giants (1Enoch 6) and taught mankind
secrets such as sorcery, the making of weapons (1Enoch 7-8) and how
to perform an abortion (1En. 69:12). YHWH’s judgement finally
comes. Shemikhazah and “all his associates” are bound fast “for
seventy generations” until “the judgement that is forever is
consummated” (1En. 9:11-12) (compare Y’hudah 1:6 & 2Kefa 2:2-10).
The giants are killed by the flood but their spirits remain on earth
as evil spirits (1En. 15:8-12). In the last days the fallen angels
will return again (1Enoch 56:5).
Now if one counts the generations from Enoch to Yeshua one finds
there were sixty-nine generations (Luke 3:23-37). So the seventy
generations ended one generation after the life of Yeshua. This
brings us to an interesting statement made by the Nazarene writer
Hegesippus around 185 C.E. as he recounted the beginning of the
apostasy:
Up to that period the Assembly had remained like a virgin
pure and uncorrupted: for, if there were any persons who
were disposed to tamper with the wholesome rule of the
proclaiming of salvation, they still lurked in some dark
place of concealment or other. But, when the sacred band of
Emissaries had in various ways closed their lives, and that
generation of men to whom it had been vouchsafed to listen to the
godlike Wisdom with their own ears had passed away, then did the
confederacy of godless error take its rise through the treachery
of false teachers, who, seeing that none of the emissaries any
longer survived, at length attempted with bare and uplifted
head to oppose the proclaiming of the truth by proclaiming
“knowledge falsely so called.”
(Hegessippus; Memoirs)
The generation which followed the life of Yeshua and his emissaries
was the generation in which Shemikhazah and his associates were to be
released. And this was the very generation in which false teachers
began with bare and uplifted head to oppose the proclaiming of the
truth, the very generation in which the apostasy began.
The long night of the apostasy is ending. The Book of Enoch is again
coming to light that it may be a cause of joy and uprightness and
much wisdom to those who observe the Torah in the last days. The
culmination of all things is at hand.
The Authenticity of the Zohar
As Evidenced by the Book of Enoch
By James Scott Trimm
[Note: The point of this paper is the “authenticity” of the Zohar, that is that the Zohar was compiles by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the late first century, and not a forgery produced in Europe in the Middle Ages. That is not to say that the Zohar should be considered authoritative or even canon, which is a separate issue entirely.]
Ever since Moses DeLeon (c. 1250 – 1305 C.E.) discovered the Zohar and revealed his discovery to the world, critics have attacked the authenticity of this book. The book itself claims to have been redacted by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the late first century. Yet some have even accused even Moses DeLeon himself of having forged the book.
Clear evidence for the originality of the book lies in the fact that the Zohar makes much use of the first and second books of Enoch, both of which were lost to the Western World in ancient times, and were not recovered until fairly modern times. 1st Enoch was not recovered until the famous explorer James Bruce brought Ethiopic copies of the book to Europe in 1773. But it was not until 1800 that translations of any of the material was published. 2nd Enoch remained unknown until William Richard Morfil translated the recently discovered Slavonic text in 1896. It was not until the 19th century that the first and second books of Enoch and their contents became known to the Western world.
Now the Zohar mentions the Book of Enoch on ten occasions. While it is true that some of these citations have no exact parallel in either 1st or 2nd Enoch as they have come down to us, this is also true of the citations of the Book of Enoch found in the ancient “Church Fathers”. Nonetheless in the majority of cases these citations have at least some parallel in 1st or 2nd Enoch, and some of them make it clear that the authors of the Zohar were quite familiar with the contents of the Books of Enoch.
The first mention of the Book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
‘The seventh precept is to circumcise the male child on the eighth day after birth and thereby to remove the defilement of the foreskin. The “living” (hayah) of which we have spoken forms the eighth grade in the scale, and hence the soul which has flown away from it must appear before it on the eighth day. And in this way it is made clear that this is really a “living soul”, emanating from that holy “living” and not from the “unholy region”. And this is alluded to in the words: Let the waters swarm, which in the Book of Enoch are explained thus: Let the water of the holy seed be stamped with the stamp of the “soul of the living”, (2Enoch 30:8?) which is the form of the letter yod impressed on the holy flesh in preference to all other marks.
(Zohar 1:13a)
This is certainly a reference to the following passage in 2nd Enoch:
On the fifth day I commanded the sea, that it should bring forth fishes, and feathered birds of many varieties, and all animals creeping over the earth, going forth over the earth on four legs, and soaring in the air, male sex and female, and every soul breathing the spirit of life.
(2Enoch 30:8)
While the passage cited must have read somewhat differently in the copy which the author of the Zohar held (there are many variations in the known manuscripts of 2Enoch) it is beyond coincidence that 2Enoch has a passage which parallels that of Genesis 1:20 as the passage cited surely did.
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM: the one included in the other. R. Abba said: ‘God did indeed send down a book to Adam, from which he became acquainted with the supernal wisdom. It came later into the hands of the “sons of God”, the wise of their generation, and whoever was privileged to peruse it could learn from it supernal wisdom. This book was brought down to Adam by the “master of mysteries”, preceded by three messengers. When Adam was expelled from the Garden of Eden, he tried to keep hold of this book, but it flew out of his hands. He thereupon supplicated God with tears for its return, and it was given back to him, in order that wisdom might not be forgotten of men, and that they might strive to obtain knowledge of their Master. Tradition further tells us that Enoch also had a book, which came from the same place as the book of the generations of Adam…. [Tr. note: Here follows a highly allusive passage identifying Enoch with “the lad” (v. Prov. XXII, 6), i.e. Metatron.] This is the source of the book known as “the book of Enoch”. When God took him, He showed him all supernal mysteries, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the Garden and its leaves and branches, all of which can be found in his book.(1Enoch 24-25; 2Enoch 8:3) Happy are those of exalted piety to whom the supernal wisdom has been revealed, and from whom it will not be forgotten for ever, as it says, “The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him, and his secret to make them know it.” ‘
(Zohar 1:37b)
Again this passage is easy to locate in the 1st and 2nd books of Enoch:
3 And the seventh mountain was in the midst of these, and it excelled them in height, resembling the seat of a throne: and fragrant trees encircled the throne.
4 And among them was a tree such as I had never yet smelt, neither was any among them nor were others like it: it had a fragrance beyond all fragrance, and its leaves and blooms and wood wither not for ever: and its fruit is beautiful, and its fruit resembles the dates of a palm.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is this tree, and fragrant, and its leaves are fair, and its blooms very delightful in appearance.’
6 Then answered Mikha’el, one of the set-apart and honored angels who was with me, and was their leader.
1 And he said unto me: ‘Chanoch, why dost you ask me regarding the fragrance of the tree, and why dost you wish to learn the truth?’
2 Then I answered him saying: ‘I wish to know about everything, but especially about this tree.’
3 And he answered saying: ‘This high mountain which you hast seen, whose summit is like the throne of Elohim, is His throne, where the Set-apart Great One, YHWH of Glory, the Eternal King, will sit, when He shall come down to visit the earth with goodness.
4 And as for this fragrant tree no mortal is permitted to touch it till the great judgment, when He shall take vengeance on all and bring (everything) to its consummation for ever.
(1Enoch 24:3-25:4)
3 And in the midst of the trees that of life, in that place whereon YHWH rests, when he goes up into Pardes; and this tree is of ineffable goodness and fragrance, and adorned more than every existing thing; and on all sides it is in form gold-looking and vermilion and fire-like and covers all, and it has produce from all fruits.
(2Enoch 8:3)
The next citation in the Zohar is as follows:
When Noah grew up, and saw how mankind were sinning before God, he withdrew himself from their society and sought to serve his Master, so as not to be led astray by them. He was especially diligent in the study of the book of Adam and the book of Enoch which we have mentioned, and from them he learnt the proper forms in which to worship God. This explains how it is that he knew it was incumbent upon him to bring an offering; it was these books which revealed to him the basis on which the existence of the world depends, to wit, the sacrifices, without which neither the higher nor the lower world can endure.’ (2Enoch 45; 59:2-6; 66:3)
(Zohar 1:58)
1 Whoever hastens to make offerings before YHWH’s face, YHWH for his part will hasten that offering by granting of his work.
2 But whoever increases his lamp before YHWH’s face and make not true judgment, YHWH will not increase his treasure in the realm of the highest.
3 When YHWH demands bread, or candles, or the flesh of beasts, or any other sacrifice, then that is nothing; but Elohim demands pure hearts, and with all that only tests the heart of man.
(2Enoch 45:1-3)
2 For man brings clean animals to make sacrifice for sin, that he may have cure of his soul.
3 And if they bring for sacrifice clean animals, and birds man has cure, he cures his soul.
4 All is given you for food, bind it by the four feet that is to make good the cure, he cures his soul.
5 But whoever kills beast without wounds, kills his own souls and defiles his own flesh.
6 And he who does any beast any injury whatsoever, in secret, it is evil practice, and he defiles his own soul.
(2Enoch 59:2-6)
3 Bow down to the true Elohim, not to dumb idols, but bow down to his similitude, and bring all just offerings before YHWH’s face. YHWH hates what is unjust.
(2Enoch 66:3)
Again we read in the Zohar:
AND THE SONS OF NOAH THAT WENT FORTH FROM THE ARK WERE SHEM, AND HAM, AND JAPHETH. R. Eleazar asked why the Scripture inserts the words “who went forth from the ark”. Did, then, Noah have other sons who did not go forth from the ark? R. Abba said: “Yes: the children whom his sons bore afterwards; and the Scripture points out that these did not go forth from the ark.’ R. Simeon said: ‘Had I been alive when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave mankind the book of Enoch and the book of Adam, I would have endeavoured to prevent their dissemination, because not all wise men read them with proper attention, and thus extract from them perverted ideas, such as lead men astray from the Most High to the worship of strange powers. Now, however, the wise who understand these things keep them secret, and thereby fortify themselves in the service of their Master.’
(Zohar 1:72b)
Here the Zohar does not indicate anything in particular that is actually said in the Book of Enoch. The next reference to the Book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
We find in the book of Enoch that after the Holy One, blessed be He, had transported Enoch to the supernal regions and shown him all the treasures of the King, both the celestial and the terrestrial (1Enoch 17-18; 2Enoch 5-6 ), He permitted him to behold the Tree of Life (1Enoch 24-25; 2Enoch 8:3) and that Tree of which Adam was warned (1Enoch 32:3-6), and showed him the place where Adam had dwelt in the Garden of Eden (1Enoch 32:3-6; 2Enoch 8), and Enoch perceived that if Adam had been obedient he would have so dwelt for ever, having eternal life and perpetual joy in the glory of the Garden. But because he broke the commandment of his Lord, he was punished.’(1Enoch 69:6)
(Zohar 2:55a)
This citation of the Book of Enoch references several things that are in fact found in 1st and 2d Enoch:
1. …the Holy One, blessed be He, had transported Enoch to the supernal regions and shown him all the treasures of the King, both the celestial and the terrestrial
This material is found in both 1st and 2nd Enoch:
1 And they took and brought me to a place in which those who were there were like flaming fire, and, when they wished, they appeared as men….
3 And I saw the places of the luminaries and the treasuries of the stars and of the thunder and in the uttermost depths, where were a fiery bow and arrows and their quiver, and a fiery sword and all the lightnings….
1 I saw the treasuries of all the winds: I saw how He had furnished with them the whole creation and the firm foundations of the earth.
(1Enoch 17:1,3; 18:1)
1 And here I looked down and saw the treasure houses of the snow, and the angels who keep their terrible store-houses, and the clouds whence they come out and into which they go.
1 They showed me the treasure house of the dew, like oil of the olive, and the appearance of its form, as of all the flowers of the earth; further many angels guarding the treasure-houses of these things, and how they are made to shut and open.
(2Enoch 5:1-6:1)
2. He permitted him to behold the Tree of Life
3 And the seventh mountain was in the midst of these, and it excelled them in height, resembling the seat of a throne: and fragrant trees encircled the throne.
4 And among them was a tree such as I had never yet smelt, neither was any among them nor were others like it: it had a fragrance beyond all fragrance, and its leaves and blooms and wood wither not for ever: and its fruit is beautiful, and its fruit resembles the dates of a palm.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is this tree, and fragrant, and its leaves are fair, and its blooms very delightful in appearance.’
6 Then answered Mikha’el, one of the set-apart and honored angels who was with me, and was their leader.
1 And he said unto me: ‘Chanoch, why dost you ask me regarding the fragrance of the tree, and why dost you wish to learn the truth?’
2 Then I answered him saying: ‘I wish to know about everything, but especially about this tree.’
3 And he answered saying: ‘This high mountain which you hast seen, whose summit is like the throne of Elohim, is His throne, where the Set-apart Great One, YHWH of Glory, the Eternal King, will sit, when He shall come down to visit the earth with goodness.
4 And as for this fragrant tree no mortal is permitted to touch it till the great judgment, when He shall take vengeance on all and bring (everything) to its consummation for ever.
(1Enoch 24:3-25:4)
3 And in the midst of the trees that of life, in that place whereon YHWH rests, when he goes up into Pardes; and this tree is of ineffable goodness and fragrance, and adorned more than every existing thing; and on all sides it is in form gold-looking and vermilion and fire-like and covers all, and it has produce from all fruits.
(2Enoch 8:3)
3. and that Tree of which Adam was warned
3 And I came to the Pardes of Righteousness, I was shown from afar off trees more numerous than these trees and two great trees there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose set-apart fruit they eat and know great wisdom. That tree is in height like the fir,
4 and its leaves are like (those of) the Carob tree: and its fruit is like the clusters of the vine, very beautiful: and the fragrance of the tree penetrates afar.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is the tree, and how attractive is its look!’
6 Then Rafa’el the set-apart angel, who was with me, answered me and said: ‘This is the tree of wisdom, of which your father of old and your mother of old, who were before you, have eaten, and they learned wisdom and their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked and they were driven out of the garden.
(1Enoch 32:3-6)
4. and showed him the place where Adam had dwelt in the Garden of Eden
(This is found in the passages from 1st and 2nd Enoch already cited above)
5. and Enoch perceived that if Adam had been obedient he would have so dwelt for ever, having eternal life and perpetual joy in the glory of the Garden. But because he broke the commandment of his Lord, he was punished.’
1Enoch does in fact mention the event of Adam’s disobedience, thought the Zohar has either interpreted further information from the account, or the version held by its author contained further information:
And the third was named Gadreel:
he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons of death to the children of men.
(1Enoch 69:6)
The next mention of the Book of Enoch is as follows:
There is here a profound mystery. According to the Book of Enoch, this “building” [the palace above the garden] is indeed constructed by the other spirit which was left in the “vessel,’, and which draws after him the spirit which roams about in the air naked and alone; and these two spirits are welded together, and if the person is worthy to be built up again, the two spirits become one indeed, an organ in which a superior soul may wrap herself. (1Enoch 13-14?)
(Zohar 2:100a)
In fact 1Enoch does in fact give us an account of this heavenly palace:
8 And behold a dream came to me, and visions fell down upon me until I lifted my eyelids toward the gates of the palace of heaven, and I saw a vision of the wrath of chastisement, and a voice came to me and it said: Speak to the sons of heaven, and reprimand them….
9 And I went in till I drew near to a wall, which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to frighten me.
10 And I went into the tongues of fire and drew near to a great house, which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tessellated floor (made) of ice.
11 Its ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightning’s, and between them were fiery cherubim, and their heaven was (clear as) water.
12 A flaming fire surrounded all their walls, and its gates blazed with fire.
13 And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me.
14 And as I quaked and trembled, I fell upon my face.
15 And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater than the former, and the entire gate stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire.
16 And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to you its splendour and its extent.
17 And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightning’s and the path of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire.
(1Enoch 18:8; 14:9-17)
The next citation of the book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
“The dust of the earth” is a reference similar to that explained in the Book of Enoch, that the associates saw the letters of which these words are composed, and a voice was heard, saying: “Awaken and sing, ye who dwell in the dust” (Isa..XXVI, I9). The first edifice of the world (of the pre-resurrection period) will be as refuse in comparison with the second edifice (of the post-resurrection period), for this last will be perfected according to the Divine plan. (2Enoch 47:5)
(Zohar 2:105b)
In fact 2Enoch does make use of the phrase “dust of the earth” but again it is unclear whether the author of the Zohar’s copy containe more information, or if he has used an unknown method of interpretation:
YHWH has placed the foundations in the unknown, and has spread forth heavens visible and invisible; he fixed the earth on the waters, and created countless creatures, and who has counted the water and the foundation of the unfixed, or the dust of the earth, or the sand of the sea, or the drops of the rain, or the morning dew, or the wind’s breathings? Who has filled earth and sea, and the indissoluble winter?
(2Enoch 47:5)
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is:
We have found in the Book of Enoch the following: “An only son [Tr. note: Aaron.] will be born unto Him of the White Head, [Tr. note The Supernal Priest] and when they of the asses’ flesh [Tr.note: The mixed multitude, cf Ezek, XXIII, 20] shall come, they will mislead him through him who puts pearls into bells of gold without knowing what he does, and an image will be fashioned with a chisel.” (1Enoch 89?)
(Zohar 2:192b)
The reference is likely to 1Enoch which mentions offspring of a white bull:
12 But that white ox-calf which was born from him begat a black wild boar and a white sheep; and the former begat many boars, but that sheep begat twelve sheep.
(1Enoch 89:12)
And an apostate race of men represented by asses:
11 And they began to bite and to chase one another; but that white bull which was born among them begat a wild ass and a white ox with it, and the wild asses multiplied.
(1Enoch 89:11)
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
Hence the words spoken by the Torah: “and I would be playing always before him” (Prov. VIII, 30), In the verse cited there is twice mention of “them that fear the Lord”; the first indicates the men themselves as they are here below, and the second their images as reflected in their words that ascend on high. This esoteric doctrine is found in the Book of Enoch, where it says that all the words of exposition uttered by the righteous on earth are adorned with crowns and are arrayed before the Holy One, blessed be He, who delights Himself with them. They then descend and come up again before His presence in the image of that righteous man who gave expression to them, and God then delights Himself with that image. The words, then, are inscribed in “a book of remembrance before Him”, so as to endure for evermore. “And they that thought upon His name” is an allusion to those that meditate on the words of Torah in order thereby to cleave to their Master through an insight into the Divine Name, so as to know Him and beceme equipped with the wisdom of His name in their heart. It is written: “And above the firmament that was over their heads was as the appearance of a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne” (Ezek. I, 26). (????)
(Zohar 2:217a)
It is unknown whether the author in the Zohar has cited a lost passage of Enoch or he has applied an unknown method of interpretation to an unknown Zohar passage.
R. Eleazar said: ‘There is a mystery relating to the offering in the verse, “I have come to my garden, my sister, my bride… eat, 0 friends, drink, 0 beloved” (S.S. v, 1), which I have seen in the book of Enoch.’ Said R. Simeon: ‘Tell us what you have seen and heard.’ (1Enoch 77:3?)
(Zohar 3:240a)
This could be a reference to any number of passages in either 1st or 2nd Enoch however a likely passage is one from 1Enoch:
3 And the fourth quarter, named the north, is divided into three parts: the first of them is for the dwelling of men: and the second contains seas of water, and the abysses and forests and rivers, and darkness and clouds; and the third part contains the garden of righteousness.
(1Enoch 77:3)
In addition to the ten direct references to the Book of Enoch there are many passages where the authors of the Zohar draw from material in the Book of Enoch. The Book of Enoch gives a detailed account of the fall of angels only implied in Genesis. According to the Book of Enoch these fallen angels were led by two major fallen angels named Shemikhaza and Azzazel. These angels copulated with men and beasts to produce a race of giants later whipped out by the flood. They also taught men many things including secrets of sorcery. Finally they were judged by being chained in a pit until the time of judgment.
The Zohar mentions this fall as follows:
R. Isaac said: “Uzza and Azael fell from the abode of their sanctity
above, they saw the daughters of mankind and sinned with them and
begat children. These were the Nefilim, of whom it is said, THE
NEFILIM WERE IN THE EARTH (Gen. 6:4).”
(Zohar 1:37a)
“Of the Nefilim it is said: “and the sons of God saw the daughters
of men that they were fair” (Gen. 6:1f). These form a second
category of the Nefilim, already mentioned above, in this way:
When God thought of making man, He said: “Let us make man
in our image, etc.” i.e. He intended to make him head over the
celestial beings, who were to be his deputies, like Joseph over
the governors of Egypt (Gen. 41:41). The angels thereupon
began to malign him and say, “What is man that You should
remember him, seeing that he will assuredly sin before You.”
Said God to them, “If you were on earth like him, you would
sin worse.” And so it was. For “when the sons of God saw the
daughters of man”, they fell in love with them, and God cast
them down from heaven. These were Uzza and Azael; from them
the “mixed multitude” derive their souls, and therefore they also
are called nefilim, because they fell into fornication with fair
women.”
(Zohar 1:25b)
The Zohar account agrees with that of 1st Enoch except for abbreviating the name Shemikhazah with Uzza. In fact according to the Zohar Balam knew where Uzza and Azael were kept in chains, and went to them to learn his sorcery:
…after God cast Uzza and Azael down from their holy
place, they went astray after the women folk and seduced
the world also. It may seem strange that being angels they
were able to abide upon the earth. The truth is, however,
that when they were cast down the celestial light which
used to sustain them left them and they were changed to
another grade through the influence of the air of this world.
Similarly the manna which came down for the Israelites in
the wilderness originated in the celestial dew from the most
recondite spot, and at first its light would radiate to all worlds
and the “field of apples”, and the heavenly angels drew
sustenance from it, but when it approached the earth it
became materialized through the influence of the air of
this world and lost its brightness, becoming only like
“coriander seed”. Now when God saw that these fallen
angels were seducing the world, He bound them in chains of
iron to a mountain of darkness. Uzza He bound at the bottom
of the mountain and covered his face with darkness because
he struggled and resisted, but Azael, who did not resist, He
set by the side of a mountain where a little light penetrated.
Men who know where they are located seek them out,
and they teach them enchantments and sorceries and
divinations. These mountains of darkness are called the
“mountains of the East”, and therefore Balaam said:
“From Aram has Balak brought me, from the mountains
of the East”. Because they both learnt their sorceries there.
Now Uzza and Azael used to tell those men who came to
them some of the notable things which they knew in former
times when they were on high, and to speak about the holy
world in which they used to be.
(Zohar 3:208a)
In which place and from whom did Balaam derive all his
Magical practices and knowledge? Rabbi Isaac replied:
“He learned it first from his father, but it was in the
“mountains of the East”, which are in an eastern country,
that he obtained a mastery of all the arts of magic and
divination. For those mountains are the abode of the
[fallen] angels Uzza and Azael whom the Holy One cast
down from heaven, and who were chained there in fetters.
It is they who impart to the sons of men a knowledge of
magic.
(Zohar 1:126a)
Here it is helpful to examine the 1st century Book of Y’hudah (Jude) in the so-called “New Testament”. This book quotes from the Book of Enoch (Jude 1:14-15 = 1Enoch 1:9) and references the account of the fallen angels (Jude 1:6-7, 13) as a typology for a last days apostasy. Y’hudah goes on to call this apostasy “the error of Balam” (Jude 1:11). Clearly the book of Y’hudah and the Zohar point to a first century tradition that Balam obtained his sorcery as a follower of the fallen angels mentioned in the Book of Enoch.
An examination of the Zohar in light of the Book of Enoch demonstrates that the Zohar could not have been a forgery produced by Moses De Leon, nor any other European living in the Middle Ages. The authors of the Zohar express a knowledge of the Book of Enoch and its contents which was impossible anytime between its loss in ancient times and its nineteenth century restoration. In fact the authentic use of the Book of Enoch in the Zohar supports the claim that at least the core of the Zohar is what it claims to be, a document compiled by first century Rabbi, the authors of which demonstrate a working knowledge of documents well known in the first century, yet unknown in the middle ages, and also of first century traditions associating Balam with the Enoch account.
The Enoch/Qumran Calendar
Wandering Stars…
They Did not Come Forth at their Appointed Times.
(Jude 1:13 & 1Enoch 18:15)
Although the Greek version of the Epistle to the Hebrews has become the standard text used in Christendom, the “Church Fathers” of Christendom openly admitted that the Letter to the Hebrews had been originally written in Hebrew and was later translated into Greek.
Eusebius in the fourth century referred to a now lost writing by Clement of Alexandria written around the year 200 C.E. which Eusebius cites as follows:
In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up
the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria]
has given us the abridged accounts of all
the canonical Scriptures, the Epistle to the Hebrews he
asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews,
in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully
translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks.
(Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes (c. 200 CE)
referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist. 6:14:2)
And Eusebius himself testified:
For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews
in the language of his country; some say
that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement,
translated the epistle.
(Eusebius (4th Cent.); Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)
Finally Jerome wrote of Hebrews:
He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew,
that is, his own tongue and most fluently
while things which were eloquently written
in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek.
(Jerome (4th Cent.); Lives of Illustrious Men, Book V)
In 1537 Munster published Hebrew Matthew which he had obtained from the Jews (this Hebrew text was very similar to the Hebrew Matthew published in 1553 by Jean DuTillet). Twenty years later, in 1557, a second edition of Munster’s Hebrew Matthew was printed, this time also containing the complete Hebrew text of the Letter to the Hebrews in an appendix. This second edition went largely unnoticed and was soon forgotten. It has since been printed in parallel columns with an English translation and is available at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds
It is important to note that the criticism that the Book of Hebrews has recently received has been aimed at the Greek text of Hebrews and not at the original Hebrew text of the book.
IS HEBREWS ANTI-NOMIAN?
Monte Judah writes:
Let’s conduct our own examination of the book of Hebrews to see if the author was “pro-Torah” using just a few clips of the writer’s presentation…. He wrote that there must be changes to the Law of Moses (Heb 7:12) because the priesthood has changed from Levite to Melchizedek….let’s ask some fundamental questions at this point.
These are the questions that should cause you to pause and question whether this book is consistent with the rest of the Scriptures. … Do we believe that some of the commandments given in the Torah should be changed?
He basis this on the Greek version of Hebrews 7:12 which reads:
For the priesthood being changed,
there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
- Heb. 7:12 KJV (from the Greek)
However the word for “change/changed” here in the Hebrew is SHENISHTANA from the verb root SH-N-H (Strong’s 8138) meaning “to repeat, to do a second time” thus the Hebraic Roots Version reads:
It is saying that according to which there is a repetition of the
office of the priesthood, of necessity it is saying there is a repetition of the Torah.
- Heb. 7:12 HRV
In the original Hebrew there is no indication that the Torah or any of its commandments are changed, only that they are repeated. This repetition is all part of the renewal of Torah which is a primary paradigm of the Book of Hebrews in the original Hebrew.
Monte Judah also keys in on Hebrews 7:18:
For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
Heb. 7:18 KJV from the Greek
However the Hebrew actually reads:
To me in this there was a carrying away of the first by a weak work and by drunkeness and that which is not worthy for use.
-Heb. 7:18 HRV from the Hebrew
The Hebrew word for “carrying away” is GISTAL’KAH. Jeremiah uses a form of this same word to describe the Babylonian captivity (Jer. 29:1, 4, 16, 20, 31; 46:19; 48:7, 11; 49:3). The “carrying away” here is that of the Babylonian captivity and the curse which has come upon Israel for having failed collectively to observe Toarh as a people (see Deut. 28-29 and Lev. 26). The Torah promises that if after this curse comes upon us, we repent and turn back to Elohim as a people, he will regather us and renew the covenant with us (Deut. 30 and Jer. 31:31f). Hebrews is saying that a “carrying away” resulted from our failure to observe the Torah thus creating the need for a repetition of the Torah through a repetition of the priesthood.
Monte Judah however sees these passages of Hebrews as leading up to
a renouncing of Torah in Hebrews 8:13 where the Greek has:
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
- Heb. 8:13 KJV from the Greek
Judah writes:
All of these statements were put forth by the writer to support hism conclusion that the Old Covenant was “obsolete,” “becoming obsolete,” “growing old,” and “ready to disappear” (Heb 8:13).
However this is not at all what the Hebrew text of Hebrews says here. It reads:
And according to that which he said ‘renewed covenant’ he has
antiquated the first to that which has put on antiquity and in
coming days behold he offers that which is longed for.
- Heb. 8:13 HRV from the Hebrew
In the Hebrew text the idea here is that Israel has (by violating Torah) antiquated the Torah but that the days are coming when the the renewal of Torah that had been longed for would come.
The Hebrew word for “longed for” here is SHEY’KAMAH (Strong’s 3642) meaning “to long for”; “to become pale” or “to vanish away”. The Greek translator misunderstood this word as meaning “to vanish away” but in the Hebrew it clearly means that the renewal of the Torah was “longed for”.
INCENSE IN THE HOLY OF HOLIES
Monte Judah maintains that there are mistakes in the Book of Hebrews. One passage which he maintains is a mistake is Hebrews 9:3- 4 of which he writes:
There is a problem with this passage. … ‘And behind the second veil, there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, having a golden altar of incense…’ [(Heb. 9:3-4)] This part is not correct as written. The altar of incense is in the first sanctuary with the lampstand and table, not in the Holy of Holies with the Ark of the Covenant.
While it is true that the “golden alter of incense” is outside the veil, the context here is that of the Day of Atonement (as we see in Heb. 8 where the High Priest is in the Holy of Holies). On the day of atonement the High Priest would take incense from the golden alter of incense and place it in the Holy of Holies (Lev. 16:12-13) so that Hebrews, in telling us that the Holy of Holies “had” the golden alter of incense because it was being filled with incense from that alter.
BLOOD OF THE COVENANT
Monte Judah also finds fault with Hebrews 9:19-21 saying:
His [the author of Hebrews] description sounds authoritative and precisely detailed. But it is not accurate when compared to the Scriptures he seems to be referring to. And more confusion is created in the minds of those who would take the time to review the facts. Actually, there are two events being spoken of here, not one as the writer is suggesting. The first event was when Moses came down from the mountain, recounting the Torah. The second was approximately a year later, after the tabernacle was set up at its inauguration. … these were two different events, even though they are improperly combined by the writer, … The writer says that Moses used the blood of calves and goats. He used water, scarlet wool, and hyssop. He sprinkled the book and the people. He goes on to say that Moses also sprinkled the tabernacle and its vessels with blood. … The writer of Hebrews has made a much bigger mistake here than the placement of the altar of incense in the Holy of Holies we described earlier. Moses did not use the blood of goats; he used only the blood of bulls (calves). Moses did not use water, scarlet wool, or hyssop. Moses did not sprinkle the book; he read the book to the people and he sprinkled the altar and then he sprinkled the people. … The writer also wrote that Moses also sprinkled with blood the tabernacle when it was established. So he makes another
mistake.
Now let us examine each of these “mistakes”:
First Judah complains that the author of Hebrews has “improperly combined” two events. Now the passage in question begins with the phrase “For IN THE DAY which Moses wrote to the people the words of YHWH in the Torah…” (Heb. 9:1 HRV). This passage is very similar to Jer. 31:32 “…the covenant which I made with their fathers IN THE DAY that I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt…”. By Monte Judah’s logic one could also argue that Jeremiah “improperly combined” the exodus from Egypt with the giving of Torah some fifty days later. These were two separate events. The Hebrew word YOM which is normally translated “day” can also have a much broader meaning referring to periods of time other than just 24 hours. This is the case in Jer. 31:32 and it is also the case in Heb. 9:1.
Secondly Judah complains that Hebrews mentions goats being offered while Exodus only mentions bulls being offered. While it is true that the KJV and some other versions mention goats in this passage, the original text of Hebrews made no such mention of goats. The Hebrew text of Hebrews and the Aramaic Peshitta and CPA texts of
Hebrews all lack the phrase “and goats” in Heb. 9:19. The phrase is also lacking in the oldest copy of Hebrews (P46) as well as many other Greek copies ()c; K; L 181; 1241; 1739).
Monte Judah’s third objection is that Exodus 24 only mentions blood, not water, scarlet wool or hyssop. Judah seems to believe that any detail included in Hebrews that is not recorded in the Torah must be a mistake. However there are many places where the books of the “New Testament” mention details of Torah events which are lacking in the written Torah itself. For example 1Cor. 10:4 states that the rock in the wilderness followed Israel. This detail is lacking in the written Torah but is found in the Midrash (B’midbar Parshat Chukkat (Num. 20:16-2a)). 2Tim. 3:8 includes the detail of the names of Pharaoh’s magicians. These names are not found in Exodus but are found in the Targum, the Talmud and the Book of Jasher. Jude 1:9 records a conflict between the angel Michael and HaSatan over the body of Moshe, while the Torah records no such conflict. Even the other books of the Tanak record details of Torah events which are not found in the written Torah. The Psalms record that Joseph was kept in fetters while imprisoned in Egypt (Ps. 105:17-18) a detail lacking in the Torah. Therefore why should it be a problem for Hebrews to include details in Torah events that are lacking in the written Torah?
In fact the Talmud records a tradition that the sprinkling with blood at Sinai was accompanied by a sprinkling of the waters of purification:
R. Johanan said to Resh Lakish: It is right according to me who infer from the Consecration; for this agrees with what we are taught: `On both of them [the Priests] we sprinkle throughout the seven days [water] from all the sin-offerings that were there’; but according to you who infer from Sinai, was there any sprinkling done on Sinai? — But according to your own reasoning, it would not be right either, for in the consecration [ceremony the sprinkling was done with] blood, whereas here with water? — That is no difficulty. For R. Hiyya taught: `The water takes the place of blood’, but
according to you, was there any sprinkling on Sinai? — He answered: It was a mere additional provision.
(b.Yoma 4a)
This tradition is recorded in a section of Talmud which discusses the use of these waters to purify the High Priest before the Day of Atonement ceremony. This water was a special water which had added to it the ashes of the red heifer (see Num. 19). These were the ashes of a red heifer burned with hyssop and scarlet wool (Num. 19:6).
Moreover Josephus records a tradition that Moses sprinkled the people with the waters of purification at the funeral of Miriam:
Moses purified the people after this manner: He brought a heifer that had never been used to the plough or to husbandry, that was complete in all its parts, and entirely of a red color, at a little distance from the camp, into
a place perfectly clean. This heifer was slain by the high priest, and her blood sprinkled with his finger seven times before the tabernacle of God; after this, the entire heifer was burnt in that state, together with its skin and entrails; and they threw cedar-wood, and hyssop, and scarlet wool, into the midst of the fire; then a clean man gathered all her ashes together, and laid them in a place perfectly clean. When therefore any persons were defiled by a dead body, they put a little of these ashes into spring water, with hyssop, and, dipping part of these ashes in it, they sprinkled them with it, both on the third day, and on the seventh, and after that they were clean. This he enjoined them to do also when the tribes should come into their own land.
(Josephus, Antiquities, 4:4:6)
Monte Judah’s fourth objection is that Exodus 24 does not mention any sprinkling of the book.
Again we should repeat, it is not a problem for Hebrews to include details of Torah events which are not to be found in the written Torah.
There is in fact a basis in the Hebrew to conclude that both the people and the book were sprinkled.
The Torah says:
And Moshe took half of the blood, and put it in basins;
and half of the blood he dashed upon the alter.
And he took the book of the covenant,
and read in the hearing of the people;
and they said: ‘All that YHWH has spoken will we do, and obey.’
And Moshe took the blood, and sprinkled it upon the people,
and said: ‘Behold the blood of the covenant,
which YHWH has made with you in agreement with
all these words.
(Ex. 24:6-8)
The phrase translated “in agreement with all these words” may also be translated “upon all these words”. Moreover the first rule of Eliezer tells us that the Hebrew particles AF, GAM and ET indicate an inclusion or amplification. The Hebrew word ET has no parallel in English (it points to the next word as a direct object) but if we were to include it in the English it would read as follows:
And Moshe took half of the blood, and put it in basins;
and half of the blood he dashed upon the alter.
And he took the book of the covenant,
and read in the hearing of the people;
and they said: ‘All that YHWH has spoken will we do, and obey.’
And Moshe took ET the blood, and sprinkled it upon the people, and said: ‘Behold the blood of the covenant,
which YHWH has made with you upon
all these words.
(Ex. 24:6-8)
Since the word ET indicates an inclusion, the parallel phrases “upon the alter”; “upon the people” and “upon all these words” would imply that the blood was upon all three of these.
THE JEWISH PARADIGM IN THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
Monte Judah writes:
…the writing and logic [of Hebrews] is Greek. It was written in Greek, quoting from Greek copies of the Scriptures, and using Greek definitions to explain and teach Hebraic things.
Now we have already demonstrated that the Book of Hebrews was written in Hebrew and that the Greek version is only a translation from the original Hebrew.
In addition the logic of Hebrews is very Hebraic and not at all Greek. This book, more than any other, uses Jewish Hermeneutics and forms of Midrashic Exegesis to formulate its arguments.
In fact the entire Book of Hebrews is an extended Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 110. This extended midrash is made up of five sub-midrashim. Each of these midrashim are in a special form of midrash known as a proem homiletic midrash. This is a form of Midrashic exegesis which utilizes Hillel’s second rule (g’zara sheva -equivalence of expressions) to tie together two passages, present a drash (exposition) and then close by quoting a third verse which also ties through a phrase and which helps summarize the results of the exegesis.
These five proem homiletic midrashim which make up the Book of
Hebrews are as follows:
I. THE MESSIAH HUMBLED AND EXALTED (1:1-3:6)
(YHWH said to my Adonai, sit at my right hand. Ps. 110:1a)
A. Initial texts: (Heb. 1:5-13)(Ps. 2:7; 2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:46/Ps.
97:7; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; Ps. 102:25-27; Ps. 110:1)
B. Exposition (1:14-2:5)
C. Second Text: (2:6-8a) (Ps. 8:4-6)
D. Exposition: (2:8b-3:6)
II. THE WORLD YET TO BE SUBJECT TO HIM (3:6-4:13)
(until your enimies are made your footstool Ps. 110:1b)
A. Initial text:(3:7-3:11) (Ps. 95:7-11)
B. Exposition (3:12-4:3)
C. Second text (4:4) (Gen. 2:2)
D. Exposition (4:5-14)
III. A MIDRASH ON MELCHIZADEK (4:14-7:28)
(A priest forever after the order of Melchizadek Ps. 110:4)
A. Introductory exposition (4:14-5:5)
B. Initial text: (5:6) (Ps. 110:4)
C. Exposition (5:7-11)
D. Parenthetical (5:12-6:12)
E. Second text (6:13-14) (Gen. 22:17)
F. Exposition (6:15-7:28)
IV. THE PRIEST AT THE RIGHT HAND OF YHWH (8:1-9:28)
(Ps. 110:1 and Ps. 110:4 brought together)
A. Introductory exposition (8:1-7)
B. Initial text (8:8-12) (Jer. 31:31-34)
C. Exposition (8:13-9:19)
D. Second text (9:20) (Ex. 24:8)
E. Exposition (9:21-9:28)
V. IN DEFENSE OF THE TEMPLE CEREMONIES (10:1-11:40)
A. Introductory exposition (10:1-4)
B. Initial text (10:5-7) (Ps. 40:6-8)
C. Exposition (10:8-14)
D. Second text (10:15-17) (Jer. 31:33-34)
E. Exposition (10:18-35)
F. Third text (10:36-38) (Hab. 2:3-4)
G. Exposition (10:39-11:40)
In this first section Paul begins his commentary on Ps. 110:1 by showing that the Messiah was exalted and therefore was first in a humbled state. Paul begins with a very complex Proem Homiletic exegesis. He begins by citing six passages (2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:43/Ps. 97:7/Neh. 9:6; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6-7; Ps. 102:25-27 and Ps. 110:1) which he uses the fourth rule of Hillel: Binyan av mish’bey k’tuvim “Building of the father [that is a rule] from two (or more) texts” to build a rule that The Messiah is of a higher order than angels (Heb. 1:4-14). Paul then gives an exposition using the first rule of Hillel (shown below in the commentary). Next Paul links these texts to Psalms 8:4-6 with Hillel’s second rule (g’zara sheva “equivelence of expresions”) using the key phrases: “angels” and “the works of your hands” as well as the concepts “crowned” and “you have put all things in subjection under his feet.” Paul then gives a concluding exposition.
In his second midrash Paul gives a Proem Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 95:7-11 and Gen. 2:2 in Hebrews 3:7-4:10 (using the keywords “day”; “works”; and “rest”) which is launched by the phrase if we hold fast the boldness and the boasting of his hope until the end correlating it with Psalm 95:8. Using g’zara sheva (Hillel’s second rule) in this Proem Homiletic Midrashic Exegesis, Paul ties God’s “works” in Ps. 95:9 with his “works” in Gen. 2:2 and his “rest” in Ps. 95:11 with his rest in Gen. 2:2. Paul also ties “today” (Lit. Heb. “the day”) in Ps. 95:7 with “day” Gen. 2:2. The sabbath “rest” that is yet to come is the time which Ps. 110:1 says “till I make Your enemies your footstool.” In other words, Paul has made a case that the Messiah’s current position is at the right hand of the throne, and that he will remain there until the time of the Millennial Kingdom. This is important because Paul wants to address the issue of what the Messiah is actually doing at the throne until the Kingdom comes.
In his third midrash Paul introduces Ps. 110:4 to his discussion. He creates another Homiletic Midrash on Ps. 110:4 (Heb. 5:6; 7:17, 21) ; Gen. 22:16-17 (Heb. 6:13-14) and Gen. 14:17-20 (Heb. 7:1-2) using the keywords “swear”, “Melchizadek”, “priest”, and “bless.”
Paul argues Melchizadek is greater than Levitical Priests because he blessed Abraham and the better always blesses the lesser (7:1, 7). Also, he argues, Abraham, who was Levi’s great-grandfather (and therefore his elder) paid tithes to Melchizadek (7:1, 5, 9). Paul also indicates that both the Levites (through the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants) and Melchizadek, are priests because of Elohim’s making an oath. Thus he argues that Yeshua can be a priest after the order of Melchizadek without being a Levite (7:13-15).
In his fourth midrash Paul ties the ideas of Ps. 110:1 and 110:4 together. The Priest in the Holy of Holies implies the Day of Atonement (the only time the High Priest ever enters the Holy of Holies). With the Day of Atonement ceremony as the setting (Lev. 16), Paul presents a Homiletic Midrash on Jer. 31:31-34 (Heb. 8:8-11); Ex. 24:8 (Heb. 9:20) and Is. 53:12 (Heb. 9:28) using the keywords: “sins” and “covenant.” The keyword “swore” in the previous Midrash referred in Heb. 6:13-14 = Gen. 22:16-17 to the Abrahamic covenant. Paul had noted that the oath of Elohim in Ps. 110:4 also therefore implied a covenant as well (7:20-22). Since Ps. 110:1, 4 implies the Day of Atonement ceremony (since they place the priest in the throne room) and since it speaks of a time when the Messiah’s enemies are made his footstool (the Kingdom), Paul keys this oath with the New Covenant of Jer. 31:31-34 in which sins are forgiven and the Kingdom is established. He cites Ex. 24:8 = Heb. 9:20 using the keyword covenant to argue that such a covenant must be sealed with blood. Citing Is. 52:12 (in Heb. 9:28) with the key word “sins”, he argues that since the Messiah bears these sins it is his blood which seals the New Covenant.
In his fifth midrash Paul, having just made use of the Day of Atonement Temple ceremony, speaks out in favor of the Temple ceremonies. He does this by giving a Proem Homiletic Midrash on Ps. 40:6-8 (Heb. 10:5-9); Jer. 31:33-34(Heb. 10:16-17) and Hab. 2:3-4 (Heb. 10:37-38) using the keywords “pleasure/will”; “come”; “Law in the heart” “sin” and “[no] offering.” Paul begins this midrash by quoting Ps. 40:6-8 (Heb. 10:5-10). Paul ties this passage to Jer. 31:34 (Heb. 10:16-18) based on the key words SIN and IN THEIR HEARTS (which appears in Ps. 40 but is truncated off in Paul’s quote) and [no] OFFERING. Finally, Paul concludes by quoting Hab. 2:3-4 (Heb. 10:37-38) through the key words HE WHO IS COMING and HAS NO PLEASURE. I believe Paul’s source here is the Aramaic of the Peshitta Tenach, for it is only here that the word “pleasure/will” is the same in Ps. 40 and Hab. 2:4 and the LXX does not agree with the wording of Hab. 2:3-4 = Heb. 10:37-38.
The context of Heb. 10 is that Paul has just discussed Yeshua in relation to the Yom Kippur ceremony in Heb. 8 thru 9. Then in Heb. 10:1-3, Paul argues that the sacrifices continue as a remembrance. Paul then opposes those who oppose the Temple and encourages Temple attendance (Heb. 10:25). The keywords tell us what Paul’s subject is: The offerings, and what is and is not pleasing to Elohim. Paul argues that the end of offerings for sin in Ps. 40:6-8 and the placing of the law in the heart (Ps. 40:8) tie Psalm 40:6-8 to the New Covenant in Jer. 31:34 which has yet to occur. To Paul, Ps. 40 describes a time when sin offerings will not be offered because sin will not be remembered, all of this because Elohim does not have pleasure in sin offerings because they result from sin which he will, when the New Covenant is fully realized, forget. Thus the offerings will end with the coming of the New Covenant (Heb. 11:18 see also Heb. 8:13). Paul closes by citing Hab. 2:3-4 (giving what seems a polemic against the interpretation given in the Hab. commentary at Qumran) All of this Paul ties to the [second] coming of the Messiah and the establishing of the New Covenant.
The Blood Covenant Paradigm in Hebrews
Monte Judah writes:
By introducing the death of the one who made it into this paragraph, the writer of Hebrews has just defined the New Covenant as being a last will and testament rather than being an agreement between God and man. But the New Covenant described by Jeremiah (31:31-33) using the word brit is not a testament or will left by a dead person. It is an agreement, a covenant between God and His chosen one people. The writer has switched the meanings to make a Hebrew covenant into a Greek will and testament.
Like many others, Monte Judah has completely misunderstood Hebrews 9:16-17 and the overall paradigm of the Book of Hebrews.
Judah wrongly believes that the topic of Hebrews 9:16-17 is that of a “last will and testament”. However the concept of basing inheritance on such a document is a hellenistic idea. In Jewish law inheritance is divided evenly among the sons, except for the firstborn who gets a double portion. It has nothing to do with what someone writes on a piece of paper.
Hebrews does not refer to a last will and testament, but to the inheritance rules related to the ancient Jewish custom of making a blood covenant.
When two people entered into a blood covenant they became members of each others house including heirship rights. There are two good examples of the making of such a covenant in the Tanak. The first is to be found in Gen. 31:43-54 (between Ya’akov and Lavan) and 1Sam. 18:1-4 (Between David and Jonathan). It was through his blood covenant with Jonathan that David inherited the throne of Saul. David had a covenant with Jonathan making him Jonathan’s joint heir, when Saul and Jonathan died in the same battle, David inherited the throne. In the same way we have a covenant with the Son of the King, when the son of the king died, we were his joint heirs.
This inheritance is the theme of the Book of Hebrews. Paul’s topic is the Blood Covenant and Inheritance. He shows that the Messiah was “made heir of all things” (1:2, 4) and the “firstborn” (1:6;12:23) (an inheritance term, see note to 12:23). He shows that the oath which made Abraham’s seed the chosen people was a covenant (6:13-14), and that the oath which makes the Messiah a priest after the order of Melchizadek (7:20-22) is the renewal of the Covenant (Heb. 7:22; 8:6-13). He also shows that this is a blood covenant sealed with the Messiah’s blood (Heb. 8 & 9). Paul argues that because of this covenant relationship, we have an inheritance (9:11-22). Since we are blood covenantors with the Messiah who is heir of all things (i.e. the Kingdom (1:13; 2:5-9) we inherit with him (1:14; 2:10-18; 9:11-22; 12:23). To Paul this inheritance is the “rest” of Ps. 95:7-11 (Heb. 4:9). A rest which has not yet been entered (4:9-10), an inheritance covenant promise like that of the Abrahmic Covenant (6:13-20) but with its promise yet to be received (11:39-40).
CONCLUSION
The Book of Hebrews was written in Hebrew according to the Hebraic Paradign. In this book Paul makes use of Jewish rules of Hermeneutics in order to interpret the Hebrew Tanak as it had come down to him. This book is a most valuable writing among those of the books of the Ketuvin Netzarim (known commonly today as the “New Testament”.
-James Trimm
[All quotes from Monte Judah taken from YAVOH Vol. 11 No. 11; Nov. 2005 "The Paradigm of the Book of Hebrews"]
A New Translation of the Book of Enoch
Most translations of the Book of Enoch available today are taken
from the ancient Ethiopic version of the text, which is the only
language in which the book was passed down in its complete form.
However in more recent years seven fragmentary Aramaic copies of the Book of Enoch have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. In
addition several fragments of the ancient Greek version of the Book
of Enoch have also come to light.
This new edition of the Book of Enoch is the first Messianic, Sacred
Name version of the Book of Enoch.
Unlike most versions of the Book of Enoch this edition is translated,
wherever possible, from the remains of the ancient Aramaic version
of the book. Wherever the Aramaic is lacking I have consulted the
Greek fragments of Enoch and I have followed the Ethiopic wherever
the Aramaic and Greek fragments are both lacking any witnesses to
the text. Unlike many other versions of 1Enoch I have always sought
to reach behind the Aramaic, Greek and Ethiopic to the original
Hebrew of 1Enoch.
This edition ALSO INCLUDES a new and fresh version of 2Enoch, also
known as “The Secrets of Enoch” as well. Although 2Enoch has only
survived in Old Slavonic manuscripts, this new version reaches
behind the Slavonic to the original Hebrew of 2Enoch.
Why is this Book of Enoch different?
Because I have sought to restore the original text by reaching to the
original Hebrew behind the Aramaic, Greek and Ethiopic texts while
making as much use as possible of the Aramaic (which is a language
very closely related to Hebrew).
For example in 1Enoch 20:7:
Richard Laurence:
Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who presides over Ikisat, over
paradise, and over the cherubim.
R. H. Charles:
Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is over Paradise and the
serpents and the Cherubim.
E. Isaac (Old Test. Pseud. vol. 1)
Gabriel, one of the holy angels who oversee the Garden of Eden, and
the serpents, and the Cherubim.
Now none of Chapter 20 has survived in the Aramaic, but it has
survived in Ethiopic and in Greek. Now the word I want to look at
here is this word “serpents” which does not seem to belong. The
word for “Serpents” in the Ethiopic is IKISAT which Laurance has
transliterated. The Greek version has DRAKONTON which also
means “serpents”. Now these Greek and Ethipic words clearly point
to an underlying Hebrew word of SEFARIM or SEPHARIM (Strong’s 8314) which can mean “serpents” but can also mean “Seraphim” (a class of angelic beings as found in Is. 6).
Clearly the Greek translator misunderstood the Hebrew word SERAPHIM and translated it DRAKONTON (serpents) and the Ethiopic translator, therefore, probably worked from the Greek translating the word in Ethiopic as IKISAT (serpents).
This new version of 1st Enoch has:
Gavri’el, one of the set-apart angels, who is over Pardes and the
Seraphim and the Cherubim.
You will also note that in the Laurance, Charles and Isaac
translations this is the last verse in Chapter 20, with the chapter
only having listed six angels. In fact the Ethiopic text is lacking
verse 8 and one of our Greek manuscripts also lacks verse 8, but one
Greek fragment has survived which includes the 8th verse which lists
the name of the seventh of the seven angels listed in this Chapter.
This new edition on the Book of Enoch includes the previously lost
8th verse with the name and function of the seventh angel.
In addition the Book of Enoch gives a list of names of twenty
leaders of the fallen angels (1En. 6 & 69). But the list of these
angels as given in most editions follows the couurpt list of names
given in the Ethiopic.
For example the leader is called:
Laurance: Samyaza
Charles: Semjaza
Isaac: Semyaz
The correct name is preserved in the Aramaic fragments found among
the Dead Sea Scrolls so that this new edition has this name as
SHEMIKHAZAH (which means “my name has seen”). This is just one of the many corrupted angelic names in most other editions of the Books of Enoch.
There are also many improvements to 2Enoch. For example the Morphil version most are familiar with has in 2Eno. 12:1:
“And I looked and saw other flying elements of the sun, whose names
are Phoenixes and Chalkydri…”
Now CHALKYDRI are “Serpents” and the PHOENIX was a Greek-Egyptian pagan mythical creature never found elsewher in the plural.
Now from context it appears that these are two names for the same
class of beings. Since the word CHALKYDRI means “serpents” and
since there are many parallels (beyond the scope of this post)
between the SERAPHIM and the pagan concept of the PHOENIX, it
appears that the SLAVONIC translator (or perhaps an earlier Greek
translator) attempted to translate the Hebrew word SERAPHIM with two words, one meaning “Serpent” and the other offerring a Parallel in the Greek mind to the SERAPHIM.
Thus this new edition of 2Enoch restores the reading to SERAPHIM and then has a detailed footnote explaining the reason for the revision and correction:
“And I looked and saw other flying elements of the sun, whose names
are Seraphim…”
The above are just a sample of the improvements made in this new and better edition of both 1st and 2nd Enoch.
