Messiah follower, do we pass judgement on those who worship idols while trusting in our own intellect, physical strength, talents, finances, emotional intelligence, qualifications, righteousness? If so, we are hypocrites and idolaters. Introduction:
As is the case with all of Hebrew Scripture, there are no chapter breaks in the scroll of the 12 Prophets in which Hosea is located. It’s important to see the text of this chapter as a continuation of the previous chapter: “They return not to the most High: they have become like a slackened bow: their princes will fall by the sword from the rage of their tongue: this stammering derision in the land Egypt.” -Hosea 7:16 1“Put a shofar (ram’s horn) to your mouth! Kanesher Like an eagle al upon beit YHVH the house of the Lord (Mercy) Ya’an because averu the people have passed over, alienated veriytiy My covenant (cutting agreement), ve’al and against Toratiy My Torah Instruction pashau rebelled. “Put the shofar to your mouth” is an instruction to the prophet Hosea. He is to blow the shofar (ram’s horn) with the wind (ruach) of the Holy Spirit in him. The mouth denotes both intimacy and proclamation. The shofar (Gen. 22) represents the voice of the Ram of God (Yeshua the King Messiah), Who is the Word (Ha-Davar) essence, the substance of God and the testimony of Yeshua is the spirit of prophecy (Rev. 19:10). It is interesting to compare a similar phrasing spoken to Yishayahu (Isaiah): “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a shofar, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.” -Isaiah 58:1 “Ram’s horn” (shofar) is often blown as a warning (Joel 2:1; Amos 3:6) and is also associated with the giving of the Torah (Ex. 19:16) [poignant given the accusation concerning rejection of Torah in verses 1 & 11], the jubilee (Lev. 25:9), war & miracles (Jos. 6:4; Jdg. 6:34; 7:8) etc. And finds its true origin in the “binding of Isaac” (Gen. 22). Meaning that at its root it is the sound of redemption. Rashi understands this verse to carry the same meaning as that of Isaiah 58:1. “The Shechinah says to the prophet: Let the voice of your palate be heard, and call like a shophar, and say: You enemies! Fly and hasten as the eagle swoops and come to the house of the Lord. To your palate a shophar, it is as though a shophar is placed to your palate. [after Jonathan]” -Rashi “Like an eagle upon the house of the LORD” “behold, as an eagle flies, so shall a king with his army come up and encamp against the house of the sanctuary of the Lord.” -Targum Yonatan The eagle is a bird of prey and is used as a figure for invading rulers and their empires (Eze. 17:3; Deut. 28:49). This is misinterpreted by the majority of Christian scholars as referring to the Assyrian invasion. This cannot be the case because the Assyrians did not take Jerusalem and defile the Temple (House of the LORD). The rabbinical interpretation rightly concludes that this is prophetic of the Babylonian invasion when Nebuchadnezzar (Ezekiel 17) would destroy the Temple in 586 BCE. Therefore, the warning reaches beyond the exile of the northern tribes to the exile of all Israel including Judah and Benjamin. “And say, ‘Thus says the LORD GOD; A great eagle with great wings, long winged, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of the cedar:” -Ezekiel 17:3 All this had been long since prophesied over Israel’s disobedience: “The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flies; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand;” -Deuteronomy 28:49 “because the people have passed over, alienated My covenant, and against My Torah Instruction rebelled.” The reason for the warning is that Israel (the northern tribes) have ignored the covenant they have with YHVH (made at Sinai) and have wilfully rebelled against the Torah Instruction of YHVH. “Pasha” a Hebrew word for sin means “to miss the mark” and at its root denotes rebellion born of idolatry. This is significant because the beginning of this chapter addresses with warning the idolatry of the previous chapter. 2 Liy To Me Yisrael (overcome in God) yizaku cries, ‘Elohay My God, yeda’anucha we know You!’ The northern tribes claim to call on God as “My God”, “Our God”, but they do so while calling on many gods and while rejecting YHVH’s covenant and wilfully turning from his Torah. To this hypocrisy they add the self-incriminating phrase “we know you” denoting intimate knowledge of God. This is vile for two reasons, first, God has offered Israel faithful intimacy and they have spurned Him, and second, they have been consistently intimate with false gods, prostituting themselves before His face. The Targum Yonatan interprets this as temporary, situational confession from the lips of the unrepentant: "in every time that distress comes upon them, they pray before me, and say, now we know that we have no God besides thee; redeem us, for we are thy people Israel;'' -Targum Yonatan Rav Shaul the Shaliach (Apostle) writes concerning hypocritical “Messianic Gentiles” who acted in a similar way. These gentile believers were demanding that other gentiles be circumcised in the flesh contrary to Shaul’s (Paul’s) teaching (Philippians 3). This same gentile circumcision cult were claiming to teach the things of God and to know God, but were in themselves detestable, disobedient, and worthless in God’s sight. “10 For there are many rebellious people, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, 11 who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of [h]dishonest gain. 12 One of them, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” 13 This testimony is true. For this reason reprimand them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, 14 not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth. 15 To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. 16 They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.” -Titus 1:10-16 (NIV) Amos, another contemporary of Hosea, makes it clear that while Israel was claiming to Know YHVH she was practicing flagrant idolatry (Amos 2:4, 7-8; 3:14; 5:26). 3 Zanach Yisrael Israel has cast off, spurned, rejected tov good; oyeiyv an enemy yirdefov will pursue him. “Israel has cast off, spurned, rejected good;” Good is not just a reference to a distinction in circumstance or flavour. Good is defined by the character of God. This is why Yeshua said “Why do you call me good, no one is good but God alone.” (Matt. 19:17; Mark 10:18). Therefore, this opening phrase is the poetic couplet which correlates to “rebelled against My Torah” (v.1). Some of our ancient rabbis rightly interpret this as “Israel has cast off and rejected God (Good Himself).” “an enemy will pursue him.” This correlates to the “eagle” who is to come against all Israel including Judah and Benjamin. In fact there is a progression of eagles through Assyria (against the northern tribes) and on to Babylon (taking Judah and Benjamin into exile). 4 Heim They himlichu have set up kings ve’lo mimeniy that did not come from Me; heisiyru they appointed princes ve’lo yadaetiy not known by Me. Kaspam With silver uzehavam and gold asu they make lahem for themselves atzabiym idols/images lema’an for the purpose of yikareit cutting themselves off. “They have set up kings that did not come from Me” “They” refers to the northern tribes and the “kings” are all the kings of the north from Jeroboam I onward. Jeroboam I having set the stage for the idolatry of the north by setting up the calf idols of Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:25-33). The evidence that the kings did not “come from” (were not established) by God is manifest in their idolatrous and unrepentant behaviour. This is not to say that God was not in control but that He allowed their disobedience for a greater redemptive purpose. Jeroboam I was allowed by the will of God to become king of the northern tribes, but was nonetheless crowned by the people without the express instruction of God, and without His counsel being sought by either rulers or people. God allowed but did not consent to the crowning of Jeroboam I. Therefore, the appointment of Jeroboam I was on the heads of the people themselves. Many of Jeroboam’s (I) successors were conspirators, who set themselves up without the consent of either God or the people of the northern tribes. They plotted to overthrow others, and reigned after slaughtering them. This is true of Shallum, Menahem, Pekah, and Hoshea (the king, not the prophet). Further still, the people of Israel had no right to choose a king for themselves; the right belonged to God alone; it was He that chose and appointed the kings of all Israel (Deut. 17:15): Saul, David, and Solomon, were all chosen and appointed by YHVH (1 Samuel 10:24). The people of the north brought curse on all the kings of the northern tribes through their rejection of the line of David. By rejecting the throne of David they rejected the greater Son of David, the King Who was to come, the King Messiah. “What share do we have in David? We have no inheritance in the son of Jesse; To your tents, Israel! Now look after your own house, David!” -1 Kings 12:16 (NIV) Jeroboam I had built up Shechem as his residence. Thus the connection to the rebuke of Hosea levelled against those practicing acts of perversity on their way to Shechem (Hosea 6:9). “they appointed princes not known by Me” Here “known” does not negate knowledge of the princes, rather it reveals the fact that there was not an intimate connection between them and YHVH as there had been with Solomon and David. The key is that the princes were “appointed” by apostate people and not by God. “With silver and gold they make for themselves idols/images for the purpose of cutting themselves off.” Their idolatry results in self-harm. Practically speaking idolatry makes waste of things which God has purposed for use while turning useful things into waste. Isaiah another contemporary of Hosea, says: “They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he makes it a god: they fall down, yes, they worship.” -Isaiah 46:6 5 Zanach Cast off, reject, spurn egleich your calf-idol Shomeron (Samaria, guarding/watch mountain) [alt. “Your calf-idol has been cast off Samaria” or "Your calf has cast you off"]! Charah Fury burns apiy in My nostrils bam against them. Ad-matay How long will they lo yuchelu refuse to overcome nikayon with innocence? “Cast off, reject, spurn your calf-idol Samaria!” This connects the apostate kingship of the north through Jeroboam I to the calf idols established by him in the territory of Samaria in the towns of Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:28-33). It is worth noting that upon setting up these calf idols Jeroboam I had spoken the same words Aaron had spoken when setting up the calf deity at Sinai. “So the king Jeroboam I consulted, and he made two golden calves; and he said to the people, ‘It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold your gods, Israel, that brought you up from the land of Egypt.’” -1 Kings 12:28 This can be read as “Your calf-idol has been cast off Samaria” or "Your calf has cast you off" Kimkhi and Ben Melekh understand this to mean that the false god has left the northern tribes in the lurch, it has forsaken them, and has removed itself. It can also mean that the calf will be carried away. In fact that is exactly what Hosea prophecies, indicating that the king of Assyria will do so (Hosea 10:5). “Fury burns in My nostrils against them. How long will they refuse to overcome with innocence? The mention of snorting nostrils in the Hebrew denotes intimate fury. There is heartbreak in the expression and a sense of incredulity, though God is not capable of the human response, it is meant to be viewed with incredulity by the hearer/reader. A shocking indictment. Israel, knowing the way of innocence revealed through covenant and Torah, nonetheless wilfully refuse it to their own harm. 6 Kiy For miYisrael from Israel vehu charash asahu he (the calf idol) is made by a craftsman; ve’lo and it is not elohiym a god/judge. Hu he (the calf idol) kiy-shevaviym will be splintered, powdered yihyeh it will happen egel to that calf of Shomeron (Samaria, guarding/watch mountain). “For it was Israel’s doing; It was only made by a joiner, It is not a god. No, the calf of Samaria shall be reduced to splinters!” -Hosea 8: 6 Sefaria translation “For from Israel he (the calf idol) is made by a craftsman.” This is an important phrase which emphasizes the fact that the calf idol is not an assimilated deity from the Canaanites or from other foreign cults but is an invention of Israel, from Sinai to Samaria (Bethel and Dan) the calf idol is the sole responsibility of Israel. The idea for the calf idol may have originally been borrowed from the Egyptians who had a cult that worshipped a living ox or cow, however the allusion here is to the fact that it was gold and silver of Israel moulded by a member of the northern tribes that was crafted into the calf idols of Bethel and Dan. With prophetic irony the calf idol of which Jeroboam I had said “behold your gods…” is called “not a god!” “he (the calf idol) will be splintered, it will happen to that calf of Shomeron (Samaria, guarding/watch mountain).” The calf idol, not a god, will provide no protection, it will not guard the mountain of guardians (Shomeron), it will be splintered like a breaking beam, pulverised into powder. The commentator Yarchi says that in ancient Aramaic (Syriac) “shevaviym” signifies, beams, planks, and boards, and pieces of them falling as dust. The Targum and Ben Meleckh agree in accordance with rabbinical teaching. The inference being that the calf idol of Samaria will be ground to fine dust and the northern tribes made to drink it mixed with water just as the golden calf was ground to powder by Moses, and all those who sinned in it were made to drink the powder mixed with water. The symbolism of the act conveys the reality that idolatry is self-harm. 7 “Kiy For ruach a wind yizrau they have sown vesufatah and a whirlwind yiktzoru they will reap. Kamah eiyn-lo The standing grain does not tzemach bud, fruit; beliy wearing out it will not ya’aseh produce kemach flour. Ulay ya’aseh If perhaps it yields grain, zariym strangers yivlahu would swallow it down. “For a wind they have sown and a whirlwind they will reap.” The wind produced by the voice of idolatrous worship has reaped the much greater whirlwind of God’s prophetic judgement at the hand of Assyria and then Babylon. “The standing grain does not bud, fruit; wearing out it will not produce flour.” The grain barely grew tall enough to produce ears sufficient for grinding flour. “If perhaps it yields grain, strangers would swallow it down.” Even if the crop were to produce grain the tribes of the north will not consume it, rather it will be eaten by the invading armies of Assyria. 