Outline of the Book of Enoch
I. THE BOOK OF WATCHERS (1-36)
A. Last Things (1:1-5:10)
1. Tribulation (1:1-2)
2. YHWH Comes to Judge the Earth (1:3-9)
3. Nature Obeys YHWH, Man Rebels (2:1-5:4)
4. The Wicked Cursed (5:5-7)
5. The Kingdom to Come (5:8-10)
B. The Fallen Angels (6:1-8:3)
1. Angels Fall (6:1-7:1)
2. Birth of Giants (7:2-6)
3. Functions of Fallen Angels (8:1-3)
C. Elohim’s Judgment on Fallen Angels (8:4-14:7)
1. Elohim Hears Cries (8:4-9:11)
2. Elohim’s Judgment (10:1-11:2)
3. Enoch Delivers Judgment (12:1-13:3)
4. Enoch Intercedes for Fallen Angels (13:4-14:7)
D. Enoch’s First Vision (14:8-19:3)
1. Enoch Enters Heaven (14:8-15)
2. The Throne Room (14:16-25)
3. Judgment on the Fallen Angels (15:1-16:3)
4. The Ends of Heaven and Earth (17:1-19:3)
E. The Arch-Angels (20:1-7)
1. Uriel (20:2)
2. Raphael (20:3)
3. Rau’el (20:4)
4. Michael (20:5)
5. Sariel (20:6)
6. Gabriel (20:7)
7. Remiel (20:8)
F. Enoch’s Second Vision (21:1-36:4)
1. Temporary Prison for Angels (21:1-6)
2. Permanent Prison for Angels (21:7-10)
3. Temporary Prison for Human Souls (22:1-14)
4. Luminaries in Heaven (23:1-4)
5. Seven Mountains and a Tree (24:1-25:7)
6. The Environs of Jerusalem (26:1-6)
7. Gey Hinnom (27:1-5)
8. East (28:1-33:4)
9. North (34:1-3)
10. West (35:1)
11. South (36:1-4)
II. The Book of Parables
Three Things Imparted to Enoch (37:1-5)
A. The First Thing (38:1-44:1)
1. Judgment of the wicked (38:1-6)
2. The Dwelling Place of the Holy Ones (39:1-14)
3. The Four Arch-Angels (40:1-10)
a. Michael (40:9)
b. Raphael (40:9)
c. Gabriel (40:9)
d. Phanuel (40:9)
4. The End of Earthly Kingdoms (41:1-2)
5. Cosmic Secrets (41:3-9)
6. Wisdom Personified (42:1-3)
7. More Cosmic Secrets (43:1-44:1)
B. The Second Thing (45:1-57:3)
1. The lot of the wicked (45:2)
2. Throne of Judgment (45:3)
3. Transformed Heavens and Earth (45:4-6)
4. Triumph of the Son of Man (46:1-8)
5. Prayers of Martyrs (47:1-2)
6. The Ancient of Days (47:3-4)
7. The Dwelling Place of the Holy Ones (48:1)
8. The Triumph of the Son of Man (48:2-49:4)
9. The Son of Man’s Judgment (50:1-5)
10. The Resurrection (51:1-5)
11. Six Mountains of Metal Melt in the West (52:1-9)
12. The End of the Tribulation (53:1-7)
13. Judgment of the Fallen Angels (54:1-6)
14. The Flood (54:7-55:2)
15. The Fallen Angel’s Punished (55:3-56:4)
16. The Last Battle (56:5-57:3)
C. The Third Thing (58:1-71:17)
1. The lot of the Righteous (58:1-6)
2. Lightning and Thunder (59:1-3)
3. The Ancient of Days on His Throne (60:1-4)
4. The Tribulation (60:5-25)
5. The Garden of Eden (61:1-13)
6. The Judgment (62:1-64:2)
a. The Upper Class Judged (62:1-13)
b. The Reward of the Righteous (62:14-16)
c. The Upper Class Judged (63:1-12)
d. The Fallen Angels Judged (64:1-2)
7. The Flood (65:1-68:5)
a. Enoch’s Prophecy of the Flood (65:1-12)
b. Angels of the Flood (66:1-2)
c. Noah warned of the Flood (67:1-13)
d. Michael and Raphael Discuss the Flood (68:1-69:1)
8. The Fallen Angels (69:1-29)
a. Their Names (69:1-3)
b. The Five Satans (69:4-14)
c. The Oath that Binds Them (69:14-26)
d. Judgment of Fallen Angels (69:27-29)
D. Enoch Taken into Heaven (70:1-71:17)
1. Translation of Enoch (70:1-4)
2. Cosmic Secrets (71:1-4)
3. Throne Room (71:5-9)
4. The Ancient of Days (71:10-17)
III. THE ASTRONOMICAL BOOK
(72-82)
A. The Sun (72)
B. The Moon and its Phases (73)
C. The Lunar Year (74)
D. The Twelve “Winds” and their Portals (75-76)
E. The Four Quarters (77)
F. The Sun and Moon and the Phases of the Moon (78)
G. Overview of Astronomical Laws (79-80:1)
H. Sin and the Perversion of the Laws (80:2-8)
I. Enoch’s Mission and the Heavenly Tablets (81)
J. Enoch’s Comission (82)
IV. THE BOOK OF DREAM VISIONS (83-90)
A. The First Deam Vision (83-84)
B. The Animal Apocalypse (85-90)
1. The Fall of the Angels and the Demoralization of Mankind. (86)
2. The Seven Archangels. (87)
3. The Punishment of the Fallen Angels by the Archangels. (88)
4. The Deluge and the Deliverance of Noah. (89:1-9)
5. From the Death of Noah to the Exodus. (89:10-27)
6. Israel in the Desert, the Giving of the Law, the Entrance into Canaan. (89:28-40)
7. From the Time of the Judges to the Building of the Temple. (89:41-50)
8. The Two Kingdoms of Israel and Judah to the Destruction of Jerusalem. (89:51-67)
9. First Period of the Angelic Rulers -from the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Return from Captivity. (89:68-71)
10. Second Period -from the Time of Cyrus to that of Alexander the Great. (89:72-77)
11. Third Period -from Alexander the Great to the Graeco-Syrian Domination. (90:1-5)
12. Fourth Period Graeco-Syrian Domination to the Maccabean Revolt (debated). (90:6-12)
13. The last Assault of the Gentiles on the Jews (where vv. 13-15 and 16-18 are doublets). (90:13-19)
14. Judgement of the Fallen Angels, the Shepherds, and the Apostates. (90:20-27)
15. The New Jerusalem, the Conversion of the surviving Gentiles, the Resurrection of the Righteous, the Messiah. Enoch awakes and weeps. (90:28-42)
V. THE EPISTLE OF ENOCH
(91-107)
The Message of the Book of Enoch
FOR WHOM DID ENOCH WRITE?
The Book of Enoch is especially given for the benefit of those
believers in the last days who are Torah Observant:
The words of the blessing with which Enoch
blessed the chosen and righteous,
who will be living in the day of tribulation,
when all the wicked and godless are to be removed.
(1Enoch 1:1)
Another book which Enoch wrote for his son Methuselah
and for those who will come after him,
and observe the Torah in the last days.
(1Enoch 108:1)
MESSAGE OF THE BOOK OF ENOCH
Yeshua warned that the last days would be like the days of Noach (Mt.
24:37-38 – HRV) And this is a major theme of the Book of Enoch.
Enoch forewarns of the coming judgement of the flood, and parallels
this with the judgement of the last days. The Book of Enoch even
prophecies that in the last days:
“women shall become pregnant and abort their babies
and cast them out from their midst”
(1En. 99:5).
The Book of Enoch tells of how 200 fallen angels led by Shemikhazah
and Azazel “saw and lusted after” human females and copulated with
them producing a race of giants (1Enoch 6) and taught mankind
secrets such as sorcery, the making of weapons (1Enoch 7-8) and how
to perform an abortion (1En. 69:12). YHWH’s judgement finally
comes. Shemikhazah and “all his associates” are bound fast “for
seventy generations” until “the judgement that is forever is
consummated” (1En. 9:11-12) (compare Y’hudah 1:6 & 2Kefa 2:2-10).
The giants are killed by the flood but their spirits remain on earth
as evil spirits (1En. 15:8-12). In the last days the fallen angels
will return again (1Enoch 56:5).
Now if one counts the generations from Enoch to Yeshua one finds
there were sixty-nine generations (Luke 3:23-37). So the seventy
generations ended one generation after the life of Yeshua. This
brings us to an interesting statement made by the Nazarene writer
Hegesippus around 185 C.E. as he recounted the beginning of the
apostasy:
Up to that period the Assembly had remained like a virgin
pure and uncorrupted: for, if there were any persons who
were disposed to tamper with the wholesome rule of the
proclaiming of salvation, they still lurked in some dark
place of concealment or other. But, when the sacred band of
Emissaries had in various ways closed their lives, and that
generation of men to whom it had been vouchsafed to listen to the
godlike Wisdom with their own ears had passed away, then did the
confederacy of godless error take its rise through the treachery
of false teachers, who, seeing that none of the emissaries any
longer survived, at length attempted with bare and uplifted
head to oppose the proclaiming of the truth by proclaiming
“knowledge falsely so called.”
(Hegessippus; Memoirs)
The generation which followed the life of Yeshua and his emissaries
was the generation in which Shemikhazah and his associates were to be
released. And this was the very generation in which false teachers
began with bare and uplifted head to oppose the proclaiming of the
truth, the very generation in which the apostasy began.
The long night of the apostasy is ending. The Book of Enoch is again
coming to light that it may be a cause of joy and uprightness and
much wisdom to those who observe the Torah in the last days. The
culmination of all things is at hand.
The Authenticity of the Zohar
As Evidenced by the Book of Enoch
By James Scott Trimm
[Note: The point of this paper is the “authenticity” of the Zohar, that is that the Zohar was compiles by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the late first century, and not a forgery produced in Europe in the Middle Ages. That is not to say that the Zohar should be considered authoritative or even canon, which is a separate issue entirely.]
Ever since Moses DeLeon (c. 1250 – 1305 C.E.) discovered the Zohar and revealed his discovery to the world, critics have attacked the authenticity of this book. The book itself claims to have been redacted by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in the late first century. Yet some have even accused even Moses DeLeon himself of having forged the book.
Clear evidence for the originality of the book lies in the fact that the Zohar makes much use of the first and second books of Enoch, both of which were lost to the Western World in ancient times, and were not recovered until fairly modern times. 1st Enoch was not recovered until the famous explorer James Bruce brought Ethiopic copies of the book to Europe in 1773. But it was not until 1800 that translations of any of the material was published. 2nd Enoch remained unknown until William Richard Morfil translated the recently discovered Slavonic text in 1896. It was not until the 19th century that the first and second books of Enoch and their contents became known to the Western world.
Now the Zohar mentions the Book of Enoch on ten occasions. While it is true that some of these citations have no exact parallel in either 1st or 2nd Enoch as they have come down to us, this is also true of the citations of the Book of Enoch found in the ancient “Church Fathers”. Nonetheless in the majority of cases these citations have at least some parallel in 1st or 2nd Enoch, and some of them make it clear that the authors of the Zohar were quite familiar with the contents of the Books of Enoch.
The first mention of the Book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
‘The seventh precept is to circumcise the male child on the eighth day after birth and thereby to remove the defilement of the foreskin. The “living” (hayah) of which we have spoken forms the eighth grade in the scale, and hence the soul which has flown away from it must appear before it on the eighth day. And in this way it is made clear that this is really a “living soul”, emanating from that holy “living” and not from the “unholy region”. And this is alluded to in the words: Let the waters swarm, which in the Book of Enoch are explained thus: Let the water of the holy seed be stamped with the stamp of the “soul of the living”, (2Enoch 30:8?) which is the form of the letter yod impressed on the holy flesh in preference to all other marks.
(Zohar 1:13a)
This is certainly a reference to the following passage in 2nd Enoch:
On the fifth day I commanded the sea, that it should bring forth fishes, and feathered birds of many varieties, and all animals creeping over the earth, going forth over the earth on four legs, and soaring in the air, male sex and female, and every soul breathing the spirit of life.
(2Enoch 30:8)
While the passage cited must have read somewhat differently in the copy which the author of the Zohar held (there are many variations in the known manuscripts of 2Enoch) it is beyond coincidence that 2Enoch has a passage which parallels that of Genesis 1:20 as the passage cited surely did.
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM: the one included in the other. R. Abba said: ‘God did indeed send down a book to Adam, from which he became acquainted with the supernal wisdom. It came later into the hands of the “sons of God”, the wise of their generation, and whoever was privileged to peruse it could learn from it supernal wisdom. This book was brought down to Adam by the “master of mysteries”, preceded by three messengers. When Adam was expelled from the Garden of Eden, he tried to keep hold of this book, but it flew out of his hands. He thereupon supplicated God with tears for its return, and it was given back to him, in order that wisdom might not be forgotten of men, and that they might strive to obtain knowledge of their Master. Tradition further tells us that Enoch also had a book, which came from the same place as the book of the generations of Adam…. [Tr. note: Here follows a highly allusive passage identifying Enoch with “the lad” (v. Prov. XXII, 6), i.e. Metatron.] This is the source of the book known as “the book of Enoch”. When God took him, He showed him all supernal mysteries, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the Garden and its leaves and branches, all of which can be found in his book.(1Enoch 24-25; 2Enoch 8:3) Happy are those of exalted piety to whom the supernal wisdom has been revealed, and from whom it will not be forgotten for ever, as it says, “The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him, and his secret to make them know it.” ‘
(Zohar 1:37b)
Again this passage is easy to locate in the 1st and 2nd books of Enoch:
3 And the seventh mountain was in the midst of these, and it excelled them in height, resembling the seat of a throne: and fragrant trees encircled the throne.
4 And among them was a tree such as I had never yet smelt, neither was any among them nor were others like it: it had a fragrance beyond all fragrance, and its leaves and blooms and wood wither not for ever: and its fruit is beautiful, and its fruit resembles the dates of a palm.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is this tree, and fragrant, and its leaves are fair, and its blooms very delightful in appearance.’
6 Then answered Mikha’el, one of the set-apart and honored angels who was with me, and was their leader.
1 And he said unto me: ‘Chanoch, why dost you ask me regarding the fragrance of the tree, and why dost you wish to learn the truth?’
2 Then I answered him saying: ‘I wish to know about everything, but especially about this tree.’
3 And he answered saying: ‘This high mountain which you hast seen, whose summit is like the throne of Elohim, is His throne, where the Set-apart Great One, YHWH of Glory, the Eternal King, will sit, when He shall come down to visit the earth with goodness.
4 And as for this fragrant tree no mortal is permitted to touch it till the great judgment, when He shall take vengeance on all and bring (everything) to its consummation for ever.
(1Enoch 24:3-25:4)
3 And in the midst of the trees that of life, in that place whereon YHWH rests, when he goes up into Pardes; and this tree is of ineffable goodness and fragrance, and adorned more than every existing thing; and on all sides it is in form gold-looking and vermilion and fire-like and covers all, and it has produce from all fruits.
(2Enoch 8:3)
The next citation in the Zohar is as follows:
When Noah grew up, and saw how mankind were sinning before God, he withdrew himself from their society and sought to serve his Master, so as not to be led astray by them. He was especially diligent in the study of the book of Adam and the book of Enoch which we have mentioned, and from them he learnt the proper forms in which to worship God. This explains how it is that he knew it was incumbent upon him to bring an offering; it was these books which revealed to him the basis on which the existence of the world depends, to wit, the sacrifices, without which neither the higher nor the lower world can endure.’ (2Enoch 45; 59:2-6; 66:3)
(Zohar 1:58)
1 Whoever hastens to make offerings before YHWH’s face, YHWH for his part will hasten that offering by granting of his work.
2 But whoever increases his lamp before YHWH’s face and make not true judgment, YHWH will not increase his treasure in the realm of the highest.
3 When YHWH demands bread, or candles, or the flesh of beasts, or any other sacrifice, then that is nothing; but Elohim demands pure hearts, and with all that only tests the heart of man.
(2Enoch 45:1-3)
2 For man brings clean animals to make sacrifice for sin, that he may have cure of his soul.
3 And if they bring for sacrifice clean animals, and birds man has cure, he cures his soul.
4 All is given you for food, bind it by the four feet that is to make good the cure, he cures his soul.
5 But whoever kills beast without wounds, kills his own souls and defiles his own flesh.
6 And he who does any beast any injury whatsoever, in secret, it is evil practice, and he defiles his own soul.
(2Enoch 59:2-6)
3 Bow down to the true Elohim, not to dumb idols, but bow down to his similitude, and bring all just offerings before YHWH’s face. YHWH hates what is unjust.
(2Enoch 66:3)
Again we read in the Zohar:
AND THE SONS OF NOAH THAT WENT FORTH FROM THE ARK WERE SHEM, AND HAM, AND JAPHETH. R. Eleazar asked why the Scripture inserts the words “who went forth from the ark”. Did, then, Noah have other sons who did not go forth from the ark? R. Abba said: “Yes: the children whom his sons bore afterwards; and the Scripture points out that these did not go forth from the ark.’ R. Simeon said: ‘Had I been alive when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave mankind the book of Enoch and the book of Adam, I would have endeavoured to prevent their dissemination, because not all wise men read them with proper attention, and thus extract from them perverted ideas, such as lead men astray from the Most High to the worship of strange powers. Now, however, the wise who understand these things keep them secret, and thereby fortify themselves in the service of their Master.’
(Zohar 1:72b)
Here the Zohar does not indicate anything in particular that is actually said in the Book of Enoch. The next reference to the Book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
We find in the book of Enoch that after the Holy One, blessed be He, had transported Enoch to the supernal regions and shown him all the treasures of the King, both the celestial and the terrestrial (1Enoch 17-18; 2Enoch 5-6 ), He permitted him to behold the Tree of Life (1Enoch 24-25; 2Enoch 8:3) and that Tree of which Adam was warned (1Enoch 32:3-6), and showed him the place where Adam had dwelt in the Garden of Eden (1Enoch 32:3-6; 2Enoch 8), and Enoch perceived that if Adam had been obedient he would have so dwelt for ever, having eternal life and perpetual joy in the glory of the Garden. But because he broke the commandment of his Lord, he was punished.’(1Enoch 69:6)
(Zohar 2:55a)
This citation of the Book of Enoch references several things that are in fact found in 1st and 2d Enoch:
1. …the Holy One, blessed be He, had transported Enoch to the supernal regions and shown him all the treasures of the King, both the celestial and the terrestrial
This material is found in both 1st and 2nd Enoch:
1 And they took and brought me to a place in which those who were there were like flaming fire, and, when they wished, they appeared as men….
3 And I saw the places of the luminaries and the treasuries of the stars and of the thunder and in the uttermost depths, where were a fiery bow and arrows and their quiver, and a fiery sword and all the lightnings….
1 I saw the treasuries of all the winds: I saw how He had furnished with them the whole creation and the firm foundations of the earth.
(1Enoch 17:1,3; 18:1)
1 And here I looked down and saw the treasure houses of the snow, and the angels who keep their terrible store-houses, and the clouds whence they come out and into which they go.
1 They showed me the treasure house of the dew, like oil of the olive, and the appearance of its form, as of all the flowers of the earth; further many angels guarding the treasure-houses of these things, and how they are made to shut and open.
(2Enoch 5:1-6:1)
2. He permitted him to behold the Tree of Life
3 And the seventh mountain was in the midst of these, and it excelled them in height, resembling the seat of a throne: and fragrant trees encircled the throne.
4 And among them was a tree such as I had never yet smelt, neither was any among them nor were others like it: it had a fragrance beyond all fragrance, and its leaves and blooms and wood wither not for ever: and its fruit is beautiful, and its fruit resembles the dates of a palm.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is this tree, and fragrant, and its leaves are fair, and its blooms very delightful in appearance.’
6 Then answered Mikha’el, one of the set-apart and honored angels who was with me, and was their leader.
1 And he said unto me: ‘Chanoch, why dost you ask me regarding the fragrance of the tree, and why dost you wish to learn the truth?’
2 Then I answered him saying: ‘I wish to know about everything, but especially about this tree.’
3 And he answered saying: ‘This high mountain which you hast seen, whose summit is like the throne of Elohim, is His throne, where the Set-apart Great One, YHWH of Glory, the Eternal King, will sit, when He shall come down to visit the earth with goodness.
4 And as for this fragrant tree no mortal is permitted to touch it till the great judgment, when He shall take vengeance on all and bring (everything) to its consummation for ever.
(1Enoch 24:3-25:4)
3 And in the midst of the trees that of life, in that place whereon YHWH rests, when he goes up into Pardes; and this tree is of ineffable goodness and fragrance, and adorned more than every existing thing; and on all sides it is in form gold-looking and vermilion and fire-like and covers all, and it has produce from all fruits.
(2Enoch 8:3)
3. and that Tree of which Adam was warned
3 And I came to the Pardes of Righteousness, I was shown from afar off trees more numerous than these trees and two great trees there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose set-apart fruit they eat and know great wisdom. That tree is in height like the fir,
4 and its leaves are like (those of) the Carob tree: and its fruit is like the clusters of the vine, very beautiful: and the fragrance of the tree penetrates afar.
5 Then I said: ‘How beautiful is the tree, and how attractive is its look!’
6 Then Rafa’el the set-apart angel, who was with me, answered me and said: ‘This is the tree of wisdom, of which your father of old and your mother of old, who were before you, have eaten, and they learned wisdom and their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked and they were driven out of the garden.
(1Enoch 32:3-6)
4. and showed him the place where Adam had dwelt in the Garden of Eden
(This is found in the passages from 1st and 2nd Enoch already cited above)
5. and Enoch perceived that if Adam had been obedient he would have so dwelt for ever, having eternal life and perpetual joy in the glory of the Garden. But because he broke the commandment of his Lord, he was punished.’
1Enoch does in fact mention the event of Adam’s disobedience, thought the Zohar has either interpreted further information from the account, or the version held by its author contained further information:
And the third was named Gadreel:
he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons of death to the children of men.
(1Enoch 69:6)
The next mention of the Book of Enoch is as follows:
There is here a profound mystery. According to the Book of Enoch, this “building” [the palace above the garden] is indeed constructed by the other spirit which was left in the “vessel,’, and which draws after him the spirit which roams about in the air naked and alone; and these two spirits are welded together, and if the person is worthy to be built up again, the two spirits become one indeed, an organ in which a superior soul may wrap herself. (1Enoch 13-14?)
(Zohar 2:100a)
In fact 1Enoch does in fact give us an account of this heavenly palace:
8 And behold a dream came to me, and visions fell down upon me until I lifted my eyelids toward the gates of the palace of heaven, and I saw a vision of the wrath of chastisement, and a voice came to me and it said: Speak to the sons of heaven, and reprimand them….
9 And I went in till I drew near to a wall, which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to frighten me.
10 And I went into the tongues of fire and drew near to a great house, which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tessellated floor (made) of ice.
11 Its ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightning’s, and between them were fiery cherubim, and their heaven was (clear as) water.
12 A flaming fire surrounded all their walls, and its gates blazed with fire.
13 And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me.
14 And as I quaked and trembled, I fell upon my face.
15 And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater than the former, and the entire gate stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire.
16 And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to you its splendour and its extent.
17 And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightning’s and the path of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire.
(1Enoch 18:8; 14:9-17)
The next citation of the book of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
“The dust of the earth” is a reference similar to that explained in the Book of Enoch, that the associates saw the letters of which these words are composed, and a voice was heard, saying: “Awaken and sing, ye who dwell in the dust” (Isa..XXVI, I9). The first edifice of the world (of the pre-resurrection period) will be as refuse in comparison with the second edifice (of the post-resurrection period), for this last will be perfected according to the Divine plan. (2Enoch 47:5)
(Zohar 2:105b)
In fact 2Enoch does make use of the phrase “dust of the earth” but again it is unclear whether the author of the Zohar’s copy containe more information, or if he has used an unknown method of interpretation:
YHWH has placed the foundations in the unknown, and has spread forth heavens visible and invisible; he fixed the earth on the waters, and created countless creatures, and who has counted the water and the foundation of the unfixed, or the dust of the earth, or the sand of the sea, or the drops of the rain, or the morning dew, or the wind’s breathings? Who has filled earth and sea, and the indissoluble winter?
(2Enoch 47:5)
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is:
We have found in the Book of Enoch the following: “An only son [Tr. note: Aaron.] will be born unto Him of the White Head, [Tr. note The Supernal Priest] and when they of the asses’ flesh [Tr.note: The mixed multitude, cf Ezek, XXIII, 20] shall come, they will mislead him through him who puts pearls into bells of gold without knowing what he does, and an image will be fashioned with a chisel.” (1Enoch 89?)
(Zohar 2:192b)
The reference is likely to 1Enoch which mentions offspring of a white bull:
12 But that white ox-calf which was born from him begat a black wild boar and a white sheep; and the former begat many boars, but that sheep begat twelve sheep.
(1Enoch 89:12)
And an apostate race of men represented by asses:
11 And they began to bite and to chase one another; but that white bull which was born among them begat a wild ass and a white ox with it, and the wild asses multiplied.
(1Enoch 89:11)
The next citation of Enoch in the Zohar is as follows:
Hence the words spoken by the Torah: “and I would be playing always before him” (Prov. VIII, 30), In the verse cited there is twice mention of “them that fear the Lord”; the first indicates the men themselves as they are here below, and the second their images as reflected in their words that ascend on high. This esoteric doctrine is found in the Book of Enoch, where it says that all the words of exposition uttered by the righteous on earth are adorned with crowns and are arrayed before the Holy One, blessed be He, who delights Himself with them. They then descend and come up again before His presence in the image of that righteous man who gave expression to them, and God then delights Himself with that image. The words, then, are inscribed in “a book of remembrance before Him”, so as to endure for evermore. “And they that thought upon His name” is an allusion to those that meditate on the words of Torah in order thereby to cleave to their Master through an insight into the Divine Name, so as to know Him and beceme equipped with the wisdom of His name in their heart. It is written: “And above the firmament that was over their heads was as the appearance of a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne” (Ezek. I, 26). (????)
(Zohar 2:217a)
It is unknown whether the author in the Zohar has cited a lost passage of Enoch or he has applied an unknown method of interpretation to an unknown Zohar passage.
R. Eleazar said: ‘There is a mystery relating to the offering in the verse, “I have come to my garden, my sister, my bride… eat, 0 friends, drink, 0 beloved” (S.S. v, 1), which I have seen in the book of Enoch.’ Said R. Simeon: ‘Tell us what you have seen and heard.’ (1Enoch 77:3?)
(Zohar 3:240a)
This could be a reference to any number of passages in either 1st or 2nd Enoch however a likely passage is one from 1Enoch:
3 And the fourth quarter, named the north, is divided into three parts: the first of them is for the dwelling of men: and the second contains seas of water, and the abysses and forests and rivers, and darkness and clouds; and the third part contains the garden of righteousness.
(1Enoch 77:3)
In addition to the ten direct references to the Book of Enoch there are many passages where the authors of the Zohar draw from material in the Book of Enoch. The Book of Enoch gives a detailed account of the fall of angels only implied in Genesis. According to the Book of Enoch these fallen angels were led by two major fallen angels named Shemikhaza and Azzazel. These angels copulated with men and beasts to produce a race of giants later whipped out by the flood. They also taught men many things including secrets of sorcery. Finally they were judged by being chained in a pit until the time of judgment.
The Zohar mentions this fall as follows:
R. Isaac said: “Uzza and Azael fell from the abode of their sanctity
above, they saw the daughters of mankind and sinned with them and
begat children. These were the Nefilim, of whom it is said, THE
NEFILIM WERE IN THE EARTH (Gen. 6:4).”
(Zohar 1:37a)
“Of the Nefilim it is said: “and the sons of God saw the daughters
of men that they were fair” (Gen. 6:1f). These form a second
category of the Nefilim, already mentioned above, in this way:
When God thought of making man, He said: “Let us make man
in our image, etc.” i.e. He intended to make him head over the
celestial beings, who were to be his deputies, like Joseph over
the governors of Egypt (Gen. 41:41). The angels thereupon
began to malign him and say, “What is man that You should
remember him, seeing that he will assuredly sin before You.”
Said God to them, “If you were on earth like him, you would
sin worse.” And so it was. For “when the sons of God saw the
daughters of man”, they fell in love with them, and God cast
them down from heaven. These were Uzza and Azael; from them
the “mixed multitude” derive their souls, and therefore they also
are called nefilim, because they fell into fornication with fair
women.”
(Zohar 1:25b)
The Zohar account agrees with that of 1st Enoch except for abbreviating the name Shemikhazah with Uzza. In fact according to the Zohar Balam knew where Uzza and Azael were kept in chains, and went to them to learn his sorcery:
…after God cast Uzza and Azael down from their holy
place, they went astray after the women folk and seduced
the world also. It may seem strange that being angels they
were able to abide upon the earth. The truth is, however,
that when they were cast down the celestial light which
used to sustain them left them and they were changed to
another grade through the influence of the air of this world.
Similarly the manna which came down for the Israelites in
the wilderness originated in the celestial dew from the most
recondite spot, and at first its light would radiate to all worlds
and the “field of apples”, and the heavenly angels drew
sustenance from it, but when it approached the earth it
became materialized through the influence of the air of
this world and lost its brightness, becoming only like
“coriander seed”. Now when God saw that these fallen
angels were seducing the world, He bound them in chains of
iron to a mountain of darkness. Uzza He bound at the bottom
of the mountain and covered his face with darkness because
he struggled and resisted, but Azael, who did not resist, He
set by the side of a mountain where a little light penetrated.
Men who know where they are located seek them out,
and they teach them enchantments and sorceries and
divinations. These mountains of darkness are called the
“mountains of the East”, and therefore Balaam said:
“From Aram has Balak brought me, from the mountains
of the East”. Because they both learnt their sorceries there.
Now Uzza and Azael used to tell those men who came to
them some of the notable things which they knew in former
times when they were on high, and to speak about the holy
world in which they used to be.
(Zohar 3:208a)
In which place and from whom did Balaam derive all his
Magical practices and knowledge? Rabbi Isaac replied:
“He learned it first from his father, but it was in the
“mountains of the East”, which are in an eastern country,
that he obtained a mastery of all the arts of magic and
divination. For those mountains are the abode of the
[fallen] angels Uzza and Azael whom the Holy One cast
down from heaven, and who were chained there in fetters.
It is they who impart to the sons of men a knowledge of
magic.
(Zohar 1:126a)
Here it is helpful to examine the 1st century Book of Y’hudah (Jude) in the so-called “New Testament”. This book quotes from the Book of Enoch (Jude 1:14-15 = 1Enoch 1:9) and references the account of the fallen angels (Jude 1:6-7, 13) as a typology for a last days apostasy. Y’hudah goes on to call this apostasy “the error of Balam” (Jude 1:11). Clearly the book of Y’hudah and the Zohar point to a first century tradition that Balam obtained his sorcery as a follower of the fallen angels mentioned in the Book of Enoch.
An examination of the Zohar in light of the Book of Enoch demonstrates that the Zohar could not have been a forgery produced by Moses De Leon, nor any other European living in the Middle Ages. The authors of the Zohar express a knowledge of the Book of Enoch and its contents which was impossible anytime between its loss in ancient times and its nineteenth century restoration. In fact the authentic use of the Book of Enoch in the Zohar supports the claim that at least the core of the Zohar is what it claims to be, a document compiled by first century Rabbi, the authors of which demonstrate a working knowledge of documents well known in the first century, yet unknown in the middle ages, and also of first century traditions associating Balam with the Enoch account.
The Enoch/Qumran Calendar
Wandering Stars…
They Did not Come Forth at their Appointed Times.
(Jude 1:13 & 1Enoch 18:15)
By
James Scott Trimm
James Scott Trimm
There has long been a controversy over the “Astronomical” section or “Calendrical” section (Chapters 72-82). What is this calendar? Why does it insist that it works when it loses more than a day a year? Why is it filled with contradictions? Why does it disagree widely with the traditional Hebrew calendar? Why does it seem to insist that its solar months coincide neatly with lunar cycles when it does not? How could the New Moon be significant to this calendar.
The answers to all of these questions can be found elsewhere in the Book of Enoch itself. The Book of Enoch recounts the fall of a group of angels, who fell from heaven and took human form in order to copulate with human women (1Enoch 6; Gen. 6). Now Chapter 41 gives a prophecy Enoch received BEFORE this fall of angels (see 1En. 39:1). At that time Enoch says concerning the movements of the Sun and Moon:
5 And I saw the chambers of the sun and moon, whence they proceed and whither they come again, and their glorious return, and how one is superior to the other, and their stately orbit, and how they do not leave their orbit, and they add nothing to their orbit and they take nothing from it, and they keep faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they are bound together.
6 And first the sun goes forth and traverses his path according to the commandment of YHWH Tzva’ot, and mighty is His name for ever and ever.
7 And after that I saw the hidden and the visible path of the moon, and she accomplishes the course of her path in that place by day and by night-the one holding a position opposite to the other before YHWH Tzva’ot.
And they give thanks and praise and rest not;
For unto them is their thanksgiving rest.
8 For the sun changes oft for a blessing or a curse,
And the course of the path of the moon is light to the righteous
And darkness to the sinners in the name of YHWH,
Who made a separation between the light and the darkness,
And divided the spirits of men,
And strengthened the spirits of the righteous,
In the name of His righteousness.
9 For no angel hinders and no power is able to hinder; for He appoints a judge for them all and He judges them all before Him.
(1En. 41:5-9 Trimm Translation)
And later in the Astronomical/Calendar section we read:
“And in the days of the sinners the years shall be shortened,
and their seed shall be tardy on their lands and fields,
and all things on the earth shall alter,
and shall not appear in their time . . . .
and many chiefs of the stars
shall transgress the order (prescribed);
and these shall alter their orbits and tasks,
and not appear at the seasons prescribed to them”
(1 Enoch 80:2,6)
(This translation of the Book of Enoch, taken wherever possible from the Aramaic manuscripts found at Qumran, is available at: http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
However AFTER the fall of these fallen angels Enoch receives another revelation concerning the “stars” (The ancients counted the Sun, the Moon, and the five visible planets as “stars”):
14 The angel said: ‘This place is the end of heaven and earth: this has become a prison for the stars and the host of heaven.
15 And the stars which roll over the fire are they which have transgressed the commandment of YHWH in the beginning of their rising, because they did not come forth at their appointed times.
16 And He was wroth with them, and bound them till the time when their guilt should be consummated (even) for ten thousand years.’
(1En. 18:14-16 Trimm Translation)
Jude refers to these “stars” when he refer to “wandering stars for whom is reserved blackness of darkness forever” (Jude 1:13b). It is no coincidence that the Greeks called the “planets” “wandering stars” or that the ancients identified them with false gods.
What Enoch is telling us is that after the fall of the angels recounted in 1Enoch 6 and Genesis 6 the heavenly luminaries changed their motions, having rebelled against YHWH’s commandments. Whereas before the fall the Sun, Moon and stars “[did] not leave their orbit, and they add[ed] nothing to their orbit and they [took] nothing from it, and they [kept] faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they [were] bound together.” (41:5) yet after the fall they no longer “did come forth at their appointed times”.
The Calendar section in 1st Enoch was originally a recounting of the pre-fall calendar. I suspect that this pre-fall calendar had a 360 day solar year with exactly twelve lunar months to the day. (This is not an astronomical absurdity, as it is very common for astronomical bodies to have the same orbital momentum and/or to be tidally locked.) After the fall the luminaries departed from “their appointed times”. It may also be possible that the solar year was exactly 364 days with exactly 12 lunar months. In any case the Calendar section may have been corrupted over the centuries by well intended attempts to “correct” the faulty calendar and make it work in one way or another. Some Essenes at Qumran may have engaged in one of these efforts.
Further evidence for this theory may be found in the Ancient Egyptian Solar Calendar. This calendar had 360 days divided into twelve months of thirty days each plus five additional days (thus a 365 day year). This is obviously similar to the Enoch Calendar which adds four days evenly distributed into one month of each of the four seasons.
But why would the Ancient Egyptian Calendar reflect a revision of Enoch’s calendar? Josephus writes in his Antiquities of the Jews:
Now Adam, who was the first man, and made out of the earth, (for our discourse must now be about him,) after Abel was slain, and Cain fled away, on account of his murder was solicitous for posterity a vehement desire of children, he being two hundred and thirty years old; after which time he lived other seven hundred, and then died. He had indeed many other children but Seth in particular. As for the rest, it would be tedious to name them; I will therefore only endeavor to give an account of those that proceeded from Seth. Now this Seth, when he was brought up, and came to those years in which he could discern what was good, became a virtuous man; and as he was himself of an excellent character, so did he leave children behind him who imitated his virtues. All these proved to be of good dispositions. They also inhabited the same country without dissensions, and in a happy condition, without any misfortunes falling upon them, till they died. They also were the inventors of that peculiar sort of wisdom which is concerned with the heavenly bodies, and their order. And that their inventions might not be lost before they were sufficiently known, upon Adam’s prediction that the world was to be destroyed at one time by the force of fire, and at another time by the violence and quantity of water, they made two pillars, the one of brick, the other of stone: they inscribed their discoveries on them both, that in case the pillar of brick should be destroyed by the flood, the pillar of stone might remain, and exhibit those discoveries to mankind; and also inform them that there was another pillar of brick erected by them. Now this remains in the land of Siriad to this day.”
(Ant. 1:2:3)
“Siriad” is believed to refer to Egypt. It refers to the Land of the Sirius followers. The Egyptian Calendar used the movements of the Star Sirius to establish the beginning of the year for their solar calendar, since its movements coincided closely with the annual flooding of the Nile. The Pillar of the Sethites (which some today call the Pillar of Enoch) had astronomical information from before the flood inscribed on it!
Some identify the Great Pyramid with this Pillar, however this is itself unlikely. Josephus mentions the Pyramids elsewhere (Ant. 2:9:1) as having been built by Hebrew slaves, and here he clearly calls them “Pyramids” not “Pillars”? Also the Great Pyramid has no inscriptions, but the Pillar of the Sethites had Astronomical information “inscribed on it”. However it may well be that the Pillar of the Sethites contained information that was used to build the Great Pyramid.
This is further supported by the fact that the Ancient Egyptian god Thoth was a perversion of Enoch and the ancient Egyptian religion a perversion of YHWH worship into Pantheistic Polytheism.
Thoth/Hermes was known to the ancients as the “Scribe of the gods” or “messenger of the gods” and was associated with the planet we know today as Mercury (the Romans god “Mercury” was a slight revision of the Greek god Hermes). While Enoch was known as “Enoch the Scribe” and “The Scribe of Righteousness” (1Enoch 12:4; 15:1; Jub. 4:17, 20) and the Talmud refers to the planet we call Mercury as “The Scribe of the Sun” (b.Shabbat 156a).
The Book of Enoch says:
“After this I saw the secrets of the heavens,
and how the kingdom is divided,
and how the actions of men are weighed in the balance.”
(1Enoch 41:1)
While the following depiction from the Egyptian Book of the Dead shows the Egyptian god Anubis weighing souls in a balance, and Thoth, the scribe of the gods, making a record:
The false god Thoth/Hermes was in fact the result of pagans turning to the worship of Enoch. These false gods are pagan twisting of Enoch.
Enoch worship resulted from a misunderstanding of who Metatron is. There are two very different traditions about who Metatron is. One tradition has it that Metatron is “the lesser YHWH”; the “Word” or “Adam Kadmon”. The other tradition has it that Metatron is just a name for Enoch.
How did the two become confused? The answer lies in the Book of Enoch. The earliest extra-biblical Ma’aseh Merkavah account is found in the Book of Enoch Chapter 14. Here Enoch comes before the figure on the throne and comes near to the “Holy Word”. The set-ting is that Enoch has been attempting to intercede for the fallen angels. Enoch passes through the worlds and comes before the throne and before the Word. Enoch is then given a message of judgment to take back to the fallen angels (1 Enoch 13-15).
Now the “Word” (Memra) is Metatron and it was this Word (Metatron) who gave Enoch a message to take back to the fallen angels. In a much later Rabbinic document the Midrash of Shemichazah and Aza’el we read:
Forthwith Metatron sent a messenger to Shemichaza and said to him: “The Holy One is about to destroy His world and bring upon it a flood.
(Midrash of Shemichazah and Aza’el)
This parallels 1 Enoch 13-15 exactly, only Enoch has simply become “a messenger” for Metatron, his name (Enoch) has been dropped. (Shemichazah and Aza’el were the leaders of the Fallen angels [1 Enoch 6; 10]). From this we can see how eventually Metatron (Adam Kadmon; the Lesser YHWH; the Word) became confused with His messenger Enoch. Just as Metatron was the Memra, the incarnate “Word”, Hermes had the epithet of Logios (Word).
Hermetic Kabbalah is an amalgamation between Jewish Kabbalah and Hermeticism. This amalgamation occurred when Hermeticists noticed parallels between Hermeticism and Jewish Kabbalah, and thus merged elements of the two systems together.
Why did Hermeticism resemble Jewish Kabbalah? Hermeticism a set of philosophical and religious beliefs based primarily upon writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, the representation of the congruence of the Egyptian god Thoth and the Greek god Hermes. In fact the Greek god Hermes was a re-imaging of the Egyptian god Thoth. The Thoth worshippers of Ancient Egypt had built their false religion around information inscribed on the Sethite Pillar.
This may also shed light on the religion of Amenhotep IV when he came to power. He had the old Egyptian religion abolished and replaced with the worship of a single universal god called Aton. Aton had been recognized by the Egyptian Polytheistic religion as an aspect of Ra. Aton was the disc of the Sun and it bears mentioning that Malachi 4:2 refers to Messiah as “the Sun of righteousness.” (And remember, the Talmud calls the planet “Mercury” with the title “the Scribe of the Sun” (b.Shabbat 156a). After Amenhotep IV’s death, the Polytheistic religion returned. But did Amenhotep IV invent this monotheistic religion, or did he embrace a competing Ancient Egyptian minority religion? Was this monotheism a monotheistic strain of this same perversion of YHWHism drawn from the Sethite Pillar?
Clearly the Ancient Egyptian calendar was based on a perversion of the pre-flood, pre-fall calendar which the Ancient Egyptian priests learned form the Sethite Pillar. They simply had to add five days to the end of the year to make an almost accurate calendar. Likewise certain Jews, attempting to “correct” the Enoch calendar, and make it work, added four days, one to each of the four seasons, to make a Solar calendar that was also almost accurate.
The traditional Hebrew calendar continues to use the Lunar Months as required by the Torah:
10 Also in the day of your gladness, and in your appointed seasons, and in your new
moons, you shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace-offerings. And they shall be to you for a memorial before your Elohim: I am YHWH your Elohim.
(Num. 10:10)
And in your new moons, you shall present a burnt-offering unto YHWH: two young
bullocks, and one ram, seven he lambs of the first year without blemish.
(Num. 28:11)
The word for “Month” in Hebrew is CHODESH and the word for “New Moon” is ROSH CHODESH (literally, the head/beginning of the moon/month)
And lest anyone should argue that ROSH CHODESH refers to a new month, but not necissarily to a New Moon:
6 And even the shining moon wanes according to its time.
Though it is for ruling the seasons and an everlasting sign.
7 By it are the seasons and the times of the statute:
And shining, it vanishes in its circuit.
8 The new moon (Rosh Chodesh), according to its name renews itself;
How wonderful is it when it changes!
The beacon of the host wanes on high,
Leaving the firmament aglow from its shining.
(Sira 43:6-8)
The traditional Hebrew calendar simply adds a leap month as needed to keep the Lunar year from falling more than a month behind the Solar year. But before the fall of the angels in Gen. 6/1Enoch 6, it was not necessary to add a leap month, because the Lunar Year and Solar Year were both exactly 360 days with twelve months of thirty days each,
(I) R. Joseph was (once) asked what was the story of Semhazai and Aza’eI, and he replied: When the generation of Enosh arose and practiced idolatry and when the generation of the Flood arose and corrupted their actions, the Holy One-Blessed be He-was grieved that He had created man, as it is said, “And God repented that he created man, and He was grieved at heart.(2) Forthwith arose two angels, whose names were Semhazai and Aza’el, and said before Him: “0 Lord of the universe, did we not say unto Thee when Thou didst create Thy world, ‘Do not create man’?”, as it is said, “What is man that Thou shouldst remember himn?”. The Holy One-Blessed be He-said to them: “Then what shall become of the world?” They said before Him. ”We wilt suffice’ (Thee) instead of it.’(3) He said. ”It is revealed and (well known to me that if peradventure you had lived in that (earthly) world, the evil inclination would have ruled you just as much as it rules over the sons of man, but you would be more stubborn than they.” They said before Him. “Give us Thy sanction and let us descend (and dwell) among the creatures and then Thou shalt see how we shall sanctify Thy name” He said to them. “Descend and dwell ye among them.”(4) Forethwith the Holy One allowed the evil inclination to rule over them, as soon as they descended. When they beheld the daughters of man that they were beautiful they began to corrupt themselves with them, as it is said, “Then the sons of God saw the daughters of man”, they could not restrain their inclination.
(5) Forthwith Semhazai beheld a girl whose name was ‘Esterah; fixing his eyes at her he said: “Listen to my (request).” But she said to him: “I will not listen to thee until thou teachest me the Name by which thou art enabled to ascend to the firmament, as soon as Thou dost mention it.” He taught her the Ineffable Name.
(6) What did she do? She mentioned It and therebv ascended to the firmament. The Holy One said; “Since she has departed from sin, go and set her among the stars.” It is she who shines brightly in the midst of the seven stars of the Pleiades; so that she may always be remembered, forthwith the Holy One fixed her among the Pleiades.
(7) When Semazai and Aza’eI saw this they took to them wives, and begat children. Semhazai begat two children, whose names were Heyya and ‘Aheyya. And Aza’el was appointed chief over all kinds of dyes and over all kinds of women’s ornaments by which they entice men to unclean thoughts of sin.
(8) Forthwith Metatron sent a messenger to Semhazai and said to him: “The Holy One is about to destroy His world, and bring upon it a flood.” Semhazai stood up and raised his voice and wept aloud, for he was sorely troubled about his sons and (his own) iniquity. And he said: “How shall my children live and what shall become of my children. for each one of them eats daily a thousand camels, a thousand horses, a thousand oxen, and all kinds (of animals)?”
(9) One night the sons of Semhazai, Heyya and ‘Aheyya, saw (visions) in dream, and both of them saw dreams. One saw a great stone spread over the earth like a table, the whole of which was written over with lines (of writing). And an angel (was seen by him) descending from the firmament with a knife in his hand and be was erasing and obliterating all the lines, save one line with four words upon it,
(10) The other (son) saw a garden, planted whole with (many) kinds of trees and (many) kinds of precious stones. And an angel (was seen by him) descending from the firmament with an axe in his hand, and he was cutting down all the trees, so that there remained only one tree containing three branches.
(11) Wben they awoke from their sleep they arose in confusion, and, going to their father, they related to him the dreams. He said to them: “‘The Holy One is about to bring a flood upon the world, and to destroy it so that there will remain but one man and his three sons,” They (thereupon) cried in anguish and wept, saying, “What shall become of us and how shall our names be perpetuated?” He said to them: “Do not trouble yourselves, for your names. Heyya and ‘Aheyya, will never cease from the mouths of creatures, because every time that men will be raising (heavy) stones or boats, or anything similar, they will shout and call your names.” With this their tempers cooled down.
(12) What did Semhazai do? He repented and suspended himself between heaven and earth head downwards and feet upwards, because he was not allowed to open his mouth hefore the Holy One-Blessed be He-, and he still hangs between heaven and earth.
(13) Aza’el (however) did not repent. And he is appointed chief over all kinds of dyes which entice man to commit sin and he still continues to corrupt them.
(14) Therefore, when the Israelites used to bring sacrifices on the day of atonement, they cast one lot for the Lord that it might atone for the iniquities of the Israelites, and one lot for Aza’el that he might bear the burden of Israel’s iniquity. This is the Aza’el that is mentioned in the Scripture.
The Book of Giants 4Q203, 1Q23, 2Q26, 4Q530-532, 6Q8
It is fair to say that the patriarch Enoch was as well known to the ancients as he is obscure to modern Bible reaclers. Besides giving his age (365 years), the book of Genesis says of him only that he “walked with God,” and afterward “he was not, because God had taken him” (Gen. 5:24). This exalted way of life and mysterious demise made Enoch into a figure of considerable fascination, and a cycle of legends grew up around him.
Many of the legends about Enoch were collected already in ancient times in several long anthologies. The most important such anthology, and the oldest, is known simply as The Book of Enoch, comprising over one hundred chapters. It still survives in its entirety (although only in the Ethiopic language) and forms an important source for the thought of Judaism in the last few centuries B.C.E. Significantly, the remnants of several almost complete copies of The Book of Enoch in Aramaic were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it is clear that whoever collected the scrolls considered it a vitally important text. All but one of the five major components of the Ethiopic anthology have turned up among the scrolls. But even more intriguing is the fact that additional, previously unknown or little-known texts about Enoch were discovered at Qumran. The most important of these is The Book of Giants.
Enoch lived before the Flood, during a time when the world, in ancient imagination, was very different. Human beings lived much longer, for one thing; Enoch’s son Methuselah, for instance, attained the age of 969 years. Another difference was that angels and humans interacted freely — so freely, in fact, that some of the angels begot children with human females. This fact is neutrally reported in Genesis (6:1-4), but other stories view this episode as the source of the corruption that made the punishing flood necessary. According to The Book of Enoch, the mingling of angel and human was actually the idea of Shernihaza, the leader of the evil angels, who lured 200 others to cohabit with women. The offspring of these unnatural unions were giants 450 feet high. The wicked angels and the giants began to oppress the human population and to teach them to do evil. For this reason God determined to imprison the angels until the final judgment and to destroy the earth with a flood. Enoch’s efforts to intercede with heaven for the fallen angels were unsuccessful (1 Enoch 6-16).
The Book of Giants retells part of this story and elaborates on the exploits of the giants, especially the two children of Shemihaza, Ohya and Hahya. Since no complete manuscript exists of Giants, its exact contents and their order remain a matter of guesswork. Most of the content of the present fragments concerns the giants’ ominous dreams and Enoch’s efforts to interpret them and to intercede with God on the giants’ behalf. Unfortunately, little remains of the independent adventures of the giants, but it is likely that these tales were at least partially derived from ancient Near Eastern mythology. Thus the name of one of the giants is Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero and subject of a great epic written in the third millennium B.C.E.
A summary statement of the descent of the wicked angels, bringing both knowledge and havoc. Compare Genesis 6:1-2, 4.
1Q23 Frag. 9 + 14 + 15 2[ . . . ] they knew the secrets of [ . . . ] 3[ . . . si]n was great in the earth [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] and they killed manY [ . . ] 5[ . . . they begat] giants [ . . . ]
The angels exploit the fruifulness of the earth.
4Q531 Frag. 3 2[ . . . everything that the] earth produced [ . . . ] [ . . . ] the great fish [ . . . ] 14[ . . . ] the sky with all that grew [ . . . ] 15[ . . . fruit of] the earth and all kinds of grain and al1 the trees [ . . . ] 16[ . . . ] beasts and reptiles . . . [al]l creeping things of the earth and they observed all [ . . . ] |8[ . . . eve]ry harsh deed and [ . . . ] utterance [ . . . ] l9[ . . . ] male and female, and among humans [ . . . ]
The two hundred angels choose animals on which to perform unnatural acts, including, presumably, humans.
1Q23 Frag. 1 + 6 [ . . . two hundred] 2donkeys, two hundred asses, two hundred . . . rams of the] 3flock, two hundred goats, two hundred [ . . . beast of the] 4field from every animal, from every [bird . . . ] 5[ . . . ] for miscegenation [ . . . ]
The outcome of the demonic corruption was violence, perversion, and a brood of monstrous beings. Compare Genesis 6:4.
4Q531 Frag. 2 [ . . . ] they defiled [ . . . ] 2[ . . . they begot] giants and monsters [ . . . ] 3[ . . . ] they begot, and, behold, all [the earth was corrupted . . . ] 4[ . . . ] with its blood and by the hand of [ . . . ] 5[giant's] which did not suffice for them and [ . . . ] 6[ . . . ] and they were seeking to devour many [ . . . ] 7[ . . . ] 8[ . . . ] the monsters attacked it.
4Q532 Col. 2 Frags. 1 – 6 2[ . . . ] flesh [ . . . ] 3al[l . . . ] monsters [ . . . ] will be [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] they would arise [ . . . ] lacking in true knowledge [ . . . ] because [ . . . ] 5[ . . . ] the earth [grew corrupt . . . ] mighty [ . . . ] 6[ . . . ] they were considering [ . . . ] 7[ . . . ] from the angels upon [ . . . ] 8[ . . . ] in the end it will perish and die [ . . . ] 9[ . . . ] they caused great corruption in the [earth . . . ] [ . . . this did not] suffice to [ . . . ] “they will be [ . . . ]
The giants begin to be troubled by a series of dreams and visions. Mahway, the titan son of the angel Barakel, reports the first of these dreams to his fellow giants. He sees a tablet being immersed in water. When it emerges, all but three names have been washed away. The dream evidently symbolizes the destruction of all but Noah and his sons by the Flood.
2Q26 [ . . . ] they drenched the tablet in the wa[ter . . . ] 2[ . . . ] the waters went up over the [tablet . . . ] 3[ . . . ] they lifted out the tablet from the water of [ . . . ]
The giant goes to the others and they discuss the dream.
4Q530 Frag.7 [ . . . this vision] is for cursing and sorrow. I am the one who confessed 2[ . . . ] the whole group of the castaways that I shall go to [ . . . ] 3[ . . . the spirits of the sl]ain complaining about their killers and crying out 4[ . . . ] that we shall die together and be made an end of [ . . . ] much and I will be sleeping, and bread 6[ . . . ] for my dwelling; the vision and also [ . . . ] entered into the gathering of the giants 8[ . . . ]
6Q8 [ . . . ] Ohya and he said to Mahway [ . . . ] 2[ . . . ] without trembling. Who showed you all this vision, [my] brother? 3[ . . . ] Barakel, my father, was with me. 4[ . . . ] Before Mahway had finished telling what [he had seen . . . ] 5[ . . . said] to him, Now I have heard wonders! If a barren woman gives birth [ . . . ]
4Q530 Frag. 4 3[There]upon Ohya said to Ha[hya . . . ] 4[ . . . to be destroyed] from upon the earth and [ . . . ] 5[ . . . the ea]rth. When 6[ . . . ] they wept before [the giants . . . ]
4Q530 Frag. 7 3[ . . . ] your strength [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] 5Thereupon Ohya [said] to Hahya [ . . . ] Then he answered, It is not for 6us, but for Azaiel, for he did [ . . . the children of] angels 7are the giants, and they would not let all their poved ones] be neglected [. . . we have] not been cast down; you have strength [ . . . ]
The giants realize the futility of fighting against the forces of heaven. The first speaker may be Gilgamesh.
4Q531 Frag. 1 3[ . . . I am a] giant, and by the mighty strength of my arm and my own great strength 4[ . . . any]one mortal, and I have made war against them; but I am not [ . . . ] able to stand against them, for my opponents 6[ . . . ] reside in [Heav]en, and they dwell in the holy places. And not 7[ . . . they] are stronger than I. 8[ . . . ] of the wild beast has come, and the wild man they call [me].
9[ . . . ] Then Ohya said to him, I have been forced to have a dream [ . . . ] the sleep of my eyes [vanished], to let me see a vision. Now I know that on [ . . . ] 11-12[ . . . ] Gilgamesh [ . . . ]
Ohya’s dream vision is of a tree that is uprooted except for three of its roots; the vision’s import is the same as that of the first dream.
6Q8 Frag. 2 1three of its roots [ . . . ] [while] I was [watching,] there came [ . . . they moved the roots into] 3this garden, all of them, and not [ . . . ]
Ohya tries to avoid the implications of the visions. Above he stated that it referred only to the demon Azazel; here he suggests that the destruction isfor the earthly rulers alone.
4Q530 Col. 2 1concerns the death of our souls [ . . . ] and all his comrades, [and Oh]ya told them what Gilgamesh said to him 2[ . . . ] and it was said [ . . . ] “concerning [ . . . ] the leader has cursed the potentates” 3and the giants were glad at his words. Then he turned and left [ . . . ]
More dreams afflict the giants. The details of this vision are obscure, but it bodes ill for the giants. The dreamers speak first to the monsters, then to the giants.
Thereupon two of them had dreams 4and the sleep of their eye, fled from them, and they arose and came to [ . . . and told] their dreams, and said in the assembly of [their comrades] the monsters 6[ . . . In] my dream I was watching this very night 7[and there was a garden . . . ] gardeners and they were watering 8[ . . . two hundred trees and] large shoots came out of their root 9[ . . . ] all the water, and the fire burned all 10[the garden . . . ] They found the giants to tell them 11[the dream . . . ]
Someone suggests that Enoch be found to interpret the vision.
[ . . . to Enoch] the noted scribe, and he will interpret for us 12the dream. Thereupon his fellow Ohya declared and said to the giants, 13I too had a dream this night, O giants, and, behold, the Ruler of Heaven came down to earth 14[ . . . ] and such is the end of the dream. [Thereupon] all th e giants [and monsters! grew afraid 15and called Mahway. He came to them and the giants pleaded with him and sent him to Enoch 16[the noted scribe]. They said to him, Go [ . . . ] to you that 17[ . . . ] you have heard his voice. And he said to him, He wil1 [ . . . and] interpret the dreams [ . . . ] Col. 3 3[ . . . ] how long the giants have to live. [ . . . ]
After a cosmic journey Mahway comes to Enoch and makes his request.
[ . . . he mounted up in the air] 41ike strong winds, and flew with his hands like ea[gles . . . he left behind] 5the inhabited world and passed over Desolation, the great desert [ . . . ] 6and Enoch saw him and hailed him, and Mahway said to him [ . . . ] 7hither and thither a second time to Mahway [ . . . The giants awaig 8your words, and all the monsters of the earth. If [ . . . ] has been carried [ . . . ] 9from the days of [ . . . ] their [ . . . ] and they will be added [ . . . ] 10[ . . . ] we would know from you their meaning [ . . . ] 11[ . . . two hundred tr]ees that from heaven [came down . . . ]
Enoch sends back a tablet with its grim message of judgment, but with hope for repentance.
4Q530 Frag. 2 The scribe [Enoch . . . ] 2[ . . . ] 3a copy of the second tablet that [Epoch] se[nt . . . ] 4in the very handwriting of Enoch the noted scribe [ . . . In the name of God the great] 5and holy one, to Shemihaza and all [his companions . . . ] 61et it be known to you that not [ . . . ] 7and the things you have done, and that your wives [ . . . ] 8they and their sons and the wives of [their sons . . . ] 9by your licentiousness on the earth, and there has been upon you [ . . . and the land is crying out] 10and complaining about you and the deeds of your children [ . . . ] 11the harm that you have done to it. [ . . . ] 12until Raphael arrives, behold, destruction [is coming, a great flood, and it will destroy all living things] 13and whatever is in the deserts and the seas. And the meaning of the matter [ . . . ] 14upon you for evil. But now, loosen the bonds bi[nding you to evil . . . ] l5and pray.
A fragment apparently detailing a vision that Enoch saw.
4Q531 Frag. 7 3[ . . . great fear] seized me and I fell on my face; I heard his voice [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] he dwelt among human beings but he did not learn from them [ . . . ]
The Book of Jasher
The term “Book of Jasher” is a bit misleading. This was not a book written by someone named “Jasher”. In fact the word “Jasher” (Hebrew: Yashar) means “Upright” so that the Hebrew Sefer HaYashar is “The Upright Book”. The definite article “Ha” tips us off that this is not a person’s name but a modifier for the word “book”.
There are two references to Jasher in the Tanak:
“And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still
(Joshua 10:13)
(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)
(2 Samuel 1:18)
From these two references in the Tanak there are several things we can learn about this mysterious book.
From the usage in Joshua 10:13 we can determine:
1. That Jasher contained the account of the prolonged day mentioned in Joshua 10.
2. That Jasher was in circulation by the time the book of Joshua was written. Since Joshua was written prior to the death of Rahab, Jasher must have been written by that time as well.
3. The Book of Jasher had enough credibility that Joshua would cite it as support for his assertion of the prolonged day.
The usage in 2Sam. 1:18 tells us:
4. The Book of Jasher supported an admonition to teach the son’s of Judah “the bow”.
The identity of this lost book has been a matter of much speculation over the centuries.
The ancient translations and paraphrases offer little help to us in identifying the Book of Jasher.
The Greek LXX omits the entire phrase from Joshua 10:13 and translates the the phrase to mean “The Book of the Upright” in 2Sam. 1:18. The Latin Vulgate has in both places “Liber Justorum” “The Book of the Upright Ones”. In the Targums the phrase is Paraphrased as “The Book of the Law”.
The Aramaic Peshitta Tanak has “The Book of Praises” in Joshua 10:13 and “The Book of the Song” in 2Sam. 1:18. This may have resulted fromma misreading of YUD-SHIN-RESH (Upright) as SHIN-YUD-RESH (Song). And some have speculated that the book in question was actually a book of songs which included reference to Joshua 10:13 in the lyrics of a song. This theory also takes “the bow” in 2Sam. 1:18 to be the name of a song.
LAID UP IN THE TEMPLE
In his own recounting of the event of the prolonged day of Joshua 10 the first century Jewish Roman historian Josephus identifies the Book of Jasher mentioned by Joshua as one of “the books laid up in the Temple” (Ant. 5:1:17). Thus the Book of Jasher was known to Josephus and was known to be among the books laid up in the Temple in the first century.
The 1625 edition of Jasher has a Preface, which says in part (translated from the Hebrew):
…when the holy city Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus,
all the military heads went in to rob and plunder, and
among the officers of Titus was one whose name was Sidrus,
who went in to search, and found in Jerusalem a house
of great extent…
According to the preface this Sidrus found a false wall in this house with a hidden room. In this room he found an old man hiding with provisions and many books including the Book of Jasher The old man found favor with Sidrus who took the old man and his books with him.
The preface says “they went from city to city and from country to country until they reached Sevilia [a city in Spain].” At that time “Seville” was called “Hispalis” and was the capital of the Roman province of Hispalensis. The manuscript was donated to the Jewish college at Cordova, Spain.
According to the 1625 edition of Jasher the first printed edition of the Book of Jasher was published in Naples Italy in 1552. However no copies of the 1552 edition are known to have survived. The earliest surviving Hebrew edition known is the 1625 edition.
The Book of Jasher is a narrative beginning with the creation of man and ends with the entry of Israel into Canaan.
The Book of Jasher passage related to Joshua 10:13 reads as follows:
“And when they were smiting, the day was declining toward evening, and Joshua said in the sight of all the people, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou moon in the valley of Ajalon, until the nation shall have revenged itself upon its enemies.
And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Joshua, and the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and it stood still six and thirty moments, and the moon also stood still and hastened not to go down a whole day.”
(Jasher 88:63-64)
The Book of Jasher passage which relates to 2Sam. 1:18 involves Jacob’s last words to his son Judah:
“Only teach thy sons the bow and all weapons of war, in order that
they may fight the battles of their brother who will rule over his
enemies.”
(Jasher 56:9)
This reads very similar to the midrash which gives these last words as:
“Thou, my son, art stronger than all thy brethren,
and from thy loins will kings arise. Teach thy children
how they may protect themselves from enemies and evil-doers”
It would seem that the author of Jasher did not create this account to fit with 2Sam. 1:18 since the same account occurs in the midrash (which itself may have been drawn from Jasher).
Certainly many serious scholars have concluded that this Book of Jasher is authentic. The well known Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar (and translator of the 1840 Book of Jasher) Moses Samuel wrote of Jasher:
“…the book is, with the exception of some doubtful parts,
a venerable monument of antiquity; and that, notwithstanding
some few additions have been made to it in comparatively
modern times, it still retains sufficient to prove it a copy
of the book referred to in Joshua, ch. x, and 2 Samuel, ch. 1.”
- Moses Samuel – Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar
And my old friend and mentor, the late Dr. Cyrus Gordon (who was the world’s leading Semitist until his death) said:
“There can be little doubt that the book of Jasher was a
national epic… The time is ripe for a fresh investigation
of such genuine sources of Scripture, particularly against
the background of the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
- Dr. Cyrus Gordon
New Translation of the Book of Jasher
NEW EDITION OF JASHER
I have in recent months completed work on the new translation of the “lost” “Book of Jasher” (cited in Josh. 10:13 & 2Sam. 1:18) from the original Hebrew. This has been a major project, taking several weeks to complete. This is the first “Messianic”, “Sacred Name” version actually translated from the original Hebrew. (http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds). This edition includes a number of passages which were (for whatever reason) omitted from the 1840 Moses Samuel translation which has circulated as the only available English translation until now. (The version published by Moshe K. is merely a revision of the 1840 English edition without any consultation of the original Hebrew.)
In my work on Jasher I have found that many Hebrew sections (some of them lengthy and important) have been omitted from all current English editions (Including Moshe’s K’s RSTNE).
I have also found that the English titles of Elohim used in Moses Samuel’s edition do not accurately reflect the Sacred Names used in the actual Hebrew, and therefore the “True Name” edition produced by Moshe K. does not contain the true Sacred Names at all.
The English translation of the Book of Jasher that is in current use was made my Moses Samuel in 1839 and published in 1840 and again in 1887 and has been published several times since in reprints of those editions.
There is also a “True Name” edition which was produced by Moshe Koniuchowsky using the Moses Samuel translation as a base text.
Moses Samual’s translation was a monumental work in its time, but it does include many errors, and it cannot be used to produce an accurate Sacred Name version of Jasher.
There are several passages in which Moses Samuel failed to include passages, some of them lengthy and important, in his translation.
For example Jasher 1:36
Moses Samuel Translates:
1:36 And Irad was born to Enoch, and Irad begat Mechuyael and
Mechuyael begat Methusael.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
1:36 And Irad was born to Chanok, and Irad begat Mechuyael and
Mechuyael begat Methusael.
However upon examining the Hebrew text I found that Moses Samuel had neglected a line of text and failed to include “and M’tushael begat Lamech”.
The Hebraic-Roots Version of the Book of Jasher reads here as follows:
1:36 And Irad was born to Chanoch, and Irad begat M’chuyael and
M’chuyael begat M’tushael and M’tushael begat Lamech.
Now lets look at Jasher 3:3
Moses Samuel translates:
3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, whilst he was
serving the Lord, and praying before him in his house, that an angel
of the Lord called to him from Heaven, and he said, Here am I.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, while he was serving
YHWH, and praying before him in his house, that a malach of the Lord
called to him from ha shamayim, and he said, Hinayni.
However, once again, in examining the original Hebrew I found that Moses Samuel had failed to include a section of text.
Thus the Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads:
3:3 And it was at the end of many days and years, while he was
serving before YHWH, and praying before YHWH in [his] house, that an
angel of YHWH called to him from Heaven saying: Chanoch, Chanoch,
and he said, Here am I.
In Jasher 3:22 There is an even longer segment omitted by Moses
Samuel.
Here the Moses Samuel Translation reads:
3:22 And the day came when Enoch went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of the Lord and
he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him
and they said, May the king live! May the king live!
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
3:22 And the day came when Chanok went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of YHWH and he
taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him and
they said, May the melech live! May the melech live!
Once again an examination of the Hebrew demonstrated that Moses
Samuel left out a section of text, this time a fairly lengthy one.
The Hebraic-Roots Version of Jasher reads here as follows:
3:22 And the day came when Chanoch went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Chanoch spoke to them all the words [of YHWH]
and he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and he taught them the fear
of YHWH. And all the sons of men feared him greatly and they were
astonished by him concerning his wisdom. And all the land bowed to
his face and they said, May the king live! May the king live!
Another example is in Jasher 10:19
Moses Samuel has:
10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzraim, Phut and Canaan
according to their generation and cities.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzrayim, Phut and Kanaan
according to
their generation and cities.
However the HRV Version of Jasher will restore a LARGE missing section in this
verse as follows:
10:19 And the children of Ham the son of Noach went also and built to
themselves cities in places where they were scattered and called also
the names of the cities by their names and by their occurrences and
these are the names of all their cities according to their families
which built to them in those days after the tower and the children of
Ham were Kush, Mitzraim, Put and Kanaan according to their generation
and cities.
Moses Samuel in his 1840 translation seems to have omitted everything between the first and second appearances of “the children of Ham”. He must have taken his eyes off of the text and then found the key phrase “the children of Ham” in the wrong place.
Another example is in Jasher 19:36
Moses Samuel has:
19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the
like.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the
same.
The Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads as follows:
19:36 And also in the city of Admah there was a certain girl, a
daughter of a noble of the men of Admah and they did the same thing to
her.
OTHER MISTRANSLATIONS
In Jasher 4:12 Moses Samuel mistakenly translates the phrase “rebelled against God”. Moshe K’s version has “rebelled against Elohim” but the actual Hebrew has “rebelled against the ground” as the HRV version of
Jasher reads.
In Jasher 6:36 Moses Samuel has the phrase “the earth and the heavens”
Moshe Koniuchowsky also has “the earth and the heavens”
The Hebrew actually reads: HaEretz V’HaYamim “the land and the seas” as the HRV version of Jasher reads.
The Hebrew word ERETZ can mean either “land” or “earth” however Moses Samuel misread YAMIM (“seas”) as SHAMAYIM (“heavens”).
A TRUE SACRED NAME EDITION
There are also many passages in which Moses Samuel failed to accurately translate “Sacred Names”. Since Moshe Koniuchowsky’s version simply revises Samuel’s translation without consulting the Hebrew, the result, though called a “True Name Edition” often does not contain the True Sacred Names which actually appear in the original Hebrew text of Jasher.
For example:
Jasher 1:10
“…and she transgressed the word of God…”
- Jasher 1:10, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840
“…and she transgressed the word of Elohim…”
- Jasher 1:10, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the Hebrew actually has:
“…and she transgressed the word of YHWH…”
- Jasher 1:10, Hebraic Roots Version- James Trimm
And again just five verses later:
Jasher 1:15
“…and God turned and inclined to Able…”
- Jasher 1:15, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840
“…and Elohim turned and inclined to Avel…”
- Jasher 1:15, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the Hebrew actually has:
“…and YHWH turned and inclined to Havel…”
- Jasher 1:15, Hebraic Roots Version
And in Jasher 2:24
“…I obtained him from the Almighty God.”
- Jasher 2:24, Moses Samuel
“…I obtained him from the Almighty Elohim.”
- Jasher 2:24, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the text actually reads:
“…I obtained him from El Shaddai.”
- Jasher 2:24, Hebraic Roots Version
(These are just a few examples from the first two chapters)
MORE
In Jasher 19:2 we are told that Avraham’s servant gave sound-alike names to the wicked judges of Sodom and Amorah (Gamorrah). In the editions of Moses Samuel and Moshe K. there is no explaination as to these sound-alike names. However the HRV version of Jasher has footnotes to each of these four alternate names explaining their actual meaning as “word plays” making fun of these wicked judges.
Proof of the Ancient Origin of the Book of Jasher
A Break Through in Book of Jasher Research
Proof of the Ancient Origin of the Book of Jasher
By James Trimm
One major stumbling block in Book of Jasher research has been the lack of real evidence that the Book of Jasher (the one that we have) is truly ancient. There has been no hard evidence to prove that this Book of Jasher existed prior to 1625.
But now the proof has been found!
In the Masoretic Text and Septuagint of Gen. 5:18 has “And Jared lived one hundred and sixty two years”. But the Book of Jasher 2:37 has “And Jared lived sixty two years”. Amazingly this agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch of Gen. 5:18.
How could the Book of Jasher and the Samaritan Pentateuch share the same scribal error? How could this reading have made its way into the Book of Jasher? If the Book of Jasher were a late compilation made in the Middle Ages, it would certainly have simply copied from the Masoretic Text. Surely a Jewish writer in Europe in the Middle Ages would not have copied data from the Samaritan Pentateuch. This is clear evidence for the ancient origin of the Book of Jasher.
There is also a similar scribal error in Jasher 5:13 where Methuselah begets Lamech at eighty seven. In the Masoretic Text this number is given as one hundred and eighty seven. In the Septuagint it is given as one hundred and sixty seven, and in the Samaritan Pentateuch as sixty seven.
Here the reading agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch in omitting “one hundred” but agrees with the Masoretic Text in reading “eighty seven”. The Book of Jasher is clearly part of the ancient textual tradition here, and not simply borrowing from the Masoretic Text.
Finally we have the proof that the Book of Jasher that we have is of ancient origin!
The Chronology of Abraham in the Book of Jasher
The Chronology of Abraham in the Book of Jasher
By
W. S. Butterbauch
(An improved translation of the Book of Jasher (Sefer HaYashar),
containing many passages missing from the commonly distributed 1840 edition, is available at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
Introduction
The discrepancy existing between the chronology of the Hebrew text of our Bible (See Ge. 11:10-32) and that of the Greek Translation known as the LXX or Septuagint, made some 283 B. C., has occupied the attention of the theologians since the early centuries with little or no success in the solution. By a comparison of these differencies it is observed that apparently 100 years is added to the ages of seven of these postdiluvian patriarch’s in the Septuagint which does not appear in the Hebrew text. This difference first begins with Arphaxad and ends with Nahor, the father of Terah. Why this differences had never been satisfactorly explained, and which of these two texts can be proved to be erroneous or which can be demonstrated to be the true and original text is the purpose of this inquiry.
Before a surveyor can calculate the amount of acreage in a given tract of ground, he must first locate an initial point with which to begin his survey. Likewise, in this instance, a search for one or more initial points must be located before success can be achieved.
It will be observed that all four chronologies, the Hebrew, Samaritan, Septuagint, and that of Josephus, agree that Noah lived to be 950 years of age; and likewise all four agree that Shem lived for a period of 152 years after the death of Noah, which took place in 2006, A. M., and that Shem dies in 2158, A. M. All four chronologies agree that Abram was born in the 70 of Terah’s age. All agree that Shem went through the experiences of the Flood with his father Noah. Since all of their descendants, with the exception of Eber, LIVED AND DIES WITHIN THE LIFE PERIOD OF SHEM, we must of necessity first confine our survey underneath the roof of these two most ancient patriarchs.
Peleg was the first to die. His death occured 10 years prior to that of Noah, and Eber the last to die, dies 29 years AFTER the death of Shem. The careful reader will discern that these several births and deaths all transpired (with this one exception of Eber) within the arena of time confined to Noah and Shem. Their several life-periods are restricted within these limits, as can be seen and understood. This analogy is suddenly broken and becomes distorted in the leapfrog hops of 100 years into a future realm of hypothesis, and when projected forward according to the mathematical basis as outlined to the Septuagint, it finds the logic of former stabilized history out of joint with the data of FACT! It enters into a fog of obscurity and disjointed historical event which becomes apparent to any student of history. By comparison, we can readily see that Peleg, who was the first to die under the roof of Noah and Shem, after being projected forward to find the period of his death under the Septuagint schedule, is made to die BEYOND the Exodus, — something is wrong, either mathematically, or else in the text, and it can only be found in the text which has previously been fabricated. Peleg, Reu, and Sezug meet their period for death after the Exodus before the birth of Abraham!!! The Septuagint schedule of time finds Isaac, Jacob and Joseph alive during the period of the Judges. When encroaching on familiar B.C. history, its chronology becomes extremely ridiculous and absurd.
Most assurdely, the Septuagint chronology has been fabricated to fit into the ideas of those Egyptian priests concerning whom Herodotus, who visited Egypt about 448 B. C., stated that their reckoning of 341 kings covering a period of 11,340 years, was questionable. Thus it has been with Septuagint chronology.
W. S. BUTTERBAUCH, M. D. Canon City, Colorado.
July 18, 1951.
_______________
THE CHRONOLOGY OF ABRAHAM
The reader must first understand the familiar relationship of Terah, the father of Abram, before he can comprehend the detailed events in the life of Abraham. The important question to be determined in this family of three brothers is the order of birth of the three, and which son is the elder, and which the younger in their family history.
” And Terah lived 70 years and begat Abram, Nahor and Haran.” (Gen. 11:26) We find a parallel statement in Gen. 10:21: “Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japhet.” In each instance God has designated His preference for leadership in the future work of His revealed Mystery. There is nothing said about the age of each, or the order of birth, however, we may detect that in each instance the elder is the last to be mentioned. In Gen. 10:21 we are informed that Japhet is the elder, and in the narration of Terah’s family of three we observe that Haran is the last mentioned. In Isaac’s family of twins, Esau was the elder, yet, Jacob is always mentioned first, thus in Terah’s family, the younger, Abram, always takes precedence over the elder, having been selected by God for a special work.
With reference to Terah, there exist certain legends found in the Talmud and in the Book of Jasher, whether true or false we do not know, but suffice to say that when legend is based upon the experiences of family life in which the chain of events coincide with family relationship and history, we are justified in giving them careful consideration.
It should be understood that the Book of Jasher is not an inspired history, neither are we justified in rejecting it wholly as fictitious. It occupies a place in history much the same as Josephus, many of whose statements are both true and erroneous. There are three different copies of Jasher extant, two of which are POSITIVELY ficticious. The historical quotations herewith made use of are not found in the ficticious copies, but come from what is supposed to be an original manuscript that found entrace into Spain shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, by certain Jews who escaped under the protection of Roman soldiers, where a few of the Jews found an asylum during the early centuries. The ablest of theologians and scholars are in doubt as to its origin. Some say it has been copied from historical incidents mentioned in the Talmud which have been enlarged upon. Te most plausible theory seems to be that the Jews who escaped from Spain, harbored among themselves certain traditional relics of early Hebrew literature. Dr. Isaac Nordheimer, professor of Oriental literature; Rabbi H. V. Nathan, and Dr. George Bush, an eminent Hebrew scholar, have all testified to the PURE RABBINICAL HEBREW of the edition from which these quotations are taken.
It was by accident that the writer came accross a statement in the Book of Jasher which reads: “Haran was 32 years old when Abram was born.” Personal curiosity prompted further investigation. Could this be fact or fiction? Further evidence seemed necessary. Sometime later this additional evidence was discovered: ” Nahor, son of Terah, died, in the 40 years of Isaac at 172.” How solve these two statements in the chronology of Terah’s family? It was evident that the solution depended upon a correct date for the birth of Abram, and that from that date the 40 of Isaac could be discovered and substantiated.
HARAN AND NAHOR, TWINS
On the basis that Abram was born in 1948, and Haran was 32 at the time of said event, it is plain that by substracting 32 from that date it would reveal the year of Haran’s birth. This done, we have 1916 for the answer. Since Nahor died in the 40 of Isaac at the age of 172, and Isaac was born when Abram was 100 years of age, we find that the birth of Isaac occured in the year 2048. This date, plus the 40 of Isaac, gives us 2088 as the year of Nahor’s death. This number less 172 his age at time of death, gives us 1916 as the year of Nahor’s birth. Thus it becomes clear as crystal that these two brothers in the family of Terah were twins.
Wide extended research in Bible history and Chronology has thus far failed to find any reference to this fact, hence the writer claims the honor for this discovery, if such it be.
Chronologers differ in regard to the era for the birth of Abram, thus leading the reader into a labyrinth of confusion and perplexity. The most reasonable initial point from which to begin the reckoning is the date for the Flood (1656). The Hebrew text gives us 292 years from the Flood to Abram’s birth, or 1948 A. M. Anno Mundi, meaning from Creation. This is taken from the Hebrew text. It is found by comparison that the Septuagint text gives us 2728 A. M., or 1275 B. C. More perplexity and more study, with no satisfactory solution. Highclass theologians fail to agree. Even Bishop Usher takes exception to the date 1948 for the birth of Abram, and says that he was born in the 130 of Terah’s age, and that he was born in year 2008. He reasons as follows: Abram could not have been born in the 70 of Terah, and that it was Haran that was born on the aforesaid date. An extended study of the chronology of the Septuagint with reference to the date of Abram’s birth, and by contrasting the time of Peleg’s death, which was said to have taken place before the death of Noah in the 48 of Abram, it was found by the Septuagint to have taken place some 200 years before the birth of Abram AFTER THE EXODUS! This redicilous situation only served to heighten interest and to study more thoroughly the Septuagint. Samaritan, and Hebrew Chronologies to determin be the truth, if such coud be found. The details of this study had finally developed into the present “COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE HEBREW AND SEPTUAGINT TERXTS OF BIBLICAL CHRONOLOGY.” With this apology of explanation, we resume our first line of investigation.
If Terah was born 222 years this side of the Flood, which date is early obtained, then the 70 of Terah is established to be 1948. No way to avoid this conclusion, but the question raised by Bishop Usher involves a new angle of reasoning. His argument rests upon the fact that a father could not be of the age of 70 (See Gen. 12:4). The existing anomaly rests in the time and order of birth of Terah’s age, concerning which Bishop Usher was unaware. This is exactly what took place, and accounts for Usher’s supposed discovery for the necessity of placing Abram’s birth in the 130 of Terah. Almost all of the leading chronologers of the world have fallen into this pit of presumption, which was excavated by Usher in order to solve the riddle of Abram’s time of birth. It is apparent that the most of them were fully satisfied with Usher’s solution, as the following will illustrate:
Dr. Akers, who is author of an exhaustive work on Chronology, says: “A single correction is required. Though Terah was only 70 years old at the birth of his son, yet, as the Hebrew and the Septuagint both say (Gen. 11:32) that he died aged 205. When Abram was called, being 75 years old (Gen. 12:4) it is evident that this birth was 60 years in the life of Terah. This requires the birth of Abram, acoording to the Hebrew, to be 2008 A.M. ”
Dr. Hales, renowed Chronologist, state: ” Terah lived 70 years, and begat Abram, Nahor and Haran (Gen. 11:26). Abram was probably the youngest son, and Haran certainly the oldest…Abram was the son of Terah by a second wife. This appears from his apology to Abimelech for his equivocation in calling Sarah his sister. ‘She is the daughter (grand-daughter) of my father, but not the daughter of my mother.’ (Gen. 20:14) By the same latitude of expression, Abram called his nephew, Lot, ‘his brother’. (Gen. 24:14). That Abram was born in his father’s 130 year, is evident from the age of Terah at his death 205 years (Gen. 11:32) at which time Abram was 75 years old.” Dr. Hales continues: “The addition of 60 years to the age of Terah at Abram’s birth, was one of the most brilliant and important of Usher’s improvements in Chronology.”
Dr. Anstey, author of “The Romance of Bible Chronology,” London, 1913, says: “Usher, in his interpretation of this question, (Abram’s birth in the 130 of Terah) is regarded as one of the improvements of his system, and is proof of his acuteness and kneenness of insight into the chronological bearing of statements contained in the text of the Holy Scriptures.” These honorary statements from numerous other Chronologists could be multiplied many-fold, but let these suffice.
“And the days of Terah were 205 years, and Terah died in Haran.” (Gen. 11:32) The supposition that Terah died at this time (in the history of Abram) was also instrumental in leading Usher into a wrong conclusion. There can be no question as to Abram’s age of 75 at this time, and we also find that Terah was 145 years of age when Abram was 75 years. Proof: 145 minus 75 is 70. This was Terah’s age at Abram’s birth. It is also true that “Terah lived and died in Haran,” but is NOT true that Terah died at the time of Abram’s departure for Canaan. Abram was 135 at the time of the death of Terah. Stephen’s prophecy (Acts 7:4) was not fulfilled at the time of Abram’s departure for Canaan at the age of 75, but many years later at the time of the death of numerous of his relatives. Sarah dies in year 2085, born in 1958. Nahor, Abram’s brother, dies in year 2088. Yes, the Lord finally removed him “in the land wherin ye now dwell ” at the time of his father’s death, and also many of his kindred accociated. The fulfillment of an event is often dependent upon a slow and developing finality not fully understood in the beginning. The probabilities are that Stephen did not fully understand the words he himself uttered under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The philosophy of the Supernatural far exceeds the comprehension of fallible man.
CAINAN
The Septuagint has a Cainan with 130 years which is not in the Hebrew or the Samaritan texts. A very grave question arises at this juncture. Ought this name to be inserted? How come this anomaly? Was there ever such a person, and if so, WHY has his name been omitted from the Hebrew genealogy? It is omitted in Gen. 10:24, 11:12, and in 1.Chron. 1:18, 24. This Cainan does not occur in the Hebrew in any of these places, so that if it had been left out in one place, and not included in another, he must have been a non-existant individual, or else have been purposely omitted in all four places for the reason that no such person existed. That his name does not appear in the Samaritan Pentateuch, or in any of the other early translations of the Hebrew, and being omitted in the Septuagint in 1. Chron. 18, and 24. WHERE SHOULD APPEAR IF GENUINE, and this particular omission in these two instances, makes the Septuagint inconsistent with itself! Dr. Hales calls attention to the fact that it is not found in those copies of the Bible used by many of the early writers, such as Berosus, Polyhistor, Josephus, Philo, Theopholus of Antioch, Africanus, Origen and Jerome. (See Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible – “Cainan”.)
Gregory ingeniously proves that Cainan was an imagery person. How this name come to be copied into Luke 3:36 is really the diffeculty. It has been already observed that it does not appear in 1. Chron. of the Septuagint, and that its first and only introduction appears in Gen. 11:12 of the Septuagint. We see, therefore, that apparantly this presence in Luke 3:36 has no foundation for its quotation from any of the Hebrew sources, and must rest SOLELY upon that of the single reference of Gen. 11:12 of the Septuagint. It would seem that it was not copied into Luke by inspiration. it seems clear that it did not come from any of the Hebrew texts, but from Septuagint resources. It is said to be wanting in one of the earliest Greek manuscripts of Luke. In whatever way it got into Luke we do not know. It may perchance have been copied by a copyist wholly ignorant of all the accompanying facts, as seems most reasonable to assume. It is not to be presumed that all of the copyists were scrupuously particular in all instances. The gravity of the outcome of probable haste may have seemed of little importance to a substitute copyist. However, these assumptions do not solve the problem. Since water cannot rise to a level higher than the spring from which it issues, so neither can the authority of the New Testament for its absence, from which the New Testament professes to derive its authority.
1Maccabees and The Book of Jasher
It would appear that the author of 1Maccabees was familiar with the Book of Jasher. Notice the similarity between 1Macc. 1:33 (which describes how Antiochus Epiphanies made Jerusalem into a fortress):
33 And they built the City of David
with a high wall with stone
and with great towers,
and it became their fortress.
(1Macc. 1:33 HRV)
and Jasher 9:27a which describes Nimrod’s building of the Tower of Babel:
27 And when they were building,
they built themselves a great city
and a very high and strong tower…
(Jasher 9:27a HRV)
THE SEVEN RULES OF HILLEL
THE SEVEN RULES OF HILLEL
The Seven Rules of Hillel existed long before Rabbi Hillel (60 BCE – 20 CE?), but he was the first to write them down. The rules are so old we see them used in the Tenach (Old Testament).
Rabbis Hillel and Shamai were competitive leading figures in Judaism during the days of Yeshua’s youth. Hillel was known for teaching the Spirit of the Law and Shamai was known for teaching the letter of the Law. Yeshua’s teaching largely followed that of the School of Hillel rather than that of the School of Shamai (an exception being Yeshua agreeing with Shamai regarding divorce in Matthew 19:9).
For example, Yeshua’s famous “golden rule”: Whatever you would that men should do to you, do you even to them, for this is the Torah and the Prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
This reads very closely with Hillel’s famous statement: What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor that is the whole Torah … (b.Shabbat 31a)
Upon Hillel’s death the mantle of the School of Hillel was passed to his son Simeon. Upon Simon’s death the mantle of the school of Hillel passed to Gamliel. This Gamilel spoke in defense of the early Nazarenes (Acts 5:34-39). He was the teacher of Shaul/Paul (Acts 22:3).
In 2 Tim. 2:15, Paul speaks of “rightly dividing the word of truth.” What did Paul mean by this? Was he saying that there were right and wrong ways to interpret the scriptures? Did Paul believe there were actual rules to be followed when interpreting (understanding) the Scriptures? Was Paul speaking of the Seven Rules of Hillel?
Paul was certainly taught these rules in the School of Hillel by Hillel’s own grandson Gamliel. When we examine Paul’s writings we will see that they are filled with usages of Hillel’s Seven Rules (several examples appear below). It would appear then that the Seven Rules of Hillel are at least part of what Paul was speaking of when he spoke of “rightly dividing the Word of truth.”
The Seven Rules of Hillel are:
1. Kal Vahomer (Light and heavy)
The Kal vahomer rule says that what applies in a less important case will certainly apply in a more important case. A kal vahomer argument is often, but not always, signaled by a phrase like “how much more…”
The Rabbinical writers recognize two forms ok kal vahomer:
kal vahomer meforash - In this form the kal vahomer argument appears explicitly.
kal vahomer satum – In which the kal vahomer argument is only implied.
There are several examples of kal vahomer in the Tenach.
For example: Behold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner. (Proverbs 11:31)
And: If you have run with footmen and they have wearied you, then how can you contend with horses? (Jerermiah 12:5a)
Other Tenach examples to look at: Deuteronomy 31:27; 1 Samuel 23:3; Jerermiah 12:5b; Ezekiel 15:5; Esther 9:12
There are several examples of kal vahomer in the New Testament. Y’shua often uses this form of argument.
For example: If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the Law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? (Jn. 7:23)
And: What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. (Mt. 12:11-12)
Other examples of Y’shua’s usage of kal vahomer are: Matthew 6:26, 30 = Luke 12:24, 28; Mathhew 7:11 = Luke 11:13; Matthew 10:25 & John 15:18-20; Matthew 12:12 & John 7:23
Paul especially used kal vahomer. Examples include: Romans 5:8-9, 10, 15, 17; 11:12, 24; 1 Corinthians 9:11-12; 12:22; 2 Corinthians 3:7-9, 11; Philippians 2:12; Philemon 1:16; Hebrews 2:2-3; 9:13-14; 10:28-29; 12:9, 25.
2. G’zerah Shavah (Equivalence of expresions)
An analogy is made between two separate texts on the basis of a similar phrase, word or root – i.e., where the same words are applied to two separate cases, it follows that the same considerations apply to both.
Tenakh example: By comparing 1 Samuel 1:10 to Judges 13:5 using the phrase “no razor shall touch his head” we may conlude that Samuel, like Samson, was a nazarite.
“New Testament” example: In Hebrews 3:6-4:13 Paul compares Psalms 95:7-11 = Hebrews 3:7-11 to Genesis 2:2 = Hebrews 4:4 based on the words “works” and “day”/”today” (“today” in Hebrew is literally “the day”). Paul uses this exogesis to conclude that there will be 6,000 years of this world followed by a 1,000 year Shabbat.
3. Binyan ab mikathub echad (Building up a “family” from a single text)
A principle is found in several passages: A consideration found in one of them applies to all.
Hebrews 9:11-22 applies “blood” from Exodus 24:8=Hebrews 9:20 to Jerermiah 31:31-34
4. Binyab ab mishene kethubim (Building up a “family” from two or more texts)
A principle is established by relating two texts together: The principle can then be applied to other passages. i.e:
You shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in measures of length, of weight, or quantity. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall you have; I am the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. (Leviticus 19:35-36)
By use of the fourth rule of Hillel we can recognize that the provision of equals weights and measures applies also to how we judge others and their actions.
In Hebrews 1:5-14, Paul sites the following to build a rule that the Messiah is of a higher order than angels:
Psalms 2:7 = Hebrews 1:5
2 Samuel 7:14 = Hebrews 1:5
Deuteronomy 32:43/Psalms 97:7/(Neh. 9:6) = Hebrews 1:6
Psalms 104:4 = Hebrews 1:7
Psalms 45:6-7 = Hebrews 1:8-9
Psalms 102:25-27 = Hebrews 1:10-12
Psalms 110:1 = Hebrews 1:13
Binyan ab mikathub echad and Binyab ab mishene kethubim are especially useful in identifying biblical principles and applying them to real life situations. In this way Scripture is recontextualized so that it remains relevant for all generations.
5. Kelal uferat (The general and the particular)
A general principle may be restricted by a particularization of it in another verse – or, conversely, a particular rule may be extended into a general principle. A Tenach example: Genesis 1:27 makes the general statement that God created man. Genesis 2:7, 21 particularizes this by giving the details of the creation of Adam and Chava (Eve). Other examples would be verses detailing with how to perform sacrifices or how to keep the feasts. In the Gospels, the principle of divorce being allowed for “uncleanliness,” is particularized to mean for sexual immorality only.
6. Kayotze bo mimekom akhar (Analogy made from another passage)
Two passages may seem to conflict until compared with a third, which has points of general though not necessarily verbal similarity. Tenach examples:
Leviticus 1:1 “out of the tent of meeting” and Exodus 25:22 “from above the ark of the covenant between the chrubim” seem to disagree until we examine Num. 7:89 where we learn that Moses entered the tent of meeting to hear YHWH speaking from between the cherubim.
1 Chronicles 27:1 explained the numerical disagreement between 2 Samuel 24:9 and 1 Chronicles 21:5.
Exodus 19:20 “YHWH came down upon Mount Sinai” seems to disagree with Deuteronomy 4:36, “Out of Heaven He let you hear His voice.” Exodus 20:19 (20:22 in some editions) reconciles the two by telling us that God brought the heavens down to the mount and spoke. (m.Sifra 1:7)
An example from Romans: Paul shows that the following Tenach passages SEEM to conflict:
The just shall live by faith (Romans 1:17 = Habakkuk 2:4) with There is none righteous, no, not one … (Romans 3:10 = Psalms 14:1-3= Psalms 53:1-3; Ecclesiastes 7:20). Paul does the same here: [G-d] will render to each one according to his deeds. (Romans 2:6 = Psalms 62:12; Proverbs 24:12) with Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man whom YHWH shall not impute sin. (Romans 4:7-8 = Psalms 32:1-2)
Paul resolves the apparent conflict by citing Genensis 15:6 (in Romans 4:3, 22): Abraham believed G-d, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Thus Paul resolves the apparent conflict by showing that under certain circumstances, belief/faith/trust (same word in Hebrew) can act as a substitute for righteousness/being just (same word in Hebrew).
7. Davar hilmad me’anino (Explanation obtained from context)
The total context, not just the isolated statement must be considered for an accurate exegesis. An example would be Romans 14:1, “I know and am convinced by the Lord Yeshua that nothing is unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” Paul is not abrogating the kosher laws, but pointing out to gentile believers in the congregation at Rome (within his larger context of Romans) that: 1) things are unclean not of themselves but because God said they are unclean, and 2) they must remember the higher principle, that their “freedom to eat what is unclean” is secondary to the salvation of unsaved Jews who are observing their behavior, as they are looking for “gentiles coming into the faith of Israel” to be acting in an “appropriate manner” as a truth test of Paul’s ministry (and Yeshua’s Messiahship).
The Thirteen Rules of Ishmael
The Thirteen Rules of Ishmael
As with the use of any such rules the thirteen rules of Ishamael should be used to formulate sound arguments.
The First Rule of Ishmael (same as 1 st rule of Hillel)
The Second Rule of Ishmael (same as 2nd rule of Hillel)
The Third Rule of Ishmael (same as 3rd & 4th rules of Hillel)
The Fourth Rule of Ishmael (same as 5th rule of Hillel)
The Fifth Rule of Ishmael
perat ukhelal
(particular and general)
If the specific instances are stated first and are followed by the general category, instances other than the particular ones mentioned are included.
EXAMPLE: Deut. 13:2 (1) – 13:6 (5)
2(13:1) If there arise in the midst of you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams-and he give you a sign or a wonder,
3 (13:2) and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto you–saying: ‘Let us go after other Elohims, which you have not known, and let us serve them’;
4(13:3) you shall not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for YHWH your Elohim puts you to proof, to know
whether you do love YHWH your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul.
5 (13:4) After YHWH your Elohim shall you walk, and Him shall you fear, and His commandments shall you keep, and unto His voice shall you hearken, and Him shall you serve, and unto Him shall you cleave. 6 (13:5) And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he has spoken perversion against YHWH your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which YHWH your Elohim commanded you to walk in. So shall you put away the evil from the midst of you.
The specific commandment not to “go after other Elohims which you have not known and serve them” is followed by the general commandment “His commandments shall you keep.”
This text tells us that even if a prophet comes along who can predict the future with 100% accuracy and who can perform signs and wonders, if he tells us to go after other Elohims he must be rejected as a false prophet. But in light of the fifth rule of lshmael we learn that if such a prophet tells us to turn from any or all of the other commandments we must also reject him as a false prophet.
EXAMPLE: Ex. 22:8 (9) “…an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast” beasts other than those specified are included.
The Sixth Rule of Ishmael
kelal uferat ukhelal i attah dan ella ke-ein ha-perat
(general, particular, general)
If a general category are stated first and is followed by specific instances and then a general category then you may derive only things similar to those specified.
EXAMPLE: Dt. 14:26 Other things than those specified in Dt. 14:26 may be purchased, but only if they are food or drink like those specified.
EXAMPLE: Matt. 23:5-12
5 And so all their works they do that they may be seen by the sons of men, for they make broad the straps of their t”ftila, and enlarge the corners of their mantles,
6 and love the principal couches at the suppers.
7 and the principal seats in the synagogues, and benedictions in the market, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi’.
8 But you shall not be called ‘rabbi’ for one is your rabbi, and that is the Messiah. And all of you are brothers.
9 Also be not you called’father’ upon the earth, for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be you called ‘teachers’, for one is your teacher, and that is Messiah.
11 Whoever will be greatest among you let him be your servant.
12 For whoever exalts himself will be abased, and whoever is abased will be exalted.
Here we have first a general statement “all their works they do that they may be seen” (5a) followed by a list of specifics (verses 5b- 10) and finally another general statement “whoever exalts himself will be abased:” (12).
According to this rule we may apply this general rule to instances other than those listed in verses 5b- 10 but only if they are of a similar nature to the ones specified.
The Seventh Rule of Ishmael
kelal she-hu tzarikh liferat uferat she-hu tzarikh li-khelal
(The general requires the particular and the particular the general)
Specification is provided by taking the general and the particular together, each requiring the other.
EXAMPLE: Returning again to Matthew 23:5-12
5 And so all their works they do that they may be seen by the sons of men, for they make broad the straps of their t”ffila, and enlarge the corners of their mantles,
6 and love the principal couches at the suppers,
7 and the principal seats in the synagogues, and benedictions in the market, and to be called by men. ‘Rabbi’.
8 But you shall not be called ‘rabbi’ for one is your rabbi, and that is the Messiah. And all of you are brothers.
9 Also be not you called’father’ upon the earth, for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be you called ‘teachers’, for one is your teacher, and that is Messiah.
11 Whoever will be greatest among you let him be your servant.
12 For whoever exalts himself will be abased, and whoever is abased will be exalted.
Here we have first a general statement “all their works they do that they may be seen” (Sa) followed by a list of specifics (verses Sb-10) and finally another general statement “whoever exalts himself will be abased:” (12).
Now the seventh rule of Ishmael tells us that the phrase “you shall not be called `rabbi„’ (8) is limited in scope by the general statements “all their works they do that they might be seen” and “whoever exalts himself”. Thus the rule against being called `rabbi’ is to be understood as limited only to cases of self-exaltation.
EXAMPLE: “Sanctify unto Me all the firstborn (masc.)” (Dt. 15:19) with “whatsoever opens the womb” (Ex. 13:2) A firstborn male would have been understood as included in the term “all the firstborn” even if a female had previously been born to that mother. Thus the particular limiting expression “whatever opens the womb” is stated. But this term would not have excluded one born after a previous c-section birth, hence the general term “all the firstborn” (b.Bek. 19a)
The Eighth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza min ha-kelal lelammed lo lelammed al atzmo yatza ella lelammed al hakelal kullo yatzo
that man has no consciousness in the afterlife. However if we apply this same general rule to both specifics then “neither have they any more a reward” would have to mean that there is no future reward for the dead. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: Some commentators take 1 Cor. 7:18 as a general prohibition against circumcision. But if I Cor. 7:18 is to be understood as a general prohibition against circumcision, then 1 Con 7:27 would have to be understood as a general prohibition against marriage. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: Some commentators take Gal. 3:28 “there is neither Jew nor Greek” to mean that members of the “Church” are neither Jews nor Gentiles but a third category “the Church of Elohim”. However if one understands “there is neither Jew nor Greek” as a specific for such a generalization, then one would also have to understand “there is neither male nor female” to mean that members of “the Church” have no sexual designations. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: “A man, also, or a woman that divines that by a ghost or a familiar spirit, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones” (Lev. 20:27) Divination by a ghost or a familiar spirit is included in the general rule against witchcraft (Dt. 18:10f). Since the penalty in Lev. 20:27 is stoning it may be inferred that the same penalty applies to other instances within the same general rule. (b.San. 67b)
The Nineth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi khelal ve-yatza liton to’an echad she-hu khe-inyano yatza lehakel ve-lo lehachmir
(when particular instances of a general rule are treated specifically, in details similar to those included in the general rule, then only the relaxations of the general rule and not its restrictions are to be applied in those instances.)
EXAMPLE: The law of the boil (Lev. 13:18-2 1) and the bum (Lev. 13:24-28) are treated specifically even though these are specific instances of the general rule regarding plague spots (Lev. 13:1-17) Therefore the general restrictions regarding
the Law of the second week (Lev. 13:5) and the quick raw flesh (Lev. 13:10 are not applied to them (Sifra 1:2)
The Tenth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza liton Wan acher she-lo khe-inyano yatza lehakellehachmir.
(When particular instances of a general rule are treated specifically in details dissimilar from those included in the general rule, then both relaxations and restrictions are to be applied in those instances)
EXAMPLE: The details on laws of plagues in the hair or beard (Lev. 13:29-37) are dissimilar from those in the general rule of plague spots. Therefore both the relaxation regarding the white hair mentioned in the general rule (Lev. 13:4) and the restriction of the yellow hair mentioned in the particular instance (Lev. 13:30) are applied (Sifra 1:3)
The Eleventh Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza lidon ba-davar he-chadash i attah yakhol lehachatziro li khelalo ad she-yachazirennu ha-katav li-khelalo be-ferush. (when a particular instance of a general rule is singled out for completely fresh treatment, the details of the general rule must not be applied to this instance unless Scripture does so specifically.)
EXAMPLE: the guilt offering of the leper requires the placing of the blood on the ear, thumb, and toe (Lev. 14:14) Consequently, the laws of the general guilt offering, such as the sprinkling of the blood on the alter (Lev. 7:2) would not have applied, were it not for the Torah passage “For as the sin offering is the priest’s so is the guilt offering” (Lev.14:13), i.e. that this is like other guilt offerings (b.Yev. 7ab)
The Twefth Rule of Ishmael
davar ha-lamed me-inyano ve-davar ha-lamed mi-sofo.
(The meaning of a passage may be deduced from (a) its
context, or (b) from a later reference in the same passage)
The first part of this rule is Hillel’s seventh rule.
EXAMPLE: “thou shall not steal” in Ex. 20:13 must refer to the capitol case of kidnapping, since the other two offenses mentioned with it: “You shall not murder” and “you shall not commit adultry” are both capitol offenses (Mekh., BaChodesh, 8, 5)
EXAMPLE: “I put the plague of leporasy in a house of the land of your possesion” (Lev. 14:34), refers only to a house built with stones, timber, and mortar, since these materials are mentioned later in verse 45.
The Thirteenth Rule of Ishmael
shenei khetuvim hamakhchishim zeh et teh ad she-yavo ha-katuv ha-shelishi ve-yakhria beineihem.
(two verses contradict one another until a third verse reconciles them.)
This is VERY similar to the sixth rule of Hillel.
The Thirty Two Rules of Eliezer
The Thirty Two Rules of Eliezer
The 32 rules of Eliezer were first written by Eliezer ben Jose HaGallil (but existed before they were written). Since they post date 30 C.E. they are not automatically authoritative to us as Nazarenes. I am teching them for two reasons:
1. In certain cases certain of them may be
valid methods of reasoning and can be carefully
used in our own expositions especially on the drash
or sod level.
2. We must be able to understand and follow
the reasoning of the Rabbinic sages so that we
can properly analyze what they have written
so that we can weigh the value of their conclusions.
As with the rules of Ishmael, here I use examples often drawn from Rabbinic halacha. I do not mean to imply by this that the examples are sound arguments.
Before covering the 32 rules of Eliezer we must cover in brief the great debate on hermeneutics between Ishmael and Akiva.
Akiva taught that since Elohim is all knowing that when he speaks, every word and even every letter is divinely inspired and has some implication. There is, according to Akiva, some real reason why Elohim has chosen to say what he has to say with exactly the words and letters he divinely chose to use.
Ishmael taught that when Elohim speaks to man he speaks as a man does with another man, on a simple level so that man may understand his words.
Now Ishmael’s 13 rules had been well grounded, but Akiva’s methods opened the door to less grounded rules. Many of these less grounded rules are found in the 32 rules of Eliezer. Moreover certain of the 32 rules of Hillel operate best on a drash or sod level. As always these rules should be used only in the making of sound arguments. Even when they are used on a drash or sod level they should be well grounded.
The First Rule of Eliezer
ribbui
(inclusion)
The Hebrew particles AF, GAM and ET indicate an inclusion or amplification.
This rule comes from the school of Akiva which taught that every word in Torah has significance.
EXAMPLE:
“You shall fear YHWH your ELOHIM” (Dt. 10:20)
Since the Hebrew here opens with ET
it is ruled that this mitzvot is extended
to include reverence for scholars.
(b.Pes. 22b)
EXAMPLE:
“God created the heavens…” (Gen. 1:1)
Since the Hebrew ET appears it is said in
Midrash Rabbah that the “Heavens” include
here the sun, moon and stars.
EXAMPLE:
“You shall wear away (gam atah) and this people
that are with you.” (Ex. 18:18) “gam” and “atah”
include “Moses” and “Aaron.” (Mek. 59b).
EXAMPLE:
“and they (the adulterers) shall both of them die”
(Dt. 22:22) gam in this passage is an inclusion
so that the execusion is not postponed until after
childbirth but the embryo is included in the
execution.
(m.Arakhin 1:4 & b.Arakhin 7a)
MORE EXAMPLES:
GAM in Dt. 26:13 (m.Ma’aser Sheni 5:10)
GAM in Num. 18:28 (m.Terum. 1:1)
The Second Rule of Eliezer
mi’ut
(exclusion)
The Hebrew particles AK, RAK and MIN point to a limitation, exclusion or diminuation.
This rule also comes from the school of Akiva which taught that every word in Torah has significance.
EXAMPLE:
“And Noah only (AK) was left…”
in Gen. Rabbah is taken to mean that Noah
did not escape unharmed but was injured.
EXAMPLE:
“And you shall be only (AK) joyful” (Dt. 16:15)
b.Sukka 48b says “That includes the eve of the
last festival day. Perhaps also the first festival day?
This one is excluded by AK.”
The Third Rule of Eliezer
ribbui achar ribbui
When two “inclusion” particles (see rule 1) are joined.
EXAMPLE:
1Sam 17:36 “”… smote both (gam at) the lion
also (gam) the bear.” is said to mean that three
other beast were killed not just the lion and bear.
In Halacha however it is said that two inclusion terms indicate instead an exclusion (b.Men. 89a)
The Fourth Rule of Eliezer
mi’ut achar mi’ut
When two “exclusion” particals (see rule 2) are joined.
Halachicly two “exclusion” particals indicate an implication of inclusion as in rule 1.
The Fifth Rule of Eliezer
kol v’chomer meforash
First rule of Hillel occurs in a text.
The Sixth Rule of Eliezer
kol v’chomer satun
First rule of Hillel applied to a text.
The Seventh Rule of Eliezer
same as Hillel’s secod rule.
The Eighth Rule of Eliezer
binyan av – same as 3rd & 4th rules of Hillel
The Nineth Rule of Eliezer
derek khetzarah
(abbreviated or elliptical phraseology)
EXAMPLE:
1Chr. 17:5 where “to another” is implied.
The Tenth Rule of Eliezer
davar shehu shanui
(Repitition is used to bring out a point)
EXAMPLE:
b.Hul. 115b The commandment “You shall
not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk” is repeated
three times (Ex. 23:19; 34:26 & Dt. 14:26)
to forbid three things: eating; benifitting and
seething. Also Akiba taught (m.Hul. 8:4)
that the three reptitions refer to the idea that
foul, game and unclean animals do not come
under this prohibition.
The Eleventh Rule of Eliezer
siddur shennechelakh
A context disrupted by sof pasukh (or any other injunctive accent) is joined.