8 Nivla Yisrael (overcomes in God/the Judge) is swallowed up; now she hayu has become bagoyim in the nations kichliy like a vessel eiyn-chefetz none delight in. Like swallowed grain Israel (northern tribes) will be swallowed up by the invading Assyrian armies. As a result of her exile she will become known among the nations as a worthless vessel, a jug with cracks in it, a tool with a blunt edge, without value, devoid of purpose, and without place. 9 Kiy For they have alu gone up to Ashur (Assyria, a step) pere a wild donkey bodeid wandering alone. Efrayim (doubly fruitful) hitnu has hired herself out ahaviym to lovers. A wild donkey wanders aimlessly and is vulnerable as prey to lions. The kings (Ephraim) of the northern tribes have sought help from the Assyrians, paying them tribute (Menachem 2 kings 15:19, Hoshea 2 Kings 17:3) and courting their power like prostitutes trying to sleep their way to a position of higher social status and strength. 10 Gam Also kiy because yitnu they have hired themselves out bagoyim in the nations, now akabetzem they gather together. Vayacheilu and defile, pollute themselves me’at becoming a little thing mimasa from the burden Melekh of a king sariym of princes. The gathering of the northern tribes refers to them being gathered for captivity. They intensify the fruit of their idolatrous sin and as a result are weakened and become subject to a king who is over many princes (an allusion to the king of Assyria Isaiah 10:8). 11 “Kiy-hirbah For Efrayim mizbechot has made many altars lachato for sin (offerings), hayu-lo which have become mizbechot altars lachato for sinning. The northern kings, first inspired by Jeroboam’s (I) idolatrous act (calf idols), have syncretised the practice of sin offerings from the Torah with the altars of false gods and the worship of the calf idols. Thus the offerings that might have covered their sin have in fact become additional sin of an abhorrent nature. How many “altars”, both physical and metaphorical, have been built in “Church” communities throughout the world? Altars built as places to repent and receive forgiveness for sin by connecting to the Gospel message, that have instead been turned into altars of sinful practice. The list is long: · “Church” Buildings costing millions, while the people of the community struggle for work and the sick and poor go unaided · Popular “Christian” music proliferated and profited from by secular record companies that own smaller “Christian” record labels. The money of believer’s being used to fund immoral secular agendas · Famous pastors, prophets, authors and worship leaders, followed as heroes to the point of idolatry · “Christian” psychology intended to help and mature believers, nonetheless fallen prey to secular psychological philosophies that contradict and distort the message of Scripture. Places where people come for help from godly men and women who should be pointing them to God’s strength in their time of need, but instead encourage them to trust in their own mental strength, and promise the self-empowerment to overcome (that empowerment being from the poisoned well of secular self-help doctrines · The list goes on and on… 12 Echtov-lo I wrote for them kemov-ribov the many things Toratiy of my Instruction (Torah), zar nechshavu but they thought of them as a foreign thing. Here God refers to His Torah which Israel had treated like the spiritual writings of another people, written in a foreign language, an alien thing that had no connection to them. They had spurned the love letter of the Creator to His creation, given to and through the nation Whom He had chosen and called to be a light to others. “I constantly reprimand them through My prophets, and write for them the great things of My Law, but they are considered a strange thing.” -Rashi 13 Zivcheiy They offer sacrifices havhavay as gifts to Me, yizbechu they sacrifice vasar flesh vayocheilu and they eat it, YHVH (Mercy) the Lord lo does not ratzam accept them. The offered sacrifices may have included offerings which were to be eaten only by the priests (Levites)[Lev. 6:24-26]. These offerings were apparently being eaten by those who should not eat them. Additionally it is possible that the priests were acting in a similar way to the sons of Eli, taking the fat that should have been burned as the LORD’s portion, and instead eating it themselves (1 Samuel 2:15-17). Of course, the priests of the north included men from tribes other than Levi, meaning that all offerings brought to God by them were apostate based on the requirements of the Torah. Ultimately, the reason the offerings were not accepted was because there was no genuine repentance, no real willingness to obey YHVH. “21 This is what the Lord of armies, the God of Israel says: “Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat flesh. 22 For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them on the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. 23 But this is [h]what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; and you shall walk [i]entirely in the way which I command you, so that it may go well for you.’ 24 Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked by their own advice and in the stubbornness of their evil hearts, and they [j]went backward and not forward.” -Jeremiah 7:21-24 (NIV) Now yizkor he will remember avonam their perverse depravities. Veyifkod and visit chatotam their sins (missing the mark, uncleanness, offenses) upon them: Hemah They yashuvu Mitzrayim will return to Egypt (double distress). God is just and must punish perversity. The disobedience of Israel will result in a return to bondage (Egypt) for the purpose of discipline and return to God. 14 Vayishkach Yisrael And Israel (overcomes in God/the Judge) has forgotten, ignored, wilfully turned from et-Oseihu their specific Maker vayiven and built heiychalot temples (to false gods); The Targum reads “and built temples to idols”. No one forgets a lover except by wilful avoidance. Israel had turned her back on her Husband (YHVH), Who was also her Creator. Like an adulterous and hateful wife she had sought other lovers (idolatry). Israel (the northern tribes) had sought strength in other gods (idolatry). Y’hudah (praise) hirbah has become great, multiplying ariym betzurot fenced cities (excitement). Veshilachtiy-eish But I will send fire be’arayv in his cities ve’achelah and devour armenoteyah the palaces.” Where Israel (the northern tribes) had sought strength in other gods (idolatry), Judah had trusted in his own strength (idolatry). But fire from God would devour them and burn away the weak strength of those temporary things they had trusted in. Historically speaking Jerusalem would be burned by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon (Jeremiah 52:13). Messiah follower, do we pass judgement on those who worship idols while trusting in our own intellect, physical strength, talents, finances, emotional intelligence, qualifications, righteousness? If so, we are hypocrites and idolaters. Copyright 2021 Yaakov Brown Mental assent to returning is not enough, part of faith in action is repentance in action. In fact, devoid of repentance in action faith is worthless. Introduction:
Verses 13-15 of the previous chapter speak of the sickness (wounds) of Ephraim and Judah and their tearing apart as prey to HaShem (likened to a Lion and a Young Llion). The chapter concludes with a redemptive promise concerning a state of distress, that results in genuine repentance before the LORD. As we continue, we see the counterpoints to wounding and tearing in the healing and binding (bandaging) of Ephraim and Judah described in the first verse of the current chapter. 1“Le’chu, let’s walk ve’nashuvah and return el YHVH (Mercy) to the Lord. Kiy For Hu He has taraf torn, ve’yirpaeinu He will heal us; He has yach struck, veyachbesheinu He will bind (bandage) us. 1“Come, let’s return to the Lord. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. a. “Let us return” is the repentant cry that activates the promised mercy. b. “LORD”, and the multiple repetitions of “He” establish for the reader (hearer) the Omnipotence of God. c. “He has torn” and “He has wounded” regard the practical discipline of the LORD which intends to provoke godly sorrow and repentance. d. “He will heal” and “He will bind” regard His healing work within the spirit and His touch of restoration in the physical. This opening phrase is pretexted in the Targum Yonatan by the words, “They shall say” referring to those in distress (5:15) in the preceding verse. The Targum reads: “They shall say ‘Let us return to the worship of the LORD.” What is certain is that the voice is human and Israelite, a call from one or more of the people to the collective asking all to return to YHVH. “Let’s walk” has both a physical application and a spiritual one. Halakhah (the way we walk) is the practical outworking of faith that is determined by the inner conviction of the soul. The Hebrew does not say “Come let’s return” but “Let’s walk and return”. The text is enforcing the idea that mental assent to returning is not enough, part of faith in action is repentance in action. In fact, devoid of repentance in action faith is worthless. Rashi says that the Hebrew “yach” is present tense and the text therefore reads, “He strikes us, He binds us up.” It is YHVH Who both destroys and makes alive: “See now that I, I am He, and no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither can any deliver out of My hand.” -Devarim (Deut.) 32:39 “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 seven days, in the day that the LORD binds up the breach of his people, and heals the stroke of their wound.” -Yishayahu (Isaiah) 30:26 The Hebrew chabash (bind) is often used to refer to bandaging wounds and should not be presumed to refer to restraint. Misunderstanding this for example leads many to misinterpret Yeshua’s revelation to Peter and the disciples regarding their role as gatekeepers of the kingdom and the authority to bind and loose (Matt. 16:15-19). Iben Ezra alludes to the fact that the ancient practice of binding wounds included softening the wound with oil prior to binding it. There is a significant link to the work of the Holy Spirit in the healing process. 2 Yechayeinu He will give us life mi-yomayim from two days; bayom in the day hashliyshiy the third yekimeinu He will raise us up, ve’nichyeh that we may live lepanayv before His face. 2 He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him. a. “Two days” and “third day” refer to the progression of a grouping of days, and coupled with “revive” denote the temporal restoration of the people, and “raise” their resurrection. b. “That we may live before Him” reveals both the outcome and the One Who made the outcome possible. As I have stated elsewhere in my commentary the repetition of terms in Hebrew poetic phrasing such as this intends synonymous or intrinsically linked ideas. This gives emphasis to the same concept by repeating it in multiples. The progression of days from two to three denotes two points, the first referring to a revival (awareness) and the second, a final resurrection (life being the result). The revival refers to the first coming of Messiah which occurred following the two figurative (days) captivities of Israel (Egyptian captivity, and Babylonian exile) and the conclusion of the third day refers to that time yet future when Messiah will return and the revival of the entire Jewish people (Israel) will occur convergent with the resurrection of the latter days. This is consistent with the commentary of Kimchi who makes a correlation between these verses and the three captivities of Egypt, Babylon and the present diaspora. Kimchi notes that the Jewish people await Ben Melekh (Son of a king) the Messiah Who will raise us up and bring us comfort. Therefore, the obvious implication is that the future revival of Israel is intrinsically connected to a resurrection that occurs after three days, and the result of that miraculous event will be that Israel is able to live before God’s face in intimate relationship. Put plainly, Messiah Yeshua will revive us in three (historical, figurative) days (through His death and resurrection) and make it possible for us to be forgiven and restored to intimate holy relationship with YHVH the God of Israel. The Targum Yonatan reads: "He will quicken us in the days of consolation which are to come, and in the day of the resurrection of the dead he will raise us up;'' Ultimately, what we are reading here is the promise of God to restore all chosen, ethnic, religious, empirical Israel (the modern Jewish people descended from Yaakov) to Himself through the death and resurrection of the Jewish King Messiah Yeshua (Romans 11:15-36) 3 Veneidah And learn to know nirdefah following after lada’at to know et-YHVH the particular Lord. Keshachar Like the dawn nachaon firmly established motzau is His going forth; veyavo And He will come chageshem like the rain lanu to us, kemalkosh as the latter rain, yoreh as spring rain aretz upon land.” 3 So let’s learn, let’s press on to know the Lord. His appearance is as sure as the dawn; And He will come to us like the rain, As the spring rain waters the earth.” a. “Learn to know” and “press on to know” establish the need for repentant people to apply the knowledge of God. b. “The LORD”, “His appearance” and “He will come” are supported by the physical reality of the rising sun, the seasonal cycle, and the perpetual precipitation of the created order. The Sefaria English translation renders the Hebrew “ve’neidah” (and learn to know) as “obedience”. The knowledge being spoken of here is applied knowledge. In ancient times the seasons were understood to have an almost immutable quality. Therefore, when Hebrew poetic/prophetic language likens the appearance of God to the dawn and to the rains that provide living waters to the land, it is saying that God’s coming to His people with healing and revival is certain, firmly established. His love and intimate knowledge of His creation is, for the creation, as reliable as the rising sun, the seasonal cycle, and the perpetual precipitation of the created order. Iben Ezra focuses on the fact that it is knowledge of the Holy Name YHVH that will bring about Israel’s truly holy state of being. He is in fact, without knowing it, referring to the revelation of Yeshua the King Messiah. “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among mankind by which we must be saved.” -Acts 4:12 NASB "we shall know him, and it will be as clear to us as the light of the morning without clouds:'' -Yosef Kimchi 4 Mah What e’eseh-lecha shall I fashion with you, Efrayim (doubly fruitful)? Mah What e’eseh-lecha shall I fashion with you, Y’hudah (praise)? Vechasdechem And your kindness, faithfulness, practical love ka’anan-boker is like a morning cloud, vechatal night mist mashkiym that rises early and holeich goes away quickly. 