EXAMPLE:
Ex. 13:3b has:
“…there shall no unleavened bread be eaten.”
Ex. 13:4a has:
“This day…”
In the Midrash Mek. to this passage Rabbi Yose HaGallil joins the end of verse 3 to the beginning of verse 4 to form the phrase:
“There shall no unleavened bread be eaten this day.”
To argue that Israel in Egypt abastained from leavened bread for only that one day.
The Twelfth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEVA LELAMMED WENIMSA LAMED
Something is adduced for comparison, but in this process fresh light is shed upon it.
Compare this with Hillel’s 7th rule.
In b.San. 74a it is stated that when faced with death one may commit any sin to save ones life except idolatry, incest and murder. Regarding the last two of these Rabbi [Y'hudah] makes the oservation that if rape may be compared to murder (Dt. 22:25-26) and we should be killed rather than murder, then we should allow ourselves to be killed rather than commit rape.
EXAMPLE:
In the Sifra on Lev. 19:10 by connecting,
against the context, LO T’LAKKAT with the
following LAANI it is deduced that the owner
must not be partial to one poor man over others by
helping him glean.
(also see b.Git. 12a)
The Thirteenth Rule of Eliezer
KELAL SHE’ACHARAW MA’ASEH WE’ENO’ELLO PERATO SHEL RI’SHON
When a general is followed by an action, then that is the particular of the former.
This is very similar to the fifth rule of Hillel.
“These are the words which you shall speak” (Ex. 19:6) [general]
“You shall be to me a Kingdom of Priests” (Ex. 19:6) [particular]
“This is the statute of the Torah” (Num. 19:2) [general]
“that they bring you a red heifer” (ibid)[particular]
“This is the ordinance of the Passover”(Ex.12:43) [general]
“no alien…” (ibid) [particular]
The Fourteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR GADOL SHANITLAH BEKATON MIMMENNU LEHASHMI’A HA’OZEN BEDEREK SHEHI’ SHOMA’AT.
Something important is compared with something trivial, that a clearer understanding may be had.
For example in Deut. 32:2 the Torah is compared to rain.
The Fifteenth Rule of Eliezer
The 15th Rule of Eliezer is the same as the 13th Rule of Ishmael.
The Sixteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR HAMEYUCHAD BIMKOMO
“Significant use of an expresion.”
EXAMPLE:
Num. 15:18 “In your coming into the Land”
Ishmael taught that this term is unique from the
other phrases in scripture like “and when you
come” or “when the Lord will bring you.”
The divergent expression here, Ishmael
said, is to teach you that Israel was obligated
to set apart challa (Num. 15:20) immediately
after enterring the land.
The Seventeenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHE’ENO MITPARESH BIMKOMO UMITPARESH BEMAKOM ACHER
A circumstance not clearly enunciated in the principal passage is referred to in another passage.
This rule especially aplies to supplementing a Torah passage from a non-Torah passage.
EXAMPLES:
The Description of Gan Eden in Gen. 2:8
may be suplemented from Ezek. 28:13.
Num. 3 may be supplemented from
1Chron. 24:19 where the courses of the
Priests are given.
The Eighteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNE’EMAR BEMIKSHATO WEHU NOHEG BAKOL
A specific case of a type of occurences is mentioned, although the whole type is meant.
EXAMPLE:
Dt. 23:11 “that which chances by night”
because the accident had in mind is likely
to occur most frequently by night.
(Sifre on Deut. 20:5f. ) but an accident
at any time is intended to be covered.
The Torah states that a man who builds
a new house and not dedicted it is exempt
from military service. (Deut. 20:5)
The Torah only speaks of “building”
but the commandment is seen as aplying
to inheriting, buying or receiving as a gift.
This also aplies to the military exemption
of him who plants a vinyard (Deut. 20:6).
The Nineteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNEíEMAR BA-ZEH WEHUí HA-DIN LACHABERO
A statement is made with regard to one subject, but it is also true in regards to another subject.
EXAMPLES:
Hosea 6:6 What is true of mercy here
is also true of the knowledge of Elohim.
According to Midrash Mek. On Ex. 21:18
If one smites the other with a stone or with a fist
R. Nathan says: He compares the stone to the fist
and the fist to a stone. As the stone must
Be ponderous enough to kill, so also the fist;
and as the fist becomes known, so must also the
Stone become known. When therefore the stone is
mingled among other stones and when
Even one stone is too small to cause death,
the slayer goes free.
The Twentieth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNEEMAR BA-ZEH WEENO INYAN LO ABAL HUí INYAN LACHABERO
A statement does not go well with the passage in which it occurs, but is in keeping with another passage and may then be applied to that passage.
Some Jewish interpreters thus teach that Deut. 33:7 does not refer to Judah, but to Simeon.
The 21st Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHUKKASH BISHTE MIDDOT WEíATAH NOTHEN LO KOAH HAYAFEH SHEBBISHTEHEN
Something is compared with two things and so only the good properties of both are attributed to it.
In Ps. 92:13 the righteous are compared to palm-trees because they bear fruit, but since they have no shade a further comparison is made to a cedar which bears no fruit but produces shade.
The 22nd Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHECHAVERO MOKIACH ALAW
A proposition which requires to be supplemented from a parallel proposition.
EXAMPLE:
According to some interpreters AL (alef-lamed)
should be supplied in front of T’YAS’RANI
in Psalm 38:2.
The 23rd Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHU MOKIACH AL CHABERO
A proposition serves to supplement a parallel proposition.
EXAMPLE:
Sifre on Deut. 11:12 says:
A land which YHWH your God cares for.
Rabbi said: Does he care for this land only,
and not for all lands? We certainly read
Job 38:26: to cause it to rain on a land
where no man is, on the wilderness,
wherein there is no man. What then does
this word signify, ìa land which YHWH
your God cares for? Because of this His caring
He cares for other lands besides theirs.
The 24th Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHAYAH BIKELAL WEYASHA MIN HAKELAL LELAMMED ‘AL ‘ASHMO YASHA
A proposition is in force with haggadic interpretation.
For example the specific stressing of
“Jericho” in Joshua 2:1 because this
passage is aggadic the stressing of Jericho
is purely idiomatic.
The 25th Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHAYAH BIKELAL WEYASHA MIN HAKELAL LELAMMED ‘AL CHABERO
This rule is a modification of the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE:
According to b.Shab. 70a:
The prohibition Ex. 35:3 to kindle fire
on the Sabbath is implied already in Ex. 35:2
(which prohibits work.) Why is it stressed?
In order to compare therewith and to say to you,
“Just as one becomes guilty by kindling fire,
which is a main item of labor, so also one
becomes guilty by performing any other
single main item of labor.
The 26th Rule of Eliezer
MASHAL
(Parable)
EXAMPLES:
Yeshua’s parables.
The Olive Tree parable (Rom. 11).
The parable of the two women (Gal. 4:21-31)
The 27th Rule of Eliezer
NEGED
Corresponding significant number.
EXAMPLE:
The Children of Israel suffered a year for a day.
Forty years (Num.14:34) for each of the forty days
(Num. 13:25) of their apostasy.
Yeshua fasted forty days in the wilderness.
Yeshua had twelve talmidim
corresponding to the twelve patriarchs.
The 28th Rule of Eliezer
MA’AL
Paronomasia. A pun, a wordplay.
EXAMPLES:
In Amos 8:1 there is a wordplay between KETZ (Summer Fruit) and KATZ (end) The same
wordplay appears in Mt. 24:14, 32 .
The 29th Rule of Eliezer
GEMATRIA
Numerology, “theomatics.”
The Sefirot of the Tree of Life are connected by 22 paths. Each of these 22 paths corresponds to one of the 22 letters of the Hebrew alef-bet (alphabet). Each of these 22 paths represents a relationship between two of the Sefirot and a combination of two of the Sefirot. As a result each Hebrew letter is more than just a letter, it is a relationship between two Sefirot as well as a combination between two of the Sefirot.
In fact Kabbalistic tradition has it that the 22 letters were involved in the creation of the universe. This is the Kabbalistic understanding of Gen. 1:1:
Bershit bara Elohim [ALEF-TAV] hashamayim v’[ALEF-TAV] haeretz
In the beginning Elohim created ALEF-TAV the heavens and
ALEF-TAV the earth.
ALEF and TAV are the first and last letters of Hebrew and are understood in Kabbalistic understanding here to be an abreviation for the whole Hebrew ALEF-BET through which the universe was created.
This is what was meant by Yochanan’s statement in Rev. 1:8; 21:66 and 22:13. Although the Greek has ALPHA and OMEGA in these passages, the Aramaic text of these passages has ALEF and TAV.
Since the 22 letters of Hebrew each represent a relationship between two of the Sefirot as well as a combination of two Sefirot. And since the 22 letters were themselves involved in the creation, every Hebrew word is more than a word, it is a matrix of relationships and combinations among the Sefirot. Therefore on a Kabbalistic level Hebrew words are looked at as a series of such paths. This leads to several important methods of seeking out hidden messages in the text of the Scriptures.
These are among others GEMATRIA and NOTARIKON
GEMATRIA – In Hebrew each letter has a numerical value. Gematria examines Hebrew words and letters in the text in light of their numerical value. Some Christians have taken to calling this “Theomatics.”
EXAMPLES:
“Shiloh comes” in Gen.49:10 = 358 which is also the gematria (numerical value) of “Messiah” as a result the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases) paraphrase SHILOH in this passage as “Messiah” and the Talmud tells us that “Shiloh”is one of the names of the Messiah.
In Gen. 17:5, 15 YHWH changes AVRAM’S name to AVRAHAM and SARAI to SARAH.
AVRAM = “High Father” and SARAI = “dominant one”
YHWH took the YUD out of SARAI. (YUD=10) and He divided it in two making to HEYS (HEY = 5).
Thus AVRAM became AVRAHAM (Father of a multitude) and SARAI became SARAH (lady, princess)
In order for AVRAM to become AVRAHAM, SARAI had to go from being dominant to being a lady.
In Mt. 1:1, 17 Messiah is the son of David. Messiah is the son of 14 generations because David = 14. Three sets of 14 generations are given because 14*3 = 42 and 42= ELOAH (God) since Messiah is also the Son of God.
The number of the beast is 666 (Rev.13:18)
The 30th Rule of Eliezer
NOTARIKON
An acronym; anagram or acrostic. Taking the first or last letters of the words of a phrase and joining them to make a new word or, conversely, expanding a word into a phrase.
For example the word GREVOUS (NiMReTZeT) in 1Kn. 2:8 is understood in the Talmud (b.Shab. 105a) to mean:
N-OEF (adulterer)
M-O’AVI (Moabite)
R-OZEAH (murderer)
TZ-OER (enemy)
T-O’EVAH (abomination)
The first three letters of Torah are BEIT-RESH-ALEF which stand for BEN, RUACH and ABBA
(Son, Spirit and Father).
The 31st Rule of Eliezer
MUKDAM SHEHU’ MECHAR BA’INYAN
Something which precedes that is placed second.
EXAMPLE:
In 1Sam. 3:3 the words “In the Temple of YHWH”
go with the words “was not yet gone out” despite
the fact that the phrase “and Samuel was laid down
to sleep” intervenes.
The 32nd Rule of Eliezer
MUKDAM U-ME’UCHAR SHEHU’ BEPARASHIOT
Many biblical sections refer to a later time than that which precedes, also vice versa.
By this rule it is argued that Numbers 7
precedes Numbers 1 in chronology of time.
This rule explains the chronological “problems” in comparing the Synoptic Gospels.
The Pesher Method
PESHAR
Another method of the Sod level (and sometimes the drash level) we must also include a type of interpretation used at Qumran (presumably by Essenes) called “Peshar” (Strong’s 6590 & 6590) the Aramaic cognate of Hebrew “Patar” (Strong”s 6622). Although this word means “interpretation” it is generally used to refer to the interpretation of dreams and visions (as in Dan. 2:4; 4:4; 5:16; Gen. 40:8) or the solution to a puzzle. The object of the Peshar method was not to interpret a Scripture simply by examining the text itself, but by reading the text with openness to the mind of Elohim, in much the way one might interpret a dream.
The “New Testament” does in fact give support for this method of interpretation:
Now we have not received the spirit of the world but the spirit that is from Eloah, so that we might know the gifts that were given to us from Eloah, Which also we speak, not in the teaching of words of the wisdom of sons of men, but in the teaching of the spirit,
and to spiritual men we compare spiritual things. For the son of man who is in the soul does not receive spiritual things, for they are foolishness to him, and he is not able to know that which is judged spiritually. Now the spiritual man judges all things, and is not judged from man. For who knows the mind of YHWH that he might instruct him? (Is. 40:13) But we have the mind of the Messiah. (1 Cor. 2:12-16)
Now if a man from you lacks wisdom,
let him ask from Eloah,
who gives to all liberally and does not reproach, and it will be given to him. (Ya’akov 1:5)
And you also, if the anointing that you
received from him abide with you,
you will not need a man to teach you. But as the anointing is from Eloah, it teaches you concerning everything
and it is true and there is no falsehood in it. And as he has taught you, abide in him.
(1 Yochanan 2:27)
These passages do not mean that Elohim just zaps the meaning of a scripture into our heads. It does mean that the Spirit illuminates the text to us. By comparison I will have much greater success reading a text in a lighted room than in a dark room. Now this does not mean that if we are in a lighted room we need not read and study the text to understand it. In a similar way the Spirit illuminates the text and opens our minds to the text, nonetheless we must read and study the text in order to understand it.
Several examples of the Pesher method are to be found in the commentaries found at Qumran, which are therefore known as “Pesharim” (plural for Peshar). These Pesharim frequently take the form of citing a passage of Scripture followed by the words, “peshero” (i.e. “the interpretation is…”) or “pesher-ha-davar” (i.e. “the interpretation of the word is…”. Often the interpretations involved reading the recent history and beliefs of the Qumran sect (presumably Essenism) into the text.
For example the Habakkuk Commentary (1QpHab) on Habakkuk 2:4b reads:
But the just shall live by his faith (Hab. 2:4b) The Pesher is, this concerns all those who observe the Torah in the House of Judah, whom Elohim will deliver to the Beit Din because of their sufferings and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness.
A similar tendency seems to have existed among the ancient Nazarenes. For example the Nazarene writer Hegesippus (c. 180 C.E.) writes concerning the martyrdom of Ya’akov HaTzadik (James the Just):
…and they fulfilled that which is written in Isaiah [3:10]
Let us take away the just, because he is offensive to us; wherefore they shall eat the fruit of their doings°.
More examples may be found in the fragmentary remains of the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah, five portions of which are preserved by Jerome in his commentary on Isaiah.
FORMS OF MIDRASHIC EXEGESIS
FORMS OF MIDRASHIC EXEGESIS
In addition to knowing and understanding the rules and principles of hermeneutics it is also important to recognize the forms of Midrashic exegesis. Two prominent types of Homiletic Midrashic Exegesis are Petihah (Also called Proem) and Yalammedenu.
Petihah (Proem) Homiletic Midrash
Petihah (Aramaic: Petihta) is a Hebrew word meaning “opening” while “Proem” is a Greek word meaning prelude. In a Petihta Homiletic Exogesis an introductory text is given, a sermon is built on this introductory texts often using additional texts. The sermon closes with a final text which usually repeats or alludes to the initial text. This process usually involves Hillel’s second rule, G’ZARA SHEVA (equivalence of expressions) thru which catchwords or keywords link the sermon together, being found in the initial text, the final text, often in the additional texts, and in the exposition itself.
An example of Petihah Homiletic Exegesis can be found in the New Testament in Romans 9:6-26:
Keywords: seed, children/son & called. Introduction: Rom. 9:1-5 Initial Text: Gen. 21:12 = Rom. 9:6-8 Second Text: Gen. 18:10 = Rom. 9:9 Exposition: Rom. 9:10-28 Final Text: Is. 1:9 = Rom. 9:29
Another Example-:
Keywords: Righteous/Just; believe/faith
Introduction: Rom. 1:16 Initial Text: Rom. 1:17 Exposition: Rom. 1:18-2:5
Second Text: Rom. 2:6 = Ps. 69:12 & Prov. 24:12 Exposition: Rom. 2:7-3:9
Third Text: Rom. 3:10-18 = Ps. 14:1-3/53:1-3/Eccl. 7:20Exposition: Rom. 3:19-4:2
Fourth Text: Rom. 4:3 = Gen. 15:6 Exposition: Rom. 4:4-6
Fifth Text: Rom. 4:7-8 = Ps. 32:1-2 Final Exposition: Rom. 4:9-8:39
A whole series of examples of this type of Midrash may be found in Hebrews. Hebrews is an extended Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 110. In this Homiletic Midrash, Paul uses five sub-Midrashim which reveal the outline of the book as follows:
L THE MESSIAH HUMBLED AND EXALTED (1:1-3:6)
(YHWH said to my Adonai, sit at my right hand. Ps. 110:1 a)
A. Initial texts: (Heb. 1:5-13)(Ps. 2:7; 2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:46/Ps. 97:7; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; Ps. 102:25-27; Ps. 110:1)
B. Exposition (1:14-2:5 )
C. Second Text: (2:6-8a) (Ps. 8:4-6)
D. Exposition: (2:8b-3:6)
H. THE WORLD YET TO BE SUBJECT TO HIM (3:6-4:13) (until your enemies are made your footstool Ps. 110:1 b) A. Initial text: (3:7-3:11) (Ps. 95:7-11) B. Exposition (3:12-4:3)
C. Second text (4:4) (Gen. 2:2)
D. Exposition (4:5-14)
18 Rom. 3:10-18 actually cites also Ps. 5:10(9); Ps. 140:4(3); Ps. 10:7; Is. 59:7-8; Prov. 1:16
IH. A MIDRASH on MELCHIZADEK (4:14-7:28)
(A priest forever after the order of Melchizadek Ps. 110:4) A. Introductory exposition (4:14-5:5) B. Initial text: (5:6) (Ps. 110:4) C. Exposition (5:7-11)
D. Parenthetical (5:12-6:12)
E. Second text (6:13-14) (Gen. 22:17) F. Exposition (6:15-7:28)
IV. THE PRIEST AT THE RIGHT HAND OF YHWH (8:1-9:28)
(Ps. 110:1 and Ps. 110:4 brought together) A. Introductory exposition (8:1-7) B. Initial text (8:8-12) (Jer. 31:31-34) C. Exposition (8:13-9:19) D. Second text (9:20) (Ex. 24:8) E. Exposition (9:21-9:28)
V. IN DEFENSE OF THE TEMPLE CEREMONIES (10:1-11:40) A. Introductory exposition (10:1-4)
B. Initial text (10:5-7) (Ps. 40:6-8)
C. Exposition (10:8-14)
D. Second text (10:15-17) (Jer. 3 1:33-34) E. Exposition (10:18-35)
F. Third text (10:36-38) (Hab. 2:3-4)
G. Exposition (10:39-11:40)
VI. CONCLUSION (12:1-13:25) Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash
Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash
Another form of Midrashic Exogesis is called Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash. This form of midrash is very similar to the Proem Midrash, but it begins with a question or problem. A New Testament Example is:
Keywords: tradition, commandment & honor
Question/Problem: Mt. 15:1-3
Initial Texts: Ex. 20:12; 21:17 = Mt. 15:4
Exposition: Mt. 15:5-6
Final Text: Is. 29:13-14 = Mt. 15:7-9
I have given here only a few examples of each of these two forms of Midrash as found in the books of the “New Testament”. However you will find many examples of these forms throughout the “New Testament”. Identifying these forms will be an important aid to you in understanding the text. This is because identifying these forms as they occur will help you to identify the verses that are being commented upon, and help you to understand the exposition given by the NT exegete as comparing these two or more Tanak passages in light of each other.
Yeshua and Tradition
by
James Scott Trimm
Yeshua himself seems to have also accepted the “traditions of our fathers” which had been passed down orally.
In John 7:37-38 we read:
“And on the great day, which is the last of the feast, Yeshua stood and cried out and said, If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures have said, rivers of water of life will flow from his belly.”
The occasion is the last great day of Sukkot (Jn. 7:2) and the setting appears to be the water libation ceremony at the Temple as prescribed by the Oral Law. A priest had a flask of gold filled with water and another has a flask of gold filled with wine. There were two silver bowls perforated with holes like a narrow snout. One was wide for the water the other is narrow for the wine. The priests poured the wine and water into each of their bowls. The wine and water mixed together. The wine flowing slowly through the narrow snout and the water flowing quickly through the wider snout. (m.Sukkot 4:9) Yeshua said that this ritual from the Oral Law was actually prophetic and symbolic of himself!
In all four Gospels Yeshua participates in the Passover Sader. The elements of the sader, such as the “cup of redemption”; dipping in bitter herbs; and the afikomen (the last piece of unleavened bread passed around and eaten at the end) all come from the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna (m.Pes. 10). Yeshua not only accepted and kept these Oral Law rituals, but also spoke of them being prophetic of himself.
In Matthew 23:35 Yeshua says “…upon you may come all the righteous blood which has been shed upon the earth, from Hevel the righteous, to Z’kharyah Ben Berekhyah, whom you slew between the Temple and the alter.”
Yeshua here relies heavily on the Oral Law in this passage in that he ties together two separate Oral Law traditions to make his point. The first is an Oral Law tradition concerning the murder of Havel (Able) that understands the plural word “bloods” crying out from the ground in Gen. 4:10 to signify that whoever kills one person is guilty of killing everyone:
…it is said , “The bloods of your brother cry” (Gen. 4:10)
It does not say, “The blood of your brother,” but.
“The bloods of your brother”—his blood and the blood
of all those who were destined to be born from him.
Another matter—the bloods of your brother—
for his blood was splattered on trees and stones….
whoever destroys a single Israelite soul
is deemed by Scripture as if he had destroyed the whole world
and whoever saves a single Israelite soul
by Scripture as if he had saved the whole world…
(m.San. 4:5)
The second Oral Law tradition is one surrounding Zechariah ben Jehoidai (2Chron. 24:20-21). The extant text of Matt. 23:35 reads “Zechariah ben Berechiah”. This, however, seems to be a scribal error. A scribe seems to have confused “Zechariah ben Jehoidai”(2Chron. 24:20-21) with “Zechariah ben Berechiah” (Zech. 1:1). The original Hebrew text used by the ancient Nazarenes read correctly with “Zechariah ben Jehoidai”
The fourth century “Church Father” Jerome writes:
In the Gospel which the Nazarenes use,
instead of “son of Barachias”
we have found written “son of Joiada.”
(Jerome; Commentary on Matthew 23:35)
Yeshua draws on a tradition surrounding Zechariah ben Jehoidai which is recorded in the Talmud. This tradition parallels the tradition concerning Abel above. In this tradition Zechariah’s blood also cries out for vengence but ceases its cry lest all Israel be destroyed. The Babylonian Talmud records the story this way:
Nebuzaradan, [After that] he saw the blood of Zechariah
seething. ‘What is this?’ cried he. ‘It is the blood of sacrifices,
which has been spilled,’ they answered. ‘Then,’ said he,
‘bring [some animal blood] and I will compare them, to see
whether they are alike.’ So he slaughtered animals and
compared them, but they were dissimilar. ‘Disclose [the secret]
to me, or if not, I will tear your flesh with iron combs,’ he
threatened. They replied: ‘This is [the blood of] a priest and a
prophet, who foretold the destruction of Jerusalem to the
Israelites, and they killed him.’ ‘I,’ said he, ‘will appease him.’
So he brought the scholars and slew them over him,
yet it did not cease [to boil]. He brought schoolchildren
and slew them over him, still it did not rest; he brought the
young priests and slew them over him, and still it did not rest,
until he had slain ninety four thousand, and still it did not rest.
Whereupon he approached him and cried out, ‘Zechariah,
Zechariah, I have destroyed the flower of them: dost thou
desire me to massacre them all?’ Straightway it rested.
Thoughts of repentance came into his mind: if they, who killed
one person only, have been so [severely punished], what will
be my fate? So he fled, sent his testament to his house, and
became a proselyte.
(b.San 96b)
While the Jerusalem Talmud has:
Rabbi Jochanan said, Eighty thousand priests were slain
for the blood of Zachariah.
Rabbi Judas asked Rabbi Achan, Where did they kill
Zachariah? Was it in the woman’s court, or in the court of
Israel? He answered: Neither in the court of Israel, nor in the
court of women, but in the court of the priests; and they did not
treat his blood in the same manner as they were wont to treat
the blood of a ram or a young goat. For of these it is written,
He shall pour out his blood, and cover it with dust. But it is
written here, The blood is in the midst of her: she set it upon
the top of the rock; she poured it not upon the ground. (Ezek.
xxiv. 7.) But why was this? That it might cause
fury to come up to take vengeance: I have set his blood upon
the top of a rock, that it should not be covered. They
committed seven evils that day: they murdered a priest, a
prophet, and a king; they shed the blood of the innocent: they
polluted the court: that day was the Sabbath : and the day of
expiation. When therefore Nebuzaradan came there (viz.
Jerusalem), he saw his blood bubbling, and said to them,
What meaneth this? They answered, It is the blood of calves,
lambs, and rams, which we have offered upon the altar. He
commanded them, that they should bring calves, and lambs,
and rams, and said I will try whether this be their blood:
accordingly they brought and slew them, but the blood of
(Zachariah) still bubbled, but the blood of these
did not bubble. Then he said, Declare to me the truth of the
matter, or else I will comb your flesh with iron combs. Then
said they to him, He was a priest, prophet, and judge, who
prophesied to Israel all these calamities which we have
suffered from you; but we arose against him, and slew him.
Then, said he, I will appease him: then he took the rabbis
and slew them upon his (viz. Zachariah’s) blood, and he was
not yet appeased. Next he took the young boys from the
schools, and slew them upon his blood, and yet it bubbled.
Then he brought the young priests and slew them in the same
place, and yet it still bubbled. So he slew at length ninety-four
thousand persons upon his blood, and it did not as yet cease
bubbling. Then he drew near to it and said,
O Zachariah, Zachariah, thou hast occasioned the death of the
chief of thy countrymen; shall I slay them all? Then the blood
ceased, and did bubble no more.
(j.Ta’anit 69)
Notice Yeshua says “between the Temple and the alter” Here Yeshua specifies the location of Zechariah’s murder more specifically than the written Tanak does. The Tanak says only that the murder occurred “in the court of the House of YHWH”. However the oral tradition recorded in the Talmud is more specific:
Rabbi Judas asked Rabbi Achan, Where did they kill
Zachariah? Was it in the woman’s court, or in the court of
Israel? He answered: Neither in the court of Israel,
nor in the court of women, but in the court of the priests
(j.Ta’anit 69)
While the Tanak places the murder simply “in the court of the House of YHWH”, Yeshua places it more specificly in the Court of Priests located “between the Temple and the alter” just as the Talmud proclaims it. Yeshua’s source here is Oral tradition and not the written Tanak.
These two murders are connected by the tradition that their blood cried out for vengence, but this is a connection built upon TRADITION.
I could go on and on with examples, but I think I have made my point.
Nazarenes and the Oral Law
By James Trimm
There has been a great deal of discussion in the movement today over how we as Nazarenes should view Jewish tradition, Oral Law and the Talmud.
Now it is important to understand the first century world from which
Nazarene Judaism emerged. There were three major sects of Judaism at the time: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.
The first century writer Josephus writes of the Pharisees:
“…the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which arenot written in the law of Moses;…”
(Josephus; Ant. 13:11:6)
The Pharisees became what is known as Rabbinic Judaism and eventually wrote these traditions (known as “Oral Law”) down in the Mishna and later the Talmud. The Mishna and Talmud are not the Oral Law, but they do contain the Oral Law as recorded by the Pharisees.
The core of the Talmud is the Mishna. The Mishna was complied around 250 CE by Rabbi Y’hudah Ha Nasi from ealier oral and/or written traditions. It cites the opinions or Rabbis and teachers who lived in the generation immediately following Ezra and Nehemiah, up until the time of its composition. The Talmud was compiled around 500 CE and consists of the Mishna written in Hebrew and the commentary to the Mishna, known as the Gemara, surrounding it in Aramaic characters.
The Sadducees rejected these traditions, as Josephus continues:
“…for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we
are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are delivered from the tradition of our forefathers…”
(ibid)
The Sadducees HAD to reject the Oral Law. They did not believe in a resurrection or an afterlife. They had rejected the things that Judaism has always held to. It was hard enough to make their views compatible with the Written Torah, it was easier for them to simply reject the Oral Torah out of hand. In fact they HAD to reject the Oral Law if they wanted to reject any understanding of the written Torah that included a resurrection and an afterlife!
Then there were the Essenes, these are they who are believed to have
written the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Essenes did not reject the concept of Oral Law, as the Sadducees did, but they did have an ALTERNATE set of such traditions, many of which are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the Scrolls is a document called MMT (“Some of the Works of teh Torah). In this document the Essenes point out some of their differences with the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna. For example in the Mishna (Hullin 4:1-5) there is an Oral tradition forbidding the eating of the fetus of a slaughtered animal, while item 12 in MMT allows the eating of such a fetus. Many of the points addressed in MMT are addressed directly at points of Oral Torah found in the Mishna. Essenes did not reject the Oral Torah, they had their own understanding of it.
Now our Nazarene forefathers had roots in Pharisaic Judaism and in Essene Judaism but not in Sadduceean Judaism.
Yeshua’s teachings often echoed those of the famous Pharisaic teacher Hillel. When Yeshu was still a child Hillel taught “Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you” while Yeshua grew up to teach “do onto others as you would have them do to you.”
The Nazarenes also clearly had roots in Essene Judaism. There is evidence that Yochanan the immerser (“John the Baptist”) came out of the Qumran community. Several of Yeshua’s Talmidim (including Kefa) had first been talmidim of Yochanan. Both the Essenes and the Nazarenes called themselves “The Way” and “Sons of Light”.
The Esseneic and Pharisaic origins of Nazarene Judaism are easily
documented and could fill volumes. I have reduced them here to a short paragraph each.
The written Torah is not complete in itself. Instead it presupposes that the reader also has access to additional information. For example the observance of Torah involves the use of the Hebrew calendar. Nowhere does the written Torah tell us the inner workings of this calendar, it presupposes that this information was also passed down to us orally by our forefathers.
There are actually two types of “Oral Law” and they are very different from one another.
The first is Oral Torah from Sinai. Moshe was on Mt. Sinai for forty days. During this time her received much of the material that we know as the Written Torah as recorded in the five books of Moses. However if one to get the five books of Moses as a “books on tape” edition, it would not take anywhere near forty days to listen to them. It would not even take one day to listen to them. So is this ALL the information Moses received on Mount Sinai? Why does Leviticus 26:46 say that Moses received “Laws” (plural) on Mount Sinai? Could he have received Torah She-Bi-Khatav (The Written Torah) and Torah She-Al-Peh (The Oral Torah)?
As we stated earlier, there is not sufficient information in the written Torah to allow it to be observed without some additional information.
For example the written Torah says not to go out of ones “place” on the Sabbath (Ex. 16:29) but just what does this mean? If the Sabbath starts and I am in the latrine, must I stay there until it is over? If I am in my home and the Sabbath starts, must I wait until the Sabbath end to go out to the latrine? Does it mean I cannot leave my house? my yard? my city? Surely the ancient Hebrews (our forefathers) asked Moses what this commandment meant. Did Moses shrug his shoulders and say “heck if I know”, or was this part of the information he also received on Mount Sinai? If so then our forefathers had this information. Is this what the Psalmist means when he says:
1: Give ear, O my people, to my Torah: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2: I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:
3: Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us.
4: We will not hide them from their children, showing to the generation to come the praises of YHWH, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done.
(Ps. 78:1-4)
Another example can be found in Deut. 12:21 which tells us that if we live to far from the Temple and need to slaughter an animal to eat, YHWH says we may do so as long as we do it “as I [YHWH] have commanded you”. But there are no instructions for the ritual slaughter of an animal in the written Torah. This commandment of the written Torah must be alluding to an oral companion to the written Torah.
One can give many more examples. What does it mean not to “work” on the Shabbat? what constitutes “work”? How does one “celebrate” the Shabbat (Ex. 31:16)? What constitutes a “Bill of Divorcement” (Deut. 24:1f) what is it supposed to say?
When Ezra read the Torah to the people in Nehemiah 8:1-8, he and the Levites also “gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading” (8:7-8). They gave them an oral companion to the written text:
1: And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spoke unto Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Torah of Moses, which YHWH had commanded to Israel.
2: And Ezra the priest brought the Torah before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.
3: And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the Book of the Torah.
4: And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.
5: And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up:
6: And Ezra blessed YHWH, the great Elohim. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped YHWH with their faces to the ground.
7: Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the Torah: and the people stood in their place.
8: So they read in the Book in the Torah of Elohim distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
(Nehemiah 8:1-8)
When the old Worldwide Church of God began observing the biblical festivals, one of the problems they ran into was how to celebrate them. Only sketchy information is given in the written Torah on many of these festivals (we will revisit this issue again later in this article in relation to Yeshua’s observances of Sukkot and Passover).
When it comes to answering these questions, we can turn to the understandings our forefathers had of these things, which they passed down to us orally, or we can make something up. Short of a mutually accepted pipeline to Elohim, those are our only choices.
Another form of Oral Law are the decrees from the Elders. The Elders are said to have ha the “halachic authority”. Halachic authority is the authority to make halachic determinations interpreting the Torah forbidding and permitting activities based on these interpretations (for example if a matter came up which was not settled by the written Torah), and resolving matters between fellow believers. The word “halacha” means “the way to walk.” Torah observance requires halachic authority for three reasons. First there are matters about which the written Torah is ambiguous and must be clarified. Secondly is the matter of conflicting Torah commands. For example the Torah requires the priests to circumcise on the eight day after a birth, but also requires rest from work on the Sabbath. Which commandment holds priority? Finally the Torah requires us to establish courts (Deut. 16:18).
In the Torah the Halachic authority was originally held by Moses himself (Ex. 18:13) but later a council of Elders were appointed (Ex. 18:13-26; Dt. 1:9-18) These Elders showed men “the way wherein they must walk” (i.e. Halacha) (Ex. 18:20) Their judgments were regarded as the judgment of Elohim himself (Dt. 1:17) and were even called “Torah” (Dt. 17:11) At first these men had authority only in small matters (Ex. 18:22, 26; Dt. 1:17) but later their authority was expanded (Dt. 17:8). This council was later defined as seventy Elders whom Elohim placed his Spirit upon (Num. 11:16-17; 24-25).
The decrees of these elders added to the body of what was known as the “Oral Law” in much the same was as “legal precedence” does in secular law today.
One classic example of a matter settled by a Decree of the Elders was the issue of circumcision on the Sabbath. Circumcision is commanded to be done on the eighth day (Gen. 17:11) yet on every seventh day no work is allowed (Ex. 20:10). The Elders decreed that the commandment to circumcise on the eighth day held priority over the commandment to rest on the Sabbath (as recorded in the Mishna m.Shabbat 18:3-19:2 and in the Talmud b.Shabbat 128a). Yeshua alluded to and agreed with this Decree of the Elders when he said:
If a man is circumcised on the day of the Sabbath
that the Torah of Moshe be not loosed,
do you murmur against me because
I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath day?
(Jn. 7:23)
Similarly we read in the Talmud:
Rabbi Eleazar answered and said: If circumcision
which attaches to one only of the two hundred and
forty eight members of the human body, suspends
the Sabbath, how much more shall [the saving of]
the whole body suspend the Sabbath!
b.Yoma 85b
Yeshua clearly advocated and recognized the authority of these Elders when he said such things as “…whoever shall say to his brother, RAKA, shall be liable to the Sanhedrin…” (Mt. 5:22) and “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat…” (Mt. 23:1).
At the same time Yeshua also took issue with the Decrees of the Elders when they conflicted with Scripture (Mt. 15; Mt. 23)
The Torah also allowed for the Halachic authority to be held by a King (Dt. 17:8-12; 14-20). Eventually the Elders decided to establish such a monarchy (1Sam. 8:1-7). The throne of these Kings was sees as being “the throne of Elohim” (1Chron. 29:23) Their Halachic authority became termed “the key of the House of David” (Is. 22:21-22).
The Pharisees once held the Keys of the House of David. Mt. 23:13 is key to understanding Yeshua’s attitude to the Halachic authority of the Pharisees. Here Yeshua says:
But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
For you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men;
for you neither go in,
nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
A parallel passage appears in Lk. 11:52:
Woe to you scribes!
For you have taken away the key of knowledge.
you did not enter in yourselves,
and those who were entering in you hindered.
Now when we look at these two passages together it becomes clear that the “key” in Luke 11:52 had the potential to open up or shut up the Kingdom of Heaven. This “key” is clearly then “the key of the house of David” in Is. 22:22:
The key of the House of David I will lay on his shoulder;
so he shall open, and no one shall shut;
and he shall shut and no one shall open.
The Pharisees took away the key (authority) thus shutting up the
Kingdom. They lost the authority, it was taken from them and given to Yeshua’s Talmidim:
In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give “the keys of the Kingdom” to Kefa and his other talmidim:
And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
The Pharisees lost this authority because of hypocrisy. Yeshua describes their hypocrisy in Mt. 23 as follows:
On Moshe’s seat sit the scribes and P’rushim.
And all that he (Moshe) says to you observe and do.
But not according to their works,
for they say, but do not.
(Mt. 23:2-3)
Yeshua repeatedly charges the Pharisees with Hypocrisy (Mt. 6; 15:7
and Matt. 23 for examples). Yeshua often charged Pharisees with
“hypocrisy” even the Talmud itself makes the same association:
King Jannai said to his wife’, `Fear not the Pharisees and the
non-Pharisees but the hypocrites who are the Pharisees; because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Phineas’
(b.Sotah 22b)
Job 13:16 says “a hypocrite shall not come before him.”
Based on this verse the Talmud itself correctly lists Hypocrites as one of four classes who will not receive the presence of the Shekhinah:
R. Hisda also said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba: Four classes
will not receive presence of the Shechinah, — the class of scoffers,
the class of liars, the class of hypocrites, and the class of
slanderers. `The class of scoffers’ — as it is written, He withdrew
His hand from the scoffers.(Hosea 7:5) `The class of liars’ — as it is
written, He that telleth lies, shall not tarry in my sight.(Ps. 101:7)
`The class of hypocrites’ — as it is written, For a hypocrite shall
not come before him.(Job 13:16) `The class of slanderers — as it is
written, For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness:
neither shall evil dwell with thee,’(Ps. 5:5) [which means] Thou art
righteous, and hence there will not be evil in thy abode.
(b.San. 103a)
We know from Numbers 11:16-17 that the Elders must have the Spirit of Elohim upon them, but since hypocrites cannot receive the presence of the Shekhinah, they cannot serve as valid Elders.
Job says: “the congregation of the hypocrites shall be desolate” (Job. 15:34)
Thus Yeshua took the Keys from the Pharisees and gave these keys to Kefa and his Talmidim:
This key is the halachic authority. Yeshua recognized that the Pharisees held that halachic authority but he also tells us that they had squandered it by rejecting the Kingdom offer (see article “The Kingdom Offer”) and refusing to use the key to help Messiah open up the Messianic Kingdom.
The Messiah himself also had the Key of David (Rev. 3:7). In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give “the keys of the Kingdom” to Kefa and his students:
And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
This passage is best understood when compared to Mt. 18:15-20 This passage deals with the law of witnesses (Mt. 18:16 = Dt. 19:15) and refers to an “assembly” (Mt. 18:17) which has the power to “bind” and “loose” (Mt. 18:18) just as does Mt. 16:18-19. Since Mt. 18:16 quotes Dt. 19:15 it is clear that the “assembly” in Mt. 18:17 (and also Mt. 16:18) is the “priests and judges who serve in those days” in Dt. 19:17. This is also clear because this “assembly” has the power to “bind” and “loose.” These are two Semitic idioms used in Rabbinic literature as technical terms referring to Halachic authority. To “bind” means to “forbid” an activity and to “loose” means to permit an activity (as in j.Ber. 5b; 6c; j.San. 28a; b.Ab. Zar. 37a; b.Ned. 62a; b.Yeb. 106a; b.Bets. 2b; 22a; b.Ber. 35a; b.Hag. 3b). Thus in Mt. 16:18-19 & 18:18 Yeshua gave his students the Halachic authority which we see them using in Acts 15.
Today we as restored Nazarenes must also have our own unique halachic authority apart from that of Rabbinic Judaism. As “sons of light” we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers. While we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers (Rabbinic Judaism) we must “come out from among them and be separate” (2Cor. 6:14-18 & Is. 52:11) for we must ourselves establish courts (Dt. 16:18).
We cannot turn to the “wisdom” of the “Pharisaic Rabbinical” Rabbis and sages of the last two thousand years and simply “accept all the Rabbinical Halakhah, except where Mashiach and His Talmidim clearly and definitely offer another position of Halakhah” for the Tenach warns us:
How can you say, “We are wise, and the Torah of YHWH is with us”?
Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.
The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken.
Behold they have rejected the Word of YHWH;
So what wisdom do they have?
(Jer. 8:8-9)
The unbelieving sages and Rabbis of “Pharisaic Rabbinical” Judaism claim they “are wise” and that “the Torah of the LORD is with us.” But they have “rejected the Word of YHWH” (i.e. Yeshua the Messiah; see Jn. 1:1, 14; Rev. 19:13) “So what wisdom do they have?”
There are preserved for us five fragments from an ancient Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah in which the fourth century Nazarene writer makes it clear that Nazarenes of the fourth century were not “following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah.” The following is taken from the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:14:
“And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel¦”
The Nazarenes explain the two houses as the two houses of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees… [they Pharisees] scattered and defiled the precepts of the Torah by traditions and mishna. And these two houses
did not accept the Savior
The Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:20-21 has:
The Scribes and the Pharisees tell you to listen to them
answer them like this:
“It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe
consults its own idols. We must not, therefore, consult your
dead [sages] about the living one.”
So it is clear that the original Nazarenes were not “following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah.”
Let us return to the subject of the Oral Law in general. Now in Acts 23:6 Paul states “I am a Pharisee”. The Pharisees maintained a belief in the traditions handed down by their forefathers. As Josephus writes:
…the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great
many observances by succession from their fathers,
which are not written in the law of Moses; …
(Josephus; Ant. 13:10:6)s
Concerning his Pharisee background Paul says:
And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my
contemporaries in my own nation, being more
exceedingly zealous for the tradition of my fathers.
(Gal. 1:14)
Notice that in Acts 28:17 Paul insists:
I have done nothing against our people
or the customs of our fathers.
(Acts 28:17)
Paul writes to the Thessalonians concerning these “traditions”:
“Therefore, brothers stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught…
withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly and not after the traditions which he received from us.”
(2Thes. 2:15; 3:6)
Paul even made use of these oral “traditions” in his writings. Paul says “…they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them: and that rock was Messiah.” (1Cor. 10:4). The Torah records more than one occasion when Moshe (Moses) brought forth water from a rock (Ex. 16:4-35; 17:1-9; Num. 20:1-13; 16-20). According to Rabbinic tradition the rock did in fact follow them. The Talmud says that it was “a moveable well” (b.Shabbat 35a) and calls it “the Well of Miriam” (b.Ta’anit 9a). Rashi comments on b.Ta’anit 9a saying that the rock “rolled and went along with Israel, and it was the rock Moshe struck.” The tradition of the moving rock known as the “Well of Miriam” is also found in B’midbar Parshat Chukkat. Paul’s statement that the rock “followed them” testifies to the fact that he accepted this oral tradition as being factual.
The second century Nazarene writer Gish’fa (Heggissipus) made use in his writings of these oral traditions. Eusebius writes of him:
And he quotes some passages from The Gospel according to
the Hebrews and from ‘The Syriac’, and some particulars from
the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was … from the Hebrews,
and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition
of the Jews.”
(Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
Yeshua himself seems to have also accepted the “traditions of our fathers” which had been passed down orally.
In John 7:37-38 we read:
“And on the great day, which is the last of the feast, Yeshua stood and cried out and said, If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures have said, rivers of water of life will flow from his belly.”
The occasion is the last great day of Sukkot (Jn. 7:2) and the setting appears to be the water libation ceremony at the Temple as prescribed by the Oral Law. A priest had a flask of gold filled with water and another has a flask of gold filled with wine. There were two silver bowls perforated with holes like a narrow snout. One was wide for the water the other is narrow for the wine. The priests poured the wine and water into each of their bowls. The wine and water mixed together. The wine flowing slowly through the narrow snout and the water flowing quickly through the wider snout. (m.Sukkot 4:9) Yeshua said that this ritual from the Oral Law was actually prophetic and symbolic of himself!
In all four Gospels Yeshua participates in the Passover Sader. The elements of the sader, such as the “cup of redemption”; dipping in bitter herbs; and the afikomen (the last piece of unleavened bread passed around and eaten at the end) all come from the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna (m.Pes. 10). Yeshua not only accepted and kept these Oral Law rituals, but also spoke of them being prophetic of himself.
There is an interesting story in the Talmud which makes a profound point about the Oral Law:
Our Rabbis taught: A certain heathen once came before Shammai and asked him, ‘How many Torahs have you?’ ‘Two,’ he replied: ‘the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.’ ‘I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Oral Torah; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah [only]. [But] he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth; the following day he reversed [them ] to him. ‘But yesterday you did not teach them to me thus,’ he protested. ‘Must you then not rely upon me? Then rely upon me with respect to the Oral [Torah] too.’
(b.Shabbat 31a)
The point of the story is that the same forefathers that passed the written Torah down to us, also passed the Oral Torah down to us with it. What logic is there in accepting the written Torah that they delivered to us as truth, while rejecting the Oral Law passed down by the very same forefathers?
Now we as Nazarenes do not believe that the Rabbis of Pharisaic/Rabbinic Judaism held the power to bind and loose after the first century, perhaps not even before the first century. Thus we should not simply accept these rulings, on the other hand we should not simply reject them out of hand. In may cases the Talmud or the related halachic Midrashim present the line of logic which led to the decisions being made. We should look at these lines of logic to determine if the decisions were valid and sound.
For example I heard one Messianic Rabbi bashing the Talmud and claiming that the Rabbis had added thirty-nine rules to the simple commandment not to work on the Sabbath. In fact the thirty-nine categories (given in m.Shabbat 7:2) are drawn from the text of the Torah. In the Torah the instructions concerning the building of the Tabernacle are interrupted by a restatement of the commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:12-17). The connection this section of Exodus has with the surrounding material seems to be the word “work” (Ex. 31:14) and “workmanship” (Ex. 31:3) (same word in the Hebrew). Thus the commandment not to “work” on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:14) is restated as a reminder to abstain from the “workmanship” of the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 31:3. Thus the term “work” in the commandment not to work on the Sabbath may be elaborated and defined by the thirty-nine categories of “workmanship” involved in building the Tabernacle.
We as Nazarenes should not reject the material in the Talmud out of hand, we should seek to understand it. Then we should “eat the date and spit out the seeds”. The same approach should be taken to the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Nazarenes should not be modern day Sadducees.
The answers to all of these questions can be found elsewhere in the Book of Enoch itself. The Book of Enoch recounts the fall of a group of angels, who fell from heaven and took human form in order to copulate with human women (1Enoch 6; Gen. 6). Now Chapter 41 gives a prophecy Enoch received BEFORE this fall of angels (see 1En. 39:1). At that time Enoch says concerning the movements of the Sun and Moon:
5 And I saw the chambers of the sun and moon, whence they proceed and whither they come again, and their glorious return, and how one is superior to the other, and their stately orbit, and how they do not leave their orbit, and they add nothing to their orbit and they take nothing from it, and they keep faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they are bound together.
6 And first the sun goes forth and traverses his path according to the commandment of YHWH Tzva’ot, and mighty is His name for ever and ever.
7 And after that I saw the hidden and the visible path of the moon, and she accomplishes the course of her path in that place by day and by night-the one holding a position opposite to the other before YHWH Tzva’ot.
And they give thanks and praise and rest not;
For unto them is their thanksgiving rest.
8 For the sun changes oft for a blessing or a curse,
And the course of the path of the moon is light to the righteous
And darkness to the sinners in the name of YHWH,
Who made a separation between the light and the darkness,
And divided the spirits of men,
And strengthened the spirits of the righteous,
In the name of His righteousness.
9 For no angel hinders and no power is able to hinder; for He appoints a judge for them all and He judges them all before Him.
(1En. 41:5-9 Trimm Translation)
And later in the Astronomical/Calendar section we read:
“And in the days of the sinners the years shall be shortened,
and their seed shall be tardy on their lands and fields,
and all things on the earth shall alter,
and shall not appear in their time . . . .
and many chiefs of the stars
shall transgress the order (prescribed);
and these shall alter their orbits and tasks,
and not appear at the seasons prescribed to them”
(1 Enoch 80:2,6)
(This translation of the Book of Enoch, taken wherever possible from the Aramaic manuscripts found at Qumran, is available at: http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
However AFTER the fall of these fallen angels Enoch receives another revelation concerning the “stars” (The ancients counted the Sun, the Moon, and the five visible planets as “stars”):
14 The angel said: ‘This place is the end of heaven and earth: this has become a prison for the stars and the host of heaven.
15 And the stars which roll over the fire are they which have transgressed the commandment of YHWH in the beginning of their rising, because they did not come forth at their appointed times.
16 And He was wroth with them, and bound them till the time when their guilt should be consummated (even) for ten thousand years.’
(1En. 18:14-16 Trimm Translation)
Jude refers to these “stars” when he refer to “wandering stars for whom is reserved blackness of darkness forever” (Jude 1:13b). It is no coincidence that the Greeks called the “planets” “wandering stars” or that the ancients identified them with false gods.
What Enoch is telling us is that after the fall of the angels recounted in 1Enoch 6 and Genesis 6 the heavenly luminaries changed their motions, having rebelled against YHWH’s commandments. Whereas before the fall the Sun, Moon and stars “[did] not leave their orbit, and they add[ed] nothing to their orbit and they [took] nothing from it, and they [kept] faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they [were] bound together.” (41:5) yet after the fall they no longer “did come forth at their appointed times”.
The Calendar section in 1st Enoch was originally a recounting of the pre-fall calendar. I suspect that this pre-fall calendar had a 360 day solar year with exactly twelve lunar months to the day. (This is not an astronomical absurdity, as it is very common for astronomical bodies to have the same orbital momentum and/or to be tidally locked.) After the fall the luminaries departed from “their appointed times”. It may also be possible that the solar year was exactly 364 days with exactly 12 lunar months. In any case the Calendar section may have been corrupted over the centuries by well intended attempts to “correct” the faulty calendar and make it work in one way or another. Some Essenes at Qumran may have engaged in one of these efforts.
Further evidence for this theory may be found in the Ancient Egyptian Solar Calendar. This calendar had 360 days divided into twelve months of thirty days each plus five additional days (thus a 365 day year). This is obviously similar to the Enoch Calendar which adds four days evenly distributed into one month of each of the four seasons.
But why would the Ancient Egyptian Calendar reflect a revision of Enoch’s calendar? Josephus writes in his Antiquities of the Jews:
Now Adam, who was the first man, and made out of the earth, (for our discourse must now be about him,) after Abel was slain, and Cain fled away, on account of his murder was solicitous for posterity a vehement desire of children, he being two hundred and thirty years old; after which time he lived other seven hundred, and then died. He had indeed many other children but Seth in particular. As for the rest, it would be tedious to name them; I will therefore only endeavor to give an account of those that proceeded from Seth. Now this Seth, when he was brought up, and came to those years in which he could discern what was good, became a virtuous man; and as he was himself of an excellent character, so did he leave children behind him who imitated his virtues. All these proved to be of good dispositions. They also inhabited the same country without dissensions, and in a happy condition, without any misfortunes falling upon them, till they died. They also were the inventors of that peculiar sort of wisdom which is concerned with the heavenly bodies, and their order. And that their inventions might not be lost before they were sufficiently known, upon Adam’s prediction that the world was to be destroyed at one time by the force of fire, and at another time by the violence and quantity of water, they made two pillars, the one of brick, the other of stone: they inscribed their discoveries on them both, that in case the pillar of brick should be destroyed by the flood, the pillar of stone might remain, and exhibit those discoveries to mankind; and also inform them that there was another pillar of brick erected by them. Now this remains in the land of Siriad to this day.”
(Ant. 1:2:3)
“Siriad” is believed to refer to Egypt. It refers to the Land of the Sirius followers. The Egyptian Calendar used the movements of the Star Sirius to establish the beginning of the year for their solar calendar, since its movements coincided closely with the annual flooding of the Nile. The Pillar of the Sethites (which some today call the Pillar of Enoch) had astronomical information from before the flood inscribed on it!
Some identify the Great Pyramid with this Pillar, however this is itself unlikely. Josephus mentions the Pyramids elsewhere (Ant. 2:9:1) as having been built by Hebrew slaves, and here he clearly calls them “Pyramids” not “Pillars”? Also the Great Pyramid has no inscriptions, but the Pillar of the Sethites had Astronomical information “inscribed on it”. However it may well be that the Pillar of the Sethites contained information that was used to build the Great Pyramid.
This is further supported by the fact that the Ancient Egyptian god Thoth was a perversion of Enoch and the ancient Egyptian religion a perversion of YHWH worship into Pantheistic Polytheism.
Thoth/Hermes was known to the ancients as the “Scribe of the gods” or “messenger of the gods” and was associated with the planet we know today as Mercury (the Romans god “Mercury” was a slight revision of the Greek god Hermes). While Enoch was known as “Enoch the Scribe” and “The Scribe of Righteousness” (1Enoch 12:4; 15:1; Jub. 4:17, 20) and the Talmud refers to the planet we call Mercury as “The Scribe of the Sun” (b.Shabbat 156a).
The Book of Enoch says:
“After this I saw the secrets of the heavens,
and how the kingdom is divided,
and how the actions of men are weighed in the balance.”
(1Enoch 41:1)
While the following depiction from the Egyptian Book of the Dead shows the Egyptian god Anubis weighing souls in a balance, and Thoth, the scribe of the gods, making a record:
The false god Thoth/Hermes was in fact the result of pagans turning to the worship of Enoch. These false gods are pagan twisting of Enoch.