4 What shall I do with you, Ephraim? What shall I do with you, Judah? For your loyalty is like a morning cloud, And like the dew which goes away early. a. “Ephraim” the northern kingdom. b. “Judah” the southern kingdom. c. “Ephraim” and “Judah” are all the tribes of Israel combined. d. “Loyalty” as a single quality is in this case perpetually unreliable “morning cloud”, “dew”, and “goes away early”. Sadly Israel’s good intentions did not last. HaShem’s response points out the hypocrisy of Israel’s claim to have understood her need to seek Him in true knowledge and thus be sure of His mercy. The response of God to His people is worded in such a way as to expose their hypocrisy as verbal assent to an idea rather than the application of true repentance. Whereas God’s coming in mercy is as reliable as the dawn, all Israel’s so called “loyalty” is as reliable as a quickly evaporating morning cloud/mist, like the dew which lasts only until the sun has risen. God’s light exposes the brevity of Israel’s so called “repentance”. 5 Al-kein Therefore chatzavtiy I have quarried them baneviyiym by the prophets; haragtiym the slayings are be’imreiy-fiy in the speaking of My mouth; umishpateycha and the judgments on you or are a light yeitzei going forth. 5 Therefore I have cut them in pieces by the prophets; I have slain them by the words of My mouth; And the judgments on you are like the light that [b]shines. a. “Cut” and “slain” refer to established discipline following fair warning. b. “Prophets” and “Words of My mouth” are intrinsically linked. c. “Judgements” and “light shining forth” denote a clear and just revelation and manifest application of God’s discipline. Remembering that His Mercy precedes His judgement and is the fruit of it. The prophets of God (Amos, Micah, Isaiah, Hosea) had been filled with and had publicly proclaimed the Word of YHVH as a means of quarrying out the righteous remnant from among the worthless rock of the wider community. The Word of YHVH will manifest in the physical, coming to pass with the slaying of the wicked and the revelation that His judgement is righteous, and is seen by all. 6 Kiy For chesed kindness, faithfulness, practical love chafatztiy I delight in, velo and not zavach sacrifice, ve’da’at And the knowledge of Elohiym (God, Judge) meiolot from whole burnt offerings. 6 For I [c]desire loyalty rather than sacrifice, And the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings. a. “Kindness, practical love” and “the knowledge (intimacy) of God the Judge” link intimate knowledge with relational love in their applied forms. b. “Sacrifice” and “burnt offerings” here refer to defiled sacrifice and apostate offerings. As I understand the Hebrew text the best reading of it is: “For kindness, faithfulness, practical love I delight in, and not (defiled) sacrifice, and knowledge of God, the Judge from whole burnt offerings.” In short, this is not saying that God desires faithfulness and knowledge of Him in place of sacrifice and offering but that faithful love for Him is better than defiled sacrifices, and knowledge of Him is evidenced in the right application of burnt offerings. The sacrifices and burnt offerings being spoken of here are the defiled and syncretised sacrifices mixing worship of YHVH with other gods. This text is not contradicting the Torah sacrificial system, nor is it saying that properly offered sacrifices and offerings are unpleasing to God, to the contrary, loyalty to God and knowledge of Him result in appropriate sacrifice and offering. In Messiah we are instructed to offer our body’s as a living sacrifice to God, and in whatever we do, be it word or deed, to do it in the name, identity, and character of the Lord Yeshua our Messiah, giving thanks to God the Father through Him (Colossians 3:17). 7 Veheimah And in the same way ke’adam as Adam (the first man) averu they have missed the mark, violated the veriyt covenant; sham there bagedu they have acted deceitfully viy toward Me. 7 But like [d]Adam they have violated the covenant; There they have dealt treacherously with Me. a. “Adam” and “dealt treacherously” are the couplet that reminds the reader/hearer of humanity’s decision to disobey God and allow sin to enter the world and death with it. b. “Violated the covenant” and “Me” show the connection between the covenant Maker God and those who enter into covenant (agreement) with Him. “Like Adam” does not mean that Adam the first man violated a written or blood atoned covenant, no such covenant was made between God and Adam. Covenant is used here in the sense of the root meaning of “bara” (cutting, eating, agreement) and denoting agreement between two persons or groups of people. In Adam’s case he and Chavah ate of the fruit of garden in agreement with the Creator. Through relationship this agreement (covenant) was implied, thus by eating of the fruit which they had agreed (covenanted) not to eat, they broke covenant with God. In the same way that the first man and subsequently mankind have chosen to act by missing the mark (which is what the Hebrew “averu” means), of The Covenant established by God’s all existing holiness (predates Exodus 19:5, Torah), Israel has despised the written covenant of Sinai. We note that the covenant entered into at Sinai at the revealing of the Torah of HaShem was unanimously agreed to by the people of Israel (Exodus 24:3). We further observe that the Torah was given as the physical, written and lasting measure by which sin is exposed. The Torah is a legal document that is therefore used to indict sinners. God’s holiness is all existing and is the ultimate reference point for determining Good from Evil. Therefore, the measure by which we determine Good and Evil predates the written Torah and makes Adam (the first man, and humanity as a whole) culpable in regard to the choice to sin against God’s holiness (the mark). “There” refers to the land of Israel and may infer a correlation between the sin of Ephraim and Judah to that sin which occurred in the valley of Achor (named after the sin of Achan who stole items dedicated to destruction from the ruins of Jericho; Joshua 7). We note that it is God’s intention to turn the valley of Achor (trouble) into a door of hope (Hosea 2:15). God had brought the tribes of Israel, from Egypt, to Sinai (Covenant of Torah) and into ha-aretz (the Land). Therefore, having been delivered from captivity, given covenant law and carried into a land of abundance, Israel, once comfortable in the land had dealt treacherously with the One Who had given them all this. “In a good land where I settled them, there they betrayed Me, like Adam, whom I brought into the Garden of Eden, and he transgressed My commandment. [from Gen. Rabbah]” -Rashi "and in the good land, which I gave unto them to do my will, they have dealt falsely with my word.'' -Targum Yonatan 8 Gil’ad (witness heap) kiryat is a city po’aleiy of makers of aven iniquity, wickedness, idolatry. akubah insidious, slippery, polluted midam from blood. 8 Gilead is a city of wrongdoers, Tracked with bloody footprints. a. “Gilead” meaning “witness heap” testifies as a witness against its own vile sin. b. “Iniquity” is linked to “slippery blood” an denotes a city in which murder and idolatrous sacrifices have resulted in the shedding of so much blood that the ground is slippery with it. The city Gilead in Gad (territory of the tribe of Gad) was the capital of the wider region of Gilead. The wider region covered area near and beyond the Jordan river, and was inhabited by Gad, Reuben, and the half tribe of Manasseh; and thus belonged to the ten tribes of the north. The city of Gilead is thought to be Ramot-Gilead, a city of refuge inhabited by priests, both apostate and Levite. This made the sin of the city even more deplorable given that the priests and Levites had knowledge of the Torah but had clearly not properly conveyed that knowledge to the wider community. While the polluting of blood can refer to murder and idolatrous sacrifices, it can also denote bloodguilt brought on the city by the misapplication of the law of refuge. It may be that murderers guilty of premeditated murder were being given refuge contrary to the law, or that those guilty of accidental killing were being given over to the avenger of blood rather than being protected by the city of refuge in accordance with Torah law*. *The Bible names the six cities as being cities of refuge: Golan, Ramot-Gilead and Bosor, on the east of the Jordan river (Left bank) [Deut. 4:43; Josh. 20:8], and Kedesh, Shechem, and Hebron on the west bank of the Jordan river [Joshua 20:7]. 9 Uchechakeiy And like robbers lying in wait for iysh a man gedudiym as a group, chever a company kohaniym of priests yeratztzechu commit murder on the way to Shechmah (Shechem, shoulder/back); kiy Surely zimah (premeditation) they have planned asu to fashion evil. 9 And as a band of robbers lie in wait for a person, So a band of priests murder on the way to Shechem; Certainly they have committed an act of infamy. a. “robbers” and “priests” are seen as synonymous. b. “lie in wait” and “way to Shechem” are considered synonymous. This verse describes priests who acting like robbers not only murder others on their way to make sacrifices (perform religious acts), but do so with premeditation. Therefore, they have exceeded even the depravity of the godless nations that surrounded Israel. They have not stumbled upon evil, they have planned it. “On the way to Shechem” can be understood to refer to those who are murdered. They are those who are passing through Shechem on their way to Jerusalem to worship the LORD at one of the Regaliym/Aliyot (going up festivals: Pesach, Shavuot, Sukkot). Some understand the verse to read “As a band of robbers wait to pounce on a person, so priests are murdered on the way to Shechem, certainly they have planned to do this evil.” *We note that Shechem was also a city of refuge and that the blood guilt on the city of Ramot-Gilead is extended to Shechem and the priests associated with that city. Shechem rests in the valley between Mt Ebal (bald) and Mt Gerizim (Cuttings off) where the Curses (Ebal) and Blessings (Gerizim) were pronounced over Israel as she entered the land (Deut. 11:29; 27; 28; Joshua 8:30-35). 10 Be’beiyt In the house Yisrael (overcome in God) raiytiy I have seen sha’aruriyah an opening to horror, dread, storm; sham there zenut fornication, harlotry le’Efrayim to Ephraim, nitma uncleanness, defilement in Yisrael. 10 In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing; Ephraim’s infidelity is there, Israel has defiled itself. a. “House of Israel” and “Ephraim” join the northern tribes to the house from which their kingship had originated. b. “Horrible thing”, “Infidelity (sexual sin)” and “defiled herself” link the abhorrent sight of sexual sin to its repercussions. Thus, as mentioned in my commentary prior to this, sexual sin is self-harm. The horror in Israel resulting from her infidelity, mixes idolatry and sexual sin. The calves set up at Dan and Bethel (1 Kings 12:25-33) mirrored the calf worshipped at the foot of Sinai (Exodus 32) and represented the ultimate affront to the covenant of YHVH. The spiritual fornication of the worship of false gods overflowed into physical sexual immorality and was mingled with the blood of the innocent in orgies of vile apostate religion. All this Israel had chosen while wilfully turning her back on HaShem. 11 Gam Also, Y’hudah, shat there is set katziyr a harvest lach for you, beshuviy in My returning you shevut from captivity Amiy My people. 11 Also, Judah, there is a harvest appointed for you, When I restore the fortunes of My people. a.“Judah” is not immune to sin, there is a judgement coming upon the southern kingdom also (Babylonian exile). However, “Harvest” represents both judgement outworked and redemption made full. b.“Return” the LORD will return Judah from exile. The meaning of this verse is beautifully complex and denotes both judgement (Harvest: Joel 3:13; Matt. 13:30-39) and salvation (Harvest: Isaiah 9:3; Luke 10:2; Matt.9:38) through returning (repentance). The English translation “When I restore the fortunes of My people” is ineffective. The Hebrew text literally reads “In My returning you from captivity My people”. The Hebrew is saying, “When I personally return you through judgement and harvest from captivity, you My people.” We note that both the harvest of judgement and the harvest of returning are associated to Judah specifically and will benefit all Israel. In other words, the judgement and restoration will come through Judah. This initially refers to the Babylonian exile and the subsequent return of all the tribes of Israel to Judea where they collectively become known as Y’hudim (Jews). However, it ultimately refers to the deliverance of Israel from sin through the King Messiah born of Judah, and the fullness of the redemption of all ethnic, chosen, religious, empirical Israel through Yeshua at the end of days (Romans 11:15-36). Copyright 2021 Yaakov Brown Sefer Yochanan (Gospel According to John) Chapter 4 Pt.1 Shomroniyt Woman at the Well (John 4:1-26)7/2/2020