Enoch worship resulted from a misunderstanding of who Metatron is. There are two very different traditions about who Metatron is. One tradition has it that Metatron is “the lesser YHWH”; the “Word” or “Adam Kadmon”. The other tradition has it that Metatron is just a name for Enoch.
How did the two become confused? The answer lies in the Book of Enoch. The earliest extra-biblical Ma’aseh Merkavah account is found in the Book of Enoch Chapter 14. Here Enoch comes before the figure on the throne and comes near to the “Holy Word”. The set-ting is that Enoch has been attempting to intercede for the fallen angels. Enoch passes through the worlds and comes before the throne and before the Word. Enoch is then given a message of judgment to take back to the fallen angels (1 Enoch 13-15).
Now the “Word” (Memra) is Metatron and it was this Word (Metatron) who gave Enoch a message to take back to the fallen angels. In a much later Rabbinic document the Midrash of Shemichazah and Aza’el we read:
Forthwith Metatron sent a messenger to Shemichaza and said to him: “The Holy One is about to destroy His world and bring upon it a flood.
(Midrash of Shemichazah and Aza’el)
This parallels 1 Enoch 13-15 exactly, only Enoch has simply become “a messenger” for Metatron, his name (Enoch) has been dropped. (Shemichazah and Aza’el were the leaders of the Fallen angels [1 Enoch 6; 10]). From this we can see how eventually Metatron (Adam Kadmon; the Lesser YHWH; the Word) became confused with His messenger Enoch. Just as Metatron was the Memra, the incarnate “Word”, Hermes had the epithet of Logios (Word).
Hermetic Kabbalah is an amalgamation between Jewish Kabbalah and Hermeticism. This amalgamation occurred when Hermeticists noticed parallels between Hermeticism and Jewish Kabbalah, and thus merged elements of the two systems together.
Why did Hermeticism resemble Jewish Kabbalah? Hermeticism a set of philosophical and religious beliefs based primarily upon writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, the representation of the congruence of the Egyptian god Thoth and the Greek god Hermes. In fact the Greek god Hermes was a re-imaging of the Egyptian god Thoth. The Thoth worshippers of Ancient Egypt had built their false religion around information inscribed on the Sethite Pillar.
This may also shed light on the religion of Amenhotep IV when he came to power. He had the old Egyptian religion abolished and replaced with the worship of a single universal god called Aton. Aton had been recognized by the Egyptian Polytheistic religion as an aspect of Ra. Aton was the disc of the Sun and it bears mentioning that Malachi 4:2 refers to Messiah as “the Sun of righteousness.” (And remember, the Talmud calls the planet “Mercury” with the title “the Scribe of the Sun” (b.Shabbat 156a). After Amenhotep IV’s death, the Polytheistic religion returned. But did Amenhotep IV invent this monotheistic religion, or did he embrace a competing Ancient Egyptian minority religion? Was this monotheism a monotheistic strain of this same perversion of YHWHism drawn from the Sethite Pillar?
Clearly the Ancient Egyptian calendar was based on a perversion of the pre-flood, pre-fall calendar which the Ancient Egyptian priests learned form the Sethite Pillar. They simply had to add five days to the end of the year to make an almost accurate calendar. Likewise certain Jews, attempting to “correct” the Enoch calendar, and make it work, added four days, one to each of the four seasons, to make a Solar calendar that was also almost accurate.
The traditional Hebrew calendar continues to use the Lunar Months as required by the Torah:
10 Also in the day of your gladness, and in your appointed seasons, and in your new
moons, you shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace-offerings. And they shall be to you for a memorial before your Elohim: I am YHWH your Elohim.
(Num. 10:10)
And in your new moons, you shall present a burnt-offering unto YHWH: two young
bullocks, and one ram, seven he lambs of the first year without blemish.
(Num. 28:11)
The word for “Month” in Hebrew is CHODESH and the word for “New Moon” is ROSH CHODESH (literally, the head/beginning of the moon/month)
And lest anyone should argue that ROSH CHODESH refers to a new month, but not necissarily to a New Moon:
6 And even the shining moon wanes according to its time.
Though it is for ruling the seasons and an everlasting sign.
7 By it are the seasons and the times of the statute:
And shining, it vanishes in its circuit.
8 The new moon (Rosh Chodesh), according to its name renews itself;
How wonderful is it when it changes!
The beacon of the host wanes on high,
Leaving the firmament aglow from its shining.
(Sira 43:6-8)
The traditional Hebrew calendar simply adds a leap month as needed to keep the Lunar year from falling more than a month behind the Solar year. But before the fall of the angels in Gen. 6/1Enoch 6, it was not necessary to add a leap month, because the Lunar Year and Solar Year were both exactly 360 days with twelve months of thirty days each,
(I) R. Joseph was (once) asked what was the story of Semhazai and Aza’eI, and he replied: When the generation of Enosh arose and practiced idolatry and when the generation of the Flood arose and corrupted their actions, the Holy One-Blessed be He-was grieved that He had created man, as it is said, “And God repented that he created man, and He was grieved at heart.(2) Forthwith arose two angels, whose names were Semhazai and Aza’el, and said before Him: “0 Lord of the universe, did we not say unto Thee when Thou didst create Thy world, ‘Do not create man’?”, as it is said, “What is man that Thou shouldst remember himn?”. The Holy One-Blessed be He-said to them: “Then what shall become of the world?” They said before Him. ”We wilt suffice’ (Thee) instead of it.’(3) He said. ”It is revealed and (well known to me that if peradventure you had lived in that (earthly) world, the evil inclination would have ruled you just as much as it rules over the sons of man, but you would be more stubborn than they.” They said before Him. “Give us Thy sanction and let us descend (and dwell) among the creatures and then Thou shalt see how we shall sanctify Thy name” He said to them. “Descend and dwell ye among them.”(4) Forethwith the Holy One allowed the evil inclination to rule over them, as soon as they descended. When they beheld the daughters of man that they were beautiful they began to corrupt themselves with them, as it is said, “Then the sons of God saw the daughters of man”, they could not restrain their inclination.
(5) Forthwith Semhazai beheld a girl whose name was ‘Esterah; fixing his eyes at her he said: “Listen to my (request).” But she said to him: “I will not listen to thee until thou teachest me the Name by which thou art enabled to ascend to the firmament, as soon as Thou dost mention it.” He taught her the Ineffable Name.
(6) What did she do? She mentioned It and therebv ascended to the firmament. The Holy One said; “Since she has departed from sin, go and set her among the stars.” It is she who shines brightly in the midst of the seven stars of the Pleiades; so that she may always be remembered, forthwith the Holy One fixed her among the Pleiades.
(7) When Semazai and Aza’eI saw this they took to them wives, and begat children. Semhazai begat two children, whose names were Heyya and ‘Aheyya. And Aza’el was appointed chief over all kinds of dyes and over all kinds of women’s ornaments by which they entice men to unclean thoughts of sin.
(8) Forthwith Metatron sent a messenger to Semhazai and said to him: “The Holy One is about to destroy His world, and bring upon it a flood.” Semhazai stood up and raised his voice and wept aloud, for he was sorely troubled about his sons and (his own) iniquity. And he said: “How shall my children live and what shall become of my children. for each one of them eats daily a thousand camels, a thousand horses, a thousand oxen, and all kinds (of animals)?”
(9) One night the sons of Semhazai, Heyya and ‘Aheyya, saw (visions) in dream, and both of them saw dreams. One saw a great stone spread over the earth like a table, the whole of which was written over with lines (of writing). And an angel (was seen by him) descending from the firmament with a knife in his hand and be was erasing and obliterating all the lines, save one line with four words upon it,
(10) The other (son) saw a garden, planted whole with (many) kinds of trees and (many) kinds of precious stones. And an angel (was seen by him) descending from the firmament with an axe in his hand, and he was cutting down all the trees, so that there remained only one tree containing three branches.
(11) Wben they awoke from their sleep they arose in confusion, and, going to their father, they related to him the dreams. He said to them: “‘The Holy One is about to bring a flood upon the world, and to destroy it so that there will remain but one man and his three sons,” They (thereupon) cried in anguish and wept, saying, “What shall become of us and how shall our names be perpetuated?” He said to them: “Do not trouble yourselves, for your names. Heyya and ‘Aheyya, will never cease from the mouths of creatures, because every time that men will be raising (heavy) stones or boats, or anything similar, they will shout and call your names.” With this their tempers cooled down.
(12) What did Semhazai do? He repented and suspended himself between heaven and earth head downwards and feet upwards, because he was not allowed to open his mouth hefore the Holy One-Blessed be He-, and he still hangs between heaven and earth.
(13) Aza’el (however) did not repent. And he is appointed chief over all kinds of dyes which entice man to commit sin and he still continues to corrupt them.
(14) Therefore, when the Israelites used to bring sacrifices on the day of atonement, they cast one lot for the Lord that it might atone for the iniquities of the Israelites, and one lot for Aza’el that he might bear the burden of Israel’s iniquity. This is the Aza’el that is mentioned in the Scripture.
The Book of Giants 4Q203, 1Q23, 2Q26, 4Q530-532, 6Q8
It is fair to say that the patriarch Enoch was as well known to the ancients as he is obscure to modern Bible reaclers. Besides giving his age (365 years), the book of Genesis says of him only that he “walked with God,” and afterward “he was not, because God had taken him” (Gen. 5:24). This exalted way of life and mysterious demise made Enoch into a figure of considerable fascination, and a cycle of legends grew up around him.
Many of the legends about Enoch were collected already in ancient times in several long anthologies. The most important such anthology, and the oldest, is known simply as The Book of Enoch, comprising over one hundred chapters. It still survives in its entirety (although only in the Ethiopic language) and forms an important source for the thought of Judaism in the last few centuries B.C.E. Significantly, the remnants of several almost complete copies of The Book of Enoch in Aramaic were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it is clear that whoever collected the scrolls considered it a vitally important text. All but one of the five major components of the Ethiopic anthology have turned up among the scrolls. But even more intriguing is the fact that additional, previously unknown or little-known texts about Enoch were discovered at Qumran. The most important of these is The Book of Giants.
Enoch lived before the Flood, during a time when the world, in ancient imagination, was very different. Human beings lived much longer, for one thing; Enoch’s son Methuselah, for instance, attained the age of 969 years. Another difference was that angels and humans interacted freely — so freely, in fact, that some of the angels begot children with human females. This fact is neutrally reported in Genesis (6:1-4), but other stories view this episode as the source of the corruption that made the punishing flood necessary. According to The Book of Enoch, the mingling of angel and human was actually the idea of Shernihaza, the leader of the evil angels, who lured 200 others to cohabit with women. The offspring of these unnatural unions were giants 450 feet high. The wicked angels and the giants began to oppress the human population and to teach them to do evil. For this reason God determined to imprison the angels until the final judgment and to destroy the earth with a flood. Enoch’s efforts to intercede with heaven for the fallen angels were unsuccessful (1 Enoch 6-16).
The Book of Giants retells part of this story and elaborates on the exploits of the giants, especially the two children of Shemihaza, Ohya and Hahya. Since no complete manuscript exists of Giants, its exact contents and their order remain a matter of guesswork. Most of the content of the present fragments concerns the giants’ ominous dreams and Enoch’s efforts to interpret them and to intercede with God on the giants’ behalf. Unfortunately, little remains of the independent adventures of the giants, but it is likely that these tales were at least partially derived from ancient Near Eastern mythology. Thus the name of one of the giants is Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero and subject of a great epic written in the third millennium B.C.E.
A summary statement of the descent of the wicked angels, bringing both knowledge and havoc. Compare Genesis 6:1-2, 4.
1Q23 Frag. 9 + 14 + 15 2[ . . . ] they knew the secrets of [ . . . ] 3[ . . . si]n was great in the earth [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] and they killed manY [ . . ] 5[ . . . they begat] giants [ . . . ]
The angels exploit the fruifulness of the earth.
4Q531 Frag. 3 2[ . . . everything that the] earth produced [ . . . ] [ . . . ] the great fish [ . . . ] 14[ . . . ] the sky with all that grew [ . . . ] 15[ . . . fruit of] the earth and all kinds of grain and al1 the trees [ . . . ] 16[ . . . ] beasts and reptiles . . . [al]l creeping things of the earth and they observed all [ . . . ] |8[ . . . eve]ry harsh deed and [ . . . ] utterance [ . . . ] l9[ . . . ] male and female, and among humans [ . . . ]
The two hundred angels choose animals on which to perform unnatural acts, including, presumably, humans.
1Q23 Frag. 1 + 6 [ . . . two hundred] 2donkeys, two hundred asses, two hundred . . . rams of the] 3flock, two hundred goats, two hundred [ . . . beast of the] 4field from every animal, from every [bird . . . ] 5[ . . . ] for miscegenation [ . . . ]
The outcome of the demonic corruption was violence, perversion, and a brood of monstrous beings. Compare Genesis 6:4.
4Q531 Frag. 2 [ . . . ] they defiled [ . . . ] 2[ . . . they begot] giants and monsters [ . . . ] 3[ . . . ] they begot, and, behold, all [the earth was corrupted . . . ] 4[ . . . ] with its blood and by the hand of [ . . . ] 5[giant's] which did not suffice for them and [ . . . ] 6[ . . . ] and they were seeking to devour many [ . . . ] 7[ . . . ] 8[ . . . ] the monsters attacked it.
4Q532 Col. 2 Frags. 1 – 6 2[ . . . ] flesh [ . . . ] 3al[l . . . ] monsters [ . . . ] will be [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] they would arise [ . . . ] lacking in true knowledge [ . . . ] because [ . . . ] 5[ . . . ] the earth [grew corrupt . . . ] mighty [ . . . ] 6[ . . . ] they were considering [ . . . ] 7[ . . . ] from the angels upon [ . . . ] 8[ . . . ] in the end it will perish and die [ . . . ] 9[ . . . ] they caused great corruption in the [earth . . . ] [ . . . this did not] suffice to [ . . . ] “they will be [ . . . ]
The giants begin to be troubled by a series of dreams and visions. Mahway, the titan son of the angel Barakel, reports the first of these dreams to his fellow giants. He sees a tablet being immersed in water. When it emerges, all but three names have been washed away. The dream evidently symbolizes the destruction of all but Noah and his sons by the Flood.
2Q26 [ . . . ] they drenched the tablet in the wa[ter . . . ] 2[ . . . ] the waters went up over the [tablet . . . ] 3[ . . . ] they lifted out the tablet from the water of [ . . . ]
The giant goes to the others and they discuss the dream.
4Q530 Frag.7 [ . . . this vision] is for cursing and sorrow. I am the one who confessed 2[ . . . ] the whole group of the castaways that I shall go to [ . . . ] 3[ . . . the spirits of the sl]ain complaining about their killers and crying out 4[ . . . ] that we shall die together and be made an end of [ . . . ] much and I will be sleeping, and bread 6[ . . . ] for my dwelling; the vision and also [ . . . ] entered into the gathering of the giants 8[ . . . ]
6Q8 [ . . . ] Ohya and he said to Mahway [ . . . ] 2[ . . . ] without trembling. Who showed you all this vision, [my] brother? 3[ . . . ] Barakel, my father, was with me. 4[ . . . ] Before Mahway had finished telling what [he had seen . . . ] 5[ . . . said] to him, Now I have heard wonders! If a barren woman gives birth [ . . . ]
4Q530 Frag. 4 3[There]upon Ohya said to Ha[hya . . . ] 4[ . . . to be destroyed] from upon the earth and [ . . . ] 5[ . . . the ea]rth. When 6[ . . . ] they wept before [the giants . . . ]
4Q530 Frag. 7 3[ . . . ] your strength [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] 5Thereupon Ohya [said] to Hahya [ . . . ] Then he answered, It is not for 6us, but for Azaiel, for he did [ . . . the children of] angels 7are the giants, and they would not let all their poved ones] be neglected [. . . we have] not been cast down; you have strength [ . . . ]
The giants realize the futility of fighting against the forces of heaven. The first speaker may be Gilgamesh.
4Q531 Frag. 1 3[ . . . I am a] giant, and by the mighty strength of my arm and my own great strength 4[ . . . any]one mortal, and I have made war against them; but I am not [ . . . ] able to stand against them, for my opponents 6[ . . . ] reside in [Heav]en, and they dwell in the holy places. And not 7[ . . . they] are stronger than I. 8[ . . . ] of the wild beast has come, and the wild man they call [me].
9[ . . . ] Then Ohya said to him, I have been forced to have a dream [ . . . ] the sleep of my eyes [vanished], to let me see a vision. Now I know that on [ . . . ] 11-12[ . . . ] Gilgamesh [ . . . ]
Ohya’s dream vision is of a tree that is uprooted except for three of its roots; the vision’s import is the same as that of the first dream.
6Q8 Frag. 2 1three of its roots [ . . . ] [while] I was [watching,] there came [ . . . they moved the roots into] 3this garden, all of them, and not [ . . . ]
Ohya tries to avoid the implications of the visions. Above he stated that it referred only to the demon Azazel; here he suggests that the destruction isfor the earthly rulers alone.
4Q530 Col. 2 1concerns the death of our souls [ . . . ] and all his comrades, [and Oh]ya told them what Gilgamesh said to him 2[ . . . ] and it was said [ . . . ] “concerning [ . . . ] the leader has cursed the potentates” 3and the giants were glad at his words. Then he turned and left [ . . . ]
More dreams afflict the giants. The details of this vision are obscure, but it bodes ill for the giants. The dreamers speak first to the monsters, then to the giants.
Thereupon two of them had dreams 4and the sleep of their eye, fled from them, and they arose and came to [ . . . and told] their dreams, and said in the assembly of [their comrades] the monsters 6[ . . . In] my dream I was watching this very night 7[and there was a garden . . . ] gardeners and they were watering 8[ . . . two hundred trees and] large shoots came out of their root 9[ . . . ] all the water, and the fire burned all 10[the garden . . . ] They found the giants to tell them 11[the dream . . . ]
Someone suggests that Enoch be found to interpret the vision.
[ . . . to Enoch] the noted scribe, and he will interpret for us 12the dream. Thereupon his fellow Ohya declared and said to the giants, 13I too had a dream this night, O giants, and, behold, the Ruler of Heaven came down to earth 14[ . . . ] and such is the end of the dream. [Thereupon] all th e giants [and monsters! grew afraid 15and called Mahway. He came to them and the giants pleaded with him and sent him to Enoch 16[the noted scribe]. They said to him, Go [ . . . ] to you that 17[ . . . ] you have heard his voice. And he said to him, He wil1 [ . . . and] interpret the dreams [ . . . ] Col. 3 3[ . . . ] how long the giants have to live. [ . . . ]
After a cosmic journey Mahway comes to Enoch and makes his request.
[ . . . he mounted up in the air] 41ike strong winds, and flew with his hands like ea[gles . . . he left behind] 5the inhabited world and passed over Desolation, the great desert [ . . . ] 6and Enoch saw him and hailed him, and Mahway said to him [ . . . ] 7hither and thither a second time to Mahway [ . . . The giants awaig 8your words, and all the monsters of the earth. If [ . . . ] has been carried [ . . . ] 9from the days of [ . . . ] their [ . . . ] and they will be added [ . . . ] 10[ . . . ] we would know from you their meaning [ . . . ] 11[ . . . two hundred tr]ees that from heaven [came down . . . ]
Enoch sends back a tablet with its grim message of judgment, but with hope for repentance.
4Q530 Frag. 2 The scribe [Enoch . . . ] 2[ . . . ] 3a copy of the second tablet that [Epoch] se[nt . . . ] 4in the very handwriting of Enoch the noted scribe [ . . . In the name of God the great] 5and holy one, to Shemihaza and all [his companions . . . ] 61et it be known to you that not [ . . . ] 7and the things you have done, and that your wives [ . . . ] 8they and their sons and the wives of [their sons . . . ] 9by your licentiousness on the earth, and there has been upon you [ . . . and the land is crying out] 10and complaining about you and the deeds of your children [ . . . ] 11the harm that you have done to it. [ . . . ] 12until Raphael arrives, behold, destruction [is coming, a great flood, and it will destroy all living things] 13and whatever is in the deserts and the seas. And the meaning of the matter [ . . . ] 14upon you for evil. But now, loosen the bonds bi[nding you to evil . . . ] l5and pray.
A fragment apparently detailing a vision that Enoch saw.
4Q531 Frag. 7 3[ . . . great fear] seized me and I fell on my face; I heard his voice [ . . . ] 4[ . . . ] he dwelt among human beings but he did not learn from them [ . . . ]
The Book of Jasher
The term “Book of Jasher” is a bit misleading. This was not a book written by someone named “Jasher”. In fact the word “Jasher” (Hebrew: Yashar) means “Upright” so that the Hebrew Sefer HaYashar is “The Upright Book”. The definite article “Ha” tips us off that this is not a person’s name but a modifier for the word “book”.
There are two references to Jasher in the Tanak:
“And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still
(Joshua 10:13)
(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)
(2 Samuel 1:18)
From these two references in the Tanak there are several things we can learn about this mysterious book.
From the usage in Joshua 10:13 we can determine:
1. That Jasher contained the account of the prolonged day mentioned in Joshua 10.
2. That Jasher was in circulation by the time the book of Joshua was written. Since Joshua was written prior to the death of Rahab, Jasher must have been written by that time as well.
3. The Book of Jasher had enough credibility that Joshua would cite it as support for his assertion of the prolonged day.
The usage in 2Sam. 1:18 tells us:
4. The Book of Jasher supported an admonition to teach the son’s of Judah “the bow”.
The identity of this lost book has been a matter of much speculation over the centuries.
The ancient translations and paraphrases offer little help to us in identifying the Book of Jasher.
The Greek LXX omits the entire phrase from Joshua 10:13 and translates the the phrase to mean “The Book of the Upright” in 2Sam. 1:18. The Latin Vulgate has in both places “Liber Justorum” “The Book of the Upright Ones”. In the Targums the phrase is Paraphrased as “The Book of the Law”.
The Aramaic Peshitta Tanak has “The Book of Praises” in Joshua 10:13 and “The Book of the Song” in 2Sam. 1:18. This may have resulted fromma misreading of YUD-SHIN-RESH (Upright) as SHIN-YUD-RESH (Song). And some have speculated that the book in question was actually a book of songs which included reference to Joshua 10:13 in the lyrics of a song. This theory also takes “the bow” in 2Sam. 1:18 to be the name of a song.
LAID UP IN THE TEMPLE
In his own recounting of the event of the prolonged day of Joshua 10 the first century Jewish Roman historian Josephus identifies the Book of Jasher mentioned by Joshua as one of “the books laid up in the Temple” (Ant. 5:1:17). Thus the Book of Jasher was known to Josephus and was known to be among the books laid up in the Temple in the first century.
The 1625 edition of Jasher has a Preface, which says in part (translated from the Hebrew):
…when the holy city Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus,
all the military heads went in to rob and plunder, and
among the officers of Titus was one whose name was Sidrus,
who went in to search, and found in Jerusalem a house
of great extent…
According to the preface this Sidrus found a false wall in this house with a hidden room. In this room he found an old man hiding with provisions and many books including the Book of Jasher The old man found favor with Sidrus who took the old man and his books with him.
The preface says “they went from city to city and from country to country until they reached Sevilia [a city in Spain].” At that time “Seville” was called “Hispalis” and was the capital of the Roman province of Hispalensis. The manuscript was donated to the Jewish college at Cordova, Spain.
According to the 1625 edition of Jasher the first printed edition of the Book of Jasher was published in Naples Italy in 1552. However no copies of the 1552 edition are known to have survived. The earliest surviving Hebrew edition known is the 1625 edition.
The Book of Jasher is a narrative beginning with the creation of man and ends with the entry of Israel into Canaan.
The Book of Jasher passage related to Joshua 10:13 reads as follows:
“And when they were smiting, the day was declining toward evening, and Joshua said in the sight of all the people, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou moon in the valley of Ajalon, until the nation shall have revenged itself upon its enemies.
And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Joshua, and the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and it stood still six and thirty moments, and the moon also stood still and hastened not to go down a whole day.”
(Jasher 88:63-64)
The Book of Jasher passage which relates to 2Sam. 1:18 involves Jacob’s last words to his son Judah:
“Only teach thy sons the bow and all weapons of war, in order that
they may fight the battles of their brother who will rule over his
enemies.”
(Jasher 56:9)
This reads very similar to the midrash which gives these last words as:
“Thou, my son, art stronger than all thy brethren,
and from thy loins will kings arise. Teach thy children
how they may protect themselves from enemies and evil-doers”
It would seem that the author of Jasher did not create this account to fit with 2Sam. 1:18 since the same account occurs in the midrash (which itself may have been drawn from Jasher).
Certainly many serious scholars have concluded that this Book of Jasher is authentic. The well known Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar (and translator of the 1840 Book of Jasher) Moses Samuel wrote of Jasher:
“…the book is, with the exception of some doubtful parts,
a venerable monument of antiquity; and that, notwithstanding
some few additions have been made to it in comparatively
modern times, it still retains sufficient to prove it a copy
of the book referred to in Joshua, ch. x, and 2 Samuel, ch. 1.”
- Moses Samuel – Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar
And my old friend and mentor, the late Dr. Cyrus Gordon (who was the world’s leading Semitist until his death) said:
“There can be little doubt that the book of Jasher was a
national epic… The time is ripe for a fresh investigation
of such genuine sources of Scripture, particularly against
the background of the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
- Dr. Cyrus Gordon
New Translation of the Book of Jasher
NEW EDITION OF JASHER
I have in recent months completed work on the new translation of the “lost” “Book of Jasher” (cited in Josh. 10:13 & 2Sam. 1:18) from the original Hebrew. This has been a major project, taking several weeks to complete. This is the first “Messianic”, “Sacred Name” version actually translated from the original Hebrew. (http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds). This edition includes a number of passages which were (for whatever reason) omitted from the 1840 Moses Samuel translation which has circulated as the only available English translation until now. (The version published by Moshe K. is merely a revision of the 1840 English edition without any consultation of the original Hebrew.)
In my work on Jasher I have found that many Hebrew sections (some of them lengthy and important) have been omitted from all current English editions (Including Moshe’s K’s RSTNE).
I have also found that the English titles of Elohim used in Moses Samuel’s edition do not accurately reflect the Sacred Names used in the actual Hebrew, and therefore the “True Name” edition produced by Moshe K. does not contain the true Sacred Names at all.
The English translation of the Book of Jasher that is in current use was made my Moses Samuel in 1839 and published in 1840 and again in 1887 and has been published several times since in reprints of those editions.
There is also a “True Name” edition which was produced by Moshe Koniuchowsky using the Moses Samuel translation as a base text.
Moses Samual’s translation was a monumental work in its time, but it does include many errors, and it cannot be used to produce an accurate Sacred Name version of Jasher.
There are several passages in which Moses Samuel failed to include passages, some of them lengthy and important, in his translation.
For example Jasher 1:36
Moses Samuel Translates:
1:36 And Irad was born to Enoch, and Irad begat Mechuyael and
Mechuyael begat Methusael.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
1:36 And Irad was born to Chanok, and Irad begat Mechuyael and
Mechuyael begat Methusael.
However upon examining the Hebrew text I found that Moses Samuel had neglected a line of text and failed to include “and M’tushael begat Lamech”.
The Hebraic-Roots Version of the Book of Jasher reads here as follows:
1:36 And Irad was born to Chanoch, and Irad begat M’chuyael and
M’chuyael begat M’tushael and M’tushael begat Lamech.
Now lets look at Jasher 3:3
Moses Samuel translates:
3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, whilst he was
serving the Lord, and praying before him in his house, that an angel
of the Lord called to him from Heaven, and he said, Here am I.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, while he was serving
YHWH, and praying before him in his house, that a malach of the Lord
called to him from ha shamayim, and he said, Hinayni.
However, once again, in examining the original Hebrew I found that Moses Samuel had failed to include a section of text.
Thus the Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads:
3:3 And it was at the end of many days and years, while he was
serving before YHWH, and praying before YHWH in [his] house, that an
angel of YHWH called to him from Heaven saying: Chanoch, Chanoch,
and he said, Here am I.
In Jasher 3:22 There is an even longer segment omitted by Moses
Samuel.
Here the Moses Samuel Translation reads:
3:22 And the day came when Enoch went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of the Lord and
he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him
and they said, May the king live! May the king live!
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
3:22 And the day came when Chanok went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of YHWH and he
taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him and
they said, May the melech live! May the melech live!
Once again an examination of the Hebrew demonstrated that Moses
Samuel left out a section of text, this time a fairly lengthy one.
The Hebraic-Roots Version of Jasher reads here as follows:
3:22 And the day came when Chanoch went forth and they all assembled
and came to him, and Chanoch spoke to them all the words [of YHWH]
and he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and he taught them the fear
of YHWH. And all the sons of men feared him greatly and they were
astonished by him concerning his wisdom. And all the land bowed to
his face and they said, May the king live! May the king live!
Another example is in Jasher 10:19
Moses Samuel has:
10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzraim, Phut and Canaan
according to their generation and cities.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzrayim, Phut and Kanaan
according to
their generation and cities.
However the HRV Version of Jasher will restore a LARGE missing section in this
verse as follows:
10:19 And the children of Ham the son of Noach went also and built to
themselves cities in places where they were scattered and called also
the names of the cities by their names and by their occurrences and
these are the names of all their cities according to their families
which built to them in those days after the tower and the children of
Ham were Kush, Mitzraim, Put and Kanaan according to their generation
and cities.
Moses Samuel in his 1840 translation seems to have omitted everything between the first and second appearances of “the children of Ham”. He must have taken his eyes off of the text and then found the key phrase “the children of Ham” in the wrong place.
Another example is in Jasher 19:36
Moses Samuel has:
19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the
like.
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s “Restoration True Name Edition” has:
19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the
same.
The Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads as follows:
19:36 And also in the city of Admah there was a certain girl, a
daughter of a noble of the men of Admah and they did the same thing to
her.
OTHER MISTRANSLATIONS
In Jasher 4:12 Moses Samuel mistakenly translates the phrase “rebelled against God”. Moshe K’s version has “rebelled against Elohim” but the actual Hebrew has “rebelled against the ground” as the HRV version of
Jasher reads.
In Jasher 6:36 Moses Samuel has the phrase “the earth and the heavens”
Moshe Koniuchowsky also has “the earth and the heavens”
The Hebrew actually reads: HaEretz V’HaYamim “the land and the seas” as the HRV version of Jasher reads.
The Hebrew word ERETZ can mean either “land” or “earth” however Moses Samuel misread YAMIM (“seas”) as SHAMAYIM (“heavens”).
A TRUE SACRED NAME EDITION
There are also many passages in which Moses Samuel failed to accurately translate “Sacred Names”. Since Moshe Koniuchowsky’s version simply revises Samuel’s translation without consulting the Hebrew, the result, though called a “True Name Edition” often does not contain the True Sacred Names which actually appear in the original Hebrew text of Jasher.
For example:
Jasher 1:10
“…and she transgressed the word of God…”
- Jasher 1:10, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840
“…and she transgressed the word of Elohim…”
- Jasher 1:10, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the Hebrew actually has:
“…and she transgressed the word of YHWH…”
- Jasher 1:10, Hebraic Roots Version- James Trimm
And again just five verses later:
Jasher 1:15
“…and God turned and inclined to Able…”
- Jasher 1:15, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840
“…and Elohim turned and inclined to Avel…”
- Jasher 1:15, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the Hebrew actually has:
“…and YHWH turned and inclined to Havel…”
- Jasher 1:15, Hebraic Roots Version
And in Jasher 2:24
“…I obtained him from the Almighty God.”
- Jasher 2:24, Moses Samuel
“…I obtained him from the Almighty Elohim.”
- Jasher 2:24, Moshe K. “True Name” version
But the text actually reads:
“…I obtained him from El Shaddai.”
- Jasher 2:24, Hebraic Roots Version
(These are just a few examples from the first two chapters)
MORE
In Jasher 19:2 we are told that Avraham’s servant gave sound-alike names to the wicked judges of Sodom and Amorah (Gamorrah). In the editions of Moses Samuel and Moshe K. there is no explaination as to these sound-alike names. However the HRV version of Jasher has footnotes to each of these four alternate names explaining their actual meaning as “word plays” making fun of these wicked judges.
Proof of the Ancient Origin of the Book of Jasher
A Break Through in Book of Jasher Research
Proof of the Ancient Origin of the Book of Jasher
By James Trimm
One major stumbling block in Book of Jasher research has been the lack of real evidence that the Book of Jasher (the one that we have) is truly ancient. There has been no hard evidence to prove that this Book of Jasher existed prior to 1625.
But now the proof has been found!
In the Masoretic Text and Septuagint of Gen. 5:18 has “And Jared lived one hundred and sixty two years”. But the Book of Jasher 2:37 has “And Jared lived sixty two years”. Amazingly this agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch of Gen. 5:18.
How could the Book of Jasher and the Samaritan Pentateuch share the same scribal error? How could this reading have made its way into the Book of Jasher? If the Book of Jasher were a late compilation made in the Middle Ages, it would certainly have simply copied from the Masoretic Text. Surely a Jewish writer in Europe in the Middle Ages would not have copied data from the Samaritan Pentateuch. This is clear evidence for the ancient origin of the Book of Jasher.
There is also a similar scribal error in Jasher 5:13 where Methuselah begets Lamech at eighty seven. In the Masoretic Text this number is given as one hundred and eighty seven. In the Septuagint it is given as one hundred and sixty seven, and in the Samaritan Pentateuch as sixty seven.
Here the reading agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch in omitting “one hundred” but agrees with the Masoretic Text in reading “eighty seven”. The Book of Jasher is clearly part of the ancient textual tradition here, and not simply borrowing from the Masoretic Text.
Finally we have the proof that the Book of Jasher that we have is of ancient origin!
The Chronology of Abraham in the Book of Jasher
The Chronology of Abraham in the Book of Jasher
By
W. S. Butterbauch
(An improved translation of the Book of Jasher (Sefer HaYashar),
containing many passages missing from the commonly distributed 1840 edition, is available at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
Introduction
The discrepancy existing between the chronology of the Hebrew text of our Bible (See Ge. 11:10-32) and that of the Greek Translation known as the LXX or Septuagint, made some 283 B. C., has occupied the attention of the theologians since the early centuries with little or no success in the solution. By a comparison of these differencies it is observed that apparently 100 years is added to the ages of seven of these postdiluvian patriarch’s in the Septuagint which does not appear in the Hebrew text. This difference first begins with Arphaxad and ends with Nahor, the father of Terah. Why this differences had never been satisfactorly explained, and which of these two texts can be proved to be erroneous or which can be demonstrated to be the true and original text is the purpose of this inquiry.
Before a surveyor can calculate the amount of acreage in a given tract of ground, he must first locate an initial point with which to begin his survey. Likewise, in this instance, a search for one or more initial points must be located before success can be achieved.
It will be observed that all four chronologies, the Hebrew, Samaritan, Septuagint, and that of Josephus, agree that Noah lived to be 950 years of age; and likewise all four agree that Shem lived for a period of 152 years after the death of Noah, which took place in 2006, A. M., and that Shem dies in 2158, A. M. All four chronologies agree that Abram was born in the 70 of Terah’s age. All agree that Shem went through the experiences of the Flood with his father Noah. Since all of their descendants, with the exception of Eber, LIVED AND DIES WITHIN THE LIFE PERIOD OF SHEM, we must of necessity first confine our survey underneath the roof of these two most ancient patriarchs.
Peleg was the first to die. His death occured 10 years prior to that of Noah, and Eber the last to die, dies 29 years AFTER the death of Shem. The careful reader will discern that these several births and deaths all transpired (with this one exception of Eber) within the arena of time confined to Noah and Shem. Their several life-periods are restricted within these limits, as can be seen and understood. This analogy is suddenly broken and becomes distorted in the leapfrog hops of 100 years into a future realm of hypothesis, and when projected forward according to the mathematical basis as outlined to the Septuagint, it finds the logic of former stabilized history out of joint with the data of FACT! It enters into a fog of obscurity and disjointed historical event which becomes apparent to any student of history. By comparison, we can readily see that Peleg, who was the first to die under the roof of Noah and Shem, after being projected forward to find the period of his death under the Septuagint schedule, is made to die BEYOND the Exodus, — something is wrong, either mathematically, or else in the text, and it can only be found in the text which has previously been fabricated. Peleg, Reu, and Sezug meet their period for death after the Exodus before the birth of Abraham!!! The Septuagint schedule of time finds Isaac, Jacob and Joseph alive during the period of the Judges. When encroaching on familiar B.C. history, its chronology becomes extremely ridiculous and absurd.
Most assurdely, the Septuagint chronology has been fabricated to fit into the ideas of those Egyptian priests concerning whom Herodotus, who visited Egypt about 448 B. C., stated that their reckoning of 341 kings covering a period of 11,340 years, was questionable. Thus it has been with Septuagint chronology.
W. S. BUTTERBAUCH, M. D. Canon City, Colorado.
July 18, 1951.
_______________
THE CHRONOLOGY OF ABRAHAM
The reader must first understand the familiar relationship of Terah, the father of Abram, before he can comprehend the detailed events in the life of Abraham. The important question to be determined in this family of three brothers is the order of birth of the three, and which son is the elder, and which the younger in their family history.
” And Terah lived 70 years and begat Abram, Nahor and Haran.” (Gen. 11:26) We find a parallel statement in Gen. 10:21: “Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japhet.” In each instance God has designated His preference for leadership in the future work of His revealed Mystery. There is nothing said about the age of each, or the order of birth, however, we may detect that in each instance the elder is the last to be mentioned. In Gen. 10:21 we are informed that Japhet is the elder, and in the narration of Terah’s family of three we observe that Haran is the last mentioned. In Isaac’s family of twins, Esau was the elder, yet, Jacob is always mentioned first, thus in Terah’s family, the younger, Abram, always takes precedence over the elder, having been selected by God for a special work.
With reference to Terah, there exist certain legends found in the Talmud and in the Book of Jasher, whether true or false we do not know, but suffice to say that when legend is based upon the experiences of family life in which the chain of events coincide with family relationship and history, we are justified in giving them careful consideration.
It should be understood that the Book of Jasher is not an inspired history, neither are we justified in rejecting it wholly as fictitious. It occupies a place in history much the same as Josephus, many of whose statements are both true and erroneous. There are three different copies of Jasher extant, two of which are POSITIVELY ficticious. The historical quotations herewith made use of are not found in the ficticious copies, but come from what is supposed to be an original manuscript that found entrace into Spain shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, by certain Jews who escaped under the protection of Roman soldiers, where a few of the Jews found an asylum during the early centuries. The ablest of theologians and scholars are in doubt as to its origin. Some say it has been copied from historical incidents mentioned in the Talmud which have been enlarged upon. Te most plausible theory seems to be that the Jews who escaped from Spain, harbored among themselves certain traditional relics of early Hebrew literature. Dr. Isaac Nordheimer, professor of Oriental literature; Rabbi H. V. Nathan, and Dr. George Bush, an eminent Hebrew scholar, have all testified to the PURE RABBINICAL HEBREW of the edition from which these quotations are taken.
It was by accident that the writer came accross a statement in the Book of Jasher which reads: “Haran was 32 years old when Abram was born.” Personal curiosity prompted further investigation. Could this be fact or fiction? Further evidence seemed necessary. Sometime later this additional evidence was discovered: ” Nahor, son of Terah, died, in the 40 years of Isaac at 172.” How solve these two statements in the chronology of Terah’s family? It was evident that the solution depended upon a correct date for the birth of Abram, and that from that date the 40 of Isaac could be discovered and substantiated.
HARAN AND NAHOR, TWINS
On the basis that Abram was born in 1948, and Haran was 32 at the time of said event, it is plain that by substracting 32 from that date it would reveal the year of Haran’s birth. This done, we have 1916 for the answer. Since Nahor died in the 40 of Isaac at the age of 172, and Isaac was born when Abram was 100 years of age, we find that the birth of Isaac occured in the year 2048. This date, plus the 40 of Isaac, gives us 2088 as the year of Nahor’s death. This number less 172 his age at time of death, gives us 1916 as the year of Nahor’s birth. Thus it becomes clear as crystal that these two brothers in the family of Terah were twins.
Wide extended research in Bible history and Chronology has thus far failed to find any reference to this fact, hence the writer claims the honor for this discovery, if such it be.
Chronologers differ in regard to the era for the birth of Abram, thus leading the reader into a labyrinth of confusion and perplexity. The most reasonable initial point from which to begin the reckoning is the date for the Flood (1656). The Hebrew text gives us 292 years from the Flood to Abram’s birth, or 1948 A. M. Anno Mundi, meaning from Creation. This is taken from the Hebrew text. It is found by comparison that the Septuagint text gives us 2728 A. M., or 1275 B. C. More perplexity and more study, with no satisfactory solution. Highclass theologians fail to agree. Even Bishop Usher takes exception to the date 1948 for the birth of Abram, and says that he was born in the 130 of Terah’s age, and that he was born in year 2008. He reasons as follows: Abram could not have been born in the 70 of Terah, and that it was Haran that was born on the aforesaid date. An extended study of the chronology of the Septuagint with reference to the date of Abram’s birth, and by contrasting the time of Peleg’s death, which was said to have taken place before the death of Noah in the 48 of Abram, it was found by the Septuagint to have taken place some 200 years before the birth of Abram AFTER THE EXODUS! This redicilous situation only served to heighten interest and to study more thoroughly the Septuagint. Samaritan, and Hebrew Chronologies to determin be the truth, if such coud be found. The details of this study had finally developed into the present “COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE HEBREW AND SEPTUAGINT TERXTS OF BIBLICAL CHRONOLOGY.” With this apology of explanation, we resume our first line of investigation.
If Terah was born 222 years this side of the Flood, which date is early obtained, then the 70 of Terah is established to be 1948. No way to avoid this conclusion, but the question raised by Bishop Usher involves a new angle of reasoning. His argument rests upon the fact that a father could not be of the age of 70 (See Gen. 12:4). The existing anomaly rests in the time and order of birth of Terah’s age, concerning which Bishop Usher was unaware. This is exactly what took place, and accounts for Usher’s supposed discovery for the necessity of placing Abram’s birth in the 130 of Terah. Almost all of the leading chronologers of the world have fallen into this pit of presumption, which was excavated by Usher in order to solve the riddle of Abram’s time of birth. It is apparent that the most of them were fully satisfied with Usher’s solution, as the following will illustrate:
Dr. Akers, who is author of an exhaustive work on Chronology, says: “A single correction is required. Though Terah was only 70 years old at the birth of his son, yet, as the Hebrew and the Septuagint both say (Gen. 11:32) that he died aged 205. When Abram was called, being 75 years old (Gen. 12:4) it is evident that this birth was 60 years in the life of Terah. This requires the birth of Abram, acoording to the Hebrew, to be 2008 A.M. ”
Dr. Hales, renowed Chronologist, state: ” Terah lived 70 years, and begat Abram, Nahor and Haran (Gen. 11:26). Abram was probably the youngest son, and Haran certainly the oldest…Abram was the son of Terah by a second wife. This appears from his apology to Abimelech for his equivocation in calling Sarah his sister. ‘She is the daughter (grand-daughter) of my father, but not the daughter of my mother.’ (Gen. 20:14) By the same latitude of expression, Abram called his nephew, Lot, ‘his brother’. (Gen. 24:14). That Abram was born in his father’s 130 year, is evident from the age of Terah at his death 205 years (Gen. 11:32) at which time Abram was 75 years old.” Dr. Hales continues: “The addition of 60 years to the age of Terah at Abram’s birth, was one of the most brilliant and important of Usher’s improvements in Chronology.”
Dr. Anstey, author of “The Romance of Bible Chronology,” London, 1913, says: “Usher, in his interpretation of this question, (Abram’s birth in the 130 of Terah) is regarded as one of the improvements of his system, and is proof of his acuteness and kneenness of insight into the chronological bearing of statements contained in the text of the Holy Scriptures.” These honorary statements from numerous other Chronologists could be multiplied many-fold, but let these suffice.
“And the days of Terah were 205 years, and Terah died in Haran.” (Gen. 11:32) The supposition that Terah died at this time (in the history of Abram) was also instrumental in leading Usher into a wrong conclusion. There can be no question as to Abram’s age of 75 at this time, and we also find that Terah was 145 years of age when Abram was 75 years. Proof: 145 minus 75 is 70. This was Terah’s age at Abram’s birth. It is also true that “Terah lived and died in Haran,” but is NOT true that Terah died at the time of Abram’s departure for Canaan. Abram was 135 at the time of the death of Terah. Stephen’s prophecy (Acts 7:4) was not fulfilled at the time of Abram’s departure for Canaan at the age of 75, but many years later at the time of the death of numerous of his relatives. Sarah dies in year 2085, born in 1958. Nahor, Abram’s brother, dies in year 2088. Yes, the Lord finally removed him “in the land wherin ye now dwell ” at the time of his father’s death, and also many of his kindred accociated. The fulfillment of an event is often dependent upon a slow and developing finality not fully understood in the beginning. The probabilities are that Stephen did not fully understand the words he himself uttered under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The philosophy of the Supernatural far exceeds the comprehension of fallible man.
CAINAN
The Septuagint has a Cainan with 130 years which is not in the Hebrew or the Samaritan texts. A very grave question arises at this juncture. Ought this name to be inserted? How come this anomaly? Was there ever such a person, and if so, WHY has his name been omitted from the Hebrew genealogy? It is omitted in Gen. 10:24, 11:12, and in 1.Chron. 1:18, 24. This Cainan does not occur in the Hebrew in any of these places, so that if it had been left out in one place, and not included in another, he must have been a non-existant individual, or else have been purposely omitted in all four places for the reason that no such person existed. That his name does not appear in the Samaritan Pentateuch, or in any of the other early translations of the Hebrew, and being omitted in the Septuagint in 1. Chron. 18, and 24. WHERE SHOULD APPEAR IF GENUINE, and this particular omission in these two instances, makes the Septuagint inconsistent with itself! Dr. Hales calls attention to the fact that it is not found in those copies of the Bible used by many of the early writers, such as Berosus, Polyhistor, Josephus, Philo, Theopholus of Antioch, Africanus, Origen and Jerome. (See Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible – “Cainan”.)
Gregory ingeniously proves that Cainan was an imagery person. How this name come to be copied into Luke 3:36 is really the diffeculty. It has been already observed that it does not appear in 1. Chron. of the Septuagint, and that its first and only introduction appears in Gen. 11:12 of the Septuagint. We see, therefore, that apparantly this presence in Luke 3:36 has no foundation for its quotation from any of the Hebrew sources, and must rest SOLELY upon that of the single reference of Gen. 11:12 of the Septuagint. It would seem that it was not copied into Luke by inspiration. it seems clear that it did not come from any of the Hebrew texts, but from Septuagint resources. It is said to be wanting in one of the earliest Greek manuscripts of Luke. In whatever way it got into Luke we do not know. It may perchance have been copied by a copyist wholly ignorant of all the accompanying facts, as seems most reasonable to assume. It is not to be presumed that all of the copyists were scrupuously particular in all instances. The gravity of the outcome of probable haste may have seemed of little importance to a substitute copyist. However, these assumptions do not solve the problem. Since water cannot rise to a level higher than the spring from which it issues, so neither can the authority of the New Testament for its absence, from which the New Testament professes to derive its authority.
1Maccabees and The Book of Jasher
It would appear that the author of 1Maccabees was familiar with the Book of Jasher. Notice the similarity between 1Macc. 1:33 (which describes how Antiochus Epiphanies made Jerusalem into a fortress):
33 And they built the City of David
with a high wall with stone
and with great towers,
and it became their fortress.
(1Macc. 1:33 HRV)
and Jasher 9:27a which describes Nimrod’s building of the Tower of Babel:
27 And when they were building,
they built themselves a great city
and a very high and strong tower…
(Jasher 9:27a HRV)
THE SEVEN RULES OF HILLEL
THE SEVEN RULES OF HILLEL
The Seven Rules of Hillel existed long before Rabbi Hillel (60 BCE – 20 CE?), but he was the first to write them down. The rules are so old we see them used in the Tenach (Old Testament).
Rabbis Hillel and Shamai were competitive leading figures in Judaism during the days of Yeshua’s youth. Hillel was known for teaching the Spirit of the Law and Shamai was known for teaching the letter of the Law. Yeshua’s teaching largely followed that of the School of Hillel rather than that of the School of Shamai (an exception being Yeshua agreeing with Shamai regarding divorce in Matthew 19:9).
For example, Yeshua’s famous “golden rule”: Whatever you would that men should do to you, do you even to them, for this is the Torah and the Prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
This reads very closely with Hillel’s famous statement: What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor that is the whole Torah … (b.Shabbat 31a)
Upon Hillel’s death the mantle of the School of Hillel was passed to his son Simeon. Upon Simon’s death the mantle of the school of Hillel passed to Gamliel. This Gamilel spoke in defense of the early Nazarenes (Acts 5:34-39). He was the teacher of Shaul/Paul (Acts 22:3).
In 2 Tim. 2:15, Paul speaks of “rightly dividing the word of truth.” What did Paul mean by this? Was he saying that there were right and wrong ways to interpret the scriptures? Did Paul believe there were actual rules to be followed when interpreting (understanding) the Scriptures? Was Paul speaking of the Seven Rules of Hillel?
Paul was certainly taught these rules in the School of Hillel by Hillel’s own grandson Gamliel. When we examine Paul’s writings we will see that they are filled with usages of Hillel’s Seven Rules (several examples appear below). It would appear then that the Seven Rules of Hillel are at least part of what Paul was speaking of when he spoke of “rightly dividing the Word of truth.”
The Seven Rules of Hillel are:
1. Kal Vahomer (Light and heavy)
The Kal vahomer rule says that what applies in a less important case will certainly apply in a more important case. A kal vahomer argument is often, but not always, signaled by a phrase like “how much more…”
The Rabbinical writers recognize two forms ok kal vahomer:
kal vahomer meforash - In this form the kal vahomer argument appears explicitly.
kal vahomer satum – In which the kal vahomer argument is only implied.
There are several examples of kal vahomer in the Tenach.
For example: Behold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner. (Proverbs 11:31)
And: If you have run with footmen and they have wearied you, then how can you contend with horses? (Jerermiah 12:5a)
Other Tenach examples to look at: Deuteronomy 31:27; 1 Samuel 23:3; Jerermiah 12:5b; Ezekiel 15:5; Esther 9:12
There are several examples of kal vahomer in the New Testament. Y’shua often uses this form of argument.
For example: If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the Law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? (Jn. 7:23)
And: What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. (Mt. 12:11-12)
Other examples of Y’shua’s usage of kal vahomer are: Matthew 6:26, 30 = Luke 12:24, 28; Mathhew 7:11 = Luke 11:13; Matthew 10:25 & John 15:18-20; Matthew 12:12 & John 7:23
Paul especially used kal vahomer. Examples include: Romans 5:8-9, 10, 15, 17; 11:12, 24; 1 Corinthians 9:11-12; 12:22; 2 Corinthians 3:7-9, 11; Philippians 2:12; Philemon 1:16; Hebrews 2:2-3; 9:13-14; 10:28-29; 12:9, 25.
2. G’zerah Shavah (Equivalence of expresions)
An analogy is made between two separate texts on the basis of a similar phrase, word or root – i.e., where the same words are applied to two separate cases, it follows that the same considerations apply to both.
Tenakh example: By comparing 1 Samuel 1:10 to Judges 13:5 using the phrase “no razor shall touch his head” we may conlude that Samuel, like Samson, was a nazarite.
“New Testament” example: In Hebrews 3:6-4:13 Paul compares Psalms 95:7-11 = Hebrews 3:7-11 to Genesis 2:2 = Hebrews 4:4 based on the words “works” and “day”/”today” (“today” in Hebrew is literally “the day”). Paul uses this exogesis to conclude that there will be 6,000 years of this world followed by a 1,000 year Shabbat.
3. Binyan ab mikathub echad (Building up a “family” from a single text)
A principle is found in several passages: A consideration found in one of them applies to all.
Hebrews 9:11-22 applies “blood” from Exodus 24:8=Hebrews 9:20 to Jerermiah 31:31-34
4. Binyab ab mishene kethubim (Building up a “family” from two or more texts)
A principle is established by relating two texts together: The principle can then be applied to other passages. i.e:
You shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in measures of length, of weight, or quantity. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall you have; I am the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. (Leviticus 19:35-36)
By use of the fourth rule of Hillel we can recognize that the provision of equals weights and measures applies also to how we judge others and their actions.
In Hebrews 1:5-14, Paul sites the following to build a rule that the Messiah is of a higher order than angels:
Psalms 2:7 = Hebrews 1:5
2 Samuel 7:14 = Hebrews 1:5
Deuteronomy 32:43/Psalms 97:7/(Neh. 9:6) = Hebrews 1:6
Psalms 104:4 = Hebrews 1:7
Psalms 45:6-7 = Hebrews 1:8-9
Psalms 102:25-27 = Hebrews 1:10-12
Psalms 110:1 = Hebrews 1:13
Binyan ab mikathub echad and Binyab ab mishene kethubim are especially useful in identifying biblical principles and applying them to real life situations. In this way Scripture is recontextualized so that it remains relevant for all generations.
5. Kelal uferat (The general and the particular)
A general principle may be restricted by a particularization of it in another verse – or, conversely, a particular rule may be extended into a general principle. A Tenach example: Genesis 1:27 makes the general statement that God created man. Genesis 2:7, 21 particularizes this by giving the details of the creation of Adam and Chava (Eve). Other examples would be verses detailing with how to perform sacrifices or how to keep the feasts. In the Gospels, the principle of divorce being allowed for “uncleanliness,” is particularized to mean for sexual immorality only.
6. Kayotze bo mimekom akhar (Analogy made from another passage)
Two passages may seem to conflict until compared with a third, which has points of general though not necessarily verbal similarity. Tenach examples:
Leviticus 1:1 “out of the tent of meeting” and Exodus 25:22 “from above the ark of the covenant between the chrubim” seem to disagree until we examine Num. 7:89 where we learn that Moses entered the tent of meeting to hear YHWH speaking from between the cherubim.