Yeshua proves Himself a prophet in her eyes, not because He foretold the future but because He revealed the present. 1Since (hos[G]) therefore, it had come to pass (ou [G], vayhiy[H]) the Lord (ho kurios[G], la-Adon[H]) knew (ginosko[G], noda[H]) that the Pharisees (Pharisaios[G], Perushiym[H], chaste, abstinent ones) had heard that Yeshua[H, A] (Iesous[G], YHVH Saves, Jesus, Joshua) was making, forming, fashioning, preparing, authoring (poieo[G]) and immersing, facilitating tevilah [baptizing] (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) gaining a great number more (pleion[G], harbeih[H]) disciples (mathetes[G] [pupils], talmidim[H] [religious students, followers]) than (or “from” alt. Heb. m’yochanan) Yochanan[H] (Ioannes [G], YHVH is gracious, John) 2 {although Yeshua Himself (autos[G], hu[H]) was not immersing, facilitating tevilah [baptizing] (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]), but His disciples (mathetes[G] [pupils], talmidim[H] [religious students, followers]) were}, [alt. Heb. kiy iym-talmiydayv: because the immersions were with the disciples]
We note that it is because of Yeshua’s foreknowledge and His spiritual discernment that He was aware of the dislike that many of the Pharisees already had for John, and for Yeshua Himself, largely in part due to the number of disciples that John and Yeshua were amassing. Both the Greek ginosko and the Hebrew noda (from yodata) can denote intimate knowledge, in other words, Yeshua knew the intimate thoughts of the Pharisees, and knew that, at this stage the majority were against His ministry. His knowledge of their thoughts in spite of the fact that they were not present to witness His actions is evidence of His Divine nature. We also see that Yeshua is called “Ho Kurios” meaning “The Lord” (Heb. La-Adon). The writer of John’s Gospel is further illuminating his Spirit given understanding concerning the Messiah’s deity (John 1). To call Yeshua “the Lord of…” would have been an acceptable usage in reference to any Jewish religious leader of the time, but to call Him “The Lord” would have been considered blasphemy by the majority of religious leaders and even by many of His disciples, until such a time as they had come to understand as John the disciple had, that Yeshua is the Imanu-El of Whom Isaiah the prophet spoke: that is, God with us, the Servant King Messiah (Isa. 7:14; 8:8). We note that the Pharisees had “heard” of what was happening, meaning that the majority had not witnessed the immersions associated with Yeshua’s ministry. Although they had witnessed the immersion ministry of John the Immerser (Baptist) [see John 1-3]. With regard to the increase in disciples who had decided to follow Yeshua it is interesting to consider the Greek word “poieo” meaning, “forming, fashioning, preparing, authoring”. Yeshua’s disciples were being formed by His ministry, they were not yet fully formed. They were being prepared for something yet future. They were being authored into a new story by the Author of all things and fashioned by the Creator Himself. At this point the Ruach Ha-Kodesh (Holy Spirit) had not yet been poured out on the disciples. Therefore, the immersion being performed was one of teshuva, returning and devotion to God and to His promised King Messiah (Though some, if not all were yet to understand what “Mashiach” truly meant). It is poignant therefore that the author of John’s Gospel makes it clear that Yeshua did not facilitate tevilah (immersion) but that it was performed and facilitated by His disciples. Yeshua would facilitate the immersion of all who believe once He was seated at the right hand of HaShem the Father after Yeshua’s death and resurrection. Thus, He instructed His disciples to “Go therefore (because all authority has been given to you…), making talmidim of all nations, immersing them in the Name of Ha Av (The Father) and of Ha-Ben (The Son), and of Ruach Ha-Kodesh (The Holy Spirit)” [Matt. 28:19]. 3 And He left, turned away (aphiemi[G], va-yeitzei[H], v’shavkah[A]) from the territory, the land (mei-eretz[H]) of Yehudah[H] (Judea, ho Ioudaia[G][Praise]) and went away again, anew (palin[G]) into, toward, for, among (eis[G]) the region of the (Galilee, Galilaia[G] ha-Galiylah[H] [Circuit, perpetual turning, going round] or Ha-Kinneret[H] [Harp]). 4 And it was necessary that (dei[G]) He Himself (autos[G]) pass through, go toward (la’avor[H]) make way (dierchomai[G], derek[H]) in the land/territory (eretz[H]) of Shomron[H] ([place of guardians, watch mountain, watch tower] Samaria, ho-Samareia[G] [guardianship]). The Samaritans (Shomroniym) are mixed race descendants of the remnant of the ten tribes of northern Israel who were left in the land when the northern kingdom fell to Assyria in 722 BCE, and colonists from Babylonia and Media brought by the Assyrian conquerors of Shomron (Samaria) [2 Kings 17:24-41]. Technically speaking their descendants are not idolaters, however, they see their version of the Torah (Pentateuch), written in an ancient Hebrew script (popularly referred to as “Paleo Hebrew”), as the only inspired word of God. Their version of the Torah differs slightly in some places but is generally equivalent to the Hebrew and Greek versions of the Torah/Pentateuch. Therefore, the Samaritans do not accept the writings of the prophets of the TaNaKH (OT) as inspired Scripture. In this respect they shared some beliefs and practices in common with the Sadducees of the first century CE. While the root of the divide between the Jews (Yehudah and Benyamin) and the Samaritans/(10 tribes) began during the division of Israel into two kingdoms following the death of king Solomon (931 BCE; 1 Kings 11-12), it was solidified following the intermarriage between the remnant of the 10 tribes left in the land and the Babylonian and Median colonists of 722 BCE. The 10 tribes (of Israel, not Samaritans) had practiced apostate worship in the north, while the Jews (Yehudah and Benyamin) had worshipped according to the Torah in Jerusalem at the Temple Mount. However, upon the return of the Jews (Yehudah, Benyamin, and the integrated exiled 10 tribes of Israel) from the Babylonian exile, the Samaritan sect fiercely opposed the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem (539 BCE; Ezra 4:6-24). They had established their own apostate form of worship associated to Mt Gerizim and therefore resisted the reestablishment of the Jerusalem Temple and its rites (even though the Samaritan Pentateuch reads as the Torah does concerning the placing of God’s Name on Mt Moriah, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem). I consider it important to note that “It was necessary for Yeshua Himself to pass through Shomron.” The witness of His disciples alone was insufficient. The people of Shomron, the Samaritans (Shomronym), who practiced an apostate derivative of the Jewish religion and were a diluted bloodline attached to the Jewish people, needed to meet the Messiah in person in order to be reconciled to Israel’s greater purpose and indeed, to God through the Messiah Yeshua. In one sense Yeshua was offering the Samaritan sect an opportunity to re-join Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical, chosen) in accordance with the Torah and Prophets and put away their apostate worship which centred its sacrificial system around Mt Gerizim rather than the Torah commanded Mt Moriah (Temple Mount). It is interesting to note that the rabbinic Judaism of the modern state of Israel has in the last few decades made serious attempts to bring the Samaritan sect back into the fold of greater Judaism. In some rare cases rabbinical Jews have married into the Samaritan sect and vice versa. Although, devout adherents on both sides continue to detest the idea of merging the two groups. Shomron (Samaria) is derived from the Hebrew “shomer” meaning to keep, guard, protect etc. The Aramaic “shavkah” is similar to the Hebrew “shuv” meaning to turn. Therefore I’ve added the possible translation “turned away”. The Greek “dierchomai” seems to be an example of transliteration converging with a composite Greek word and representing the Hebrew “derek” meaning “way, path, direction” etc. This is yet another, albeit subtle indication of the possibility of an original Hebrew manuscript of Yochanan’s Gospel. At very least it is another indication of the writer’s initial audience, that being Judeans, Jews (The collected tribes post exile), Samaritans, Israelis of the first century CE. 5 So He came to (va’yavo[H]), into, toward, for, among (eis[G]) a city (polis[G]) of the land/territory of Shomron[H] ([place of guardians, watch mountain, watch tower] Samaria, ho-Samareia[G] [guardianship]) called Suchar[H] (Sychar, Suchar[G] [drunken]), neighbouring (plesion[G]) the field (chorion[G]) that Yaakov[H] (Iakob[G], Jacob [grasps the heel, follower]) gave (natan[H]) to his son Yosef[H] (Joseph, Ioseph[G] [YHVH adds, double blessing]); 6 and Yaakov’s spring, well (pege[G], be’eir[H]) was there. Therefore (oun[G]) [because Yaakov’s well was there] Yeshua[H, A] (Iesous[G], YHVH Saves, Jesus, Joshua), being wearied from the way, journey (min-ha-derek [H]) sat by, on, before, at (epi[G], al[H]) the spring, well (pege[G] be’eir[H]). It was about 12pm midday (the sixth hour of the Jewish day, counted from sunrise [approx. 6am]). The walk from Jerusalem (Judea region) to the Galilee (Capernaum) is approximately 40 hours (4 days of 10 hours walking per day) 209 km. Jacob’s well is about a third of the way between Jerusalem and Galilee (Capernaum). Some have suggested that “the sixth hour” refers to the Roman method of time keeping and should be interpreted as referring to 6pm in the evening. In support of this supposition they refer to the singular instance of Genesis 24:11 and the fact that the women came out to draw water in the evening. However, there are a number of reasons why this cannot be the case in the context of John 4:6. I do not believe this meeting took place at 6pm. The author is a Jew telling Jewish time to a Jewish audience using the Greek language, and is therefore using the Jewish method of time keeping. Furthermore, if we accept the argument that women drew water in the evening or late afternoon, we must also admit that the women (plural) of the entire village or community did so together. Therefore, in the present instance Yeshua would have been speaking to a group of women, whereas the text indicates a solitary woman and a conversation that would have been considered too intimate to be had in the hearing of others. The text does not tell us when Yeshua left Judea, nor does it tell us how long it took Him to reach Jacob’s well. At most it would have been a one and a half day walk consisting of eight to ten hours travel per day during the cool parts of the day and breaking to camp in between (at noon when the day was hottest). If Yeshua had arrived along with His disciples at 6pm in the evening they would not have had time to purchase goods at the market, which would have been near closing, nor would there have been time for all the other events associated to this meeting to have taken place prior to nightfall (v.27-54). Finally, the writer of John’s Gospel clearly uses the hours of the Jewish day elsewhere in his Gospel, (John 1:39 “tenth hour referring to 4pm”; John 11:9 “twelve hours in a day” referring to the 12 daylight hours of the Jewish day; John 19:14 “sixth hour” midday during Pilate’s declaration concerning Yeshua prior to His crucifixion). It would be inconsistent of him to swing from one method of time recording to another. Nor is it even remotely likely that he would do this for a single event while maintaining a Jewish time recording method for all other instances in his Gospel. Therefore, it seems extremely unlikely that the writer of John is referring to the sixth hour according to Roman time. This meeting took place at 12pm according to Jewish time counted from the first hour following sunrise (approx. 6am). This means that the woman had made a solo journey to the well at an unusual time. One of the reasons for this may have been her adulterous lifestyle which was as abhorrent to the first century Samaritan religion and culture as it was to the Jews. Thus, she was collecting her water at midday in order to avoid verbal and physical abuse levelled at her by the other women of her village (region), some of whom may well have been victims of her promiscuous lifestyle. Biblical Sychar is thought to have been situated in the vicinity of modern Nablus in the Israeli territory of Shomron. We note that the Greek for Sychar is a direct transliteration of the Hebrew Suchar. Once again, Jewish audience, Hebrew place names. Interestingly the modern Hebrew sucar (sugar) is spelled the same way. We note that Jacob’s well is situated not far from the base of Mt Gerizim and close to modern day Nablus. This is important given the dialogue that follows regarding which of the two mountains, Mt Gerizim or Mt Moriah (Temple Mount), is the correct place upon which to offer sacrifices and worship before Hashem (YHVH). The references to Shechem and Yaakov’s well are found in Gen. 33:19; 48:22; Josh. 24:32. We note that Yeshua was physically weary and thirsty, although He is God with us He took on the frailty of human existence for our sake (Phil. 2:6-11; Heb. 4:15). There is a beautiful irony here, Yeshua (God with us) allows Himself to become physically thirsty in order to satiate the spiritual thirst of the human soul. The physical thirst of Yeshua is mentioned only once more in the Gospel of John, at the same time of day (12pm, sixth hour) during His crucifixion (19:28). 7 There came a woman (ishah [wife]), a shomroniyt {of the land/territory of Shomron[H] ([place of guardians, watch mountain, watch tower] a Samaritan)} to draw (antleo[G], lishav[H]) water (hudor[G], mayim[H]). The (ho[G]) Yeshua[H, A] (Iesous[G], YHVH Saves, Jesus, Joshua) said to her, “Give (didomi[G], taniy-na[H]) Me (moi[G], liy[H]) a drink.” 8 For His disciples (mathetes[G] [pupils], talmidim[H] [religious students, followers]) had gone away into the city to buy food (ochel[H]) in the market (agorazo[G], shuk[H]). We see that both the Greek “gune” and the Hebrew “ishah” meaning woman, can also mean wife. This is an intentional ambiguity as pretext to the conversation that follows regarding the woman’s many sexual partners. The departure of Yeshua’s disciples may be intended to explain the lack of anyone else to serve Him water. It also emphasises the solitude of the situation. The text infers that there were no other people present at the well. 9 Therefore the Samaritan (ha-shomroniyt: of the land/territory of Shomron[H] [place of guardians, watch mountain, watch tower]) woman (ha-ishah [the wife]) said to Him, “How is it that You, being Yehudiy[H] (a Jew [of Israel], a religious Jew, an ethnic Jew, a Judean, Ioudaios[G]), ask me for a drink since I am a Samaritan woman?” (For ha-Yehudiym [the Judeans, Jews] have no dealings, do not associate with, participate with [sugchraomai[G]do things jointly or in unison] with Ha-Shomroniym Samaritans.) In the context of this meeting the Greek Ioudaios is qualified by the Samaritan woman’s view. The Samaritan sect used the term Yehudiym, Ioudaios to refer not only to the religious and region specific Judeans but also to all the tribes of ethnic, religious Israel. Therefore, it is correct to translate Ioudaios in the more general form “Jews” in this instance. NB: It is important to keep in mind that the Jews of the first century CE were the collected body of the returned tribes of Israel gathered together following the exile in the region of Judea and were therefore collectively called Yehudiym. By the first century CE this title was not used exclusively to describe the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Southern Kingdom). The popular theory of the so called “Lost Tribes” is untenable when tested against the history of the Jewish people. This myth has been used by many to develop such anti-Semitic teachings as “Replacement Theology”, “British Israel” etc. It is also used by some modern Christian scholars to support the lie that the modern Jewish people are not related to the Biblical Jewish people. There is an important pretext here in the use of the Greek sugchraomai, meaning “use jointly”. The religious Jews of the first century CE did not share in the apostate practises of the Samaritans. Nor did they dine with Samaritans or Gentiles except in rare circumstances. Primarily this was in order to keep themselves set apart unto God. It may have become a practise of hubris, but it had started from a pure motive. After all, to participate in the sacrifice of an animal on Mt Gerizim for example, to share its meat etc. would have been in direct violation of the Torah. From the perspective of the Samaritan woman (a sinful woman who clearly did not keep even the laws of her own Samaritan sect) Yeshua’s request is an opportunity to debate what she may see as the arrogant religious position of Jews such as Yeshua. Her reference to the Jewish practise of setting themselves apart may be an attempt to deny water to Yeshua. After all, we must remember that historically, culturally and contextually, Yeshua is an enemy from the Samaritan woman’s point of view. Those religious Jews who travelled through Samaria at this time in history did so primarily because it was the most direct route to the Galilee, enabling them to avoid the Gentile cities of the Decapolis. They travelled through Samaria but generally avoided contact with the villages and people of Samaria. However, the Jewish sages had varied views concerning the Samaritans, who the rabbinical rabbis called “Cuthites”, a name derived from one of the locations in Babylon that the non Jewish forebears of the Samaritans had come from (2 Kings 17:24). "a roasted egg of the Cuthites (or Samaritans), lo, this is lawful: says R. Jacob bar Acha, in the name of R. Lazar, the boiled victuals of the Cuthites (Samaritans), lo, these are free; this he says concerning boiled food, because it is not their custom to put wine and vinegar into it,'' - T. Hieros. Avoda Zara, fol. 44. 4. "the unleavened bread of the Cuthites (or Samaritans), is lawful, and that a man is allowed the use of it at the passover.'' - T. Bab. Gittin, fol. 10. 1. & Cholin, fol. 4. 1. & Kiddushin, fol. 76. 1. "he that buys wine of the Cuthites (Samaritans), says, the two logs that I shall separate, lo, they are first fruits, &c.'' - Misn. Demai, c. 7. sect. 4. Vid. Bartenora in ib. "that, he that eats the bread of the Cuthites (or Samaritans), is as if he eat flesh; to when (who reported this) says (R. Akiba) be silent, I will not tell you what R. Eliezer thinks concerning it.'' - Misna Sheviith, c. 8. sect. 10. Pirke Eliezer, c. 38. "because the Cuthites (or Samaritans) ate at his table, it was the reason why his children went into captivity-and further add, that whoever invites a Cuthite (or Samaritan) into his house, and ministers to him, is the cause of captivity to his children.'' -T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 104. 1. "three days before the feasts of idolaters (for such they reckoned the Samaritans, as well as others), it is forbidden to have any commerce with them, to borrow of them, or lend to them - T. Bab. Becorot, fol. 7. 2. Piske Toseph. ib. art. 4. & in Megilla, art 102. Misna Avoda Zara, c. 1. sect. 1. Yeshua’s view concerning the Samaritans seems to have been one of reconciliation and inclusion in the greater body of the Jewish people (Luke 9:52), and their spiritual redemption through Him. However, it would require their repentance. FYI: Today Jews who live in Shomron and Judea need not fear the Samaritans (descendants of the Shomroniym of the first century) but are constantly under attack from Palestinian extremists and are regularly taunted and verbally abused by so called Christian organisations such as the EAPPI (Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel) who are funded by the WCC (World Council of Churches), whose 350 members include denominations such as Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, Mennonite, Pentecostal, Eastern Orthodox, Quakers, Lutheran and many more. Circa 2020 10 Yeshua[H, A] answered and said to her, “If you perceived, (eido, yada’at[H]) knew the gift (ho-dorea, et-matan[H]) of the God (ho-Theos[G], ha-Elohim[H]), and Who it is Who says to you, ‘Give Me a drink,’ you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water (mayim chayim[H], hudor-zao[G]).” Note that the unity of God is alluded to in the person of Yeshua and in His insistence that the woman needs to ask the question of God in order to receive the gift which is manifest in the woman’s presence. Therefore, Messiah is both the gift of God and God with us Who gives the gift of eternal living, represented here using the figure of living water: water that comes from an untouched spring of the earth rather than from a manmade cistern (Num. 19:17). It is also known for its refreshing application (Jer. 2:14; 17:13). Living water is moving water that is undefiled and finds its origin and flow in God alone. In short, living water comes from above and renews the sin affected earth. 11“Has a nation changed gods When they were not gods? But My people have changed their glory For that which does not profit. 12 “Be appalled, O heavens, at this, And shudder, be very desolate,” declares the Lord. 13 “For My people have committed two evils: They have forsaken Me, The fountain of living waters, To hew for themselves cisterns, Broken cisterns That can hold no water. -Jeremiah 2:11-13 (NASB) 11 She said to Him, “My Lord, Master (kurios[G], adoniy[H]), You have nothing to draw with and the well, pit, abyss (phrear[G]) is deep; from what place (pothen[G]) then do You hold, wear, possess (echo[G]) the (ho[G]) living water (mayim chayim[H], hudor-zao[G])? 12 You are not greater (meizon[G]ha-gadol[H]) than our father (ho-pater[G], aviynu[H]) Yaakov[H], are You, who gave (didomi[G], natan-lanu[H]) us the well (ho-phrear[G], et ha-beir[H]), and for himself drew out to drink of it himself and his sons and his cattle?” We note that like Nakdimon (Nicodemus) the Samaritan woman fails to understand the full spiritual meaning of Yeshua’s figurative speech. Therefore, she answers in response to what she understands as a literal offer of water from the well of Jacob. Another beautiful irony, in that the water Yeshua offers does come through Jacob from God in the form of the descendant of Jacob and Person of God’s only begotten Son. Yeshua’s words and countenance had clearly sparked a fire of transformation in the woman, who now calls Him “My Lord (Master)” rather than referring to Him as part of the collective of the Jewish people as she had before. The use of the Greek “phrear” can refer to the abyss or netherworld and infers at least in part that the woman had begun to sense that this was a spiritual conversation. “Phrear” is a word that denotes bottomless depth and is probably employed here to indicate that the well of Jacob is in fact quite literally a well from a natural underground spring of flowing water and is therefore a physical representation of the figurative application of the Hebrew mayim-chayim (living waters). 13 Yeshua[H, A] answered and said to her, “Everyone, all who drink (pino[G], kol-hashoteh[H]) of, from this water (hudor[G], min-ha-mayim[H]) will suffer thirst, return to thirst (dipsao[G], yashuv veyitzma[H]) again; 14 but whoever drinks (pino[G], yishteh[H]) of, from the water (hudor[G], min-ha-mayim yishteh[H) that I will give (notein[H]) him shall never suffer thirst (dipsao[G], yitzma[H]) into the unbroken age, eternity, the world (eis ho aion[G], le’olam[H]); because (kiy[H]) the water (hudor[G], ha-mayim[H]) that I am giving (didomi[G], eten-lo[H]) him will become, arise, close to the source (ginomai[G], vekirbo lim’kor[H]) in him a well, spring (pege[G]) of water (hudatos[G], mayim[H]) springing, leaping, gushing up (hallomai[G]) into, toward, among life, living (zoe[G], lechayeiy[H], L’chaye[A]Pl.) without end, in the eternal world (aionios[G], ha-olam[H]).” This living water is the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit is poured out on every believer beginning at Shavuot (Pentecost) approx. 33 CE (Acts 2), as a result of Yeshua’s death, resurrection, ascension and authority at God’s right hand. Rain, water, living water, are all symbolic of the moving and life giving Spirit of the Living God. The context of this passage denotes spiritual renewal and points to a relationship of worship that can only be participated in by those who dwell in the Spirit of God and the Truth of His Son (v.24). We know that the water Yeshua is speaking of is the Ruach Ha-Kodesh (Holy Spirit) because Yeshua Himself says so: “37 Now on the last day, the great day of the feast (Sukkot), Yeshua stood and cried out, saying, “[g]If anyone is thirsty, [h]let him come to Me and drink. 38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From [i]his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’” 39 But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Yeshua was not yet glorified.” -Yochanan (John) 7:37-39 “‘For I will pour out water on [a]the thirsty land And streams on the dry ground; I will pour out My Spirit on your offspring And My blessing on your descendants;” -Isaiah 43:3 (NASB) ““Ho! Every one who thirsts, come to the waters; And you who have no [a]money come, buy and eat. Come, buy wine and milk Without money and without cost.” -Isaiah 55:1 (NASB) “And the Lord will continually guide you, And satisfy your [a]desire in scorched places, And give strength to your bones; And you will be like a watered garden, And like a spring of water whose waters do not [b]fail.” -Isaiah 58:11 (NASB) 15 Speaking (lego[G]) to Him the woman (gune[G], ha-ishah[H] [wife]) said, “Lord, Master (kurios[G], adoniy[H]), give (didomi[G], tenah[H]) me this (touto[G]) the (ho[G]) water (hudor[G], ha-mayim[H]), so I will never suffer thirst (dipsao[G], lo etzma[H]) nor walk (dierchomai[G]) here [Heb. Alt. od velo osiyf labo “continually adding by coming”] to draw water over and over again (antleo[G]).” 