1 Chronicles 27:1 explained the numerical disagreement between 2 Samuel 24:9 and 1 Chronicles 21:5.
Exodus 19:20 “YHWH came down upon Mount Sinai” seems to disagree with Deuteronomy 4:36, “Out of Heaven He let you hear His voice.” Exodus 20:19 (20:22 in some editions) reconciles the two by telling us that God brought the heavens down to the mount and spoke. (m.Sifra 1:7)
An example from Romans: Paul shows that the following Tenach passages SEEM to conflict:
The just shall live by faith (Romans 1:17 = Habakkuk 2:4) with There is none righteous, no, not one … (Romans 3:10 = Psalms 14:1-3= Psalms 53:1-3; Ecclesiastes 7:20). Paul does the same here: [G-d] will render to each one according to his deeds. (Romans 2:6 = Psalms 62:12; Proverbs 24:12) with Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man whom YHWH shall not impute sin. (Romans 4:7-8 = Psalms 32:1-2)
Paul resolves the apparent conflict by citing Genensis 15:6 (in Romans 4:3, 22): Abraham believed G-d, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Thus Paul resolves the apparent conflict by showing that under certain circumstances, belief/faith/trust (same word in Hebrew) can act as a substitute for righteousness/being just (same word in Hebrew).
7. Davar hilmad me’anino (Explanation obtained from context)
The total context, not just the isolated statement must be considered for an accurate exegesis. An example would be Romans 14:1, “I know and am convinced by the Lord Yeshua that nothing is unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” Paul is not abrogating the kosher laws, but pointing out to gentile believers in the congregation at Rome (within his larger context of Romans) that: 1) things are unclean not of themselves but because God said they are unclean, and 2) they must remember the higher principle, that their “freedom to eat what is unclean” is secondary to the salvation of unsaved Jews who are observing their behavior, as they are looking for “gentiles coming into the faith of Israel” to be acting in an “appropriate manner” as a truth test of Paul’s ministry (and Yeshua’s Messiahship).
The Thirteen Rules of Ishmael
The Thirteen Rules of Ishmael
As with the use of any such rules the thirteen rules of Ishamael should be used to formulate sound arguments.
The First Rule of Ishmael (same as 1 st rule of Hillel)
The Second Rule of Ishmael (same as 2nd rule of Hillel)
The Third Rule of Ishmael (same as 3rd & 4th rules of Hillel)
The Fourth Rule of Ishmael (same as 5th rule of Hillel)
The Fifth Rule of Ishmael
perat ukhelal
(particular and general)
If the specific instances are stated first and are followed by the general category, instances other than the particular ones mentioned are included.
EXAMPLE: Deut. 13:2 (1) – 13:6 (5)
2(13:1) If there arise in the midst of you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams-and he give you a sign or a wonder,
3 (13:2) and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto you–saying: ‘Let us go after other Elohims, which you have not known, and let us serve them’;
4(13:3) you shall not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for YHWH your Elohim puts you to proof, to know
whether you do love YHWH your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul.
5 (13:4) After YHWH your Elohim shall you walk, and Him shall you fear, and His commandments shall you keep, and unto His voice shall you hearken, and Him shall you serve, and unto Him shall you cleave. 6 (13:5) And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he has spoken perversion against YHWH your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which YHWH your Elohim commanded you to walk in. So shall you put away the evil from the midst of you.
The specific commandment not to “go after other Elohims which you have not known and serve them” is followed by the general commandment “His commandments shall you keep.”
This text tells us that even if a prophet comes along who can predict the future with 100% accuracy and who can perform signs and wonders, if he tells us to go after other Elohims he must be rejected as a false prophet. But in light of the fifth rule of lshmael we learn that if such a prophet tells us to turn from any or all of the other commandments we must also reject him as a false prophet.
EXAMPLE: Ex. 22:8 (9) “…an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast” beasts other than those specified are included.
The Sixth Rule of Ishmael
kelal uferat ukhelal i attah dan ella ke-ein ha-perat
(general, particular, general)
If a general category are stated first and is followed by specific instances and then a general category then you may derive only things similar to those specified.
EXAMPLE: Dt. 14:26 Other things than those specified in Dt. 14:26 may be purchased, but only if they are food or drink like those specified.
EXAMPLE: Matt. 23:5-12
5 And so all their works they do that they may be seen by the sons of men, for they make broad the straps of their t”ftila, and enlarge the corners of their mantles,
6 and love the principal couches at the suppers.
7 and the principal seats in the synagogues, and benedictions in the market, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi’.
8 But you shall not be called ‘rabbi’ for one is your rabbi, and that is the Messiah. And all of you are brothers.
9 Also be not you called’father’ upon the earth, for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be you called ‘teachers’, for one is your teacher, and that is Messiah.
11 Whoever will be greatest among you let him be your servant.
12 For whoever exalts himself will be abased, and whoever is abased will be exalted.
Here we have first a general statement “all their works they do that they may be seen” (5a) followed by a list of specifics (verses 5b- 10) and finally another general statement “whoever exalts himself will be abased:” (12).
According to this rule we may apply this general rule to instances other than those listed in verses 5b- 10 but only if they are of a similar nature to the ones specified.
The Seventh Rule of Ishmael
kelal she-hu tzarikh liferat uferat she-hu tzarikh li-khelal
(The general requires the particular and the particular the general)
Specification is provided by taking the general and the particular together, each requiring the other.
EXAMPLE: Returning again to Matthew 23:5-12
5 And so all their works they do that they may be seen by the sons of men, for they make broad the straps of their t”ffila, and enlarge the corners of their mantles,
6 and love the principal couches at the suppers,
7 and the principal seats in the synagogues, and benedictions in the market, and to be called by men. ‘Rabbi’.
8 But you shall not be called ‘rabbi’ for one is your rabbi, and that is the Messiah. And all of you are brothers.
9 Also be not you called’father’ upon the earth, for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be you called ‘teachers’, for one is your teacher, and that is Messiah.
11 Whoever will be greatest among you let him be your servant.
12 For whoever exalts himself will be abased, and whoever is abased will be exalted.
Here we have first a general statement “all their works they do that they may be seen” (Sa) followed by a list of specifics (verses Sb-10) and finally another general statement “whoever exalts himself will be abased:” (12).
Now the seventh rule of Ishmael tells us that the phrase “you shall not be called `rabbi„’ (8) is limited in scope by the general statements “all their works they do that they might be seen” and “whoever exalts himself”. Thus the rule against being called `rabbi’ is to be understood as limited only to cases of self-exaltation.
EXAMPLE: “Sanctify unto Me all the firstborn (masc.)” (Dt. 15:19) with “whatsoever opens the womb” (Ex. 13:2) A firstborn male would have been understood as included in the term “all the firstborn” even if a female had previously been born to that mother. Thus the particular limiting expression “whatever opens the womb” is stated. But this term would not have excluded one born after a previous c-section birth, hence the general term “all the firstborn” (b.Bek. 19a)
The Eighth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza min ha-kelal lelammed lo lelammed al atzmo yatza ella lelammed al hakelal kullo yatzo
that man has no consciousness in the afterlife. However if we apply this same general rule to both specifics then “neither have they any more a reward” would have to mean that there is no future reward for the dead. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: Some commentators take 1 Cor. 7:18 as a general prohibition against circumcision. But if I Cor. 7:18 is to be understood as a general prohibition against circumcision, then 1 Con 7:27 would have to be understood as a general prohibition against marriage. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: Some commentators take Gal. 3:28 “there is neither Jew nor Greek” to mean that members of the “Church” are neither Jews nor Gentiles but a third category “the Church of Elohim”. However if one understands “there is neither Jew nor Greek” as a specific for such a generalization, then one would also have to understand “there is neither male nor female” to mean that members of “the Church” have no sexual designations. Thus their interpretation violates the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE: “A man, also, or a woman that divines that by a ghost or a familiar spirit, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones” (Lev. 20:27) Divination by a ghost or a familiar spirit is included in the general rule against witchcraft (Dt. 18:10f). Since the penalty in Lev. 20:27 is stoning it may be inferred that the same penalty applies to other instances within the same general rule. (b.San. 67b)
The Nineth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi khelal ve-yatza liton to’an echad she-hu khe-inyano yatza lehakel ve-lo lehachmir
(when particular instances of a general rule are treated specifically, in details similar to those included in the general rule, then only the relaxations of the general rule and not its restrictions are to be applied in those instances.)
EXAMPLE: The law of the boil (Lev. 13:18-2 1) and the bum (Lev. 13:24-28) are treated specifically even though these are specific instances of the general rule regarding plague spots (Lev. 13:1-17) Therefore the general restrictions regarding
the Law of the second week (Lev. 13:5) and the quick raw flesh (Lev. 13:10 are not applied to them (Sifra 1:2)
The Tenth Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza liton Wan acher she-lo khe-inyano yatza lehakellehachmir.
(When particular instances of a general rule are treated specifically in details dissimilar from those included in the general rule, then both relaxations and restrictions are to be applied in those instances)
EXAMPLE: The details on laws of plagues in the hair or beard (Lev. 13:29-37) are dissimilar from those in the general rule of plague spots. Therefore both the relaxation regarding the white hair mentioned in the general rule (Lev. 13:4) and the restriction of the yellow hair mentioned in the particular instance (Lev. 13:30) are applied (Sifra 1:3)
The Eleventh Rule of Ishmael
davar she-hayah bi-khelal ve-yatza lidon ba-davar he-chadash i attah yakhol lehachatziro li khelalo ad she-yachazirennu ha-katav li-khelalo be-ferush. (when a particular instance of a general rule is singled out for completely fresh treatment, the details of the general rule must not be applied to this instance unless Scripture does so specifically.)
EXAMPLE: the guilt offering of the leper requires the placing of the blood on the ear, thumb, and toe (Lev. 14:14) Consequently, the laws of the general guilt offering, such as the sprinkling of the blood on the alter (Lev. 7:2) would not have applied, were it not for the Torah passage “For as the sin offering is the priest’s so is the guilt offering” (Lev.14:13), i.e. that this is like other guilt offerings (b.Yev. 7ab)
The Twefth Rule of Ishmael
davar ha-lamed me-inyano ve-davar ha-lamed mi-sofo.
(The meaning of a passage may be deduced from (a) its
context, or (b) from a later reference in the same passage)
The first part of this rule is Hillel’s seventh rule.
EXAMPLE: “thou shall not steal” in Ex. 20:13 must refer to the capitol case of kidnapping, since the other two offenses mentioned with it: “You shall not murder” and “you shall not commit adultry” are both capitol offenses (Mekh., BaChodesh, 8, 5)
EXAMPLE: “I put the plague of leporasy in a house of the land of your possesion” (Lev. 14:34), refers only to a house built with stones, timber, and mortar, since these materials are mentioned later in verse 45.
The Thirteenth Rule of Ishmael
shenei khetuvim hamakhchishim zeh et teh ad she-yavo ha-katuv ha-shelishi ve-yakhria beineihem.
(two verses contradict one another until a third verse reconciles them.)
This is VERY similar to the sixth rule of Hillel.
The Thirty Two Rules of Eliezer
The Thirty Two Rules of Eliezer
The 32 rules of Eliezer were first written by Eliezer ben Jose HaGallil (but existed before they were written). Since they post date 30 C.E. they are not automatically authoritative to us as Nazarenes. I am teching them for two reasons:
1. In certain cases certain of them may be
valid methods of reasoning and can be carefully
used in our own expositions especially on the drash
or sod level.
2. We must be able to understand and follow
the reasoning of the Rabbinic sages so that we
can properly analyze what they have written
so that we can weigh the value of their conclusions.
As with the rules of Ishmael, here I use examples often drawn from Rabbinic halacha. I do not mean to imply by this that the examples are sound arguments.
Before covering the 32 rules of Eliezer we must cover in brief the great debate on hermeneutics between Ishmael and Akiva.
Akiva taught that since Elohim is all knowing that when he speaks, every word and even every letter is divinely inspired and has some implication. There is, according to Akiva, some real reason why Elohim has chosen to say what he has to say with exactly the words and letters he divinely chose to use.
Ishmael taught that when Elohim speaks to man he speaks as a man does with another man, on a simple level so that man may understand his words.
Now Ishmael’s 13 rules had been well grounded, but Akiva’s methods opened the door to less grounded rules. Many of these less grounded rules are found in the 32 rules of Eliezer. Moreover certain of the 32 rules of Hillel operate best on a drash or sod level. As always these rules should be used only in the making of sound arguments. Even when they are used on a drash or sod level they should be well grounded.
The First Rule of Eliezer
ribbui
(inclusion)
The Hebrew particles AF, GAM and ET indicate an inclusion or amplification.
This rule comes from the school of Akiva which taught that every word in Torah has significance.
EXAMPLE:
“You shall fear YHWH your ELOHIM” (Dt. 10:20)
Since the Hebrew here opens with ET
it is ruled that this mitzvot is extended
to include reverence for scholars.
(b.Pes. 22b)
EXAMPLE:
“God created the heavens…” (Gen. 1:1)
Since the Hebrew ET appears it is said in
Midrash Rabbah that the “Heavens” include
here the sun, moon and stars.
EXAMPLE:
“You shall wear away (gam atah) and this people
that are with you.” (Ex. 18:18) “gam” and “atah”
include “Moses” and “Aaron.” (Mek. 59b).
EXAMPLE:
“and they (the adulterers) shall both of them die”
(Dt. 22:22) gam in this passage is an inclusion
so that the execusion is not postponed until after
childbirth but the embryo is included in the
execution.
(m.Arakhin 1:4 & b.Arakhin 7a)
MORE EXAMPLES:
GAM in Dt. 26:13 (m.Ma’aser Sheni 5:10)
GAM in Num. 18:28 (m.Terum. 1:1)
The Second Rule of Eliezer
mi’ut
(exclusion)
The Hebrew particles AK, RAK and MIN point to a limitation, exclusion or diminuation.
This rule also comes from the school of Akiva which taught that every word in Torah has significance.
EXAMPLE:
“And Noah only (AK) was left…”
in Gen. Rabbah is taken to mean that Noah
did not escape unharmed but was injured.
EXAMPLE:
“And you shall be only (AK) joyful” (Dt. 16:15)
b.Sukka 48b says “That includes the eve of the
last festival day. Perhaps also the first festival day?
This one is excluded by AK.”
The Third Rule of Eliezer
ribbui achar ribbui
When two “inclusion” particles (see rule 1) are joined.
EXAMPLE:
1Sam 17:36 “”… smote both (gam at) the lion
also (gam) the bear.” is said to mean that three
other beast were killed not just the lion and bear.
In Halacha however it is said that two inclusion terms indicate instead an exclusion (b.Men. 89a)
The Fourth Rule of Eliezer
mi’ut achar mi’ut
When two “exclusion” particals (see rule 2) are joined.
Halachicly two “exclusion” particals indicate an implication of inclusion as in rule 1.
The Fifth Rule of Eliezer
kol v’chomer meforash
First rule of Hillel occurs in a text.
The Sixth Rule of Eliezer
kol v’chomer satun
First rule of Hillel applied to a text.
The Seventh Rule of Eliezer
same as Hillel’s secod rule.
The Eighth Rule of Eliezer
binyan av – same as 3rd & 4th rules of Hillel
The Nineth Rule of Eliezer
derek khetzarah
(abbreviated or elliptical phraseology)
EXAMPLE:
1Chr. 17:5 where “to another” is implied.
The Tenth Rule of Eliezer
davar shehu shanui
(Repitition is used to bring out a point)
EXAMPLE:
b.Hul. 115b The commandment “You shall
not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk” is repeated
three times (Ex. 23:19; 34:26 & Dt. 14:26)
to forbid three things: eating; benifitting and
seething. Also Akiba taught (m.Hul. 8:4)
that the three reptitions refer to the idea that
foul, game and unclean animals do not come
under this prohibition.
The Eleventh Rule of Eliezer
siddur shennechelakh
A context disrupted by sof pasukh (or any other injunctive accent) is joined.
EXAMPLE:
Ex. 13:3b has:
“…there shall no unleavened bread be eaten.”
Ex. 13:4a has:
“This day…”
In the Midrash Mek. to this passage Rabbi Yose HaGallil joins the end of verse 3 to the beginning of verse 4 to form the phrase:
“There shall no unleavened bread be eaten this day.”
To argue that Israel in Egypt abastained from leavened bread for only that one day.
The Twelfth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEVA LELAMMED WENIMSA LAMED
Something is adduced for comparison, but in this process fresh light is shed upon it.
Compare this with Hillel’s 7th rule.
In b.San. 74a it is stated that when faced with death one may commit any sin to save ones life except idolatry, incest and murder. Regarding the last two of these Rabbi [Y'hudah] makes the oservation that if rape may be compared to murder (Dt. 22:25-26) and we should be killed rather than murder, then we should allow ourselves to be killed rather than commit rape.
EXAMPLE:
In the Sifra on Lev. 19:10 by connecting,
against the context, LO T’LAKKAT with the
following LAANI it is deduced that the owner
must not be partial to one poor man over others by
helping him glean.
(also see b.Git. 12a)
The Thirteenth Rule of Eliezer
KELAL SHE’ACHARAW MA’ASEH WE’ENO’ELLO PERATO SHEL RI’SHON
When a general is followed by an action, then that is the particular of the former.
This is very similar to the fifth rule of Hillel.
“These are the words which you shall speak” (Ex. 19:6) [general]
“You shall be to me a Kingdom of Priests” (Ex. 19:6) [particular]
“This is the statute of the Torah” (Num. 19:2) [general]
“that they bring you a red heifer” (ibid)[particular]
“This is the ordinance of the Passover”(Ex.12:43) [general]
“no alien…” (ibid) [particular]
The Fourteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR GADOL SHANITLAH BEKATON MIMMENNU LEHASHMI’A HA’OZEN BEDEREK SHEHI’ SHOMA’AT.
Something important is compared with something trivial, that a clearer understanding may be had.
For example in Deut. 32:2 the Torah is compared to rain.
The Fifteenth Rule of Eliezer
The 15th Rule of Eliezer is the same as the 13th Rule of Ishmael.
The Sixteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR HAMEYUCHAD BIMKOMO
“Significant use of an expresion.”
EXAMPLE:
Num. 15:18 “In your coming into the Land”
Ishmael taught that this term is unique from the
other phrases in scripture like “and when you
come” or “when the Lord will bring you.”
The divergent expression here, Ishmael
said, is to teach you that Israel was obligated
to set apart challa (Num. 15:20) immediately
after enterring the land.
The Seventeenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHE’ENO MITPARESH BIMKOMO UMITPARESH BEMAKOM ACHER
A circumstance not clearly enunciated in the principal passage is referred to in another passage.
This rule especially aplies to supplementing a Torah passage from a non-Torah passage.
EXAMPLES:
The Description of Gan Eden in Gen. 2:8
may be suplemented from Ezek. 28:13.
Num. 3 may be supplemented from
1Chron. 24:19 where the courses of the
Priests are given.
The Eighteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNE’EMAR BEMIKSHATO WEHU NOHEG BAKOL
A specific case of a type of occurences is mentioned, although the whole type is meant.
EXAMPLE:
Dt. 23:11 “that which chances by night”
because the accident had in mind is likely
to occur most frequently by night.
(Sifre on Deut. 20:5f. ) but an accident
at any time is intended to be covered.
The Torah states that a man who builds
a new house and not dedicted it is exempt
from military service. (Deut. 20:5)
The Torah only speaks of “building”
but the commandment is seen as aplying
to inheriting, buying or receiving as a gift.
This also aplies to the military exemption
of him who plants a vinyard (Deut. 20:6).
The Nineteenth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNEíEMAR BA-ZEH WEHUí HA-DIN LACHABERO
A statement is made with regard to one subject, but it is also true in regards to another subject.
EXAMPLES:
Hosea 6:6 What is true of mercy here
is also true of the knowledge of Elohim.
According to Midrash Mek. On Ex. 21:18
If one smites the other with a stone or with a fist
R. Nathan says: He compares the stone to the fist
and the fist to a stone. As the stone must
Be ponderous enough to kill, so also the fist;
and as the fist becomes known, so must also the
Stone become known. When therefore the stone is
mingled among other stones and when
Even one stone is too small to cause death,
the slayer goes free.
The Twentieth Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHENNEEMAR BA-ZEH WEENO INYAN LO ABAL HUí INYAN LACHABERO
A statement does not go well with the passage in which it occurs, but is in keeping with another passage and may then be applied to that passage.
Some Jewish interpreters thus teach that Deut. 33:7 does not refer to Judah, but to Simeon.
The 21st Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHUKKASH BISHTE MIDDOT WEíATAH NOTHEN LO KOAH HAYAFEH SHEBBISHTEHEN
Something is compared with two things and so only the good properties of both are attributed to it.
In Ps. 92:13 the righteous are compared to palm-trees because they bear fruit, but since they have no shade a further comparison is made to a cedar which bears no fruit but produces shade.
The 22nd Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHECHAVERO MOKIACH ALAW
A proposition which requires to be supplemented from a parallel proposition.
EXAMPLE:
According to some interpreters AL (alef-lamed)
should be supplied in front of T’YAS’RANI
in Psalm 38:2.
The 23rd Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHU MOKIACH AL CHABERO
A proposition serves to supplement a parallel proposition.
EXAMPLE:
Sifre on Deut. 11:12 says:
A land which YHWH your God cares for.
Rabbi said: Does he care for this land only,
and not for all lands? We certainly read
Job 38:26: to cause it to rain on a land
where no man is, on the wilderness,
wherein there is no man. What then does
this word signify, ìa land which YHWH
your God cares for? Because of this His caring
He cares for other lands besides theirs.
The 24th Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHAYAH BIKELAL WEYASHA MIN HAKELAL LELAMMED ‘AL ‘ASHMO YASHA
A proposition is in force with haggadic interpretation.
For example the specific stressing of
“Jericho” in Joshua 2:1 because this
passage is aggadic the stressing of Jericho
is purely idiomatic.
The 25th Rule of Eliezer
DAVAR SHEHAYAH BIKELAL WEYASHA MIN HAKELAL LELAMMED ‘AL CHABERO
This rule is a modification of the eighth rule of Ishmael.
EXAMPLE:
According to b.Shab. 70a:
The prohibition Ex. 35:3 to kindle fire
on the Sabbath is implied already in Ex. 35:2
(which prohibits work.) Why is it stressed?
In order to compare therewith and to say to you,
“Just as one becomes guilty by kindling fire,
which is a main item of labor, so also one
becomes guilty by performing any other
single main item of labor.
The 26th Rule of Eliezer
MASHAL
(Parable)
EXAMPLES:
Yeshua’s parables.
The Olive Tree parable (Rom. 11).
The parable of the two women (Gal. 4:21-31)
The 27th Rule of Eliezer
NEGED
Corresponding significant number.
EXAMPLE:
The Children of Israel suffered a year for a day.
Forty years (Num.14:34) for each of the forty days
(Num. 13:25) of their apostasy.
Yeshua fasted forty days in the wilderness.
Yeshua had twelve talmidim
corresponding to the twelve patriarchs.
The 28th Rule of Eliezer
MA’AL
Paronomasia. A pun, a wordplay.
EXAMPLES:
In Amos 8:1 there is a wordplay between KETZ (Summer Fruit) and KATZ (end) The same
wordplay appears in Mt. 24:14, 32 .
The 29th Rule of Eliezer
GEMATRIA
Numerology, “theomatics.”
The Sefirot of the Tree of Life are connected by 22 paths. Each of these 22 paths corresponds to one of the 22 letters of the Hebrew alef-bet (alphabet). Each of these 22 paths represents a relationship between two of the Sefirot and a combination of two of the Sefirot. As a result each Hebrew letter is more than just a letter, it is a relationship between two Sefirot as well as a combination between two of the Sefirot.
In fact Kabbalistic tradition has it that the 22 letters were involved in the creation of the universe. This is the Kabbalistic understanding of Gen. 1:1:
Bershit bara Elohim [ALEF-TAV] hashamayim v’[ALEF-TAV] haeretz
In the beginning Elohim created ALEF-TAV the heavens and
ALEF-TAV the earth.
ALEF and TAV are the first and last letters of Hebrew and are understood in Kabbalistic understanding here to be an abreviation for the whole Hebrew ALEF-BET through which the universe was created.
This is what was meant by Yochanan’s statement in Rev. 1:8; 21:66 and 22:13. Although the Greek has ALPHA and OMEGA in these passages, the Aramaic text of these passages has ALEF and TAV.
Since the 22 letters of Hebrew each represent a relationship between two of the Sefirot as well as a combination of two Sefirot. And since the 22 letters were themselves involved in the creation, every Hebrew word is more than a word, it is a matrix of relationships and combinations among the Sefirot. Therefore on a Kabbalistic level Hebrew words are looked at as a series of such paths. This leads to several important methods of seeking out hidden messages in the text of the Scriptures.
These are among others GEMATRIA and NOTARIKON
GEMATRIA – In Hebrew each letter has a numerical value. Gematria examines Hebrew words and letters in the text in light of their numerical value. Some Christians have taken to calling this “Theomatics.”
EXAMPLES:
“Shiloh comes” in Gen.49:10 = 358 which is also the gematria (numerical value) of “Messiah” as a result the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases) paraphrase SHILOH in this passage as “Messiah” and the Talmud tells us that “Shiloh”is one of the names of the Messiah.
In Gen. 17:5, 15 YHWH changes AVRAM’S name to AVRAHAM and SARAI to SARAH.
AVRAM = “High Father” and SARAI = “dominant one”
YHWH took the YUD out of SARAI. (YUD=10) and He divided it in two making to HEYS (HEY = 5).
Thus AVRAM became AVRAHAM (Father of a multitude) and SARAI became SARAH (lady, princess)
In order for AVRAM to become AVRAHAM, SARAI had to go from being dominant to being a lady.
In Mt. 1:1, 17 Messiah is the son of David. Messiah is the son of 14 generations because David = 14. Three sets of 14 generations are given because 14*3 = 42 and 42= ELOAH (God) since Messiah is also the Son of God.
The number of the beast is 666 (Rev.13:18)
The 30th Rule of Eliezer
NOTARIKON
An acronym; anagram or acrostic. Taking the first or last letters of the words of a phrase and joining them to make a new word or, conversely, expanding a word into a phrase.
For example the word GREVOUS (NiMReTZeT) in 1Kn. 2:8 is understood in the Talmud (b.Shab. 105a) to mean:
N-OEF (adulterer)
M-O’AVI (Moabite)
R-OZEAH (murderer)
TZ-OER (enemy)
T-O’EVAH (abomination)
The first three letters of Torah are BEIT-RESH-ALEF which stand for BEN, RUACH and ABBA
(Son, Spirit and Father).
The 31st Rule of Eliezer
MUKDAM SHEHU’ MECHAR BA’INYAN
Something which precedes that is placed second.
EXAMPLE:
In 1Sam. 3:3 the words “In the Temple of YHWH”
go with the words “was not yet gone out” despite
the fact that the phrase “and Samuel was laid down
to sleep” intervenes.
The 32nd Rule of Eliezer
MUKDAM U-ME’UCHAR SHEHU’ BEPARASHIOT
Many biblical sections refer to a later time than that which precedes, also vice versa.
By this rule it is argued that Numbers 7
precedes Numbers 1 in chronology of time.
This rule explains the chronological “problems” in comparing the Synoptic Gospels.
The Pesher Method
PESHAR
Another method of the Sod level (and sometimes the drash level) we must also include a type of interpretation used at Qumran (presumably by Essenes) called “Peshar” (Strong’s 6590 & 6590) the Aramaic cognate of Hebrew “Patar” (Strong”s 6622). Although this word means “interpretation” it is generally used to refer to the interpretation of dreams and visions (as in Dan. 2:4; 4:4; 5:16; Gen. 40:8) or the solution to a puzzle. The object of the Peshar method was not to interpret a Scripture simply by examining the text itself, but by reading the text with openness to the mind of Elohim, in much the way one might interpret a dream.
The “New Testament” does in fact give support for this method of interpretation:
Now we have not received the spirit of the world but the spirit that is from Eloah, so that we might know the gifts that were given to us from Eloah, Which also we speak, not in the teaching of words of the wisdom of sons of men, but in the teaching of the spirit,
and to spiritual men we compare spiritual things. For the son of man who is in the soul does not receive spiritual things, for they are foolishness to him, and he is not able to know that which is judged spiritually. Now the spiritual man judges all things, and is not judged from man. For who knows the mind of YHWH that he might instruct him? (Is. 40:13) But we have the mind of the Messiah. (1 Cor. 2:12-16)
Now if a man from you lacks wisdom,
let him ask from Eloah,
who gives to all liberally and does not reproach, and it will be given to him. (Ya’akov 1:5)
And you also, if the anointing that you
received from him abide with you,
you will not need a man to teach you. But as the anointing is from Eloah, it teaches you concerning everything
and it is true and there is no falsehood in it. And as he has taught you, abide in him.
(1 Yochanan 2:27)
These passages do not mean that Elohim just zaps the meaning of a scripture into our heads. It does mean that the Spirit illuminates the text to us. By comparison I will have much greater success reading a text in a lighted room than in a dark room. Now this does not mean that if we are in a lighted room we need not read and study the text to understand it. In a similar way the Spirit illuminates the text and opens our minds to the text, nonetheless we must read and study the text in order to understand it.
Several examples of the Pesher method are to be found in the commentaries found at Qumran, which are therefore known as “Pesharim” (plural for Peshar). These Pesharim frequently take the form of citing a passage of Scripture followed by the words, “peshero” (i.e. “the interpretation is…”) or “pesher-ha-davar” (i.e. “the interpretation of the word is…”. Often the interpretations involved reading the recent history and beliefs of the Qumran sect (presumably Essenism) into the text.
For example the Habakkuk Commentary (1QpHab) on Habakkuk 2:4b reads:
But the just shall live by his faith (Hab. 2:4b) The Pesher is, this concerns all those who observe the Torah in the House of Judah, whom Elohim will deliver to the Beit Din because of their sufferings and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness.
A similar tendency seems to have existed among the ancient Nazarenes. For example the Nazarene writer Hegesippus (c. 180 C.E.) writes concerning the martyrdom of Ya’akov HaTzadik (James the Just):
…and they fulfilled that which is written in Isaiah [3:10]
Let us take away the just, because he is offensive to us; wherefore they shall eat the fruit of their doings°.
More examples may be found in the fragmentary remains of the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah, five portions of which are preserved by Jerome in his commentary on Isaiah.
FORMS OF MIDRASHIC EXEGESIS
FORMS OF MIDRASHIC EXEGESIS
In addition to knowing and understanding the rules and principles of hermeneutics it is also important to recognize the forms of Midrashic exegesis. Two prominent types of Homiletic Midrashic Exegesis are Petihah (Also called Proem) and Yalammedenu.
Petihah (Proem) Homiletic Midrash
Petihah (Aramaic: Petihta) is a Hebrew word meaning “opening” while “Proem” is a Greek word meaning prelude. In a Petihta Homiletic Exogesis an introductory text is given, a sermon is built on this introductory texts often using additional texts. The sermon closes with a final text which usually repeats or alludes to the initial text. This process usually involves Hillel’s second rule, G’ZARA SHEVA (equivalence of expressions) thru which catchwords or keywords link the sermon together, being found in the initial text, the final text, often in the additional texts, and in the exposition itself.
An example of Petihah Homiletic Exegesis can be found in the New Testament in Romans 9:6-26:
Keywords: seed, children/son & called. Introduction: Rom. 9:1-5 Initial Text: Gen. 21:12 = Rom. 9:6-8 Second Text: Gen. 18:10 = Rom. 9:9 Exposition: Rom. 9:10-28 Final Text: Is. 1:9 = Rom. 9:29
Another Example-:
Keywords: Righteous/Just; believe/faith
Introduction: Rom. 1:16 Initial Text: Rom. 1:17 Exposition: Rom. 1:18-2:5
Second Text: Rom. 2:6 = Ps. 69:12 & Prov. 24:12 Exposition: Rom. 2:7-3:9
Third Text: Rom. 3:10-18 = Ps. 14:1-3/53:1-3/Eccl. 7:20Exposition: Rom. 3:19-4:2
Fourth Text: Rom. 4:3 = Gen. 15:6 Exposition: Rom. 4:4-6
Fifth Text: Rom. 4:7-8 = Ps. 32:1-2 Final Exposition: Rom. 4:9-8:39
A whole series of examples of this type of Midrash may be found in Hebrews. Hebrews is an extended Homiletic Midrash on Psalm 110. In this Homiletic Midrash, Paul uses five sub-Midrashim which reveal the outline of the book as follows:
L THE MESSIAH HUMBLED AND EXALTED (1:1-3:6)
(YHWH said to my Adonai, sit at my right hand. Ps. 110:1 a)
A. Initial texts: (Heb. 1:5-13)(Ps. 2:7; 2Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:46/Ps. 97:7; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; Ps. 102:25-27; Ps. 110:1)
B. Exposition (1:14-2:5 )
C. Second Text: (2:6-8a) (Ps. 8:4-6)
D. Exposition: (2:8b-3:6)
H. THE WORLD YET TO BE SUBJECT TO HIM (3:6-4:13) (until your enemies are made your footstool Ps. 110:1 b) A. Initial text: (3:7-3:11) (Ps. 95:7-11) B. Exposition (3:12-4:3)
C. Second text (4:4) (Gen. 2:2)
D. Exposition (4:5-14)
18 Rom. 3:10-18 actually cites also Ps. 5:10(9); Ps. 140:4(3); Ps. 10:7; Is. 59:7-8; Prov. 1:16
IH. A MIDRASH on MELCHIZADEK (4:14-7:28)
(A priest forever after the order of Melchizadek Ps. 110:4) A. Introductory exposition (4:14-5:5) B. Initial text: (5:6) (Ps. 110:4) C. Exposition (5:7-11)
D. Parenthetical (5:12-6:12)
E. Second text (6:13-14) (Gen. 22:17) F. Exposition (6:15-7:28)
IV. THE PRIEST AT THE RIGHT HAND OF YHWH (8:1-9:28)
(Ps. 110:1 and Ps. 110:4 brought together) A. Introductory exposition (8:1-7) B. Initial text (8:8-12) (Jer. 31:31-34) C. Exposition (8:13-9:19) D. Second text (9:20) (Ex. 24:8) E. Exposition (9:21-9:28)
V. IN DEFENSE OF THE TEMPLE CEREMONIES (10:1-11:40) A. Introductory exposition (10:1-4)
B. Initial text (10:5-7) (Ps. 40:6-8)
C. Exposition (10:8-14)
D. Second text (10:15-17) (Jer. 3 1:33-34) E. Exposition (10:18-35)
F. Third text (10:36-38) (Hab. 2:3-4)
G. Exposition (10:39-11:40)
VI. CONCLUSION (12:1-13:25) Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash
Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash
Another form of Midrashic Exogesis is called Yelammedenu Homiletic Midrash. This form of midrash is very similar to the Proem Midrash, but it begins with a question or problem. A New Testament Example is:
Keywords: tradition, commandment & honor
Question/Problem: Mt. 15:1-3
Initial Texts: Ex. 20:12; 21:17 = Mt. 15:4
Exposition: Mt. 15:5-6
Final Text: Is. 29:13-14 = Mt. 15:7-9
I have given here only a few examples of each of these two forms of Midrash as found in the books of the “New Testament”. However you will find many examples of these forms throughout the “New Testament”. Identifying these forms will be an important aid to you in understanding the text. This is because identifying these forms as they occur will help you to identify the verses that are being commented upon, and help you to understand the exposition given by the NT exegete as comparing these two or more Tanak passages in light of each other.
Yeshua and Tradition
by
James Scott Trimm
Yeshua himself seems to have also accepted the “traditions of our fathers” which had been passed down orally.
In John 7:37-38 we read:
“And on the great day, which is the last of the feast, Yeshua stood and cried out and said, If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures have said, rivers of water of life will flow from his belly.”
The occasion is the last great day of Sukkot (Jn. 7:2) and the setting appears to be the water libation ceremony at the Temple as prescribed by the Oral Law. A priest had a flask of gold filled with water and another has a flask of gold filled with wine. There were two silver bowls perforated with holes like a narrow snout. One was wide for the water the other is narrow for the wine. The priests poured the wine and water into each of their bowls. The wine and water mixed together. The wine flowing slowly through the narrow snout and the water flowing quickly through the wider snout. (m.Sukkot 4:9) Yeshua said that this ritual from the Oral Law was actually prophetic and symbolic of himself!
In all four Gospels Yeshua participates in the Passover Sader. The elements of the sader, such as the “cup of redemption”; dipping in bitter herbs; and the afikomen (the last piece of unleavened bread passed around and eaten at the end) all come from the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna (m.Pes. 10). Yeshua not only accepted and kept these Oral Law rituals, but also spoke of them being prophetic of himself.
In Matthew 23:35 Yeshua says “…upon you may come all the righteous blood which has been shed upon the earth, from Hevel the righteous, to Z’kharyah Ben Berekhyah, whom you slew between the Temple and the alter.”
Yeshua here relies heavily on the Oral Law in this passage in that he ties together two separate Oral Law traditions to make his point. The first is an Oral Law tradition concerning the murder of Havel (Able) that understands the plural word “bloods” crying out from the ground in Gen. 4:10 to signify that whoever kills one person is guilty of killing everyone:
…it is said , “The bloods of your brother cry” (Gen. 4:10)
It does not say, “The blood of your brother,” but.
“The bloods of your brother”—his blood and the blood
of all those who were destined to be born from him.
Another matter—the bloods of your brother—
for his blood was splattered on trees and stones….
whoever destroys a single Israelite soul
is deemed by Scripture as if he had destroyed the whole world
and whoever saves a single Israelite soul
by Scripture as if he had saved the whole world…
(m.San. 4:5)
The second Oral Law tradition is one surrounding Zechariah ben Jehoidai (2Chron. 24:20-21). The extant text of Matt. 23:35 reads “Zechariah ben Berechiah”. This, however, seems to be a scribal error. A scribe seems to have confused “Zechariah ben Jehoidai”(2Chron. 24:20-21) with “Zechariah ben Berechiah” (Zech. 1:1). The original Hebrew text used by the ancient Nazarenes read correctly with “Zechariah ben Jehoidai”
The fourth century “Church Father” Jerome writes:
In the Gospel which the Nazarenes use,
instead of “son of Barachias”
we have found written “son of Joiada.”
(Jerome; Commentary on Matthew 23:35)
Yeshua draws on a tradition surrounding Zechariah ben Jehoidai which is recorded in the Talmud. This tradition parallels the tradition concerning Abel above. In this tradition Zechariah’s blood also cries out for vengence but ceases its cry lest all Israel be destroyed. The Babylonian Talmud records the story this way:
Nebuzaradan, [After that] he saw the blood of Zechariah
seething. ‘What is this?’ cried he. ‘It is the blood of sacrifices,
which has been spilled,’ they answered. ‘Then,’ said he,
‘bring [some animal blood] and I will compare them, to see
whether they are alike.’ So he slaughtered animals and
compared them, but they were dissimilar. ‘Disclose [the secret]
to me, or if not, I will tear your flesh with iron combs,’ he
threatened. They replied: ‘This is [the blood of] a priest and a
prophet, who foretold the destruction of Jerusalem to the
Israelites, and they killed him.’ ‘I,’ said he, ‘will appease him.’
So he brought the scholars and slew them over him,
yet it did not cease [to boil]. He brought schoolchildren
and slew them over him, still it did not rest; he brought the
young priests and slew them over him, and still it did not rest,
until he had slain ninety four thousand, and still it did not rest.
Whereupon he approached him and cried out, ‘Zechariah,
Zechariah, I have destroyed the flower of them: dost thou
desire me to massacre them all?’ Straightway it rested.
Thoughts of repentance came into his mind: if they, who killed
one person only, have been so [severely punished], what will
be my fate? So he fled, sent his testament to his house, and
became a proselyte.
(b.San 96b)
While the Jerusalem Talmud has:
Rabbi Jochanan said, Eighty thousand priests were slain
for the blood of Zachariah.
Rabbi Judas asked Rabbi Achan, Where did they kill
Zachariah? Was it in the woman’s court, or in the court of
Israel? He answered: Neither in the court of Israel, nor in the
court of women, but in the court of the priests; and they did not
treat his blood in the same manner as they were wont to treat
the blood of a ram or a young goat. For of these it is written,
He shall pour out his blood, and cover it with dust. But it is
written here, The blood is in the midst of her: she set it upon
the top of the rock; she poured it not upon the ground. (Ezek.
xxiv. 7.) But why was this? That it might cause
fury to come up to take vengeance: I have set his blood upon
the top of a rock, that it should not be covered. They
committed seven evils that day: they murdered a priest, a
prophet, and a king; they shed the blood of the innocent: they
polluted the court: that day was the Sabbath : and the day of
expiation. When therefore Nebuzaradan came there (viz.
Jerusalem), he saw his blood bubbling, and said to them,
What meaneth this? They answered, It is the blood of calves,
lambs, and rams, which we have offered upon the altar. He
commanded them, that they should bring calves, and lambs,
and rams, and said I will try whether this be their blood:
accordingly they brought and slew them, but the blood of
(Zachariah) still bubbled, but the blood of these
did not bubble. Then he said, Declare to me the truth of the
matter, or else I will comb your flesh with iron combs. Then
said they to him, He was a priest, prophet, and judge, who
prophesied to Israel all these calamities which we have
suffered from you; but we arose against him, and slew him.
Then, said he, I will appease him: then he took the rabbis
and slew them upon his (viz. Zachariah’s) blood, and he was
not yet appeased. Next he took the young boys from the
schools, and slew them upon his blood, and yet it bubbled.
Then he brought the young priests and slew them in the same
place, and yet it still bubbled. So he slew at length ninety-four
thousand persons upon his blood, and it did not as yet cease
bubbling. Then he drew near to it and said,
O Zachariah, Zachariah, thou hast occasioned the death of the
chief of thy countrymen; shall I slay them all? Then the blood
ceased, and did bubble no more.
(j.Ta’anit 69)
Notice Yeshua says “between the Temple and the alter” Here Yeshua specifies the location of Zechariah’s murder more specifically than the written Tanak does. The Tanak says only that the murder occurred “in the court of the House of YHWH”. However the oral tradition recorded in the Talmud is more specific:
Rabbi Judas asked Rabbi Achan, Where did they kill
Zachariah? Was it in the woman’s court, or in the court of
Israel? He answered: Neither in the court of Israel,
nor in the court of women, but in the court of the priests
(j.Ta’anit 69)
While the Tanak places the murder simply “in the court of the House of YHWH”, Yeshua places it more specificly in the Court of Priests located “between the Temple and the alter” just as the Talmud proclaims it. Yeshua’s source here is Oral tradition and not the written Tanak.
These two murders are connected by the tradition that their blood cried out for vengence, but this is a connection built upon TRADITION.
I could go on and on with examples, but I think I have made my point.
Nazarenes and the Oral Law
By James Trimm
There has been a great deal of discussion in the movement today over how we as Nazarenes should view Jewish tradition, Oral Law and the Talmud.
Now it is important to understand the first century world from which
Nazarene Judaism emerged. There were three major sects of Judaism at the time: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.
The first century writer Josephus writes of the Pharisees:
“…the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which arenot written in the law of Moses;…”
(Josephus; Ant. 13:11:6)
The Pharisees became what is known as Rabbinic Judaism and eventually wrote these traditions (known as “Oral Law”) down in the Mishna and later the Talmud. The Mishna and Talmud are not the Oral Law, but they do contain the Oral Law as recorded by the Pharisees.
The core of the Talmud is the Mishna. The Mishna was complied around 250 CE by Rabbi Y’hudah Ha Nasi from ealier oral and/or written traditions. It cites the opinions or Rabbis and teachers who lived in the generation immediately following Ezra and Nehemiah, up until the time of its composition. The Talmud was compiled around 500 CE and consists of the Mishna written in Hebrew and the commentary to the Mishna, known as the Gemara, surrounding it in Aramaic characters.
The Sadducees rejected these traditions, as Josephus continues:
“…for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we
are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are delivered from the tradition of our forefathers…”
(ibid)
The Sadducees HAD to reject the Oral Law. They did not believe in a resurrection or an afterlife. They had rejected the things that Judaism has always held to. It was hard enough to make their views compatible with the Written Torah, it was easier for them to simply reject the Oral Torah out of hand. In fact they HAD to reject the Oral Law if they wanted to reject any understanding of the written Torah that included a resurrection and an afterlife!
Then there were the Essenes, these are they who are believed to have
written the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Essenes did not reject the concept of Oral Law, as the Sadducees did, but they did have an ALTERNATE set of such traditions, many of which are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the Scrolls is a document called MMT (“Some of the Works of teh Torah). In this document the Essenes point out some of their differences with the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna. For example in the Mishna (Hullin 4:1-5) there is an Oral tradition forbidding the eating of the fetus of a slaughtered animal, while item 12 in MMT allows the eating of such a fetus. Many of the points addressed in MMT are addressed directly at points of Oral Torah found in the Mishna. Essenes did not reject the Oral Torah, they had their own understanding of it.
Now our Nazarene forefathers had roots in Pharisaic Judaism and in Essene Judaism but not in Sadduceean Judaism.
Yeshua’s teachings often echoed those of the famous Pharisaic teacher Hillel. When Yeshu was still a child Hillel taught “Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you” while Yeshua grew up to teach “do onto others as you would have them do to you.”
The Nazarenes also clearly had roots in Essene Judaism. There is evidence that Yochanan the immerser (“John the Baptist”) came out of the Qumran community. Several of Yeshua’s Talmidim (including Kefa) had first been talmidim of Yochanan. Both the Essenes and the Nazarenes called themselves “The Way” and “Sons of Light”.
The Esseneic and Pharisaic origins of Nazarene Judaism are easily
documented and could fill volumes. I have reduced them here to a short paragraph each.
The written Torah is not complete in itself. Instead it presupposes that the reader also has access to additional information. For example the observance of Torah involves the use of the Hebrew calendar. Nowhere does the written Torah tell us the inner workings of this calendar, it presupposes that this information was also passed down to us orally by our forefathers.
There are actually two types of “Oral Law” and they are very different from one another.
The first is Oral Torah from Sinai. Moshe was on Mt. Sinai for forty days. During this time her received much of the material that we know as the Written Torah as recorded in the five books of Moses. However if one to get the five books of Moses as a “books on tape” edition, it would not take anywhere near forty days to listen to them. It would not even take one day to listen to them. So is this ALL the information Moses received on Mount Sinai? Why does Leviticus 26:46 say that Moses received “Laws” (plural) on Mount Sinai? Could he have received Torah She-Bi-Khatav (The Written Torah) and Torah She-Al-Peh (The Oral Torah)?
As we stated earlier, there is not sufficient information in the written Torah to allow it to be observed without some additional information.
For example the written Torah says not to go out of ones “place” on the Sabbath (Ex. 16:29) but just what does this mean? If the Sabbath starts and I am in the latrine, must I stay there until it is over? If I am in my home and the Sabbath starts, must I wait until the Sabbath end to go out to the latrine? Does it mean I cannot leave my house? my yard? my city? Surely the ancient Hebrews (our forefathers) asked Moses what this commandment meant. Did Moses shrug his shoulders and say “heck if I know”, or was this part of the information he also received on Mount Sinai? If so then our forefathers had this information. Is this what the Psalmist means when he says:
1: Give ear, O my people, to my Torah: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2: I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:
3: Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us.
4: We will not hide them from their children, showing to the generation to come the praises of YHWH, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done.
(Ps. 78:1-4)
Another example can be found in Deut. 12:21 which tells us that if we live to far from the Temple and need to slaughter an animal to eat, YHWH says we may do so as long as we do it “as I [YHWH] have commanded you”. But there are no instructions for the ritual slaughter of an animal in the written Torah. This commandment of the written Torah must be alluding to an oral companion to the written Torah.
One can give many more examples. What does it mean not to “work” on the Shabbat? what constitutes “work”? How does one “celebrate” the Shabbat (Ex. 31:16)? What constitutes a “Bill of Divorcement” (Deut. 24:1f) what is it supposed to say?
When Ezra read the Torah to the people in Nehemiah 8:1-8, he and the Levites also “gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading” (8:7-8). They gave them an oral companion to the written text:
1: And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spoke unto Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Torah of Moses, which YHWH had commanded to Israel.
2: And Ezra the priest brought the Torah before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.
3: And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the Book of the Torah.
4: And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.
5: And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up:
6: And Ezra blessed YHWH, the great Elohim. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped YHWH with their faces to the ground.
7: Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the Torah: and the people stood in their place.
8: So they read in the Book in the Torah of Elohim distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
(Nehemiah 8:1-8)
When the old Worldwide Church of God began observing the biblical festivals, one of the problems they ran into was how to celebrate them. Only sketchy information is given in the written Torah on many of these festivals (we will revisit this issue again later in this article in relation to Yeshua’s observances of Sukkot and Passover).
When it comes to answering these questions, we can turn to the understandings our forefathers had of these things, which they passed down to us orally, or we can make something up. Short of a mutually accepted pipeline to Elohim, those are our only choices.
Another form of Oral Law are the decrees from the Elders. The Elders are said to have ha the “halachic authority”. Halachic authority is the authority to make halachic determinations interpreting the Torah forbidding and permitting activities based on these interpretations (for example if a matter came up which was not settled by the written Torah), and resolving matters between fellow believers. The word “halacha” means “the way to walk.” Torah observance requires halachic authority for three reasons. First there are matters about which the written Torah is ambiguous and must be clarified. Secondly is the matter of conflicting Torah commands. For example the Torah requires the priests to circumcise on the eight day after a birth, but also requires rest from work on the Sabbath. Which commandment holds priority? Finally the Torah requires us to establish courts (Deut. 16:18).
In the Torah the Halachic authority was originally held by Moses himself (Ex. 18:13) but later a council of Elders were appointed (Ex. 18:13-26; Dt. 1:9-18) These Elders showed men “the way wherein they must walk” (i.e. Halacha) (Ex. 18:20) Their judgments were regarded as the judgment of Elohim himself (Dt. 1:17) and were even called “Torah” (Dt. 17:11) At first these men had authority only in small matters (Ex. 18:22, 26; Dt. 1:17) but later their authority was expanded (Dt. 17:8). This council was later defined as seventy Elders whom Elohim placed his Spirit upon (Num. 11:16-17; 24-25).
The decrees of these elders added to the body of what was known as the “Oral Law” in much the same was as “legal precedence” does in secular law today.
One classic example of a matter settled by a Decree of the Elders was the issue of circumcision on the Sabbath. Circumcision is commanded to be done on the eighth day (Gen. 17:11) yet on every seventh day no work is allowed (Ex. 20:10). The Elders decreed that the commandment to circumcise on the eighth day held priority over the commandment to rest on the Sabbath (as recorded in the Mishna m.Shabbat 18:3-19:2 and in the Talmud b.Shabbat 128a). Yeshua alluded to and agreed with this Decree of the Elders when he said:
If a man is circumcised on the day of the Sabbath
that the Torah of Moshe be not loosed,
do you murmur against me because
I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath day?
(Jn. 7:23)
Similarly we read in the Talmud:
Rabbi Eleazar answered and said: If circumcision
which attaches to one only of the two hundred and
forty eight members of the human body, suspends
the Sabbath, how much more shall [the saving of]
the whole body suspend the Sabbath!
b.Yoma 85b
Yeshua clearly advocated and recognized the authority of these Elders when he said such things as “…whoever shall say to his brother, RAKA, shall be liable to the Sanhedrin…” (Mt. 5:22) and “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat…” (Mt. 23:1).
At the same time Yeshua also took issue with the Decrees of the Elders when they conflicted with Scripture (Mt. 15; Mt. 23)
The Torah also allowed for the Halachic authority to be held by a King (Dt. 17:8-12; 14-20). Eventually the Elders decided to establish such a monarchy (1Sam. 8:1-7). The throne of these Kings was sees as being “the throne of Elohim” (1Chron. 29:23) Their Halachic authority became termed “the key of the House of David” (Is. 22:21-22).
The Pharisees once held the Keys of the House of David. Mt. 23:13 is key to understanding Yeshua’s attitude to the Halachic authority of the Pharisees. Here Yeshua says:
But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
For you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men;
for you neither go in,
nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
A parallel passage appears in Lk. 11:52:
Woe to you scribes!
For you have taken away the key of knowledge.
you did not enter in yourselves,
and those who were entering in you hindered.
Now when we look at these two passages together it becomes clear that the “key” in Luke 11:52 had the potential to open up or shut up the Kingdom of Heaven. This “key” is clearly then “the key of the house of David” in Is. 22:22:
The key of the House of David I will lay on his shoulder;
so he shall open, and no one shall shut;
and he shall shut and no one shall open.
The Pharisees took away the key (authority) thus shutting up the
Kingdom. They lost the authority, it was taken from them and given to Yeshua’s Talmidim:
In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give “the keys of the Kingdom” to Kefa and his other talmidim:
And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
The Pharisees lost this authority because of hypocrisy. Yeshua describes their hypocrisy in Mt. 23 as follows:
On Moshe’s seat sit the scribes and P’rushim.
And all that he (Moshe) says to you observe and do.
But not according to their works,
for they say, but do not.
(Mt. 23:2-3)
Yeshua repeatedly charges the Pharisees with Hypocrisy (Mt. 6; 15:7
and Matt. 23 for examples). Yeshua often charged Pharisees with
“hypocrisy” even the Talmud itself makes the same association:
King Jannai said to his wife’, `Fear not the Pharisees and the
non-Pharisees but the hypocrites who are the Pharisees; because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Phineas’
(b.Sotah 22b)
Job 13:16 says “a hypocrite shall not come before him.”