16 Yeshua[H, A] said to her, “Go, and call (phoneo[G], vekiriy[H]) your husband (aner[G], leiysheich[H]) and come here.” The request of the Samaritan woman comes from her sin seeded brokenness and her desire to find a life that has meaning beyond that of sensual pleasure, temporary physical gratification and empty promises. However, she still interprets Yeshua’s words literally, referring to the well’s location and her desire to no longer have to revisit it. Note that Yeshua did not give her the water He had spoken of straight away in response to her request. Rather He began by pointing out her sin with the view to lead her to repentance so that she might receive the water He had spoken of following His resurrection. The unrepentant cannot receive the water of living (the promised Holy Spirit) because without turning toward God, no one can engage in relationship with Him, nor be sustained by His Spirit. To deny sin and its fruit is to deny a self-inflicted wound. 17 The woman (gune[G], ha-ishah[H] [wife]) answered and said, “I have no husband (aner[G], iysh[H][man]).” Yeshua[H, A] said to her, “Yes (ken[H]) you spoke correctly when you (kalos[G],) said, ‘I have no husband (aner[G , iysh[H][man])’; 18 In fact you have had five (chamishah[H]) husbands (aner[G], bealiym[H][husbands, masters, rulers]), and at the present time (nun[G]) the one whom you now have is not your husband (aner[G], ba’leikh[H][your husband, master, ruler]); this you have said truly (alethes[G], emet[H]).” The woman intended to hide her sin with her answer but Yeshua exposed that which she had attempted to hide by illuminating the truth of her situation. Something only those who knew the woman could have known. Thus, He proves Himself a prophet in her eyes, not because He foretold the future but because He revealed the present. The prophets of Israel were primarily tasked with exposing sin and calling Israel to repentance. Yeshua plays the same role in this encounter. The Hebrew text better conveys the nuance of Yeshua’s response. When Yeshua repeats the woman’s answer back to her He uses her words “I have no man/husband (iysh)”, but when He exposes her half-truth (a lie) He says “In fact you have had five husbands/masters (bealiym)” using the Hebrew “ba’al” which refers specifically to a husband rather than the generic term “iysh” which can mean husband or man. Ba’aliym was the title used to describe the false gods worshipped by Israel’s forebears, thus, Yeshua makes a drash of this idolatry in order to expose the woman’s true spiritual state. Not only is Yeshua exposing the woman’s words and spiritual condition, He is also clearly defining for her the nature and extent of her sin. Put simply, “You spoke well saying that you have no husband, in fact you have had five sexual partners and married four of them officially, while the one you are with at present you have not married officially.” The historical, religious context here is of paramount importance. It explains the depth of sin of the woman, the sin of the male leaders in her village, the reason she was at the well at an unusual time of day and it partly qualifies the religious Jewish avoidance of the Samaritan region and people. The religious Samaritan’s of the first century CE adhered to their slightly corrupted version of the Torah with great devotion. They would have frowned upon adultery and the defiling of the marriage bed through premarital sexual relations. However, it seems from Yeshua’s words that the woman had been married by religious ceremony four times. This means that either all three of her first husbands had died or committed adultery against her leaving her free to marry under Torah law, or that the religious leaders of her village had allowed her marriages to take place outside of the requirements of the Torah. Based on the text it appears that the latter is the more likely. The fifth man is not her husband, meaning that she is either cheating on her fourth husband or is in an illicit premarital affair, or is in an illicit sexual relationship with another woman’s husband. In any case she would have been a woman despised by the other woman of her village (many of whom had been victims of her sin), a woman with few friends and many male admirers. It is likely that she survived because the men of her village enjoyed her and advocated for her promiscuous lifestyle. The hypocrisy of the religious was not limited to certain Jewish religious leaders, it was also clearly prevalent in the Samaritan sect. 19 The woman (gune[G], ha-ishah[H] [wife]) said to Him, “Lord, Master (kurios[G], adoniy[H]), I perceive, see (theoreo[G], roah[H]) that You are a prophet (prophetes[G], naviy[H]). 20 Our fathers (avoteiynu[H]) worshiped, bowed down, kissed (proskuneo[G], hishtachau[H], saghed[A]) in/on this mountain (bahar[H]), and you (ve’atem[H]) say (omriym[H][Pl]) Jerusalem (Yerushalayim[H] [Flood of Peace]) she (hiy[H]) is the place (ha-makum[H]) where men ought to worship, bow down (proskuneo[G], lehishtachot[H], saghed[A]).” As stated previously, she perceived that Yeshua was a prophet not because He foretold the future but because He exposed the present. The use of the Hebrew “Ha-Makum” in the woman’s response is significant. Ha-makum is a name for the Temple Mount and literally means “The Place”. It is used in reference to the place where Jacob lay his head and saw the dream of Jacob’s ladder (Gen.28:10-19). This story was of great importance to both Jews and Samaritans and as a result the location of “The Place” was contested. The Samaritans believed (incorrectly) that Mt Gerizim (near modern Nablus [Biblical Shechem/Sychar] in the Shomron region) was Ha-Makum (the Place) while the Jews correctly understood that Mt Moriah (The Temple Mount in Jerusalem) is Ha-Makum (The Place). Something that Yeshua affirms in the following verses. NB: Gerizim means “cuttings” a plural of garaz “cut off”. Moriah translates literally as “from the sight of YHVH” meaning “YHVH has seen and chosen” (me-ra’ah-YHVH). Eyval (Ebal) means “Stone” or “Bare Mountain”. Both mountains are mentioned in the proclaiming blessing and curse over Israel as they approached the promised land (Deut. 11:29; 27, 28). We note that the woman recognises Yeshua as a prophet and includes Him in her general reference to the Jewish people as a whole. Notice that the name Jerusalem means “Flood or Downpour of Peace” and refers to the Spirit of God and the Son being poured out over the inhabitants of the city, something which took place at Shavuot (Pentecost approx.. 33 CE) and will take place again at the reconciliation of all Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical, chosen). 21 Yeshua[H, A] said to her, “Dear woman (gune[G], ishah[H] [wife]), believe, trust in, have the faith in Me (ha’amiyniy[H]), because (kiy[H]) a certain definite time, an hour (hora[G], sha’ah[H]) is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you (all) worship (proskuneo[G], tishtachau[H], saghed[A]) the Father (ho pater[G], la’Av[H]). 22 You all (humeis[G], atem [H]) worship (proskuneo[G], mishtachaviym[H],saghed[A]) what you can’t see, do not know (eido[G], yedatem[H]); we worship (proskuneo[G], mishtachaviym[H]) Who (ho[G]) we see, know (eido[G], yadednu[H]), because (hoti[G], kiy[H]) the (ho[G]) salvation (ha-yeshuah[H]), deliverance, preservation, safety (soteria[G]) is out of, by, from (ex[G], min[H]) the Jewish people (Ioudaios[G], ha-yehudiym hiy[H]) [Aramaic alt. d’chaye men yihudaye, “living is from the Jews”]. Notice that the woman had placed emphasis on the location of worship whereas Yeshua places the emphasis on The Father. Therefore, it is not upon mountains that we are to rely but upon the Creator of mountains. “We know Who we worship” is an allusion to the fact that God had revealed Himself to the people of Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical, chosen) from Abraham and through the generations of Isaac, Jacob and their children’s children. God chose Israel to receive His Torah and His prophets and had appointed her to be a light of His redemptive purpose to all humanity. Although Israel had failed in this task corporately, she none the less had always had among her those who were devout toward God and knew Whom they worshipped. Therefore, Yeshua is not ashamed to include Himself in the collective voice of Israel (ethnic, religious, chosen, empirical), saying “We know Who we worship…” Salvation (Himself: Yeshua) comes from the Jews (plural), that is, from the Jewish bloodline. Yeshua has essentially challenged the woman to examine her sinful state and consider repentance, then accept that the promised Messiah is of the Jewish people and accept His saving work in order to receive the water He has spoken of. This will also result in her re-inclusion back into the tribal body of Israel (The Jews of the first century). The Aramaic text is interesting because it makes “chaye” (Aramaic plural meaning living) synonymous with “yeshuah” (Hebrew feminine form for Salvation). 23 A certain definite time, an hour (hora[G], sha’ah[H]) is coming, [Heb. Alt. Olam tavo sha’ah “A world is coming in time”] and now is, when the true (alethinos[G], ha-amitiym[H]) worshipers (proskunetes[G], yishtachau[H]) will worship (proskuneo[G]) the Father (ho pater[G], la’Av[H]) in spirit (pneuma[G], beruach[H]) and in truth (aletheia[G], uve’emet[H]); for such people the Father seeks (zeteo[G]) to be His worshipers (proskuneo[G]). [Heb. Alt. kiy bemishtachaviym koeileh chapeitz ha-Av “Because it is in worshippers who worship as a whole that the Father reveals the objective”] This revelation connects the individual to the collective and emphasises corporate worship. The text does not say, “The true worshipper” but “the true worshippers”. Yeshua points the woman to her inclusion in Israel and away from individual and tribal rivalries. 24 God is (Theos[G], Elohim[H]) spirit (pneuma[G], ruach[H]), and those who worship (proskuneo[G], vehamishtachaviym[H]) Him must (tzeriychiym[H] [Pl]) worship in spirit (pneuma[G], beruach[H]) and in truth (aletheia[G], uve’emet[H]).” In the Spirit of God Who is the nearest subject of “Spirit”, and in the Truth of His Living Word (Yeshua) Who is the speaker. Again the language is plural, “those” not “the one”. In one sense our personal experience of God’s Spirit and Truth is reliant on the corporate experience of God’s Spirit and Truth. One cannot exist without the other. 25 The woman (gune[G], ha-ishah[H] [wife]) said to Him, “I know, see, perceive (eido[G], yadatiy[G]) that Messiah (Messias[G], Mashiach[H]) is coming, (He who is called Christos[G] [Anointed One]); when He comes, He will announce, make known, declare, tell (anaggello[G], veyagiyd[H]) all things to us (hapas[G], et kol[H]).” 26 Yeshua[H, A] said to her, “I (Ani[H]) who speak (ha-medabeir ) to you I am He (Ani Hu[H]).” [Heb. Lit. “I Am the One speaking to you, I Am He”]. The woman professes her belief that the promised Messiah is coming. Her confession is no different from many Jews and most Samaritans today, who believe in the coming of a Messiah but do not accept that the Messiah has already come or that Yeshua is the promised Messiah. Although the woman has concluded that Yeshua is a prophet and therefore a man of God, she has not put two and two together. Therefore, Yeshua speaks plainly to her, “I AM the One (Messiah) speaking to you”. The Hebrew text reads “Ani Ha-medabeir eilayikh Ani hu”, “I Am the One speaking to you, I Am He.” This statement reflects the Self-existent proclamation of HaShem [YHVH] (Exodus 3:14). Yeshua uses this “I AM” identifier nine times in the Gospel according to Yochanan (John) [4:26; 6:20; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:9; 18:5, 6, 8)[cf. Mark 14:61-62]. By His use of this statement of Self-revelation Yeshua implies that He is more than just a man, He is the promised Imanu-El (God with us), the manifestly present God, come to redeem His chosen people and all among humanity who will receive Him. Even if one could disassociate Yeshua’s use of “I Am” from the Self-existing statement of YHVH (Exodus 3:14) in eight out of its nine uses within John’s Gospel, none can refute its clear meaning in John 8:58: “Yeshua said to them, “In Truth, in truth, be’emet, be’emet, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.” In His response to the Samaritan woman at the well, Yeshua is quite literally quoting Isaiah 52:6 “Therefore My people shall know My name; therefore in that day I am the one who is speaking, ‘Here I am.” NB: Isaiah 52:6 is pretext to the latter part of Isaiah 52 and the entire chapter of Isaiah 53 which explains the coming Messiah’s sacrificial death. Yeshua is either the Messiah and God with us or He is an apostate heretic, a liar and a fraud. There is absolutely no room for the foolish notion that Yeshua was simply a good Rabbi but not the Messiah, nor for the false doctrine that He is the Messiah but is not God with us. The Scripture demands that we make a choice. Face to face with the King Messiah the Samaritan woman at the well was presented with that same choice. She chose well, will you? Copyright 2020 Yaakov Brown Many have focused on the actions of Shimon and Levi in this account, however, the greater lesson here is one of holiness, that is, Israel’s need to be set apart unto God alone. Introduction:
Yaakov has only recently separated himself and his family from Esav in obedience to God’s instruction regarding the unique role that Israel is to have among the nations. Now, having only just returned to the Land of promise, he is faced with yet another threat to Israel’s distinctive identity in God. The threat of intermarriage with the idolatrous inhabitants of Shechem (See Gen 24; 27:46-28:9 for the lengths to which the Patriarchs will go to avoid intermarriage). As in the case of the many other events recorded early in Genesis, this story may well have acted as inspiration for the writing of later commandments (Exodus 23:27-33; Deut. 22:28-29; Deut. 7:1-5). Many have focused on the actions of Shimon and Levi in this account, however, the greater lesson here is one of holiness, that is, Israel’s need to be set apart unto God alone. With this in mind we are able to better navigate the great offense that is represented in the defiling of Dinah and the judgement that comes against the people of Shechem as a result of their prince’s sin. 34:1 And Dinah (Judgement) Bat Leah (Daughter of Leah [Weary]), which she bore unto Ya’akov (Follows after the heel), went out to see the Banot HaAretz (Daughters of the land). Given the lengths to which Yaakov has gone to keep his family separate (camped outside the city Gen. 33:18), it is at very least foolish for Dinah to compromise cultural etiquette by leaving the camp to engage with the daughters of the of the land (Specifically the provence of Shechem). Some of our Sages suggest that Dinah was enticed by the daughters of Shechem, however, there is nothing in the text to indicate this. The plain meaning of the text simply denotes an inquisitive teenager’s poorly thought out adventure, one that ends in tragedy and heart break for Dinah. One might ask, “Why was she not seen leaving and called back?” To which we can respond, “Her brothers were elsewhere herding the animals and Yaakov along with his wives could easily have been preoccupied at the time.” 2 And when Shechem (Back) Ben Chamor (Son of a He-ass) the Chivi (Aramaic: Serpentine or Hebrew: Hivite, villagers), Nasi HaAretz (Prince of the land) saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and violated her. The Midrash notes that the Hebrew Chivi, does not refer to Shechem being a Hivite because he is an Amorite (Gen. 48:22). It states therefore, that the word Chivi is a borrowed Aramaic word meaning Serpentine. Thus we read, “Shechem son of a He-ass, the serpentine prince of the land”. Some suggest that the last word of verse two simply refers to fornication (sexual relations outside of the marriage covenant). However, the combining of the terms, “took, lay, violated” denotes a violent act that can only be seen as rape. This act would have had far reaching consequences for Dinah given the stigma attached to women in this ancient culture, who were considered sexually defiled, unclean (2 Sam. 13:12-16). It is worth noting that these events must have taken place in or near the city of Shechem and in close proximity to the daughters of the land and yet no one came to Dinah’s aid. 3 And his nefesh (Core being) had devak (Clung to, overtook, pursued) Dinah Bat Ya’akov (Judgement the daughter of the one who follows after the heel), and he loved the na’arah (Young woman), and spoke to (implored) the lev (core being, soul, heart) of hanaarah (The Young Woman). 4 And Shechem spoke unto Chamor aviv (his father), saying, “Get me this yaldah (child) for an isha (wife).” In some sense the opening phrase could read, “With all his might he overtook Dinah”. The text is careful to show Dinah’s connection to Yaakov, thus making her rape and capture a defiling act against the household of Israel. Having taken Dinah without any attempt to arrange betrothal through proper channels, and having ruined any chance of her having future prospects for marriage, Shechem seems to have developed a genuine love for Dinah and with no respect for her feelings or her victimization, he begs her to reciprocate. Dinah is initially described as a young woman (na’arah), however this is qualified by the term that follows; yaldah (a female child). The Sages say that Dinah was 13 years of age when these events occurred. This only adds to the despicable nature of Shechem’s crime. 5 And Ya’akov heard that he (Shechem) had made his bat Dinah (Daughter Judgement) tameh (sexually unclean, defiled); now his banim (Sons) were with his mikneh (herds) in the sadeh (field); and Ya’akov held his peace until they were come. Yaakov had heard of Dinah’s defilement but the text infers that he had heard the information from a source other than Dinah herself, which is consistent with the latter verses explaining her residence in the house of Shechem; meaning that Shechem had, with the approval of his father Chamor, kept Dinah at his home in Shechem (city) from the time of the rape. It seems likely that while Yaakov may have wanted to rescue his daughter at once, he realised that the residents of Shechem outnumbered his retinue and that he must consider his response carefully before acting so as not to endanger Dinah further. Thus he, “held his peace”, waiting for his sons to return so that they could aid him in the recovery of their sister. 6 And Chamor avi Shechem (He-ass, father of Back) went out unto Ya’akov to speak with him. Having either intentionally or tacitly approved of his sons actions, Chamor, after ignoring all accepted cultural protocol for seeking a betrothal contract, goes out from the town of Shechem where Yaakov’s daughter Dinah is being held against her will, to speak with Yaakov and arrange a marriage and co-existence between their tribes. If this behaviour is vindictive of the culture in Shechem, it is proof that they are a people of dubious moral character at best. 7 And the Bnei Ya’akov (Sons of Jacob) came from the sadeh (field) when they heard it; and the anashim (men) were grieved (hurt, tortured within), and they were extremely furious, because he (Shechem) had brought nevalah (folly, disgrace, outrage) against Yisrael in lying with Bat Ya’akov (Daughter of Jacob); a thing that should not to be done. At the beginning of this account Dinah is called the daughter of Leah (Weary), that is, a daughter of vulnerability. Here however, she is called the daughter of Yaakov, who is the daughter of the disciple of HaShem, a man who has been given the name Israel and with it the Land. Shechem’s sin, as abhorrent as it is in regard to Dinah’s personal suffering, is considered by the sons of Israel to be a defiling of their father’s name and of Israel’s identity as a set apart people unto HaShem. Thus it is, “a thing that should not be done!” (An abomination). It is in understanding the spiritual implications of Shechem’s act that we are able to better understand the actions of Shimon and Levi in avenging their sister. 8 And Chamor spoke with them, saying, “The nefesh (Inner being) of beni (my son) Shechem longs for your bat (Daughter); now give her to him as a isha (Wife). 9 So intermarry with us, and give your banot (daughters) to us, and take benoteinu (our daughters) for yourselves. This request is offensive on many levels, however the greatest offense is against the lineage of God’s chosen people. The patriarchs have pursued marriage within their own ethnicity according to God’s instruction and Yaakov has imparted this tradition to his children. The Torah, speaking of, among others, the Amorites and Chivi, says: “Neither shall you make marriages with them; your daughter you shall not give unto his son, nor his daughter shall you take for your son. For they will turn away your son from following Me, that they may serve elohim acherim (other gods); so will the anger of Hashem be kindled against you, and destroy you suddenly.” –D’varim/Deut. 7:4-5 In light of God’s calling on Israel and the later instruction of the Torah, what Chamor is proposing stands in direct opposition to the will of HaShem. The Scripture shows that the primary reason for Israel’s need to avoid intermarriage is for her protection against idolatry. 10 Then you will dwell with us; and HaAretz (The land) shall be before you; dwell and trade in it, and take possession of it.” This is a deceptive proposal given that Chamor’s intention is not that Yaakov prosper but that he and the people of Shechem might prosper at Yaakov’s expense (v.23). 11 And Shechem said to her father (Yaakov) and to her achim (Brothers), “Let me find chen (grace) in your eyes, and whatever you require of me I will give. 12 Ask me for a great mohar (bride price, dowry) and mattan (gift), and I will pay according to what you demand of me; but give me the na’arah (Young woman) as isha (a wife).” Having defiled Dinah Shechem now pretends honour by offering a bride price (mohar), something that should have been done before he approached her to have sex with her. 13 And the Bnei Ya’akov (the sons of Jacob) answered Shechem and Chamor aviv (his father) with mirmar (cunning) when they spoke because he had made Dinah their achot (sister) tameh (Unclean, defiled); The sons of Yaakov had arrived at the camp at the same time as Chamor and Shechem but they had time after hearing of the atrocity to formulate a plan of retaliation while the travelled back to the camp. They don’t lose their cool but devise a ruse that will gain them the time they need to rescue their sister and redeem their father’s honour. The emphasis again on the Hebrew tameh (defiled, unclean) juxtaposes the heinousness of the crime against the cunning of the response. 14 And they said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give achoteinu (our sister) to ish (a man) that is arelah (uncircumcised); for that would be a cherpah (reproach, disgrace) to us; 15 But in this will we consent to you: If you will become like us, that every zachar (male) of you be circumcised; 16 Then will we give benoteinu (our daughters) to you, and we will take your banot (daughters) to us, and we will dwell among you, and we will become as Am Echad (One People). 17 But if you will not pay heed to us, to become circumcised; then we’ll take biteinu (our daughter), and we will go. The brothers of Dinah clearly had no intention of honouring their proposed arrangement. They were preparing for retribution and needed a way to make their enemy vulnerable because without an advantage they would have been outnumbered and unable to rescue Dinah. It is difficult to pass judgement on their deception because it is merely being used as a ploy in order to facilitate the righteous action of rescuing their sister from wicked men. Notice that the brothers of Dinah call her their daughter. This is to emphasize her very young age and identify her as a vulnerable and precious member of the family of Yaakov. 18 And their words pleased Chamor, and Shechem Ben Chamor (Son of Chamor). 19 And the na’ar (Young man) agreed to do the thing, because he had delight in Bat Ya’akov (The daughter of Jacob); and he was the most respected member kol Bait Aviv (of all his father’s house). The title, “Most respected member of all his father’s house” infers Shechem’s rule over the people and his influence upon their daily practices. 20 And Chamor and Shechem bno came unto the Sha’ar of their city, and they spoke with the anashim (men) of their city, saying, As I have alluded to in previous articles, the city gate is the location of all legal agreements and official city wide declarations and proposals in the ancient East. 21 “These anashim (men) are shlemim (peaceable) with us; therefore let them settle in HaAretz (The land), and let them trade for HaAretz (The land), hinei (behold, wow, at once), it is plenty of room for them; let us take their banot (daughters) to us as nashim (wives), and let us give them benoteinu (our daughters). 22 Only in order for these anashim (men) to consent to dwell with us, as Am Echad (One people), every zachar (male) among us must be circumcised, just as they are nimolim (ones being circumcised). 23 Shall not their mikneh (herds) and their property and every behemah (beast) of theirs be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will settle among us.” It is verse 23 that reveals Chamor and Shechem’s true motivations. In fact, it is possible that Shechem’s raping of Dinah was part of a larger plan to gain wealth through intermarriage with Yaakov. 24 And to Chamor and to Shechem bno (his son) paid heed all those that went out of the Sha’ar (gate) of his city; and every zachar (male) was circumcised, all that went out of the Sha’ar (gate) of his city. This verse is strategically important because it confirms that all the men of the town and surrounding province of Shechem submitted themselves to the procedure. Thus incapacitating the province’s entire force of fighting men 25 And it came to pass on Yom HaShlishi (the third day), when they were in pain, that two of the Bnei Ya’akov (sons of Jacob), Shimon (hears: Listens to God) and Levi (joined to: Priesthood), achei Dinah (brothers of), took each ish (man) his cherev (sword, long knife), and came upon the Ir (city) betach (with trust, boldly, confidently), and they slaughtered kol zachar (all the males). The third day following an adult circumcision is said to be the most painful day of recovery, thus Shimon and Levi planned their attack to maximize the number of potential casualties. In fact, they killed every male in the town of Shechem. It seems that the other sons of Yaakov were either unwilling to kill the men of Shechem, or simply less zealous in retribution and lagging behind. They do however, appear later in order to plunder the city. Shimon is Leah’s third born and Levi her sixth child and the child closest in age to Dinah. It seems that these two brothers of Dinah must have had a close relationship with her and are therefore, fiercely protective of her. Their anger is later criticized by Yaakov but he does not question their reasons or their love for Dinah and the household of Israel. 26 And they slaughtered Chamor and Shechem bno (his son) with the edge of the cherev (sword), and took Dinah from the Bait Shechem (House of) and left. Dinah, like a modern sex trafficked slave, has been kept in Shechem’s own house this entire time. 27 The Bnei Ya’akov came upon the chalalim (dead ones, slain ones), and plundered the Ir (city), because they had made their achot (sister) tameh (defiled, violated, unclean). The remaining sons of Yaakov, though not directly involved in the slaying of the men of Shechem, none the less show tacit approval, and with the defilement of their sister in mind they plunder the entire city. 28 They seized their tzon (sheep), and their bakar (oxen), and their chamorim (asses), and that which was in the Ir (city), and that which was in the sadeh (field), 29 And all their wealth, and all their little ones, and their nashim (wives, women) they carried off and plundered even all that was in the bayit (house). Chamor and Shechem had planned to become rich off of Yaakov, instead, Yaakov grows rich as a consequence of Shechem’s sin. Bayit (House) is singular and denotes a counter point to Shechem’s imprisoning of Dinah in his Bayit. The Bayit, once a place where he trapped the woman whom he thought would bring him joy and riches, is now gutted of all its wealth over his dead body. 30 And Ya’akov said to Shimon and Levi, “You have brought trouble on me to make me a stench among the inhabitants of HaAretz (The land) among the Kena’ani and the Perizzi; and I being few in mispar (number), they shall gather themselves together against me, and attack me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my bayit (household).” Notice that at least at this juncture, Yaakov does not say that Shimon and Levi have acted unjustly, nor does he accuse them of wrong doing (although, on his death bed he does curse the anger of Shimon and Levi and condemns the brothers for being excessive in their zeal Gen. 49:5-7). At this point Yaakov seems less concerned with the retribution carried out on his daughter’s behalf and more concerned with the resulting effect it might have with regard to the tribes who inhabit the land around about him. “Shimon and Levi are achim (brothers); kelei chamas (instruments of violence) are their swords. O my nefesh, enter not you into their sod (secret, council); unto their kehal (assembly), may my kavod (glory), not be united with them; for in their anger they slaughtered ish (a man), and in their ratzon (self-will) they uprooted an ox. Arur (cursed) be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel; I will dispense them in Ya’akov, and scatter them in Yisrael.” –Genesis 49:5-7 Note that it is note Shimon or Levi who are cursed but their anger and their wrath. “Human anger does not produce the righteousness that God requires.” –Yaakov 1:20 31 And they said, “Should he deal with achoteinu (our sister) like with zonah (prostitute)?” This is of course a rhetorical question. It goes unanswered because it need not be answered. No man should defile a woman in this way. The man who does will be judged (Dinah) and hearing God (Shimon) the Priest (Levi: joined) of HaShem will join in the task of punishing him. © Yaakov Brown A trickling troop walks straight after troubled judgement, wrestling, weary, seeing and hearing, are joined by praise and paid wages, exalted in judgement over the sheep to whom HaShem adds. Introduction:
Yaakov has wrestled with God and humanity and has overcome, not in his own strength but through the gracious undeserved favour of God’s blessing. Having been blessed by the Man Who is God with us, Yaakov has been given the name Yisrael (He who overcomes in God). Now, just as Avraham looked up and saw, so too Yaakov/Yisrael looks up and sees his brother Esav approaching, and with the certain knowledge that God is with him, he prepares his family and goes out to meet Esav. 33:1 And Ya’akov (Follows after the heel) lifted up his eyes, and looked, and, hinei (behold, wow, truly, at once), Esav (Hairy) came, and with him arba me’ot ish (four hundred men). And he divided the yeladim (Children) unto Leah (Weary) and unto Rachel (Ewe), and unto the two shefachot (Servants). We ask, “Is it Yaakov or Yisrael who lifts up his eyes?” In fact he will continue to be seen from two distinct perspectives. From the perspective of the Man Who is the Malakh (Messenger, Angel) of HaShem and God with us, Yaakov will hence forth always be seen complete, redeemed and whole as Yisrael (Overcomes in Elohiym). However, in the working out of that journey of completion within time and space, the readers of the Torah look upon Yaakov, the man who yet struggles while his eternal identity is being refined by God. 2 And he (Yaakov) put the shefachot (maid servants) and their yeladim (Children) rishonah (At the first, in front), and Leah and her yeladim (Children) acharonim (behind them), and Rachel and Yosef acharonim (behind them). The order of the wives and children denotes their standing in the family structure and does not mean that Yaakov was using the former as shields for the latter. If Esav had intended to wipe Yaakov out he would have attacked all of Yaakov’s retinue, in which case the order that they approached would have made little difference. The wives and children approached Esav as follows:
A trickling troop walks straight after troubled judgement, wrestling, weary, seeing and hearing, are joined by praise and paid their wages, exalted in judgement over the sheep to whom HaShem adds. 3 And he (Yaakov) passed over ’p’neihem before faces, and bowed to the earth/land/ ground sheva pe’amim seven times (like a beat or a stroke), until he came near to achiv (his brother). Why seven times? The p’shat (plain meaning) of the bowing down reveals Yaakov’s complete humility and reconciliatory intention. The significance of the Hebrew number seven, which means fullness, completion, rest, adds weight to the symbolic nature of Yaakov’s actions. He is not worshipping but placating. Nor is he repenting for wrong doing. After all, as we have already established in the previous chapters, Yaakov received the blessing that was rightfully his. Nowhere in this account does Yaakov admit to having taken what didn’t belong to him, nor does he confess to deceiving Esav. To the contrary, he is seeking to appease his brother Esav, who had formerly vowed to murder him (Gen 27:41, Gen 32:12). 4 And Esav ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his tzavar (neck), and kissed him; and they wept. The Greek text of the Septuagint does not contain the word, “kissed” and the Hebrew vayishakeihu, translated as kissed has special dot pointings over every character to indicate that the latter scribes were possibly uncertain as to whether it should be included. Other views propose that the special pointing indicates an unusual meaning for the Hebrew word. Certain rabbinical commentary has suggested that the reason for the markings is that Esav’s kiss was disingenuous, while others affirm his desire for true reconciliation. 5 And he (Esav) lifted up his eyes, and saw the nashim (wives) and the yeladim (children); and said, “Who are those with you?” And he (Yaakov) said, the yeladim which Elohiym has graciously given your eved (servant). Yaakov seems to be hedging his answer. He doesn’t mention his wives and refers to the children in general terms and with emphasis on their origin being from Elohiym. He also reaffirms his humble status as Esav’s eved (servant). Although Yaakov knows that God has made Esav and his descendants the servants of Israel. 6 Then the shefachot (maid servants) came near, they and their yeladim (children), and they bowed themselves. 7 And Leah also with her yeladim came near, and bowed themselves; and after came Yosef near and Rachel, and they bowed themselves. It’s worth noting that the maid servants and Leah both approach in front of their children in a protective manner but Yosef (YHVH adds) comes before his mother, denoting that even as a young boy he had a sense of his future role as a protector and redeemer of Israel. This also acts as a poetic reconciling of the fact that YHVH has added all that have come before this meeting and that he will add all that will come after it. 8 And he (Esav) said, “Who are all these machaneh (host) which I met?” And he (Yaakov) said, “These are to find chen (grace, favour) in the eyes of adoni (my lord). The servants of Yaakov have already explained the meaning of the droves to Esav, making his question somewhat dubious. However, Yaakov names Esav “My lord” and reasserts his desire to find favour (not forgiveness) in Esav’s eyes. 9 And Esav said, “I have enough, achi (my brother); keep that which you have for yourself.” This seems to be a generous offer but culturally speaking may well simply be the banter of etiquette rather than a genuine refusal. However, Esav does use the more intimate term achi (My brother) rather than ach (brother). 10 And Ya’akov said, “No, now, if I have found chen (grace) in your eyes, then receive my minchah tribute at my yad (hand) based on these gifts I have seen your face, as though seeing the p’nei Elohiym (the face of G-d) vatirtzeini (and you have been appeased by me). The reason Yaakov uses the phrase, “P’nei Elohiym” and thus connects the present meeting with the wrestling of the previous chapter, is that he wants to acknowledge that just as he had seen God’s face and lived, he has now seen his brother’s face and lived. Thus he is in literal fulfilment of the meaning of the wrestling match and his subsequent new name. In the case of the Man Who was God, Yaakov has lived through God’s grace and in the present instance it is through the provisions God has graciously given him that he has been able to appease (not pay back) Esav. In both cases Yaakov was sure he should have died and in both cases God provides for his redemption. 11 take up, now, bir’chati my blessing which has come to you; because Elohiym (Judge) has dealt graciously with me, and because yesh li khol (there is to me everything, my needs are met). And he (Yaakov) pressed him (Esav), and he (Esav) accepted. These words show Yaakov’s gracious and humble character in that they impart to Esav the overflow of the blessing Yaakov has received from God. “Take now my blessing which has come to you.” Note also that although Yaakov has given over a generous portion from his flocks and herds, he none the less says, “yesh li khol” I have everything. This everything is more than just human relationships, children, physical wealth and status. It is the realization that through humility and blessing God has purchased Yaakov an eternal home. HaShem is everything and in Him all things exist and move and have their being. 12 And he (Esav) said, Nise’ah (let us take our journey), and let us go, I will go next to you. 13 And he (Yaakov) said unto him (Esav), “Adoni (My lord) know that the yeladim (Children) are tender and the nursing tzon (small animals of the herds) and bakar (cattle) are upon me; and if men should overdrive them yom echad (in one day), all the tzon (small animals of the herds) will die. 14 Let now adoni (my lord), pass over before his eved (servant); and I will lead on slowly, according to the pace of the drove that goes before me and the pace the yeladim are able to endure, until I come unto adoni at Seiyr.” 15 And Esav said, “Let me now leave with you some of ha-am (the people) that are with me. And he (Yaakov) said, “Why do that? Let me find chen (grace, favour) in the eyes of adoni.” 16 So Esav returned that day on his derech walking to Seiyr. We must ask why Esav felt the need to leave men with Yaakov. This has an ominous tone to it that suggests his mistrust of his brother had not subsided and that his appeasement may not last. Therefore, Yaakov again employs the title my lord and offers a reasonable excuse for remaining. Yaakov may or may not have intended to eventually travel to Seiyr. Regardless, it seems his concern was with keeping to his calling to return to the land which the God of Beit-El had called him back to. He clearly had no intention of joining his brother. Yaakov knew that God had called him and his descendants to be set apart and had instructed Yaakov to return to the land of K’naan (Israel). Therefore, it’s likely that this is the primary reason for his using delay tactics with Esav. 17 And Ya’akov journeyed to Sukkot (shelters), and built a bayit (house), and made sukkot (shelters) for his mikneh (herds); therefore the shem (name) of ha-makom (the place) is called Sukkot (shelters). It is interesting that Yaakov built a bayit (house) for himself rather than a temporary dwelling (sukkah). The building of a house is more permanent, and yet he had not finished his wandering. Of course, the Hebrew bayit (home) may simply denote the fact that he had settled and made a home for himself. The name of the city Sukkot seems prophetic of the future festival of HaShem and its connection to the wanderings of the people of Israel. 18 And Ya’akov came in/to shaleim (wholeness, safety, peace, completeness) a city of Shechem (Back, shoulder), which is in eretz Kena’an (land of Canaan), when he came from Padan Aram (field of exaltation); and encamped before the city. 19 And he (Yaakov) bought a chelkat hasadeh (piece of land), where he had pitched there his ohel (tent), from the yad (hand) of the Bnei (sons) of Chamor (Male Ass) Avi (father) Shechem (Back, shoulder), for a hundred pieces of kesitah (a currency). The purchase of this parcel of land is one of three where the Torah vouches for Israel’s legitimate right of ownership. This is affirmed by the use of a common and uncontested currency. The other places are: The cave at Machpelah, brought by Avraham, and the site of the Temple, purchased by King David. 20 And he erected there a Mizbe’ach (Altar, from zabach: shed blood, slaughter, kill), and called it El Elohei Yisrael (God the God/Judge of Israel: one who overcomes in God). As we have learned previously, an altar, when unqualified by other terms, is by nature an altar of blood sacrifice (zabach). Therefore, we can infer from the text that Yaakov also offered a sacrifice there, acknowledging through the shedding of blood that HaShem is El Elohei Yisrael. In doing so Yaakov takes ownership of his new name and the land that is attached to it. © Yaakov Brown 2017 |
Yaakov BrownFounder of the Beth Melekh International Messiah Following Jewish Community, Archives
February 2024
|