Based on this verse the Talmud itself correctly lists Hypocrites as one of four classes who will not receive the presence of the Shekhinah:
R. Hisda also said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba: Four classes
will not receive presence of the Shechinah, — the class of scoffers,
the class of liars, the class of hypocrites, and the class of
slanderers. `The class of scoffers’ — as it is written, He withdrew
His hand from the scoffers.(Hosea 7:5) `The class of liars’ — as it is
written, He that telleth lies, shall not tarry in my sight.(Ps. 101:7)
`The class of hypocrites’ — as it is written, For a hypocrite shall
not come before him.(Job 13:16) `The class of slanderers — as it is
written, For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness:
neither shall evil dwell with thee,’(Ps. 5:5) [which means] Thou art
righteous, and hence there will not be evil in thy abode.
(b.San. 103a)
We know from Numbers 11:16-17 that the Elders must have the Spirit of Elohim upon them, but since hypocrites cannot receive the presence of the Shekhinah, they cannot serve as valid Elders.
Job says: “the congregation of the hypocrites shall be desolate” (Job. 15:34)
Thus Yeshua took the Keys from the Pharisees and gave these keys to Kefa and his Talmidim:
This key is the halachic authority. Yeshua recognized that the Pharisees held that halachic authority but he also tells us that they had squandered it by rejecting the Kingdom offer (see article “The Kingdom Offer”) and refusing to use the key to help Messiah open up the Messianic Kingdom.
The Messiah himself also had the Key of David (Rev. 3:7). In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give “the keys of the Kingdom” to Kefa and his students:
And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
This passage is best understood when compared to Mt. 18:15-20 This passage deals with the law of witnesses (Mt. 18:16 = Dt. 19:15) and refers to an “assembly” (Mt. 18:17) which has the power to “bind” and “loose” (Mt. 18:18) just as does Mt. 16:18-19. Since Mt. 18:16 quotes Dt. 19:15 it is clear that the “assembly” in Mt. 18:17 (and also Mt. 16:18) is the “priests and judges who serve in those days” in Dt. 19:17. This is also clear because this “assembly” has the power to “bind” and “loose.” These are two Semitic idioms used in Rabbinic literature as technical terms referring to Halachic authority. To “bind” means to “forbid” an activity and to “loose” means to permit an activity (as in j.Ber. 5b; 6c; j.San. 28a; b.Ab. Zar. 37a; b.Ned. 62a; b.Yeb. 106a; b.Bets. 2b; 22a; b.Ber. 35a; b.Hag. 3b). Thus in Mt. 16:18-19 & 18:18 Yeshua gave his students the Halachic authority which we see them using in Acts 15.
Today we as restored Nazarenes must also have our own unique halachic authority apart from that of Rabbinic Judaism. As “sons of light” we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers. While we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers (Rabbinic Judaism) we must “come out from among them and be separate” (2Cor. 6:14-18 & Is. 52:11) for we must ourselves establish courts (Dt. 16:18).
We cannot turn to the “wisdom” of the “Pharisaic Rabbinical” Rabbis and sages of the last two thousand years and simply “accept all the Rabbinical Halakhah, except where Mashiach and His Talmidim clearly and definitely offer another position of Halakhah” for the Tenach warns us:
How can you say, “We are wise, and the Torah of YHWH is with us”?
Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.
The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken.
Behold they have rejected the Word of YHWH;
So what wisdom do they have?
(Jer. 8:8-9)
The unbelieving sages and Rabbis of “Pharisaic Rabbinical” Judaism claim they “are wise” and that “the Torah of the LORD is with us.” But they have “rejected the Word of YHWH” (i.e. Yeshua the Messiah; see Jn. 1:1, 14; Rev. 19:13) “So what wisdom do they have?”
There are preserved for us five fragments from an ancient Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah in which the fourth century Nazarene writer makes it clear that Nazarenes of the fourth century were not “following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah.” The following is taken from the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:14:
“And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel¦”
The Nazarenes explain the two houses as the two houses of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees… [they Pharisees] scattered and defiled the precepts of the Torah by traditions and mishna. And these two houses
did not accept the Savior
The Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:20-21 has:
The Scribes and the Pharisees tell you to listen to them
answer them like this:
“It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe
consults its own idols. We must not, therefore, consult your
dead [sages] about the living one.”
So it is clear that the original Nazarenes were not “following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah.”
Let us return to the subject of the Oral Law in general. Now in Acts 23:6 Paul states “I am a Pharisee”. The Pharisees maintained a belief in the traditions handed down by their forefathers. As Josephus writes:
…the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great
many observances by succession from their fathers,
which are not written in the law of Moses; …
(Josephus; Ant. 13:10:6)s
Concerning his Pharisee background Paul says:
And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my
contemporaries in my own nation, being more
exceedingly zealous for the tradition of my fathers.
(Gal. 1:14)
Notice that in Acts 28:17 Paul insists:
I have done nothing against our people
or the customs of our fathers.
(Acts 28:17)
Paul writes to the Thessalonians concerning these “traditions”:
“Therefore, brothers stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught…
withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly and not after the traditions which he received from us.”
(2Thes. 2:15; 3:6)
Paul even made use of these oral “traditions” in his writings. Paul says “…they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them: and that rock was Messiah.” (1Cor. 10:4). The Torah records more than one occasion when Moshe (Moses) brought forth water from a rock (Ex. 16:4-35; 17:1-9; Num. 20:1-13; 16-20). According to Rabbinic tradition the rock did in fact follow them. The Talmud says that it was “a moveable well” (b.Shabbat 35a) and calls it “the Well of Miriam” (b.Ta’anit 9a). Rashi comments on b.Ta’anit 9a saying that the rock “rolled and went along with Israel, and it was the rock Moshe struck.” The tradition of the moving rock known as the “Well of Miriam” is also found in B’midbar Parshat Chukkat. Paul’s statement that the rock “followed them” testifies to the fact that he accepted this oral tradition as being factual.
The second century Nazarene writer Gish’fa (Heggissipus) made use in his writings of these oral traditions. Eusebius writes of him:
And he quotes some passages from The Gospel according to
the Hebrews and from ‘The Syriac’, and some particulars from
the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was … from the Hebrews,
and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition
of the Jews.”
(Eccl. Hist. 4:22)
Yeshua himself seems to have also accepted the “traditions of our fathers” which had been passed down orally.
In John 7:37-38 we read:
“And on the great day, which is the last of the feast, Yeshua stood and cried out and said, If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures have said, rivers of water of life will flow from his belly.”
The occasion is the last great day of Sukkot (Jn. 7:2) and the setting appears to be the water libation ceremony at the Temple as prescribed by the Oral Law. A priest had a flask of gold filled with water and another has a flask of gold filled with wine. There were two silver bowls perforated with holes like a narrow snout. One was wide for the water the other is narrow for the wine. The priests poured the wine and water into each of their bowls. The wine and water mixed together. The wine flowing slowly through the narrow snout and the water flowing quickly through the wider snout. (m.Sukkot 4:9) Yeshua said that this ritual from the Oral Law was actually prophetic and symbolic of himself!
In all four Gospels Yeshua participates in the Passover Sader. The elements of the sader, such as the “cup of redemption”; dipping in bitter herbs; and the afikomen (the last piece of unleavened bread passed around and eaten at the end) all come from the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna (m.Pes. 10). Yeshua not only accepted and kept these Oral Law rituals, but also spoke of them being prophetic of himself.
There is an interesting story in the Talmud which makes a profound point about the Oral Law:
Our Rabbis taught: A certain heathen once came before Shammai and asked him, ‘How many Torahs have you?’ ‘Two,’ he replied: ‘the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.’ ‘I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Oral Torah; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah [only]. [But] he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth; the following day he reversed [them ] to him. ‘But yesterday you did not teach them to me thus,’ he protested. ‘Must you then not rely upon me? Then rely upon me with respect to the Oral [Torah] too.’
(b.Shabbat 31a)
The point of the story is that the same forefathers that passed the written Torah down to us, also passed the Oral Torah down to us with it. What logic is there in accepting the written Torah that they delivered to us as truth, while rejecting the Oral Law passed down by the very same forefathers?
Now we as Nazarenes do not believe that the Rabbis of Pharisaic/Rabbinic Judaism held the power to bind and loose after the first century, perhaps not even before the first century. Thus we should not simply accept these rulings, on the other hand we should not simply reject them out of hand. In may cases the Talmud or the related halachic Midrashim present the line of logic which led to the decisions being made. We should look at these lines of logic to determine if the decisions were valid and sound.
For example I heard one Messianic Rabbi bashing the Talmud and claiming that the Rabbis had added thirty-nine rules to the simple commandment not to work on the Sabbath. In fact the thirty-nine categories (given in m.Shabbat 7:2) are drawn from the text of the Torah. In the Torah the instructions concerning the building of the Tabernacle are interrupted by a restatement of the commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:12-17). The connection this section of Exodus has with the surrounding material seems to be the word “work” (Ex. 31:14) and “workmanship” (Ex. 31:3) (same word in the Hebrew). Thus the commandment not to “work” on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:14) is restated as a reminder to abstain from the “workmanship” of the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 31:3. Thus the term “work” in the commandment not to work on the Sabbath may be elaborated and defined by the thirty-nine categories of “workmanship” involved in building the Tabernacle.
We as Nazarenes should not reject the material in the Talmud out of hand, we should seek to understand it. Then we should “eat the date and spit out the seeds”. The same approach should be taken to the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Nazarenes should not be modern day Sadducees.
The Messiah is Jewish Tradition
By
James Scott Trimm
One of the most important evidences of the importance of the Oral Law for believers in Yeshua as Messiah, is that the Messiah concept is in itself Oral Law.
Let me explain what I mean. Using the Tanak alone, one cannot demonstrate that there is a single eschatological figure to come called “The Messiah”. If you presented a group of people who never heard of the concept of “The Messiah” with copies of the Tanak and left them alone for years, you would not come back to hear them talking about a figure known as “The Messiah”.
Yes there are references to a figure called “the servant” in Isaiah. And there is a prophecy of “a prophet” like Moses in Deut 18 (some take this to refer generally to each of the prophets after Moses). And there are also prophecies in the Tanak concerning a figure called “the branch” using a variety of different Hebrew words for “branch”. And there are a number of other passages referring to figures sometimes with no appellation at all. How do we know that these and other prophecies speak of a single figure called “The Messiah” and not to a number of different figures altogether? The answer is “tradition”.
Do a word search on “The Messiah” in the Tanak and you will get zero results. If one rejects tradition, then one rejects the very basis for the concept of “The Messiah”, Yeshua or otherwise.
I have found in seeking to debate an anti-missionary that they want to limit the material to be cited in the debate to be the Tanak only. This is odd because the anti-missionaries I am speaking of are Rabbinic Jews. Why should they want to eliminate the Targums, Talmuds, Midrashim, Zohar and other Rabbinic literature from the debate? Neither of us are Kaaraites, so why take a Kaarite position in the debate? The reason friends, is that the concept of the Messiah is essentially an Oral Law concept! And the anti-missionaries KNOW THIS WELL. The Messiah is almost never mentioned in the Tanak by that title (The possible exceptions being “YHWH has anointed me” (Is. 61:1); “His anointed” (Ps. 2:2) “an anointed shall be cut off” (Dan. 9:26). Even these passages are unclear in the Tanak alone, as they could simply refer to a “an anointed one” rather than “The Messiah.”
The only way to demonstrate clearly that any given passage is in fact a reference to Messiah is to rely upon the Oral Law (thru such sources as the Targums, the Talmuds, the Midrashim and the Zohar). It is the Oral Law that ties all of these passages together into a single figure known as “The Messiah.”
For example the word “Messiah” never appears in Isaiah 53, yet we know form the Targum, the Talmud, the Midrash Rabbah and the Zohar that Isaiah 53 speaks of the Messiah.
This is why, while some Rabbinic Jews and even Orthodox Rabbis have accepted Yeshua as the Messiah, I know of no case where a Kaarite (Karaites reject the Oral Law) has come to Messiah. There is virtually no way to make the case to a Kaarite that Yeshua is the Messiah. By contrast I can show any open minded Rabbinic Jew that Yeshua is the Messiah of Judaism, and I have done just that in my free book Mashiach: The Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective.
In fact it is for this very reason that Yeshua’s original followers came from the Pharisees and Essenes and few if any came from the Sadducees. That is because the Sadducees rejected the Oral Law and thus had no framework for the very concept of the Messiah and they could not accept Yeshua as a Messiah when they did not even accept the concept of Messiah at all.
The idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all.
Out of Egypt I have Called My Son
By
James Scott Trimm
We read in the Goodnews according to Matthew:
13 And after they had departed, and behold, the angel of YHWH appeared to Yosef in a dream, saying: Arise, take the boy and His mother, and flee you away into Egypt and be there. And there you will stay until I return to you: for Herod is seeking to put the boy to death.
14 And he arose, <and did as the angel had said to him,> and took up the boy and His mother by night, and departed into Egypt,
15 And was there until the death of Herod: to fulfill what was spoken from YHWH by the prophet, who said, From out of Egypt I have called, My Son. (Hosea 11:1)
(Matt. 2:13-15 HRV)
In an attempt to discredit this account, as well as the Messiahship of Yeshua, Tovia Singer and other anti-missionaries have claimed that Matthew quotes this passage of Hosea totally out of context. In reality Matthew’s use of this passage as a Messianic prophecy is perfectly justified, and in fact shows a great deal of Jewish insight.
First off it is important to have a basic understanding of Jewish hermeneutics. In Judaism it is understood that there are four levels of understanding of a passage, which correspond to the four Hebrew letters that spell the Hebrew word PaRDeS (Paradise) The word PRDS is also an acronym (called in Judaism “notarikon”) for:
[P]ashat (Heb. “simple”) The plain, simple, literal level of understanding.
[R]emez (Heb. “hint”) The implied level of understanding.
[D]rash (Heb. “search”) The allegorical, typological or homiletically level of understanding.
[S]od (Heb. “hidden”) The hidden, secret or mystical level of understanding.
These are the four levels of understanding. The Four Gospels each express one of these four levels of understanding of the life of Yeshua.
The Pashat Gospel is Mark. Mark wrote a simple, brief, concise, pashat account of Yeshua’s life for the Goyim (Gentiles) while he was in Babylon with Kefa (1Kefa 5:13). He wrote his Gospel in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic for his Syrian and Assyrian readers in Babylon. Mark thus compiled material from Matthew and Luke and simplified it to create a simple version for Goyim. .
The Remez Gospel is Luke. Luke wrote a more detailed account for the High Priest Theophilus (a Sadducee). The Sadducees were rationalists and sticklers for details.
The Drash Gospel is Matthew. Matthew presents his account of Yeshua’s life as a Midrash to the Pharisees, as a continuing story tied to various passages from the Tanak As a drash level account Matthew also includes a number of parables in his account.
The Sod Gospel is Yochanan (John). Yochanan addresses the Mystical Essene sect and concerns himself with mystical topics like light, life, truth, the way and the Word. Yochanan includes many Sod interpretations in his account. For example Yochanan 1:1 presents a Sod understanding of Gen. 1:1. Yochanan 3:14; 8:28 & 12:32 present a Sod understanding of Num. 21:9 etc.).
Now let us return to Hosea 11:1 where we read:
When Israel was a child, then I loved him,
And out of Egypt I called My son.
This passage draws from the Torah Exodus 4:22-23:
Then you shall say to Pharaoh,
“Thus says YHWH:
‘Israel is my first-born son.
I have said to you, ‘Let My son go,
That he may worship Me,’
Yet you refuse to let him go.
Now I will slay your first-born son.’”
(Sh’mot (Ex.) 4:22-23)
Now if Israel is the first-born son of YHWH spoken of in these passages, then why did Matthew apply this passage (Hoshea 11:1) to the Messiah?
Why in the world does YHWH identify Israel as His first-born son? Why does Matthew identify Messiah as His son? Who in Judaism is the first-born Son of YHWH? Why the apparent confusion? Is Matthew really taking Hoshea 11:1 out of context?
No Matthew is giving a Midrash, a Drash understanding of Hosea 11:1 and Exodus 4:22-23. In order to understand this Midrash it is important to understand the concept of the “firstborn Son of Yah” in Judaism.
The firstborn Son of Yah referenced in the Zohar and is the Middle Pillar of the Godhead which the Zohar identifies as “The Son of Yah”. The Zohar describes the three pillars of the Godhead as follows:
Then Elohim said, “Let thee be light; and there was light.
And Elohim saw that the light was good…
Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and it is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right.
The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And God separated between the light and between the darkness.”…
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
The right and left pillars are assigned as Mother and Father, the middle pillar, which balances the feminine and masculine characteristics from the male and female sides, is identified in the Zohar as “the Son of Yah”. The Zohar says:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead, which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
In another Passage the Zohar has:
We may also translate, “he who withholds blessings from the Son”, whom the Father and Mother have crowned and blessed with many blessings, and concerning whom they commanded, “Kiss the son lest he be angry” (Ps. II, 12), since he is invested both with judgement (gevurah) and with mercy (chesed).
(Zohar 3:191b)
And elsewhere the Zohar says of the Son:
The Holy One, blessed be He, has a son, whose glory (tifret) shines from one end of the world to another. He is a great and mighty tree, whose head reaches heaven, and whose roots are set in the holy ground, and his name is “Mispar” and his place is in the uppermost heaven… as it is written, “The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God” (Ps. 19:1). Were it not for this “Mispar” there would be neither hosts nor offspring in any of the worlds.
(Zohar 2:105a)
This is intended to point the reader back to a familiar passage from the Bahir:
Why are they called Sephirot?
Because it is written (Psalm 19:2),
“The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God.”
(Bahir 125)
According to the Zohar, the Middle Pillar of the Godhead is not only known as the “Son of Yah” but also as “Metatron”:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the godhead,
which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
The Middle Pillar is also known as “Metatron”:
The Middle Pillar [of the godhead] is Metatron,
Who has accomplished peace above,
According to the glorious state there.
(Zohar 3:227)
In the Zohar we are also told that Metatron is “the firstborn”:
“And Abraham said to his oldest servant of his house…” (Gen. 24:2) Who is this of whom it said “his servant?” In what sense must this be understood? Who is this servant? R. Nehori answered:
“It is in no other sense to be understood than expressed in the word “His servant,”
His servant, the servant of Elohim, the chief to His service. And who is he? Metatron, as said. He is appointed to glorify the bodies which are in the grave.
This is the meaning of the words “Abraham said to His servant” that is to the servant of Elohim. The servant is Metatron, the eldest of His [YHWH's] House, who is the firstborn of all creatures of Elohim, who is the ruler of all He has; because Elohim has committed to Him the government over all His hosts.
(Zohar 1:129b)
So in Judaism both Israel and “The Son of Yah” are identified as the “first-born Son of YHWH”.
According to the first century Jewish writer Philo, this firstborn Son of Elohim is also known as “The Word:
Philo Writes of the Word (Logos):
For there are, as it seems, two temples belonging to God; one being this world, in which the high priest is the divine word, his own firstborn son. The other is the rational soul, the priest of which is the real true man,
(On Dreams 215)
And if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son of God, neverthless let him labour earnestly to be adorned according to his Firstborn Word, the eldest of his angels, as the great archangel of many names; for He is called, “the Authority”, and “the Name of God”, and “the Word”, and “man according to God’s image”, and “He who sees Israel”. . . For even if we are not yet suitable to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image, of his most sacred Word; for the image of God is his most ancient word.
( On the Confusion of Tongues XXVIII:146-147)
Thus, indeed, being a shepherd is a good thing, so that it is justly attributed, not only to kings, and to wise men, and to souls who are perfectly purified, but also to God, the ruler of all things; and he who confirms this is not any ordinary person, but a prophet, whom it is good to believe, he namely who wrote the psalms; for he speaks thus, “The Lord is my shepherd, and he shall cause me to lack Nothing;” (Ps. 23:1.) and let every one in his turn say the same thing,
for it is very becoming to every man who loves God to study such a song as this, but above all this world should sing it. For God, like a shepherd and a king, governs (as if they were a flock of sheep) the earth, and the water, and the air, and the fire, and all the plants, and living creatures that are in them, whether mortal or divine; and he regulates the nature of the heaven, and the periodical revolutions of the sun and moon, and the variations and harmonious movements of the other stars, ruling them according to law and justice; appointing, as their immediate superintendent, his own right reason, his first-born son, who is to receive the charge of this sacred company, as the lieutenant of the great king; for it is said somewhere, “Behold, I am he! I will send my messenger before thy face, who shall keep thee in the Road.”(Ex. 23:20.)
(On Husbandry 50-51)
Furthermore Philo tells us that “The Word” (Logos) and the Messiah are one and the same:
“The head of all things is the eternal Word (Logos) of the eternal God, under which, as if it were his feet or other limbs, is placed the whole world, over which He passes and firmly stands. Now it is not because Messiah is Lord that He passes and sits over the whole world, for His seat with His Father and God but because for its perfect fullness the world is in need of the care and superintendence of the best ordered dispensation, and for its own complete piety, of the Divine Word (Logos), just as living creatures (need) a head, without which it is impossible to live.”
(Q&A on Exodus, II, 117)
So when YHWH says in Sh’mot (Ex.) 4:22-23 and Hoshea 11:1 that Israel is his first-born son he is speaking allegorically. He is comparing Israel to Messiah.
And when Mattitiyahu quotes Hoshea 11:`1 and applies this sonship to Messiah he is referring to the reality behind the allegory of Hosea 11:1 and Sh’mot 4:22-23. In effect Matthew is saying that Yeshua the Messiah is the figure that later Rabbinic Judaism came to call “The Son of Yah”. Therefore the Torah in Sh’mot 4:22-23 is prompting us that there is an allegorical relationship between Israel and Messiah:
So how is the Messiah allegorically like Israel?
* Both made a major impact on the world.
* Both were born through a biological miracle on their mother’s womb.
* Both were taken into Egypt to save their lives.
* Both are called up out of Egypt.
* Both have been despised and rejected by man.
* Rome attempted to execute each of them.
* Both are resurrected never to die again.
By saying, “Israel is my first-born son”, ELOHIM is saying that by oppressing Israel, it is as if Pharaoh was oppressing the Son of Yah, the Messiah himself.
In fact the Tanya makes use of this same allegory which connects the Son of Yah as spoken of in the Zohar with Israel:
So, allegorically speaking, have the souls of Jews risen in the [Divine] thought, as it is written, “My firstborn son is Israel,” and “Ye are children unto the Lord your G-d”. That is to say, just as a child is derived from his father’s brain, so— to use an anthropomorphism— the soul of each Israelite is derived from G-d’s (blessed be He) thought and wisdom.
(Tanya; Likutei Amarim; Chapter 2)
Similarly is it with the human soul, which is divided in two— sechel (intellect) and middot (emotional attributes). The intellect includes chochmah, binah and da at (ChaBaD), whilst the middot are love of G-d, dread and awe of Him, glorification of Him, and so forth. ChaBaD [the intellectual faculties] are called “mothers” and source of the middot, for the latter are “offspring” of the former.
(Tanya; Likutei Amarim; Chapter 3)
Behold a Virgin Shall Conceive and Bear a Son
by
James Scott Trimm
We read in Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [ALMA] shall conceive, and bear a son,
And call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
Anti-missionary Tovia Singer challenges the application of this verse to a virgin birth in the books known as the “New Testament.”
The truth is that the evidence is overwhelming that this verse is a Messianic prophecy and does in fact refer to a virgin birth of the Messiah. This can be shown in three ways:
The first is the meaning of the Hebrew word ALMA and why it would be used here.
The second is the reading of the other ancient versions of Isaiah 7:14.
And the third is the overall context of this passage.
Now great controversy surrounds the Hebrew word ALMA in Isaiah 7:14.
It has been suggested that the Hebrew word “ALMA” simply means “young woman” and that if Isaiah had intended to refer to a “virgin” he would have used the Hebrew word BETULAH. SO the question arises, what is an ALMA? What is a BETULAH and why would Isaiah use the word ALMA rather than BETULAH if it were to be a virgin birth?
The word ALMA refers to a young unmarried woman one of whose characteristics is virginity. There is no instance where the word ALMA is used to refer to a non-virgin. In such passages as Gen. 24:43 (compare Gen. 24:43 with 24:16 where BETULAH appears) and Song 1:3; 6:8 ALMA clearly refers to virgins. In fact the Hebrew Publishing Company Translation of 1916 translates ALMA as “virgin” in Gen. 24:43 and in Song 1:3; 6:8. Moreover an ancient Ugaritic tablet was discovered which uses ALMA in synonymous poetic parallelism as the synonymous parallel to the cognate of BETULAH. For this reason one of the worlds leading Semitists, the late Dr. Cyrus Gordon who was Jewish and did NOT believe in the virgin birth of Yeshua maintains that Is. 7:14 may be translated as “virgin” (Almah in Isaiah 7:14; Gordon, Cyrus H.; JBR 21:106). So why would Isaiah have used ALMA rather than BETULAH? Because a BETULAH can be a young married woman who is not a virgin, but pure because she is married (as in Joel 1:8).
Now it has been suggested that Isaiah 7:14 refers not to a birth to a “virgin” but to a birth to a “young woman”.
In order to understand how this passage was understood anciently we should look at the other ancient versions of the book of Isaiah. The Aramaic Peshitta Tanak has:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [B'TULTA] shall conceive, and bear a son,
And call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
The Aramaic word B’TULTA clearly means “virgin” and not simply “young lady”.
Now lets look at the Greek Septuagint reading:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [PARTHENOS] shall conceive,
and bear a son, and call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
The Greek PARTHENOS means “virgin” and not simply “young lady”.
Thus both the ancient Aramaic and ancient Greek versions of Isaiah 7:14 understand ALMA here to refer to a virgin.
Finally I want to examine the context of Isaiah 7:14. First I will want to examine the immediate context of Isaiah 7 and then the broader context of this whole section of Isaiah.
Literal translation of Hebrew of Is. 7:14:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give to you(pl) a sign:
behold the ALMA will conceive and bear a son
and she will call his name Immanuel.
“you” in verse 14 is plural. By contrast King Achaz is singular you in verses 11 and 16-17. The sign to Achaz was that before a child should know how to choose good from bad, the siege would end (16-17). That child was NOT be the newborn child of verse 14 the child is Isaiah’s son Sh’ar-Yashuv from Isaiah 7:3. The prophecy of Is. 7:14 is not addressed only to Achaz as is the rest of the prophecy.
The following literal translation clears things up: (s)=singular (pl)=plural
7:3a Then YHWH said to Isaiah, “Go out now to meet
Achaz, you(s) and Shear-Jashub your(s) son…
7:10 …YHWH spoke again to Achaz saying:
7:11 “Ask a sign for yourself(s) from YHWH your(s) God;
ask it either in the depth or in the height above.”
7:12 But Achaz said: “I will not ask, nor will I test YHWH”
7:13 Then he said: “Hear now, O House of David! Is it a small
thing for you(pl) to weary men, but will you(pl) weary my God
also?
7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give to you(pl) a sign:
behold the ALMA will conceive and bear a son and she will
call his name Immanuel.
7:15 Curds and honey He shall eat, that he may know to refuse
the evil and choose the good.
7:16 For behold before the child shall know to refuse the evil
and choose the good, the land that you(s) dread will be forsaken by both her kings.
7:17 YHWH will bring the King of Assyria upon you(s) and your(s) people and your(s) father’s house…
Note the clear distinction to what is addressed to you(pl) and what is addressed to you(s) (Achaz) and how this creates a distinction between the newborn in verse 14 and the child in verse 16. Thus the birth in Is. 7:14 is not a sign to Achaz alone.
Isaiah 8:8-9:7 also speaks of this same “Immanuael” figure. Thus it is clear that the “Immanuel” of Is. 7:14 & 8:8 is also the child born in Isaiah 9:6-7.
Now the NT clearly applies these passages to Yeshua as Messiah. Rev. 21:3 alludes to Is. 7:14 & 8:8, 10. 1Kefa 3:14-15 cites Isaiah 8:12-13 in regards to Messiah. Romans 9:32 & 1Kefa 2: apply Is. 8:14 to Messiah. Hebrews 2:13 applies Isaiah 8:17-18 to Messiah. Finally Mt. 4:15-16 and Luke 1:79 apply Isaiah 8:23-9:1 (9:1-2) to Messiah.
Of the 5 surviving fragments of the ancient Netzarim Midrash on Isaiah, three of them fall in this section of Isaiah and all three apply the passages to Yeshua.
Moreover the Talmud applies Is. 8:14 to Messiah:
Judah and Hezekiah, the sons of R. Hiyya, once sat at table with Rabbi and uttered not a word. Whereupon he said: Give the young men plenty of strong wine, so that they may say something. When the wine took effect, they began by saying: The son of David cannot appear ere the two ruling houses in Israel shall have come to an end, viz., the Exilarchate, in Babylon and the Patriarchate in Palestine, for it is written, And he shall be for a Sanctuary, for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both houses of Israel (Is. 8:14). Thereupon he [Rabbi] exclaimed: You throw thorns in my eyes, my children! At this, R. Hiyya [his disciple] remarked: Master, be not angered, for the numerical value of the letters of yayin is seventy, and likewise the letters of sod: When yayin [wine] goes in, sod [secrets] comes out.
(b.San. 38a)
Moreover Targum Jonathan on Isaiah applies Is. 9:6-7 to the Messiah as well.
(For more on Isaiah 9:6-7 as a Messianic Prophecy see my article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect”
Finally the figure in Isaiah 9:6-7 certainly seems to be the same as that in Is. 11:1f. This is important because EVERYONE agrees that Is. 11:1f refers to the Messiah.
Thus by examining the overall context of Isaiah 7:14 it becomes clear that Isaiah 7:14 is indeed a messianic prophecy which prophecies of the virgin birth of the Messiah.
The Secret of the Closed MEM and the Virgin Birth
The Secret of the Closed MEM and the Virgin Birth
by
James Scott Trimm
We read in Isaiah:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The mighty God, The everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall
be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,
to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with
justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD
of hosts will perform this.
(Is. 9:6-7 KJV)
In his Let’s Get Biblical tape set Anti-Missionary Tovia Singer insists this passage must refer to Hezikiah.
Singer argues that the passage is in the perfect verb form and must refer to events which had already occurred. In my recent article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect” I demonstrated that the passage is a Messianic prophecy, that Singer’s argument is false, and that the passage refers to the future.
Singer’s argument that the figure described in Isaiah 9:6-7 is Hezikiah actually contradicts the Rabbinic position as stated in the Talmud.
Before going further there are two things the reader needs to know.
First off the Hebrew letter MEM is always written as a closed mem when it is written at the end of a word, but as an open mem when it is written at the beginning of the word.
Secondly there is a traditional anomaly which is preserved in the Massoretic Text.
The letter MEM in the word L’MAR’BEH (“of the increase”) is written as a closed final MEM when it should be written with an open MEM.
The Talmud discusses the use of the abnormal closed final MEM in this passage as follows:
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end (Is. 9:6). R. Tanhum said: Bar Kappara expounded in Sepphoris, Why is every mem in the middle of a word open, whilst this is closed? — The Holy One, blessed be He, wished to appoint Hezekiah as the Messiah, and Sennacherib as Gog and Magog; whereupon the Attribute of
Justice said before the Holy One, blessed be He: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! If Thou didst not make David the Messiah, who uttered so many hymns and psalms before Thee, wilt Thou appoint Hezekiah as such, who did not hymn Thee in spite of all these miracles which Thou wroughtest for him?’ Therefore it [sc. the mem] was closed. Straightway the earth exclaimed: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Let me utter song before Thee instead of this righteous man [Hezekiah], and make him the Messiah.’ So it broke into song before Him, as it is written, From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous. Then the Prince of the Universe said to Him: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! It [the earth] hath fulfilled Thy desire [for songs of praise] on behalf of this righteous man.’ But a heavenly Voice cried out, ‘It is my secret, it is my secret.’ To which the prophet rejoined, ‘Woe is me, woe is me: how long [must we wait]?’ The heavenly Voice [again] cried out, ‘The treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously: which Raba — others say, R. Isaac — interpreted: until there come
spoilers, and spoilers of the spoilers.
(b.San. 94a)
Here the Talmud specifically tells us that Hezikiah was not the Messianic figure mentioned in Isaiah 9:6-7 because of the closed final mem and because of a secret of Elohim which is revealed by the use of a final MEM in this word.
Now it is important to understand that in Rabbinic thought, the MEM is associated with the womb. As we read in the Sefer Yetzirah:
“Three Mothers Alef, Mem, Shin are in the body of male and female: Fire and Water and Air. Head was created from Fire, and Womb was created from Water, and Chest was created from Air, balancing the scales between them.”
(Sefer Yetzirah 3:6)
Furthermore the Zohar teaches that the final MEM in ADAM represents the female side which was taken from Adam to make woman:
Further, the words “let us make man” may be taken to signify that Elohim imparted to the lower beings who came from the side of the upper world the secret of forming the divine name “Adam”, which embraces the upper and the lower in virtue of its three letters, aleph, daleth, and final MEM. When these three letters descended below, together in their complete form, the name Adam was found to comprise male and female. The female was attached to the side of the male until Elohim cast him into a deep slumber, during which he lay on the site of the Temple. God then sawed her off from him and adorned her like a bride and brought her to him, as it is written, “And he took one of his sides and closed up the place with flesh.” (Gen. 2:21).
(Zohar 1:34b)
The Bahir elaborates that not only does a MEM represent a womb, but an open MEM represents an open womb amd a closed MEM represents a closed womb:
“The open Mem. What is the open Mem ? It includes both male and female. What is the closed Mem ? It is made like a womb from above. But Rabbi Rahumai said that the womb is like the letter Teth . He said it is like a Teth on the inside, while I say that it is like a Mem on the outside.
What is a Mem? Do not read Mem, but Mayim (water). Just like water is wet, so is the womb always wet. Why does the open Mem include both male and female, while the closed Mem is male? This teaches us that the Mem is primarily male. The opening was then added to it for the sake of the female. Just like the male cannot give birth, so the closed MEM cannot give birth. And just like the female has an opening with which to give birth, so can the open MEM give birth. The MEM is therefore open and closed.”
(Bahir 84-85)
While Singer claims that Hezikiah was the figure described in Isaiah 9:6-7 the Talmud states that Hezikiah was not this figure because of the “secret” of the closed final MEM. What is the secret of the closed final MEM? the MEM represents the WOMB and the the closed MEM points the birth of Messiah to a woman with a closed rather than an open womb! This points us to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son…”
Messiah would be born to the closed womb of a virgin. The closed MEM (closed womb) birth described in Isaiah 9:6-7 points us back to the virgin birth described in Isaiah 7:14. Hezikiah could not have been the figure born in Isaiah 9:6-7 because he was not born of a virgin.
UNTO US A CHILD IS BORN
ISAIAH 9:6-7 AND THE PROPHETIC PERFECT
By
James Scott Trimm
We read in Isaiah 9:6-7:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The mighty God, The everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall
be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,
to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with
justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD
of hosts will perform this.
(Is. 9:6-7 KJV)
Is. 9:6, 7 … anti-missionaries including Tovia Singer LOVE to claim this must be past tense and refer to an event prior to Isaiah’s writing.
In reality there is no such thing as tense in Hebrew grammar. In reality Hebrew verbs do not take past, present and future forms, but perfect (completed action) or imperfect (incomplete action).
In Hebrew thinking, an action is regarded as
being either completed or incomplete. Hebrew,
therefore, knows no past, present, or future tenses,
but has instead a Perfect and an Imperfect. …
The Hebrew Perfect may be taken to represent
action in the past… the equivalent of the English
present tense is supplied by the participle…. and the
[equivalent of] the English future tense (with other
varieties) by the imperfect.
(A Practical Grammer for Classical Hebrew. 2nd Ed.
Clarendon Press; Oxford; 1959; J. A. Weingreen pp. 56-57)
To be strictly accurate we should speak of “forms” rather than “tenses” of the verb, since it is the completeness or otherwise of an action which is being expressed and not the time factor, as in English….
…Hebrew has no “tenses” in the normal sense of
the word. Instead there are two “states”…
(Teach Yourself Biblical Hebrew; R.K. Harrison;
1984; pages 68, 80)
Normally a verb in the perfect form would imply a past tense which is why Singer insists this must be past tense and that it therefore refers to Hezekiah.
In reality there is a special idiom in Hebrew called the “Prophetic Perfect” this is where prophet speaks of future events in the perfect form because he has seen them in the future where they have already happened.
Gesenius’ mentions the Prophetic Perfect idiom and describes it this way:
…he [the prophetic writer] describes the future
event as if it had been already seen or heard by him.
(Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. 2nd edition
Translated by A. E. Crowley; Clarendon Press;
Oxford; 1956; Edited by E. Klautzsch; pp. 312-313)
There are many examples of the Prophetic Perfect in the Tanak:
Isaiah 5:13 “Therefore My people are gone into captivity, for want of knowledge; and their honorable men are famished, and their multitude are parched with thirst” (JPS)
In this verse (Is. 5:13) this verb is in the perfect form but it is clearly a future event because the captivity spoken of did not occur in Isaiah’s lifetime.
Other examples are:
Isaiah 10:28-32 “He is come to Aiath, he is passed through Migron; at Michmas he layeth up his baggage; They are gone over the pass; they have taken up their lodging at Geba; Ramah trembleth; Gibeath-shaul is fled. Cry thou with a shrill voice, O daughter of Gallim! Hearken, O Laish! O thou poor Anathoth! Madmenah is in mad flight; the inhabitants of Gebim flee to cover. This very day shall he halt at Nob, shaking his hand at the mount of the daughter of Zion, the hill of Jerusalem.” (JPS)
Jeremiah 23:2 “Therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, against the shepherds that feed My people: Ye have scattered My flock, and driven them away, and have not taken care of them; behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord.” (JPS)
Amos 5:2 “The virgin of Israel is fallen, she shall no more rise; she is cast down upon her land, there is none to raise her up” (JPS)
In fact the Targum Jonathan to Isaiah 9:6-7 clearly identifies the figure spoken of in Is. 9:6-7 as the Messiah.
“The prophet says to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old, Wonderful counselor, Mighty God, he who lives forever, the Messiah, in whose days peace shall increase upon us”
(Targum Jonathan Is. 9:6)
And we read in the Midrash Rabbah:
Rabbi Jose the Galilean says: The name of the Messiah too is
“peace”; as it is written: “God the mighty, the everlasting Father,
the ruler of peace” (Quoting Is. 9:5-6 (6-7))
(PEREK HA SHALOM; NUMBERS RABBAH XI, 16-20)
He said to him: ‘I have yet to raise up the Messiah,’ of whom it is written, For a child is born to us (Isa. IX, 5). Until I come unto my Lord unto Seir (Gen. XXXIII, I4). R. Samuel b. Nahman said: We have searched all the Scriptures and we have nowhere found [it stated] that Jacob ever came together with Esau at Seir. What then is the meaning of, ‘Unto Seir’? Jacob [meant] to say to him: ‘I have yet to raise up judges and saviours to exact punishment from you.’ Whence this? For it is said, And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau (Obad. I, 21). Israel asked God: ‘Master of the Universe, how long shall we remain subjected to him?’ He replied: ‘Until the day comes of which it is written, There shall step forth a star out of Jacob and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel (Num. XXIV, 17); when a star shall step forth from Jacob and devour the stubble of Esau.’
(Midrash Rabbah – Deuteronomy I:20)
And we read in the Zohar:
“As for the expression El Gibbor, the whole verse in which this occurs in an epitome of the holy supernal faith. The word “Wonderful” alludes to the supernal Wisdom, which is wondrous and concealed beyond the reach of all; “Counsellor” is the supernal stream which issues forth perennially and counsels all and waters all; “El” refers to Abraham, “Gibbor” to Issac, and “Everlasting Father” to Jacob, who lays hold of both sides and attains perfection. The “Prince of Peace” is the Zaddik, who brings peace to the world, peace to the House, peace to the Matrona.”
(Zohar 3:31a)
So even the ancient sages understood Isaiah 9:5-6 (6-7 in some editions) to refer to a FUTURE MESSIAH. Why would they do this if this passage supposedly obviously speaks of the past? Obviously it does NOT have to be in the past tense. Like Isaiah 5:13 it is written in the prophetic perfect.
A Body You Have Clothed Me With
By
James Scott Trimm
One passage in which the “New Testament” is said to quote the Greek Septuagint is in Hebrews 10:5-6:
5 Concerning therefore His coming into the world it is said, Sacrifice and offering You do not desire, but a body, You have prepared for Me.
6 Burnt offering and sin offering, You do not ask for.
7 Then it said, Behold I come. For in the roll of the book it is written of Me. I will do Your will, Elohi,
(Heb. 10:5-7 HRV)
This passage is quoting from Psalms were we read in the Masoretic Text:
7 (40:6) Sacrifice and meal-offering You have no delight in: ears you have cut for me; burnt-offering and sin-offering have You not required.
8 (40:7) Then said I, Behold, I am come in the roll of the book, it is written of me.
(Psalm 40:7-8 (6-7) HRV)
Where the Masoretic Text has “ears you have cut for me” the Greek Septuagint has “a body you have clothed me with”. The Munster Hebrew text of Hebrews has “a body you have prepared for me” and the Aramaic Peshitta has “a body you have clothed me with” where they quote this passage in Heb. 10:5.
Is Hebrews quoting the Greek Septuagint, or is it quoting a (now lost) first century Hebrew text which agreed with the Septuagint in this verse?
Support for this idea comes from a surprising place indeed, the Zohar. In the Zohar we read:
THIS is the Book of the generations of Adam. In the day that Alhim created man, in the likeness of Alhim made he him.” (Gen. v., 1.) Said Rabbi Isaac: “The Holy One showed Adam the forms and features of his descendants that should appear in the world after him, and of the sages and kings who should rule over Israel. He also made known to him, that the life and reign of David would be of short duration. Then said Adam to the Holy One, ‘let seventy years of my earthly existence be taken and granted to the life of David.’ This request was granted, otherwise Adam’s life would have attained to a thousand years. This was the reason that David said: ‘For thou, Lord, hast made me glad through thy work; I will triumph in the work of thine hands (Ps. xcii., 5), for thou hast filled me with joy in prolonging the days of my life. ‘It was thy own act and wish,’ said the Holy One, ‘when thou wast incarnated as Adam, the work of my hands and not of flesh and blood.’ Amongst the wise men and sages that should appear on the earth, Adam rejoiced greatly on beholding the form of Rabbi Akiba who would become distinguished by his great knowledge of the secret doctrine. On seeing, however, as in a vision, his martyrdom and cruel death, Adam became exceedingly sad and said: ‘Thine eyes beheld me ere I was clothed in a body and all things are written in thy book; each day hath its events that shall come to pass, are therein to be found.’ Observe that the book of the generations of Adam was that which the Holy One through the angel Rosiel, guardian of the great mysteries and secret doctrine, gave unto Adam whilst yet in the garden of Eden.
(Zohar 1:55a-55b as translated in The Sepher Ha-Zohar or the Book of Light; By Nurho de Manhar; p. 234-235; 1900-14)
Here the Zohar is also clearly alluding to Psalm 40:7-8 (6-7)… but with a reading that also agrees with the Septuagint against the Masoretic Text. Is the author of the Zohar quoting the Septuagint? Is he seeking to support the reading of the book of Hebrews against the Masoretic Text? Or is it possible that the ancient author of the Zohar was also holding a Hebrew text of Psalm 49:7-8 (6-7) that agreed with the Septuagint. This one passages supports both the Hebrew/Aramaic origin of Hebrews as well as the ancient origin of the text of the Zohar.
Proof that Yeshua is the Messiah
Proof that Yeshua is the Messiah
By James Trimm
Yeshua MUST be Messiah (regardless of whether or not any other “Messianic Prophecies” are validly speaking of Yeshua)
Isaiah 29 ties the apostasy of Judah to a sealed book (29:10-12) but with the revealing of that sealed book comes an enlightenment and restoration (29:18).
Now it is very important to realize that according to Isaiah 29 our people (Judah) are in a state of general blindness/slumber until the sealed book is revealed (29:10-14, 18).
Now Isaiah does not tell us what the book is or when it is revealed. However that information is given elswhere in the Tanak. Daniel writes of his own book:
But you, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book to the time of the end… Go your way Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”
(Daniel 12:4, 10)
So this “sealed book” would seem to be at least in part, the Book of Daniel and it seems to be come unsealed in the last days. Remember Daniel wrote after the days of Isaiah so Daniel knew about the sealed book of Isaiah 29:10-12, 18 when he wrote Daniel 12:4, 10.
So lets bring together Isaiah 29:10-14, 18 with Daniel 12:4, 10. What do we learn from these two sections of the Tanak taken together? We learn that our people Judah are in an apostasy until some information hidden in the Book of Daniel (and perhaps some other books) is revealed in the last days and the revealing of that information opens their eyes.
This means that mainline Judaism is in apostasy but in the last days there is a restoration of Judah when certain hidden (sealed) information in Daniel is revealed.
So what information is sealed in Daniel? The restoration of our people is usually tied to Messiah… could this hidden information in Daniel relate to the identity of Messiah?
Interesting the Talmud states:
The Targum of the Prophets was composed by Jonathon ben Uzziel under the guidance of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi… and a Bat Kol (voice from heaven) came forth and exclaimed, “Who is this that has revealed My secrets to mankind?”… He further sought to reveal by a Targum the inner meaning of the Ketuvim, but a bat kol went forth and said, “Enough!”. What was the reason?– Because the date of the Messiah is foretold in it.
(Babylonian Talmud; b.Megillah 3a)
Now the only prophetic book of the Ketuvim is Daniel and this is also a book of the Ketuvim for which no Targum was evr made. The following quote from Josephus also supports the theory that Daniel is the book in question:
We believe that Daniel conversed with God; for he did not only prophecy of future events, as did the other prophets, but also determined the time of their accomplishment.
(Josephus; Antiquities 10:11:7)
Now the Qumran community found just this information (the time of the Messiah) in the Book of Daniel:
The visitation is the Day of Salvation that He has decreed through Isaiah the prophet concerning all the captives, inasmuch as Scripture says, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who announces peace, who brings good news, who announces salvation, who says to Zion “Your ELOHIM reigns”.” (Isaiah 52;7)
This scriptures interpretation : “the mountains” are the prophets, they who were sent to proclaim God`s truth and to prophesy to all Israel. “The messengers” is the Anointed of the spirit, of whom Daniel spoke; “After the sixty-two weeks, a Messiah shall be cut off” (Daniel 9;26, from 11Q13)
So now we have learned that there is good reason to believe that the sealed information in the Book of Daniel which opens the eyes of Judah when it is revealed in the last days is the time of Messiah sealed up in Daniel 9:24-27.
Now lets recap:
Anyone can see from Isaiah 29 that the apostasy of Judah ends with the revealing of a sealed book.
Anyone can see from Daniel 12 that this sealed book is (at least in part) the Book of Daniel.
Anyone can see that the information sealed up in Daniel is (at least in part) the time of Messiah.
Anyone can see that this information is to be found in Daniel 9.
Daniel 9 unsealed
1: In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;
2: In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
Daniel has been doing some Tanak study. He has been reading Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10. He has read about the 70 year exile.
The reason for a 70 year captivity had been that YHWH was punishing us for having forsaken the Torah. He punished us with the curses of Deuteronomy 28-29 and Leviticus 26 as the Torah had warned us. The key issue here was that of the violation of the Sabbath of the Land (Exodus 21:2; 23:11; Leviticus.
25:2, 20; 26:2, 34; Deuteronomy 15:1)
According to the Torah, if we as a people did not keep the sabbath of the land every seven years we would be cursed (Leviticus 26:34)
3: And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes:
4: And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;
5: We have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments:
6: Neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land.
7: O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee.
8: O Lord, to us belongeth confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee.
9: To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him;
10: Neither have we obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets.
11: Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.
12: And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.
13: As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.
14: Therefore hath the LORD watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us: for the LORD our God is righteous in all his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice.
15: And now, O Lord our God, that hast brought thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly.
16 O Lord, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us.
17: Now therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake.
18 O my God, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine eyes, and behold our desolations, and the city which is called by thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies.
19: O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name.
Daniel is very concerned. It has been 70 years and he wants to go home! He is a very old man by now. But he has worried because he knows his Torah. He knows that the Torah warns that if Israel still does not repent after the curse is inacted that Israel will have the punishment multiplied by seven (Lev. 26:18) Daniel is hoping that YHWH will not be enacting the next level punishment. For that would mean 70 * 7 or another 490 years!
20: And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;
21: Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
22: And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.
23: At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
24: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Daniel learns that there will indeed be at least another 490 years of curses for Israel. The “weeks” here are not seven DAYS but seven YEARS. In fact the Hebrew word here actually just means “seven [somethings]”
25: Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
7 “weeks” here would be 49 years (a Jubilee cycle) plus theeescore and two weeks (3*20+2=62) is 69 “weeks” or 483 years.
But remember we are not counting years here but actual sabbath year cycles which are specific seven year blocks. In other words this is actually a count of how many sabbath year cycle blocks fall between these two points.
Our starting point is “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” which is Ezra 7:11-16 and gives us a start date of 457 BCE. Between that date and the Messiah 69 sabbath year cycle blocks would fall.
26: And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Messiah is cut off after ther 62 “weeks” which follow the 7 weeks. This elaboration allows us to see that the division of these two blocks (the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks) was to show that after the 7 weeks “the street shall be built again, and the wall” but the Messiah would not come until after the 62 week block following that.
The Messiah would be “cut off” at that time. This is an idiom meaning that he would be executed. He would not be executed for himself, but for others. Then the people of a prince destroy Jerusalem after that time.
27: And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Remember there were 490 years or 70 “weeks” but we have so far covered only 483 (or 69 “weeks”).
This is because the big test of our trust in YHWH is the Sabbath of the land. This is where Israel SHOWS our trust in YHWH by trusting him to provide. The curse would not end until we reinstitute the sabbath of the land (2 Chronicles 36:21).
So YHWH in his infinite mercy would send the Messiah seven years BEFORE the 490 years would end to call us to repent and return to Torah in time to reinstitute the sabbath of the land BEFORE the 490 years are over. (See my paper THE KINGDOM OFFER)
The curse will not end until we as a people repent and show that by reinstituting the sabbath of the land. When we do that we will finally kick off the last seven years of the curse we have lived with all of this time.
There is so much to learn from this chapter. Including the nature of the Kingdom offer and the layout of the last seven years. But most importantly is the time that the Messiah would come and be “cut off”.
Now if our start point is 457 BCE and 69 “weeks” must fall between this point and the death of Messiah, then Messiah would have to be executed sometime in a window from 26 C.E. to 40 C.E. (depending on how the sabbath year cycles fall).
So if Yeshua was NOT the Messiah that would be “cut off, but not for himself” during that window… then who was?
Messaih would be executed in a window of time somewhere between 26 and 44 C.E.. And he would arive in accordance to the completion of a series of sabbath-year-cycles and jubilee cycles. Now these cycles indicate “the year of release”. So lets look for more clues about this Messiah who is cut off at such a time.
Lets look at Isaiah 60:22-61:2.
“A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation: I YHWH will hasten it in its time.”
(Isaiah 60:22)
“A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation:” is the Kingdom represented by a stone in Daniel 2:34-35, 45 which “became a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (Daniel 3:35).
“I YHWH will hasten it in its time.” refers to the “Kingdom offer”.
“The Spirit of Adonai YHWH is upon me; because YHWH has anointed me to proclaim good tidings to the meek; he has sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. To proclaim the acceptable year of YHWH, and the day of vengeance of our ELOHIM, to comfrort all who mourn.”
(Isaiah 61:1-2)
Here we have an anointed one, a “Messiah” who comes in accordance with the jubilee and seven year cycles to proclaim liberty to captives. It is also significant as we will soon find that he makes this proclomation to “Zion” (Isaiah 61:3). This Messiah comes to REDEEM.
Lets see if Isaiah speaks any more about this figure who makes a proclomation of redemption to Zion. In Isaiah 52:7 we also read about a figure who also proclaims good tidings to Zion. This proclomation appears in Isaiah 53 and also involves one who comes to redeem (Isaiah 53:4-5, 11-12) and is cut off, but not for himself (53:8; 53:4-5, 11-12) just like the figure in Daniel. The figure must be the Messiah of Daniel 9 and Isaiah 61.
I wonder how this Messiah dies? Perhaps the prophets give me some clue. Zechariah writes:
“…they shall look upon me whom they have pierced…”
(Zechariah 12:10)
According to both the Talmud (b.Sukkot 52a) and the Targum, this “pierced one” is the Messiah. Now Zechariah 12:10 takes place at the coming of Messiah as king, but they notice that he was the same one whom they had “pierced” or “thrust through”. Lets read on and see if Zechariah gives us any clues as to who this is and just how he was pierced. As we read further Zechariah 12:10-14 speaks of the people mourning over having pierced this guy. Zechariah 13:1-4 takes place at the intiation of the Messianic age. The Messiah is judging idolaters and false prophets. No wonder they are now mourning over this pierced one! Then in verses 5-6 we get a detailed scene of one of these judgements:
“And he shall say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a husbandman; for a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.’ And he [the defendant] shall say to him [Messiah], ‘What are these wounds in your hands?’ Then he [the Messiah] shall answer: ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.’ “
Zechariah 13:5-6
Zechariah 13:6 points us back to 12:10 regarding how they mourn when they see he is the pierced one.
So now we have a Messiah who would be “cut off” sometime between 26 and 44 C.E. not for himself but to redeem others. This execution would involve having his hands pierced.
Now lets look at Zechariah 13:2. Notice that this guy will “cut off the names of the idols out of the land” (13:2). Sounds like the same guy about whom Micah 5:13 says “Your graven images also will I cut off”. This guy is born in Beit-Lechem (Bethlehem) according to Micah 5:2 (and the Targum to Micah 5:2 says this is Messiah).
In summation
According to Isaiah 29 our people (Judah) are in a state of general blindness/slumber until the sealed book is revealed (29:10-14, 18).
Daniel tells us that his book is sealed until the last days (Daniel 12)
The sealed information in Daniel’s book would appear to be the time of Messiah in Daniel 9.
Daniel 9 unsealed reveals to us that Messiah would be “cut off” for others sometime between 26 and 44 CE.
This passage points us to various other prophecies about this figure which also tell us that he is born in Beit-Lechem, and executed by having his hands pierced.
Who could this be?
Judith, Channukah and the Last Days
By James Scott Trimm
(An excerpt from Channukah and the Last Days
http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
By
James Scott Trimm
One of the most important evidences of the importance of the Oral Law for believers in Yeshua as Messiah, is that the Messiah concept is in itself Oral Law.
Let me explain what I mean. Using the Tanak alone, one cannot demonstrate that there is a single eschatological figure to come called “The Messiah”. If you presented a group of people who never heard of the concept of “The Messiah” with copies of the Tanak and left them alone for years, you would not come back to hear them talking about a figure known as “The Messiah”.
Yes there are references to a figure called “the servant” in Isaiah. And there is a prophecy of “a prophet” like Moses in Deut 18 (some take this to refer generally to each of the prophets after Moses). And there are also prophecies in the Tanak concerning a figure called “the branch” using a variety of different Hebrew words for “branch”. And there are a number of other passages referring to figures sometimes with no appellation at all. How do we know that these and other prophecies speak of a single figure called “The Messiah” and not to a number of different figures altogether? The answer is “tradition”.
Do a word search on “The Messiah” in the Tanak and you will get zero results. If one rejects tradition, then one rejects the very basis for the concept of “The Messiah”, Yeshua or otherwise.
I have found in seeking to debate an anti-missionary that they want to limit the material to be cited in the debate to be the Tanak only. This is odd because the anti-missionaries I am speaking of are Rabbinic Jews. Why should they want to eliminate the Targums, Talmuds, Midrashim, Zohar and other Rabbinic literature from the debate? Neither of us are Kaaraites, so why take a Kaarite position in the debate? The reason friends, is that the concept of the Messiah is essentially an Oral Law concept! And the anti-missionaries KNOW THIS WELL. The Messiah is almost never mentioned in the Tanak by that title (The possible exceptions being “YHWH has anointed me” (Is. 61:1); “His anointed” (Ps. 2:2) “an anointed shall be cut off” (Dan. 9:26). Even these passages are unclear in the Tanak alone, as they could simply refer to a “an anointed one” rather than “The Messiah.”
The only way to demonstrate clearly that any given passage is in fact a reference to Messiah is to rely upon the Oral Law (thru such sources as the Targums, the Talmuds, the Midrashim and the Zohar). It is the Oral Law that ties all of these passages together into a single figure known as “The Messiah.”
For example the word “Messiah” never appears in Isaiah 53, yet we know form the Targum, the Talmud, the Midrash Rabbah and the Zohar that Isaiah 53 speaks of the Messiah.
This is why, while some Rabbinic Jews and even Orthodox Rabbis have accepted Yeshua as the Messiah, I know of no case where a Kaarite (Karaites reject the Oral Law) has come to Messiah. There is virtually no way to make the case to a Kaarite that Yeshua is the Messiah. By contrast I can show any open minded Rabbinic Jew that Yeshua is the Messiah of Judaism, and I have done just that in my free book Mashiach: The Messiah from a True Jewish Perspective.
In fact it is for this very reason that Yeshua’s original followers came from the Pharisees and Essenes and few if any came from the Sadducees. That is because the Sadducees rejected the Oral Law and thus had no framework for the very concept of the Messiah and they could not accept Yeshua as a Messiah when they did not even accept the concept of Messiah at all.
The idea of Yeshua as the Messiah makes perfect sense in terms of Jewish tradition, but without Jewish tradition, there is no concept of a Messiah at all.
Out of Egypt I have Called My Son
By
James Scott Trimm
We read in the Goodnews according to Matthew:
13 And after they had departed, and behold, the angel of YHWH appeared to Yosef in a dream, saying: Arise, take the boy and His mother, and flee you away into Egypt and be there. And there you will stay until I return to you: for Herod is seeking to put the boy to death.
14 And he arose, <and did as the angel had said to him,> and took up the boy and His mother by night, and departed into Egypt,
15 And was there until the death of Herod: to fulfill what was spoken from YHWH by the prophet, who said, From out of Egypt I have called, My Son. (Hosea 11:1)
(Matt. 2:13-15 HRV)
In an attempt to discredit this account, as well as the Messiahship of Yeshua, Tovia Singer and other anti-missionaries have claimed that Matthew quotes this passage of Hosea totally out of context. In reality Matthew’s use of this passage as a Messianic prophecy is perfectly justified, and in fact shows a great deal of Jewish insight.
First off it is important to have a basic understanding of Jewish hermeneutics. In Judaism it is understood that there are four levels of understanding of a passage, which correspond to the four Hebrew letters that spell the Hebrew word PaRDeS (Paradise) The word PRDS is also an acronym (called in Judaism “notarikon”) for:
[P]ashat (Heb. “simple”) The plain, simple, literal level of understanding.
[R]emez (Heb. “hint”) The implied level of understanding.
[D]rash (Heb. “search”) The allegorical, typological or homiletically level of understanding.
[S]od (Heb. “hidden”) The hidden, secret or mystical level of understanding.
These are the four levels of understanding. The Four Gospels each express one of these four levels of understanding of the life of Yeshua.
The Pashat Gospel is Mark. Mark wrote a simple, brief, concise, pashat account of Yeshua’s life for the Goyim (Gentiles) while he was in Babylon with Kefa (1Kefa 5:13). He wrote his Gospel in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic for his Syrian and Assyrian readers in Babylon. Mark thus compiled material from Matthew and Luke and simplified it to create a simple version for Goyim. .
The Remez Gospel is Luke. Luke wrote a more detailed account for the High Priest Theophilus (a Sadducee). The Sadducees were rationalists and sticklers for details.
The Drash Gospel is Matthew. Matthew presents his account of Yeshua’s life as a Midrash to the Pharisees, as a continuing story tied to various passages from the Tanak As a drash level account Matthew also includes a number of parables in his account.
The Sod Gospel is Yochanan (John). Yochanan addresses the Mystical Essene sect and concerns himself with mystical topics like light, life, truth, the way and the Word. Yochanan includes many Sod interpretations in his account. For example Yochanan 1:1 presents a Sod understanding of Gen. 1:1. Yochanan 3:14; 8:28 & 12:32 present a Sod understanding of Num. 21:9 etc.).
Now let us return to Hosea 11:1 where we read:
When Israel was a child, then I loved him,
And out of Egypt I called My son.
This passage draws from the Torah Exodus 4:22-23:
Then you shall say to Pharaoh,
“Thus says YHWH:
‘Israel is my first-born son.
I have said to you, ‘Let My son go,
That he may worship Me,’
Yet you refuse to let him go.
Now I will slay your first-born son.’”
(Sh’mot (Ex.) 4:22-23)
Now if Israel is the first-born son of YHWH spoken of in these passages, then why did Matthew apply this passage (Hoshea 11:1) to the Messiah?
Why in the world does YHWH identify Israel as His first-born son? Why does Matthew identify Messiah as His son? Who in Judaism is the first-born Son of YHWH? Why the apparent confusion? Is Matthew really taking Hoshea 11:1 out of context?
No Matthew is giving a Midrash, a Drash understanding of Hosea 11:1 and Exodus 4:22-23. In order to understand this Midrash it is important to understand the concept of the “firstborn Son of Yah” in Judaism.
The firstborn Son of Yah referenced in the Zohar and is the Middle Pillar of the Godhead which the Zohar identifies as “The Son of Yah”. The Zohar describes the three pillars of the Godhead as follows:
Then Elohim said, “Let thee be light; and there was light.
And Elohim saw that the light was good…
Why, it may be asked, was it necessary to repeat the word “light” in this verse? The answer is that the first “light” refers to the primordial light which is of the Right Hand, and it is destined for the “end of days”; while the second “light” refers to the Left Hand, which issues from the Right.
The next words, “And God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. 1:4), refer to the pillar which, standing midway between them, unites both sides, and therefore when the unity of the three, right, left, and middle, was complete, “it was good”, since there could be no completion until the third had appeared to remove the strife between Right and Left, as it is written, “And God separated between the light and between the darkness.”…
This is the Middle Pillar: Ki Tov (that it was good) threw light above and below and on all other sides, in virtue of YHWH, the name which embraces all sides.
(Zohar 1:16b)
The right and left pillars are assigned as Mother and Father, the middle pillar, which balances the feminine and masculine characteristics from the male and female sides, is identified in the Zohar as “the Son of Yah”. The Zohar says:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the Godhead, which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
In another Passage the Zohar has:
We may also translate, “he who withholds blessings from the Son”, whom the Father and Mother have crowned and blessed with many blessings, and concerning whom they commanded, “Kiss the son lest he be angry” (Ps. II, 12), since he is invested both with judgement (gevurah) and with mercy (chesed).
(Zohar 3:191b)
And elsewhere the Zohar says of the Son:
The Holy One, blessed be He, has a son, whose glory (tifret) shines from one end of the world to another. He is a great and mighty tree, whose head reaches heaven, and whose roots are set in the holy ground, and his name is “Mispar” and his place is in the uppermost heaven… as it is written, “The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God” (Ps. 19:1). Were it not for this “Mispar” there would be neither hosts nor offspring in any of the worlds.
(Zohar 2:105a)
This is intended to point the reader back to a familiar passage from the Bahir:
Why are they called Sephirot?
Because it is written (Psalm 19:2),
“The heavens declare (me-SaPRim) the glory (tifret) of God.”
(Bahir 125)
According to the Zohar, the Middle Pillar of the Godhead is not only known as the “Son of Yah” but also as “Metatron”:
Better is a neighbor that is near, than a brother far off.
This neighbor is the Middle Pillar in the godhead,
which is the Son of Yah.
(Zohar 2:115)
The Middle Pillar is also known as “Metatron”:
The Middle Pillar [of the godhead] is Metatron,
Who has accomplished peace above,
According to the glorious state there.
(Zohar 3:227)
In the Zohar we are also told that Metatron is “the firstborn”:
“And Abraham said to his oldest servant of his house…” (Gen. 24:2) Who is this of whom it said “his servant?” In what sense must this be understood? Who is this servant? R. Nehori answered:
“It is in no other sense to be understood than expressed in the word “His servant,”
His servant, the servant of Elohim, the chief to His service. And who is he? Metatron, as said. He is appointed to glorify the bodies which are in the grave.
This is the meaning of the words “Abraham said to His servant” that is to the servant of Elohim. The servant is Metatron, the eldest of His [YHWH's] House, who is the firstborn of all creatures of Elohim, who is the ruler of all He has; because Elohim has committed to Him the government over all His hosts.
(Zohar 1:129b)
So in Judaism both Israel and “The Son of Yah” are identified as the “first-born Son of YHWH”.
According to the first century Jewish writer Philo, this firstborn Son of Elohim is also known as “The Word:
Philo Writes of the Word (Logos):
For there are, as it seems, two temples belonging to God; one being this world, in which the high priest is the divine word, his own firstborn son. The other is the rational soul, the priest of which is the real true man,
(On Dreams 215)
And if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son of God, neverthless let him labour earnestly to be adorned according to his Firstborn Word, the eldest of his angels, as the great archangel of many names; for He is called, “the Authority”, and “the Name of God”, and “the Word”, and “man according to God’s image”, and “He who sees Israel”. . . For even if we are not yet suitable to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image, of his most sacred Word; for the image of God is his most ancient word.
( On the Confusion of Tongues XXVIII:146-147)
Thus, indeed, being a shepherd is a good thing, so that it is justly attributed, not only to kings, and to wise men, and to souls who are perfectly purified, but also to God, the ruler of all things; and he who confirms this is not any ordinary person, but a prophet, whom it is good to believe, he namely who wrote the psalms; for he speaks thus, “The Lord is my shepherd, and he shall cause me to lack Nothing;” (Ps. 23:1.) and let every one in his turn say the same thing,
for it is very becoming to every man who loves God to study such a song as this, but above all this world should sing it. For God, like a shepherd and a king, governs (as if they were a flock of sheep) the earth, and the water, and the air, and the fire, and all the plants, and living creatures that are in them, whether mortal or divine; and he regulates the nature of the heaven, and the periodical revolutions of the sun and moon, and the variations and harmonious movements of the other stars, ruling them according to law and justice; appointing, as their immediate superintendent, his own right reason, his first-born son, who is to receive the charge of this sacred company, as the lieutenant of the great king; for it is said somewhere, “Behold, I am he! I will send my messenger before thy face, who shall keep thee in the Road.”(Ex. 23:20.)
(On Husbandry 50-51)
Furthermore Philo tells us that “The Word” (Logos) and the Messiah are one and the same:
“The head of all things is the eternal Word (Logos) of the eternal God, under which, as if it were his feet or other limbs, is placed the whole world, over which He passes and firmly stands. Now it is not because Messiah is Lord that He passes and sits over the whole world, for His seat with His Father and God but because for its perfect fullness the world is in need of the care and superintendence of the best ordered dispensation, and for its own complete piety, of the Divine Word (Logos), just as living creatures (need) a head, without which it is impossible to live.”
(Q&A on Exodus, II, 117)
So when YHWH says in Sh’mot (Ex.) 4:22-23 and Hoshea 11:1 that Israel is his first-born son he is speaking allegorically. He is comparing Israel to Messiah.
And when Mattitiyahu quotes Hoshea 11:`1 and applies this sonship to Messiah he is referring to the reality behind the allegory of Hosea 11:1 and Sh’mot 4:22-23. In effect Matthew is saying that Yeshua the Messiah is the figure that later Rabbinic Judaism came to call “The Son of Yah”. Therefore the Torah in Sh’mot 4:22-23 is prompting us that there is an allegorical relationship between Israel and Messiah:
So how is the Messiah allegorically like Israel?
* Both made a major impact on the world.
* Both were born through a biological miracle on their mother’s womb.
* Both were taken into Egypt to save their lives.
* Both are called up out of Egypt.
* Both have been despised and rejected by man.
* Rome attempted to execute each of them.
* Both are resurrected never to die again.
By saying, “Israel is my first-born son”, ELOHIM is saying that by oppressing Israel, it is as if Pharaoh was oppressing the Son of Yah, the Messiah himself.
In fact the Tanya makes use of this same allegory which connects the Son of Yah as spoken of in the Zohar with Israel:
So, allegorically speaking, have the souls of Jews risen in the [Divine] thought, as it is written, “My firstborn son is Israel,” and “Ye are children unto the Lord your G-d”. That is to say, just as a child is derived from his father’s brain, so— to use an anthropomorphism— the soul of each Israelite is derived from G-d’s (blessed be He) thought and wisdom.
(Tanya; Likutei Amarim; Chapter 2)
Similarly is it with the human soul, which is divided in two— sechel (intellect) and middot (emotional attributes). The intellect includes chochmah, binah and da at (ChaBaD), whilst the middot are love of G-d, dread and awe of Him, glorification of Him, and so forth. ChaBaD [the intellectual faculties] are called “mothers” and source of the middot, for the latter are “offspring” of the former.
(Tanya; Likutei Amarim; Chapter 3)
Behold a Virgin Shall Conceive and Bear a Son
by
James Scott Trimm
We read in Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [ALMA] shall conceive, and bear a son,
And call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
Anti-missionary Tovia Singer challenges the application of this verse to a virgin birth in the books known as the “New Testament.”
The truth is that the evidence is overwhelming that this verse is a Messianic prophecy and does in fact refer to a virgin birth of the Messiah. This can be shown in three ways:
The first is the meaning of the Hebrew word ALMA and why it would be used here.
The second is the reading of the other ancient versions of Isaiah 7:14.
And the third is the overall context of this passage.
Now great controversy surrounds the Hebrew word ALMA in Isaiah 7:14.
It has been suggested that the Hebrew word “ALMA” simply means “young woman” and that if Isaiah had intended to refer to a “virgin” he would have used the Hebrew word BETULAH. SO the question arises, what is an ALMA? What is a BETULAH and why would Isaiah use the word ALMA rather than BETULAH if it were to be a virgin birth?
The word ALMA refers to a young unmarried woman one of whose characteristics is virginity. There is no instance where the word ALMA is used to refer to a non-virgin. In such passages as Gen. 24:43 (compare Gen. 24:43 with 24:16 where BETULAH appears) and Song 1:3; 6:8 ALMA clearly refers to virgins. In fact the Hebrew Publishing Company Translation of 1916 translates ALMA as “virgin” in Gen. 24:43 and in Song 1:3; 6:8. Moreover an ancient Ugaritic tablet was discovered which uses ALMA in synonymous poetic parallelism as the synonymous parallel to the cognate of BETULAH. For this reason one of the worlds leading Semitists, the late Dr. Cyrus Gordon who was Jewish and did NOT believe in the virgin birth of Yeshua maintains that Is. 7:14 may be translated as “virgin” (Almah in Isaiah 7:14; Gordon, Cyrus H.; JBR 21:106). So why would Isaiah have used ALMA rather than BETULAH? Because a BETULAH can be a young married woman who is not a virgin, but pure because she is married (as in Joel 1:8).
Now it has been suggested that Isaiah 7:14 refers not to a birth to a “virgin” but to a birth to a “young woman”.
In order to understand how this passage was understood anciently we should look at the other ancient versions of the book of Isaiah. The Aramaic Peshitta Tanak has:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [B'TULTA] shall conceive, and bear a son,
And call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
The Aramaic word B’TULTA clearly means “virgin” and not simply “young lady”.
Now lets look at the Greek Septuagint reading:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin [PARTHENOS] shall conceive,
and bear a son, and call his name Immanuel.
(Is. 7:14)
The Greek PARTHENOS means “virgin” and not simply “young lady”.
Thus both the ancient Aramaic and ancient Greek versions of Isaiah 7:14 understand ALMA here to refer to a virgin.
Finally I want to examine the context of Isaiah 7:14. First I will want to examine the immediate context of Isaiah 7 and then the broader context of this whole section of Isaiah.
Literal translation of Hebrew of Is. 7:14:
Therefore the Lord himself shall give to you(pl) a sign:
behold the ALMA will conceive and bear a son
and she will call his name Immanuel.
“you” in verse 14 is plural. By contrast King Achaz is singular you in verses 11 and 16-17. The sign to Achaz was that before a child should know how to choose good from bad, the siege would end (16-17). That child was NOT be the newborn child of verse 14 the child is Isaiah’s son Sh’ar-Yashuv from Isaiah 7:3. The prophecy of Is. 7:14 is not addressed only to Achaz as is the rest of the prophecy.
The following literal translation clears things up: (s)=singular (pl)=plural
7:3a Then YHWH said to Isaiah, “Go out now to meet
Achaz, you(s) and Shear-Jashub your(s) son…
7:10 …YHWH spoke again to Achaz saying:
7:11 “Ask a sign for yourself(s) from YHWH your(s) God;
ask it either in the depth or in the height above.”
7:12 But Achaz said: “I will not ask, nor will I test YHWH”
7:13 Then he said: “Hear now, O House of David! Is it a small
thing for you(pl) to weary men, but will you(pl) weary my God
also?
7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give to you(pl) a sign:
behold the ALMA will conceive and bear a son and she will
call his name Immanuel.
7:15 Curds and honey He shall eat, that he may know to refuse
the evil and choose the good.
7:16 For behold before the child shall know to refuse the evil
and choose the good, the land that you(s) dread will be forsaken by both her kings.
7:17 YHWH will bring the King of Assyria upon you(s) and your(s) people and your(s) father’s house…
Note the clear distinction to what is addressed to you(pl) and what is addressed to you(s) (Achaz) and how this creates a distinction between the newborn in verse 14 and the child in verse 16. Thus the birth in Is. 7:14 is not a sign to Achaz alone.
Isaiah 8:8-9:7 also speaks of this same “Immanuael” figure. Thus it is clear that the “Immanuel” of Is. 7:14 & 8:8 is also the child born in Isaiah 9:6-7.
Now the NT clearly applies these passages to Yeshua as Messiah. Rev. 21:3 alludes to Is. 7:14 & 8:8, 10. 1Kefa 3:14-15 cites Isaiah 8:12-13 in regards to Messiah. Romans 9:32 & 1Kefa 2: apply Is. 8:14 to Messiah. Hebrews 2:13 applies Isaiah 8:17-18 to Messiah. Finally Mt. 4:15-16 and Luke 1:79 apply Isaiah 8:23-9:1 (9:1-2) to Messiah.
Of the 5 surviving fragments of the ancient Netzarim Midrash on Isaiah, three of them fall in this section of Isaiah and all three apply the passages to Yeshua.
Moreover the Talmud applies Is. 8:14 to Messiah:
Judah and Hezekiah, the sons of R. Hiyya, once sat at table with Rabbi and uttered not a word. Whereupon he said: Give the young men plenty of strong wine, so that they may say something. When the wine took effect, they began by saying: The son of David cannot appear ere the two ruling houses in Israel shall have come to an end, viz., the Exilarchate, in Babylon and the Patriarchate in Palestine, for it is written, And he shall be for a Sanctuary, for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both houses of Israel (Is. 8:14). Thereupon he [Rabbi] exclaimed: You throw thorns in my eyes, my children! At this, R. Hiyya [his disciple] remarked: Master, be not angered, for the numerical value of the letters of yayin is seventy, and likewise the letters of sod: When yayin [wine] goes in, sod [secrets] comes out.
(b.San. 38a)
Moreover Targum Jonathan on Isaiah applies Is. 9:6-7 to the Messiah as well.
(For more on Isaiah 9:6-7 as a Messianic Prophecy see my article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect”
Finally the figure in Isaiah 9:6-7 certainly seems to be the same as that in Is. 11:1f. This is important because EVERYONE agrees that Is. 11:1f refers to the Messiah.
Thus by examining the overall context of Isaiah 7:14 it becomes clear that Isaiah 7:14 is indeed a messianic prophecy which prophecies of the virgin birth of the Messiah.
The Secret of the Closed MEM and the Virgin Birth
The Secret of the Closed MEM and the Virgin Birth
by
James Scott Trimm
We read in Isaiah:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The mighty God, The everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall
be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,
to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with
justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD
of hosts will perform this.
(Is. 9:6-7 KJV)
In his Let’s Get Biblical tape set Anti-Missionary Tovia Singer insists this passage must refer to Hezikiah.
Singer argues that the passage is in the perfect verb form and must refer to events which had already occurred. In my recent article “Unto Us a Child is Born- Isaiah 9:6-7 and the Prophetic Perfect” I demonstrated that the passage is a Messianic prophecy, that Singer’s argument is false, and that the passage refers to the future.
Singer’s argument that the figure described in Isaiah 9:6-7 is Hezikiah actually contradicts the Rabbinic position as stated in the Talmud.
Before going further there are two things the reader needs to know.
First off the Hebrew letter MEM is always written as a closed mem when it is written at the end of a word, but as an open mem when it is written at the beginning of the word.
Secondly there is a traditional anomaly which is preserved in the Massoretic Text.
The letter MEM in the word L’MAR’BEH (“of the increase”) is written as a closed final MEM when it should be written with an open MEM.
The Talmud discusses the use of the abnormal closed final MEM in this passage as follows:
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end (Is. 9:6). R. Tanhum said: Bar Kappara expounded in Sepphoris, Why is every mem in the middle of a word open, whilst this is closed? — The Holy One, blessed be He, wished to appoint Hezekiah as the Messiah, and Sennacherib as Gog and Magog; whereupon the Attribute of
Justice said before the Holy One, blessed be He: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! If Thou didst not make David the Messiah, who uttered so many hymns and psalms before Thee, wilt Thou appoint Hezekiah as such, who did not hymn Thee in spite of all these miracles which Thou wroughtest for him?’ Therefore it [sc. the mem] was closed. Straightway the earth exclaimed: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Let me utter song before Thee instead of this righteous man [Hezekiah], and make him the Messiah.’ So it broke into song before Him, as it is written, From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous. Then the Prince of the Universe said to Him: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! It [the earth] hath fulfilled Thy desire [for songs of praise] on behalf of this righteous man.’ But a heavenly Voice cried out, ‘It is my secret, it is my secret.’ To which the prophet rejoined, ‘Woe is me, woe is me: how long [must we wait]?’ The heavenly Voice [again] cried out, ‘The treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously: which Raba — others say, R. Isaac — interpreted: until there come
spoilers, and spoilers of the spoilers.
(b.San. 94a)
Here the Talmud specifically tells us that Hezikiah was not the Messianic figure mentioned in Isaiah 9:6-7 because of the closed final mem and because of a secret of Elohim which is revealed by the use of a final MEM in this word.
Now it is important to understand that in Rabbinic thought, the MEM is associated with the womb. As we read in the Sefer Yetzirah:
“Three Mothers Alef, Mem, Shin are in the body of male and female: Fire and Water and Air. Head was created from Fire, and Womb was created from Water, and Chest was created from Air, balancing the scales between them.”
(Sefer Yetzirah 3:6)
Furthermore the Zohar teaches that the final MEM in ADAM represents the female side which was taken from Adam to make woman:
Further, the words “let us make man” may be taken to signify that Elohim imparted to the lower beings who came from the side of the upper world the secret of forming the divine name “Adam”, which embraces the upper and the lower in virtue of its three letters, aleph, daleth, and final MEM. When these three letters descended below, together in their complete form, the name Adam was found to comprise male and female. The female was attached to the side of the male until Elohim cast him into a deep slumber, during which he lay on the site of the Temple. God then sawed her off from him and adorned her like a bride and brought her to him, as it is written, “And he took one of his sides and closed up the place with flesh.” (Gen. 2:21).
(Zohar 1:34b)
The Bahir elaborates that not only does a MEM represent a womb, but an open MEM represents an open womb amd a closed MEM represents a closed womb:
“The open Mem. What is the open Mem ? It includes both male and female. What is the closed Mem ? It is made like a womb from above. But Rabbi Rahumai said that the womb is like the letter Teth . He said it is like a Teth on the inside, while I say that it is like a Mem on the outside.
What is a Mem? Do not read Mem, but Mayim (water). Just like water is wet, so is the womb always wet. Why does the open Mem include both male and female, while the closed Mem is male? This teaches us that the Mem is primarily male. The opening was then added to it for the sake of the female. Just like the male cannot give birth, so the closed MEM cannot give birth. And just like the female has an opening with which to give birth, so can the open MEM give birth. The MEM is therefore open and closed.”
(Bahir 84-85)
While Singer claims that Hezikiah was the figure described in Isaiah 9:6-7 the Talmud states that Hezikiah was not this figure because of the “secret” of the closed final MEM. What is the secret of the closed final MEM? the MEM represents the WOMB and the the closed MEM points the birth of Messiah to a woman with a closed rather than an open womb! This points us to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son…”
Messiah would be born to the closed womb of a virgin. The closed MEM (closed womb) birth described in Isaiah 9:6-7 points us back to the virgin birth described in Isaiah 7:14. Hezikiah could not have been the figure born in Isaiah 9:6-7 because he was not born of a virgin.
UNTO US A CHILD IS BORN
ISAIAH 9:6-7 AND THE PROPHETIC PERFECT
By
James Scott Trimm
We read in Isaiah 9:6-7:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The mighty God, The everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall
be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,
to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with
justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD
of hosts will perform this.
(Is. 9:6-7 KJV)
Is. 9:6, 7 … anti-missionaries including Tovia Singer LOVE to claim this must be past tense and refer to an event prior to Isaiah’s writing.
In reality there is no such thing as tense in Hebrew grammar. In reality Hebrew verbs do not take past, present and future forms, but perfect (completed action) or imperfect (incomplete action).
In Hebrew thinking, an action is regarded as
being either completed or incomplete. Hebrew,
therefore, knows no past, present, or future tenses,
but has instead a Perfect and an Imperfect. …
The Hebrew Perfect may be taken to represent
action in the past… the equivalent of the English
present tense is supplied by the participle…. and the
[equivalent of] the English future tense (with other
varieties) by the imperfect.
(A Practical Grammer for Classical Hebrew. 2nd Ed.
Clarendon Press; Oxford; 1959; J. A. Weingreen pp. 56-57)
To be strictly accurate we should speak of “forms” rather than “tenses” of the verb, since it is the completeness or otherwise of an action which is being expressed and not the time factor, as in English….
…Hebrew has no “tenses” in the normal sense of
the word. Instead there are two “states”…
(Teach Yourself Biblical Hebrew; R.K. Harrison;
1984; pages 68, 80)
Normally a verb in the perfect form would imply a past tense which is why Singer insists this must be past tense and that it therefore refers to Hezekiah.
In reality there is a special idiom in Hebrew called the “Prophetic Perfect” this is where prophet speaks of future events in the perfect form because he has seen them in the future where they have already happened.
Gesenius’ mentions the Prophetic Perfect idiom and describes it this way:
…he [the prophetic writer] describes the future
event as if it had been already seen or heard by him.
(Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. 2nd edition
Translated by A. E. Crowley; Clarendon Press;
Oxford; 1956; Edited by E. Klautzsch; pp. 312-313)
There are many examples of the Prophetic Perfect in the Tanak:
Isaiah 5:13 “Therefore My people are gone into captivity, for want of knowledge; and their honorable men are famished, and their multitude are parched with thirst” (JPS)
In this verse (Is. 5:13) this verb is in the perfect form but it is clearly a future event because the captivity spoken of did not occur in Isaiah’s lifetime.
Other examples are:
Isaiah 10:28-32 “He is come to Aiath, he is passed through Migron; at Michmas he layeth up his baggage; They are gone over the pass; they have taken up their lodging at Geba; Ramah trembleth; Gibeath-shaul is fled. Cry thou with a shrill voice, O daughter of Gallim! Hearken, O Laish! O thou poor Anathoth! Madmenah is in mad flight; the inhabitants of Gebim flee to cover. This very day shall he halt at Nob, shaking his hand at the mount of the daughter of Zion, the hill of Jerusalem.” (JPS)
Jeremiah 23:2 “Therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, against the shepherds that feed My people: Ye have scattered My flock, and driven them away, and have not taken care of them; behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord.” (JPS)
Amos 5:2 “The virgin of Israel is fallen, she shall no more rise; she is cast down upon her land, there is none to raise her up” (JPS)
In fact the Targum Jonathan to Isaiah 9:6-7 clearly identifies the figure spoken of in Is. 9:6-7 as the Messiah.
“The prophet says to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old, Wonderful counselor, Mighty God, he who lives forever, the Messiah, in whose days peace shall increase upon us”
(Targum Jonathan Is. 9:6)
And we read in the Midrash Rabbah:
Rabbi Jose the Galilean says: The name of the Messiah too is
“peace”; as it is written: “God the mighty, the everlasting Father,
the ruler of peace” (Quoting Is. 9:5-6 (6-7))
(PEREK HA SHALOM; NUMBERS RABBAH XI, 16-20)
He said to him: ‘I have yet to raise up the Messiah,’ of whom it is written, For a child is born to us (Isa. IX, 5). Until I come unto my Lord unto Seir (Gen. XXXIII, I4). R. Samuel b. Nahman said: We have searched all the Scriptures and we have nowhere found [it stated] that Jacob ever came together with Esau at Seir. What then is the meaning of, ‘Unto Seir’? Jacob [meant] to say to him: ‘I have yet to raise up judges and saviours to exact punishment from you.’ Whence this? For it is said, And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau (Obad. I, 21). Israel asked God: ‘Master of the Universe, how long shall we remain subjected to him?’ He replied: ‘Until the day comes of which it is written, There shall step forth a star out of Jacob and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel (Num. XXIV, 17); when a star shall step forth from Jacob and devour the stubble of Esau.’
(Midrash Rabbah – Deuteronomy I:20)
And we read in the Zohar:
“As for the expression El Gibbor, the whole verse in which this occurs in an epitome of the holy supernal faith. The word “Wonderful” alludes to the supernal Wisdom, which is wondrous and concealed beyond the reach of all; “Counsellor” is the supernal stream which issues forth perennially and counsels all and waters all; “El” refers to Abraham, “Gibbor” to Issac, and “Everlasting Father” to Jacob, who lays hold of both sides and attains perfection. The “Prince of Peace” is the Zaddik, who brings peace to the world, peace to the House, peace to the Matrona.”
(Zohar 3:31a)
So even the ancient sages understood Isaiah 9:5-6 (6-7 in some editions) to refer to a FUTURE MESSIAH. Why would they do this if this passage supposedly obviously speaks of the past? Obviously it does NOT have to be in the past tense. Like Isaiah 5:13 it is written in the prophetic perfect.
A Body You Have Clothed Me With
By
James Scott Trimm
One passage in which the “New Testament” is said to quote the Greek Septuagint is in Hebrews 10:5-6:
5 Concerning therefore His coming into the world it is said, Sacrifice and offering You do not desire, but a body, You have prepared for Me.
6 Burnt offering and sin offering, You do not ask for.
7 Then it said, Behold I come. For in the roll of the book it is written of Me. I will do Your will, Elohi,
(Heb. 10:5-7 HRV)
This passage is quoting from Psalms were we read in the Masoretic Text:
7 (40:6) Sacrifice and meal-offering You have no delight in: ears you have cut for me; burnt-offering and sin-offering have You not required.
8 (40:7) Then said I, Behold, I am come in the roll of the book, it is written of me.
(Psalm 40:7-8 (6-7) HRV)
Where the Masoretic Text has “ears you have cut for me” the Greek Septuagint has “a body you have clothed me with”. The Munster Hebrew text of Hebrews has “a body you have prepared for me” and the Aramaic Peshitta has “a body you have clothed me with” where they quote this passage in Heb. 10:5.
Is Hebrews quoting the Greek Septuagint, or is it quoting a (now lost) first century Hebrew text which agreed with the Septuagint in this verse?
Support for this idea comes from a surprising place indeed, the Zohar. In the Zohar we read:
THIS is the Book of the generations of Adam. In the day that Alhim created man, in the likeness of Alhim made he him.” (Gen. v., 1.) Said Rabbi Isaac: “The Holy One showed Adam the forms and features of his descendants that should appear in the world after him, and of the sages and kings who should rule over Israel. He also made known to him, that the life and reign of David would be of short duration. Then said Adam to the Holy One, ‘let seventy years of my earthly existence be taken and granted to the life of David.’ This request was granted, otherwise Adam’s life would have attained to a thousand years. This was the reason that David said: ‘For thou, Lord, hast made me glad through thy work; I will triumph in the work of thine hands (Ps. xcii., 5), for thou hast filled me with joy in prolonging the days of my life. ‘It was thy own act and wish,’ said the Holy One, ‘when thou wast incarnated as Adam, the work of my hands and not of flesh and blood.’ Amongst the wise men and sages that should appear on the earth, Adam rejoiced greatly on beholding the form of Rabbi Akiba who would become distinguished by his great knowledge of the secret doctrine. On seeing, however, as in a vision, his martyrdom and cruel death, Adam became exceedingly sad and said: ‘Thine eyes beheld me ere I was clothed in a body and all things are written in thy book; each day hath its events that shall come to pass, are therein to be found.’ Observe that the book of the generations of Adam was that which the Holy One through the angel Rosiel, guardian of the great mysteries and secret doctrine, gave unto Adam whilst yet in the garden of Eden.
(Zohar 1:55a-55b as translated in The Sepher Ha-Zohar or the Book of Light; By Nurho de Manhar; p. 234-235; 1900-14)
Here the Zohar is also clearly alluding to Psalm 40:7-8 (6-7)… but with a reading that also agrees with the Septuagint against the Masoretic Text. Is the author of the Zohar quoting the Septuagint? Is he seeking to support the reading of the book of Hebrews against the Masoretic Text? Or is it possible that the ancient author of the Zohar was also holding a Hebrew text of Psalm 49:7-8 (6-7) that agreed with the Septuagint. This one passages supports both the Hebrew/Aramaic origin of Hebrews as well as the ancient origin of the text of the Zohar.
Proof that Yeshua is the Messiah
Proof that Yeshua is the Messiah
By James Trimm
Yeshua MUST be Messiah (regardless of whether or not any other “Messianic Prophecies” are validly speaking of Yeshua)
Isaiah 29 ties the apostasy of Judah to a sealed book (29:10-12) but with the revealing of that sealed book comes an enlightenment and restoration (29:18).
Now it is very important to realize that according to Isaiah 29 our people (Judah) are in a state of general blindness/slumber until the sealed book is revealed (29:10-14, 18).
Now Isaiah does not tell us what the book is or when it is revealed. However that information is given elswhere in the Tanak. Daniel writes of his own book:
But you, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book to the time of the end… Go your way Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”
(Daniel 12:4, 10)
So this “sealed book” would seem to be at least in part, the Book of Daniel and it seems to be come unsealed in the last days. Remember Daniel wrote after the days of Isaiah so Daniel knew about the sealed book of Isaiah 29:10-12, 18 when he wrote Daniel 12:4, 10.
So lets bring together Isaiah 29:10-14, 18 with Daniel 12:4, 10. What do we learn from these two sections of the Tanak taken together? We learn that our people Judah are in an apostasy until some information hidden in the Book of Daniel (and perhaps some other books) is revealed in the last days and the revealing of that information opens their eyes.
This means that mainline Judaism is in apostasy but in the last days there is a restoration of Judah when certain hidden (sealed) information in Daniel is revealed.
So what information is sealed in Daniel? The restoration of our people is usually tied to Messiah… could this hidden information in Daniel relate to the identity of Messiah?
Interesting the Talmud states:
The Targum of the Prophets was composed by Jonathon ben Uzziel under the guidance of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi… and a Bat Kol (voice from heaven) came forth and exclaimed, “Who is this that has revealed My secrets to mankind?”… He further sought to reveal by a Targum the inner meaning of the Ketuvim, but a bat kol went forth and said, “Enough!”. What was the reason?– Because the date of the Messiah is foretold in it.
(Babylonian Talmud; b.Megillah 3a)
Now the only prophetic book of the Ketuvim is Daniel and this is also a book of the Ketuvim for which no Targum was evr made. The following quote from Josephus also supports the theory that Daniel is the book in question:
We believe that Daniel conversed with God; for he did not only prophecy of future events, as did the other prophets, but also determined the time of their accomplishment.
(Josephus; Antiquities 10:11:7)
Now the Qumran community found just this information (the time of the Messiah) in the Book of Daniel:
The visitation is the Day of Salvation that He has decreed through Isaiah the prophet concerning all the captives, inasmuch as Scripture says, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who announces peace, who brings good news, who announces salvation, who says to Zion “Your ELOHIM reigns”.” (Isaiah 52;7)
This scriptures interpretation : “the mountains” are the prophets, they who were sent to proclaim God`s truth and to prophesy to all Israel. “The messengers” is the Anointed of the spirit, of whom Daniel spoke; “After the sixty-two weeks, a Messiah shall be cut off” (Daniel 9;26, from 11Q13)
So now we have learned that there is good reason to believe that the sealed information in the Book of Daniel which opens the eyes of Judah when it is revealed in the last days is the time of Messiah sealed up in Daniel 9:24-27.
Now lets recap:
Anyone can see from Isaiah 29 that the apostasy of Judah ends with the revealing of a sealed book.
Anyone can see from Daniel 12 that this sealed book is (at least in part) the Book of Daniel.
Anyone can see that the information sealed up in Daniel is (at least in part) the time of Messiah.
Anyone can see that this information is to be found in Daniel 9.
Daniel 9 unsealed
1: In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;
2: In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
Daniel has been doing some Tanak study. He has been reading Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10. He has read about the 70 year exile.
The reason for a 70 year captivity had been that YHWH was punishing us for having forsaken the Torah. He punished us with the curses of Deuteronomy 28-29 and Leviticus 26 as the Torah had warned us. The key issue here was that of the violation of the Sabbath of the Land (Exodus 21:2; 23:11; Leviticus.
25:2, 20; 26:2, 34; Deuteronomy 15:1)
According to the Torah, if we as a people did not keep the sabbath of the land every seven years we would be cursed (Leviticus 26:34)
3: And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes:
4: And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;
5: We have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments:
6: Neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land.
7: O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee.
8: O Lord, to us belongeth confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee.
9: To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him;
10: Neither have we obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets.
11: Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.
12: And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.
13: As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.
14: Therefore hath the LORD watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us: for the LORD our God is righteous in all his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice.
15: And now, O Lord our God, that hast brought thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly.
16 O Lord, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us.
17: Now therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake.
18 O my God, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine eyes, and behold our desolations, and the city which is called by thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies.
19: O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name.
Daniel is very concerned. It has been 70 years and he wants to go home! He is a very old man by now. But he has worried because he knows his Torah. He knows that the Torah warns that if Israel still does not repent after the curse is inacted that Israel will have the punishment multiplied by seven (Lev. 26:18) Daniel is hoping that YHWH will not be enacting the next level punishment. For that would mean 70 * 7 or another 490 years!
20: And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;
21: Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
22: And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.
23: At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
24: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Daniel learns that there will indeed be at least another 490 years of curses for Israel. The “weeks” here are not seven DAYS but seven YEARS. In fact the Hebrew word here actually just means “seven [somethings]”
25: Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
7 “weeks” here would be 49 years (a Jubilee cycle) plus theeescore and two weeks (3*20+2=62) is 69 “weeks” or 483 years.
But remember we are not counting years here but actual sabbath year cycles which are specific seven year blocks. In other words this is actually a count of how many sabbath year cycle blocks fall between these two points.
Our starting point is “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” which is Ezra 7:11-16 and gives us a start date of 457 BCE. Between that date and the Messiah 69 sabbath year cycle blocks would fall.
26: And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Messiah is cut off after ther 62 “weeks” which follow the 7 weeks. This elaboration allows us to see that the division of these two blocks (the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks) was to show that after the 7 weeks “the street shall be built again, and the wall” but the Messiah would not come until after the 62 week block following that.
The Messiah would be “cut off” at that time. This is an idiom meaning that he would be executed. He would not be executed for himself, but for others. Then the people of a prince destroy Jerusalem after that time.
27: And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Remember there were 490 years or 70 “weeks” but we have so far covered only 483 (or 69 “weeks”).
This is because the big test of our trust in YHWH is the Sabbath of the land. This is where Israel SHOWS our trust in YHWH by trusting him to provide. The curse would not end until we reinstitute the sabbath of the land (2 Chronicles 36:21).
So YHWH in his infinite mercy would send the Messiah seven years BEFORE the 490 years would end to call us to repent and return to Torah in time to reinstitute the sabbath of the land BEFORE the 490 years are over. (See my paper THE KINGDOM OFFER)
The curse will not end until we as a people repent and show that by reinstituting the sabbath of the land. When we do that we will finally kick off the last seven years of the curse we have lived with all of this time.
There is so much to learn from this chapter. Including the nature of the Kingdom offer and the layout of the last seven years. But most importantly is the time that the Messiah would come and be “cut off”.
Now if our start point is 457 BCE and 69 “weeks” must fall between this point and the death of Messiah, then Messiah would have to be executed sometime in a window from 26 C.E. to 40 C.E. (depending on how the sabbath year cycles fall).
So if Yeshua was NOT the Messiah that would be “cut off, but not for himself” during that window… then who was?
Messaih would be executed in a window of time somewhere between 26 and 44 C.E.. And he would arive in accordance to the completion of a series of sabbath-year-cycles and jubilee cycles. Now these cycles indicate “the year of release”. So lets look for more clues about this Messiah who is cut off at such a time.
Lets look at Isaiah 60:22-61:2.
“A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation: I YHWH will hasten it in its time.”
(Isaiah 60:22)
“A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation:” is the Kingdom represented by a stone in Daniel 2:34-35, 45 which “became a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (Daniel 3:35).
“I YHWH will hasten it in its time.” refers to the “Kingdom offer”.
“The Spirit of Adonai YHWH is upon me; because YHWH has anointed me to proclaim good tidings to the meek; he has sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. To proclaim the acceptable year of YHWH, and the day of vengeance of our ELOHIM, to comfrort all who mourn.”
(Isaiah 61:1-2)
Here we have an anointed one, a “Messiah” who comes in accordance with the jubilee and seven year cycles to proclaim liberty to captives. It is also significant as we will soon find that he makes this proclomation to “Zion” (Isaiah 61:3). This Messiah comes to REDEEM.
Lets see if Isaiah speaks any more about this figure who makes a proclomation of redemption to Zion. In Isaiah 52:7 we also read about a figure who also proclaims good tidings to Zion. This proclomation appears in Isaiah 53 and also involves one who comes to redeem (Isaiah 53:4-5, 11-12) and is cut off, but not for himself (53:8; 53:4-5, 11-12) just like the figure in Daniel. The figure must be the Messiah of Daniel 9 and Isaiah 61.
I wonder how this Messiah dies? Perhaps the prophets give me some clue. Zechariah writes:
“…they shall look upon me whom they have pierced…”
(Zechariah 12:10)
According to both the Talmud (b.Sukkot 52a) and the Targum, this “pierced one” is the Messiah. Now Zechariah 12:10 takes place at the coming of Messiah as king, but they notice that he was the same one whom they had “pierced” or “thrust through”. Lets read on and see if Zechariah gives us any clues as to who this is and just how he was pierced. As we read further Zechariah 12:10-14 speaks of the people mourning over having pierced this guy. Zechariah 13:1-4 takes place at the intiation of the Messianic age. The Messiah is judging idolaters and false prophets. No wonder they are now mourning over this pierced one! Then in verses 5-6 we get a detailed scene of one of these judgements:
“And he shall say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a husbandman; for a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.’ And he [the defendant] shall say to him [Messiah], ‘What are these wounds in your hands?’ Then he [the Messiah] shall answer: ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.’ “
Zechariah 13:5-6
Zechariah 13:6 points us back to 12:10 regarding how they mourn when they see he is the pierced one.
So now we have a Messiah who would be “cut off” sometime between 26 and 44 C.E. not for himself but to redeem others. This execution would involve having his hands pierced.
Now lets look at Zechariah 13:2. Notice that this guy will “cut off the names of the idols out of the land” (13:2). Sounds like the same guy about whom Micah 5:13 says “Your graven images also will I cut off”. This guy is born in Beit-Lechem (Bethlehem) according to Micah 5:2 (and the Targum to Micah 5:2 says this is Messiah).
In summation
According to Isaiah 29 our people (Judah) are in a state of general blindness/slumber until the sealed book is revealed (29:10-14, 18).
Daniel tells us that his book is sealed until the last days (Daniel 12)
The sealed information in Daniel’s book would appear to be the time of Messiah in Daniel 9.
Daniel 9 unsealed reveals to us that Messiah would be “cut off” for others sometime between 26 and 44 CE.
This passage points us to various other prophecies about this figure which also tell us that he is born in Beit-Lechem, and executed by having his hands pierced.
Who could this be?
Judith, Channukah and the Last Days
By James Scott Trimm
(An excerpt from Channukah and the Last Days
http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds )
The Apocryphal book of Judith is about a beautiful and devout Jewish widow who saves her city from an invading army. The Elders of her city decide to surrender unless help arrives within five days. Judith leaves and enters the camp of the opposing general. She beguiles him by her beauty but ultimately returns to her city with his head in a bag. This inspires her city to route the invading army. In the end the High Priest comes to her city an honors Judith for her valor.
Many modern critics have accused the Book of Judith of anachronisms and historical inaccuracies. On the surface the book claims to be set “In the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh, in the days of Arphaxad who ruled over the Medes in Ecbatana”. In fact Nebuchadnezzar was actually the King of Babylon, not the King of Assyria. In actuality these are all Euphemisms and the book is actually set in the Maccabean era. For example the book of Judith uses Nebuchadnezzar as a euphemism for Antiochus Epiphanies, because both names have a gematria (numerical value) of 423.
There are other reasons to associate Antiochus Epiphanies with Nebuchadnezzar the King of BabyloThe call to “come out of Babylon” is phrased in Zechariah as coming out of “The Land of the North” and Antiochus Epiphanies was the “King of the North” in Daniel 11. Also as we discovered in the last chapter, Antiochus Epiphanies parallels the first “Beast” of Revelation 13. This “Beast” of Revelation 13 is described as follows:
1 And I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast coming
up from the sea that had ten horns and seven heads: and upon
his horns, ten diadems, and upon his head, the name of
blasphemy.
2 And the beast that I saw was like a leopard, and his feet like
those of a bear, and his mouth [was] like that of lions. And the
dragon gave to him his power, and his throne, and great
authority.
(Rev. 13:1-2)
up from the sea that had ten horns and seven heads: and upon
his horns, ten diadems, and upon his head, the name of
blasphemy.
2 And the beast that I saw was like a leopard, and his feet like
those of a bear, and his mouth [was] like that of lions. And the
dragon gave to him his power, and his throne, and great
authority.
(Rev. 13:1-2)
This is a composite of the four beasts Daniel sees in his vision in Daniel 7. Students of Biblical Prophecy will be well aware that Daniel’s prophecy in Chapter 7 parallels the dream of the image made up of various substances in Daniel 2 and that the “image” of Daniel 2 is a composite of the kingdoms laid out as “Beast” in Daniel 7. In other words, the “image” of Daniel 2 parallels the “Beast” of Revelation 13. This is significant because in Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar is told that the “head” of this image represents him as the King of Babylon. This is because Nebuchadnezzar was symbolizing Antiochus Epiphanies who was to come. This is further substantiated by the parallel between the abomination of desolation and the arrogant proclamation attributed to the last days “King of Babylon” in Isaiah 14 and the fact that the account of Antiochus Epiphanies death in 2nd Maccabees recalls language from this portion of Isaiah 14.
In reality the book takes place during the rule of Antiochus Epiphanies over the Selucid Empire of Syria and of Ptolemy VI over Egypt. The story appears in several Midrashim in Jewish literature in which it is set in the Maccabean era. It is commonly recognized in Judaism as a Channukah story. And like the books of the Maccabees, the Book of Judith has much to teach us about last days events. The Book of Judith features two primary villains Nebuchadnezzar who is called “King of Assyria” and one of his generals named Holofernes. As discussed above, Nebuchadnezzar is used as a euphemism for Antiochus Epiphanies and Holoferenes represents one of his generals. Just as Antiochus Epiphanies is a type and shadow of the first “Beast” of Revelation 13, Holofernes is a type and shadow of the second “Beast” of Revelation 13.
Holofernes enacts an edict from “Nebuchadnezzar” (Antiochus Epiphanies) to abolish all other forms of worship in favor of the worship of “Nebuchadnezzar” (Antiochus Epiphanies):
…he [Holofernes] did cast down their frontiers, and cut down
their groves: for he had decreed to destroy all the gods of the
land, that all nations should worship Nabuchodonosor only,
and that all tongues and tribes should call upon him as god.
(Judith 3:8)
their groves: for he had decreed to destroy all the gods of the
land, that all nations should worship Nabuchodonosor only,
and that all tongues and tribes should call upon him as god.
(Judith 3:8)
3: He will send his power, and will destroy them from the face
of the earth, and their God shall not deliver them: but we his
servants will destroy them as one man; for they are not able to
sustain the power of our horses.
4: For with them we will tread them under foot, and their
mountains shall be drunken with their blood, and their fields
shall be filled with their dead bodies, and their footsteps shall
not be able to stand before us, for they shall utterly perish, saith
king Nabuchodonosor, lord of all the earth: for he said, None
of my words shall be in vain.
(Judith 6:3-4)
of the earth, and their God shall not deliver them: but we his
servants will destroy them as one man; for they are not able to
sustain the power of our horses.
4: For with them we will tread them under foot, and their
mountains shall be drunken with their blood, and their fields
shall be filled with their dead bodies, and their footsteps shall
not be able to stand before us, for they shall utterly perish, saith
king Nabuchodonosor, lord of all the earth: for he said, None
of my words shall be in vain.
(Judith 6:3-4)
Holofernes prefigures the second beast of Revelation 13, which causes people to worship the first beast:
11 And I saw another beast coming up from the earth, and he
had two horns, even like a lamb, and he was speaking as a
dragon.
12 And he will exercise all the authority of the first beast
before him, and he will cause the earth and those who dwell in
it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he will do great signs in such a manner, that he will
make fire to descend from heaven upon the earth, before the
sons of men.
14 And he will seduce, those who are dwelling on the earth: by
the signs that are given to him to work in the presence of the
beast; saying to those who are dwelling on the earth [that they
should] make an image for the beast, who had the wound of the
sword and lived.
15 And it was given to him to give breath to the image of the
beast: and he will cause all who will not worship the image of
the beast, to be killed.
(Rev. 13:11-15 HRV)
had two horns, even like a lamb, and he was speaking as a
dragon.
12 And he will exercise all the authority of the first beast
before him, and he will cause the earth and those who dwell in
it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he will do great signs in such a manner, that he will
make fire to descend from heaven upon the earth, before the
sons of men.
14 And he will seduce, those who are dwelling on the earth: by
the signs that are given to him to work in the presence of the
beast; saying to those who are dwelling on the earth [that they
should] make an image for the beast, who had the wound of the
sword and lived.
15 And it was given to him to give breath to the image of the
beast: and he will cause all who will not worship the image of
the beast, to be killed.
(Rev. 13:11-15 HRV)
Judith 2:20 speaks of the army of Holofernes as “like a swarm of locusts” recalling the army of locusts in Joel and Revelation 9. The main character Y’hudit (Judith) represents the remnant of House of Judah which overcomes the false prophet. Her name means simply “Jewess” (this may also be a euphemism and not her actual name). She parallels the “woman” in Revelation 12 who dwells in the wilderness for forty-two months. In parallel Judith had been a widow for three years and four months (about 1,200 days) (Judith 8:4). Her husband had dies at the time of the barely harvest (around Passover) and had been named “Manasseh” (Judith 8:1-3). Her bridegroom parallels Messiah, the bridegroom of Judah, Messiah was impaled at Passover (at the barley harvest) when he died in the role of Messiah “ben Yosef”.
Channukah is not just a Jewish holiday, it is a key to prophetic events of the last days. Embedded within the Channukah story are elements foreshadowing the apostasy, the abomination of desolation, the Great Tribulation the Anti-Messiah, the martyrs of the tribulation, the false prophet, the remnant, the return of Messiah and the Messianic Kingdom to come.
I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Nazarene Judaism moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.
I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Nazarene Judaism moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה