The same fire that warms the righteous consumes the wicked. 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: “Ephraim has provoked bitter anger; and his blood will be left upon him, and his scorn Adonai will return to him.” Chapter 13 1 When Efrayim (doubly fruitful) spoke, reteit trembling. He nasa hu lifted himself up beYisrael in Israel, vayesham and incurred guilt baBa’al in Baal (master, lord, husband, Canaanite fertility deity) vayamot and died. “When Ephraim spoke, trembling.” This is most likely an allusion to Jeroboam trembling before Solomon in whose court he had served prior to his rebellion and the setting up of the northern kingdom (1 Kings 11:26). The text speaks of Ephraim (the kings of northern Israel) who exalted himself (pride) in Israel (the 10 northern tribes), in the past tense saying that he has already died as a result of his guilt in worshipping the Canaanite fertility deity Ba’al. In other words, the end of the northern kingship was predetermined by the idolatrous actions of her first king (1 Kings 12:25-33) and the subsequent actions of Ahab, who sinned in worship of Ba’al under the influence of Jezebel (1 Kings 16:31). With regard to the pride that caused Jeroboam to engage Ba’al Rashi says: “As soon as he assumed greatness and became guilty with Baal.” “‘he died’ i.e., Jeroboam’s dynasty was terminated, and so was Ahab’s dynasty. Jonathan renders: When one of the house of Ephraim would speak, fear would seize the nations. They were great among Israel, but when they sinned by worshipping idols, they were slain.” -Rashi There is strong textual evidence supporting an intrinsic link between the calf deities of Jeroboam, the calf of Sinai and the Ba’aliym (Canaanite deities). Therefore, it is inconsistent to make the claim that the tribes of the north considered the calves to be representations of YHVH. They clearly linked the calves to the false Canaanite deities the Ba’aliym. The fact that there were two calves (1 Kings 12:29) supports this polytheistic understanding, and blatantly contradicts a monotheistic Deity. Both the leaders of Israel (Sinai) [Exodus 32:4] and Jeroboam I [1 Kings 12:28] had appropriated the actions of YHVH and attributed them to other gods (calf deity of Egypt, calf deity representing Baal). The text teaches us that humble position does not necessarily denote a godly outcome. It is true that the Scripture says “humble yourselves before the Lord and He will lift you up” (Yaakov 4:10; 1 Peter 5:6), however, although Jeroboam was in a humble position before the Lord he had not humbled himself but had been appointed as servant to Solomon (1 Kings 11:26). Additionally Jeroboam lifted himself up (God allowed his kingship in response to Solomon’s disobedience, He did not appoint Jeroboam). His belief in his own strength over that of the Lord’s (in spite of the fact that the prophet Ahijah [1 Kings 11:26-39] had informed him that it was YHVH Who was allowing him to have dominion over the 10 northern tribes) resulted in idolatry. Note: In this verse “Israel” is used of the 10 tribes and not all of Israel (as some foolish commentators suggest). We know this because the kings of the north beginning with Jeroboam I lifted themselves up over the 10 tribes of the north only. The sin of the southern kingdom under Solomon was the worship of Ashtoret, Molek and Chemosh (1 Kings 11:4-8) and not the worship of Ba’al (who is not mentioned in the indictment against Solomon), as is the case concerning the indictment of Israel in the present verse. Therefore, the resulting death is that of the northern kingship and the exile of the northern tribes, and not, as some erroneously suggest, the death of all Israel (all 12 tribes). 2 And now yosifu they increase lachato their sin (miss the mark of God’s glory), vayasu and they have made lahem for them maseichah cast metal icons, mikasoam from silver, kitvunam skilfully made atzabiym idols ma’aseih charashiym kuloh lahem all from the work of an engraver, to them. Heim They omeriym say zovecheiy adam “sacrifice a man (human sacrifice) agaliym yishakun kiss the calves [alt. they say ‘a man sacrifices to calves he kisses!’]” This is a description of human sacrifices offered to man-made cast metal and silver plated idols. “They increase their sin” is an allusion to the fact that idolatry diversified and increased under the reign of Ahab and was maintained under the reigns of the pursuant kings of the north. In short the calf idol worship was merely the beginning. The silver mentioned tells us that idols other than the calves of Bethel and Dan (made of gold ref. 1 Kings 12:28) were being made. Sadly, human sacrifice to false gods was not alien to Israel (2 Kings 17:17; 23:10; Eze. 20:26; Mic. 6:7). “Kiss the calves” This is an allusion to worship of the two calf deities of Bethel and Dan. A “kiss” is a symbolic act of intimacy, homage, submission (Psalms 2:12; 1 Kings 19:18). Rashi notes: “Those who sacrifice man may kiss the calves The priests of Molech say to Israel, “Whoever sacrifices his son to the idol is worthy of kissing the calf” for he has offered him a precious gift. So did our Sages explain this in Sanhedrin (63b), and it fits the wording of the verse better than Jonathan’s translation.” -Rashi “Yet I reserve seven thousand in Israel—all whose knees have not bowed down to Baal and whose mouths have not kissed him.” -1 Kings 19:18 NIV 3 Lachein Therefore, yihu they have become ka’anan-boker like a morning cloud vechatal and like night mist (dew) mashkiym holeich and leave early, kemotz like chaff yesoeir driven by the storm winds migoren from the threshing floor, ucheashan and like smoke meiarubah from a chimney. Each of the examples given here are short lived, they appear and are gone soon after. The inference is that the northern kingdom and its kingship, will, historically speaking, be brief. 4 Ve’Anochiy And I Am YHVH the Lord Eloheycha your God/Judge, meieretz mitzrayim from the land of Egypt (double distress); veilohiym zulatiy lo and no gods but Me teida did you know umoshiya nor any other saviour. YHVH reminds Ephraim (northern tribes) that He is her God and Judge, and has been from before she existed as a people. He has been with Israel from her bondage in Egypt and is the One Who delivered her from her captivity. “no gods but Me” is in response to the false claim of Jeroboam I, who pointed out the calf idols and said “Behold your gods, Israel, that brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” (1 Kings 12:28). 5 Aniy I yedatiycha yes I knew you bamidbar in the desert be’eretz taluvot in the land of drought. YHVH was present, in the cloud of the presence, in provision of quail and manna, in provision of water, leading Israel through her desert journey, and continuing to do so even after she had rebelled against Him (Numbers 13 & 14). 6 Kemariytam Because of their pasture, vayisbau they became full, shaveu they were satisfied [alt. they became fully filled], vayarom and exalted with pride libam in their inner being (heart); al-kein shecheichuniy Therefore they’ve forgotten Me. Due to God’s provision and care Israel became comfortable, full, “well grazed”. Rather than give glory to God for their comfort as their forefather Abraham had done, Israel instead turned to other gods and appropriated God’s gifts naming them as evidence of the provision of false gods. 7 Vaehiy And I will become lahem to them kemo like shachal a lion; kenamer like a leopard I al-derech I will lie in wait in the way, ashur observing. YHVH previously depicted as the Shepherd of Israel (4:16) is now seen as a Lion Who, like a leopard, a bear, and other predatory wild animals, attacks the sheep and rips them apart (cf. Jeremiah 5:6). God is pictured figuratively as a Lion throughout Hebrew Scripture. YHVH as Lion is both a terrifying and comforting use of imagery. When Israel sins He comes as a Lion of discipline (Hosea 13:7-8), and when Israel repents He comes as a Lion of fierce protection and comfort (Hosea 11:10-11). “A lion has roared! Who will not fear? The Lord God has spoken! Who can do anything but prophesy?” -Amos 3:8 NASB “I yes, I will lie in wait in the way, (Ashur) observing.” The Lord will not only attack in discipline, He will lie in wait even as Israel is taken into exile. The Hebrew “ashur” observe is identical in spelling to the proper noun of the Empire. Thus, HaShem will ashur (observe) them on the way to Ashur. “by the way I will lurk Heb. אָשּׁוּר. Every instance of אָשּׁוּר in Scripture is punctuated with a “dagesh,” but this one is “weak,” since it is not a place name but it means, “I will lurk and ambush.” Comp. (Num. 24:17) “I see him (אֲשּׁוּרֶנוּ) but not near.” -Rashi Both the king of Assyria and Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon are referred to as lions scattering the sheep of Israel: “Israel is a scattered [a]flock, the lions have driven them away. The first one who devoured him was the king of Assyria, and this last one who has gnawed his bones is Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.” -Jeremiah 50:17 NASB 8 Efgesheim I will encounter them kidov like a bear shakul bereaved of her cubs, ve’ekra and tear open segor the enclosure libam of their inner being (hearts); veocheleim I will eat them sham there kelaviy like a lioness, chayat hasadeh a beast of the land tevake’eim that tears them to pieces. The imagery of the bear is ambiguous. HaShem comes as a bear bereaved of her cubs. Israel are His cubs, and at the same time are the abductors of His cubs (leading their own children astray) [cf. 2 Sam. 17:8; 2 Kings 2:24; Pr. 17:12]. Rashi rightly observes that HaShem is bereaved in the loss of His children the people of Israel and in the need for the disciplining of them. “as a bereaving bear Heb. שַׁכּוּל. Like שּׁוֹכֵל, as you say חָנּוּן, gracious, and רַחוּם, merciful, so שַּׁכּוּל, i.e., entirely attired with bereavements and ready to bereave people.” -Rashi “tear open the enclosure of their inner being (hearts)” This denotes the “heart surgery” that will be required in order to fix Israel’s disobedient heart of stone and make it a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 11:19). The heart is the core being and the centre of consciousness. Note that the Hebrew libam (hearts) is plural and that the text says “their”. Therefore the present text denotes God’s intention to open and convert the heart of rebellion at the centre of His people. “And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh,” -Ezekiel 11:19 NASB The Targum Yonatan supports this understanding: “My word shall meet them as a bear bereaved, and I will break the wickedness of their hearts…'' -Targum Yonatan 9 Shichetcha It is to your own destruction, Yisrael (overcome in God) Israel, kiy-viy ve’ezrecha that you are against Me, against your help. God would help Israel, but she has turned her back on Him. The northern kingdom will suffer the consequences of their own sin and therefore, “your own destruction”. The destruction that is coming is a direct consequence of Israel’s poor political decisions and abhorrent worship practices (sacrificing children to false gods). Israel has weakened herself. God will simply pull back His hand of protection and Israel’s discipline will be the fruit of her actions. As I have previously stated, sin, among other things, is self-harm. Now, as always, our help is in YHVH, and not of our own strength. 10 Ehiy Where is malkecha your king, eifo where? Veyoshiyacha And who will save you bechol-areycha in all your cities? Veshofeteycha And your judges/rulers, asher to whom amarta you said, “tenah-liy melech Give me a king vesariym and princes”? “Where is your king?” This can be understood as a rhetorical question relating to the withdrawing of YHVH’s (King of Israel) hand. It may refer to the death of Israel’s (the northern kingdom) last king. The former is the most likely given the follow up question “And who will save you?” In short, “Without Me (YHVH) Who will save you?” And where are “your judges?” God is Israel’s Judge. Israel had asked both God and her human judges and rulers for a king like the other nations (1 Sam. 8:5, 20), however, here the text is referring to the request of the northern tribes for a king other than the king of Judah (1 Kings 12:26). “I will be, where is your king? Heb. אֱהִי מַלְכְּךָ אֵפוֹא. Jonathan renders: Where is your king? But I say that it is unnecessary to interpret it other than its apparent meaning. I will be standing from afar to see where your king is, for I will make Myself see what your end will be, where your saviour is.” -Rashi 11 Eten-lecha I gave you melekh a king beapiy while My nostrils flared (fierce anger), ve’ekach and snatched him away be’evratiy in the excess of My wrath. The monarchy of the northern kingdom is considered apostate and rebellious by God Who had allowed it in His anger against Solomon’s sin but did not appoint its kings (1 Kings 12:16). Additionally the first king of all 12 tribes of Israel was given as a response to rebellion against God and that same king Saul likewise rebelled and was taken away by God (killed by the Philistines) [1 Sam. 8:7]. 12 Tzarur Bound up avon is the perversity of Efrayim; tzefunah chatato His hidden sin (missing the mark of God’s glory). The sin of Ephraim is more than a simple missing of the mark, it is intentional and perpetual perversity. It is bound up, kept for a time of punishment. Additionally, the depravity of Ephraim has bound him up. Perversity binds the one who practices it. It comes back upon the sinner. The fornicator contracts a deadly sexually transmitted disease, the murderer is killed by the relative of his victim, the liar tells so many lies that when he speaks the truth he is not believed to his hurt and so on. "the sins of the house of Ephraim are treasured up; they are reserved to punish all their offences;'' -Targum Yonatan "the sins of the house of Ephraim are treasured up; they are reserved to punish all their offences;'' -Job 14:17 NASB 13 Chevleiy The (umbilical) cord yoledah of childbirth yavou will wrap (come) around (on) lo him; hu-vein lo chacham He is not a wise son (brain oxygen starved at birth), kiy for eit-lo ya’amod it is not the time to remain, bemishbar in the breaking forth baniym of children [alt. the time for hesitation is not at the moment of birth]. First and foremost this is an analogy concerning new birth. Israel has been offered numerous opportunities to repent and be delivered into a new season of favour in right standing with God, but has instead resisted to her own hurt. The analogy speaks of a child who knows that it’s time to break forth from the womb but instead twists itself into a breech position and in doing so strangles itself on its own umbilical cord, starving itself of oxygen and impairing its cognitive development. In these circumstances the father of ancient Israel must come and forcibly move the baby into birthing position or cut open the mother performing a C-section delivery. In both cases there is great suffering as a consequence but the baby’s life is saved. Therefore, YHVH is explaining to His wayward people that they have placed themselves in a position where they are unable to see the predicament they have put themselves in, nor are they able to deliver themselves. "distress and trouble shall come upon them, as pains on a woman with child; he is not wise to know my fear:'' -Targum Yonatan 14 Miyad From the hand of sheol (the place of the departed) efdeim shall I ransom them? Mimavet From death egaleim I will redeem them! Ehiy Where are they? Devareycha Your plagues mavet Death, Ehiy Where are they? katavecha Of your destruction Sheol (the place of the departed), nocham repent! Yisateir It shall be concealed (covered) from mei’eiynay My eyes. “From the hand of sheol (the place of the departed) shall I ransom them?” The question is rhetorical, the answer is “Of course yes, I will ransom them!”, in fact the answer is given in the proceeding phrase. Note: Sheol is NOT the grave (kever). Sheol is the holding place of the departed. Nor are Biblical Israelites (Jews) buried under the earth. Therefore, kever (grave) in Biblical Hebrew means an above ground interment in either a tomb or by piling large rocks over the body above ground. Numerous false theologies regarding death and the afterlife can be avoided by this one simple piece of basic Hebrew understanding. “From death I will redeem them!” This is a promise, the answer to the previous question. YHVH will redeem Israel from death, not natural death (although He has often delivered Israel this way) but from eternal death. We know that at the time of Israel’s exile to Assyria many died, therefore, HaShem is not alluding to the temporal death of the body but to the eternal death of the soul/spirit, the neshama (transcendent consciousness). Hosea is prophesying the redemption that comes through Yeshua the King Messiah, through His atoning/covering blood and His resurrection living. The fullness of this promise culminating in the salvation of all the remnant of Israel (Romans 11:25-27). “Where are they? Your plagues Death, Where are they? Of your destruction Sheol (the place of the departed), repent! It shall be concealed (covered) from My eyes.” How does God conceal death? By covering it. Kippur, to cover, atone for. The beginning of the verse explains that the concealing of death will come about through “ransom” and “redemption”. Therefore, the covering and concealment of death from the eyes of HaShem will be made possible through vicarious sacrifice, a kaparah (atonement, sacrifice, reconciliation) that puts death to death permanently. Those who have met Yeshua the King Messiah know that He performed that atoning sacrifice by giving His sinless body into the hands of God and died on the Roman cross, rising again on the third day according to Scripture and thus offering redemption through the ransom He paid, perpetually to the Jew first, and also to the nations in perpetuity unto the judgement and life everlasting (Romans 1:16). It is this verse that Rav Shaul is quoting in 1 Corinthians 15:55: “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” (NIV) “I am He Who would ransom them from the clutches of the grave and redeem them from death…” -Rashi 15 Kiy For hu he bein among achiym brothers and sisters yafriy is fruitful, yavo kadiym ruach an east wind will come, YHVH (Mercy) The Lord mimidbar from the wilderness oleh comes up; ve’yeivosh mekoro and his fountain will become dry veyecherav and dried up ma’yano his spring; hu yishseh he will plunder otzar the treasure kol-keliy chemdah of all the precious vessels. “For he among brothers and sisters is fruitful” This refers to Ephraim and is the literal meaning of his name. Ephraim was prophesied to be fruitful (Gen. 48:10-20), and became a powerful tribe (Judges 8:1-3; 12:1-7; 1 Sam. 1:1-4). Prominent leaders such as Joshua (Josh. 24:30) and Jeroboam (1 Kings 11:26) came from Ephraim and the tribe was subsequently named for the 10 tribes of the north. “An east wind will come” This refers specifically to the wind of the Assyrian empire wielded by God as a sword of discipline (Hosea 5:13, 7:11, 8:9; 2 Kings 17:3). The Targum supports this understanding: "now will I bring against him a king strong as a burning wind;''-Targum Yonatan The king of Babylon is also referred to as a violent wind in Jeremiah 4:11. The “east wind” is used as a metaphor for false knowledge (Job 15:2), imminent onslaught (Isaiah 27:21), a scattering force (Jeremiah 18:17), it is a wind of discipline wielded by YHVH for the purpose of returning His people to Himself. “The Lord from the wilderness comes up;” The Lord is in control of all that is about to happen, He is wielding the winds of Assyria and Babylon. "by the word of the Lord, through the way of the wilderness shall he come up;'' -Targum Yonatan “And his fountain will become dry and dried up his spring” This is a metaphor for the drying up of Israel’s access to the living waters of YHVH poured out on the faithful among His people. The LORD is the fountain of Israel, who have access to His waters through repentance and return. “Lord, the hope of Israel, All who abandon You will be put to shame. Those who turn away on earth will be written down, Because they have forsaken the fountain of living water, that is the Lord.” -Jeremiah 17:13 NASB It is also a metaphor denoting the reduction of progeny over the period of exile (cf. Deut. 33:28). Israel (the sons of Jacob) are called the “fountain of Jacob” in Scripture (Psalms 68:26). The fear of the Lord is also called a fountain (Prov. 14:27). Therefore, this is an indication that Israel’s fear of God has dried up and resulted in Israel’s discipline. “He will plunder the treasure of all the precious vessels.” This does not concern the vessels of the Temple which were taken away over 100 years later by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Chronicles 36:7). Rather it refers to vessels associated with the worship of false gods, removed by the Assyrians when they invaded the northern territories of Israel. “he shall destroy the house of his treasures, and shall lay waste the city of his kingdom; he shall spoil the treasuries, all vessels of desire.'' -Targum Yonatan 16 [14:1] Tesham Shomeron (guardian mountain) Samaria will pay for her guilt (offense), kiy Because maretah she rebelled beiloheyah against her God. Bacherev In the sword yipolu they will fall oleleiyhem their infants yerutashu dashed to pieces vehariyotayv and their pregnant women yevukau will be ripped apart. Samaria was the head/capital of Ephraim (Isaiah 7:9) which was besieged for three years by Shalmaneser king of Assyria (the east wind); and eventually conquered and its inhabitants taken into exile (2 Kings 17:5) [Assyria invaded in 734 BCE then conquered and exiled its residents between 722 and 721 BCE]. Samaria was a hot bed of idolatry and vile sacrificial practices to false deities, a beacon of pagan worship. God would give a foreign idolater the strength to topple it and destroy its altars. Samaria’s guilt would come upon her own head because she rebelled against her God to her own harm. Chapter 14 1 [2] Shuvah Return, Yisrael, ad to YHVH the Lord Eloheycha your God/Judge, kiy for chashalta you have stumbled ba’avonecha in your depravity. "return to the fear of the Lord.'' -Targum Yonatan “to the Lord your God One taught in the name of Rabbi Meir: Return, O Israel, while He is still יהוה, with the Divine Attribute of Mercy; otherwise, He is אֶלֹהֶיךָ with the Divine Attribute of Justice, before the defense becomes the prosecution. [from Pesikta d’Rav Kahana, p. 164a]” -Rashi YHVH continues to offer a hand of mercy and calls Israel to return to Him and turn away from her depravity. The rhythm of Mercy, judgement and the fruit of judgement Mercy, continues just as it does in the words of Hosea’s contemporaries (Isaiah, Amos, Micah). "great is repentance, for it brings a man to the throne of glory;'' -Talmud Bavliy Yoma, fol. 86. 1. Rashi understands this as a warning to the southern kingdom of Judah (& Benjamin): “Return, O Israel You, who are in the land of Judah, lest what happens to Samaria happens to you. Therefore, the topics are juxtaposed. This can be compared to a king against whom a province rebelled. The king sent a general and commanded him to destroy it. That general was expert and deliberate. He said to them, “Take for yourselves days (sic); otherwise, I will do to you as I have done to such-and-such a province and to its allies, and to such-and-such a prefecture and to its allies.” Therefore it says, “Samaria shall be accounted guilty,” and then Scripture says: “Return, O Israel.” As is found in Sifrei in the section commencing. (Num. 25:1), “And Israel abode in Shittim.” -Rashi 2 [3] Kechu Take imachem with you devariym words, essences, things veshuvu and return el-YHVH to the Lord. Imru Say to Him, “Eilayv away kol-tisa avon take all depravity away vekach-tov and receive good uneshalemah and a covenant of peace, wholeness, wellbeing pariym sefateiynu fruit [calves] of our lips. The text uses “devariym” (words, essence, things) rather than ketuviym (written words) or Torah (Instruction) because God is admonishing Israel to carry and walk in His living Word that is His written Word in action, the Word not only the Torah but of the prophets and writings, the right action of faith in Him, Halakhah (the way we walk). Yeshua the King Messiah is revealed as the Living Word (Davar) Essence of the Universe Who is both Author and Goal of the TaNaKH (Bible) [John 1; Romans 10:4]. We note that only in the Word is Israel able to return to YHVH (Mercy). “Say to Him, “take all depravity away and receive good and a covenant of peace, wholeness, wellbeing fruit [calves] of our lips.” This is an instruction to the people to ask God to take away all their iniquity through a covenant that brings peace. This is a reference to the blood sacrifice of Yeshua the King Messiah and the covenant of peace that His shed blood establishes. Only by receiving it can Israel be saved from the rightful punishment for her sin. We note that this covenant becomes an act of worship that overflows from her lips, that is, the testimony of salvation through Yeshua the King Messiah. This is why the ambiguity occurs in the Hebrew text. The Hebrew prym can mean either the plural of fruit peri or of calf par. This is because the author of the prophetic work is conveying the Divine Word of God indicating both sacrifice and the testimony of that same sacrifice as it is heard on the lips of those who receive it. The ambiguity therefore, conveys an intended convergent meaning. “and teach [us the] good [way] Heb. וְקַח-טוֹב. And teach us the good way. Another explanation: The few good deeds in our hands take in Your hand and judge us accordingly. And so does David say (Psalms 17:2): “Let my sentence come forth from before You, may Your eyes behold the right.” Another explanation: And accept good And accept confession from us, as it is said (Psalms 92:2): “It is good to confess to the Lord. and let us render [for] bulls that we should have sacrificed before you, let us render them with the placation of the words of our lips.” -Rashi 3 [4] Ashur (a step) Assyria lo yoshiyeinu will not save us, al-sus lo nirkav on horses we will not ride; velo-nomar and nor will we say od again, ‘eloheiynu Our god’ lema’aseih To the work yadeiynu of our hands; asher-becha For in You yerucham there is mercy, compassion for yatom the fatherless.” These words continue the proposed confession of repentant Israel at a future time post exile. Assyria to whom the northern kings had turned would not only not save them but would in fact conquer and subjugate them. “Assyria shall not save us Say this also before Him, “We no longer seek the aid of man, neither from Assyria nor from Egypt.” -Rashi “nor will we say again, ‘Our god’ To the work of our hands” Part of Israel’s repentance involves turning their backs on all false idols. I am reminded of the son of a Hindu High Priest who came to faith in our community and was being immersed (tevilah) in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. He excitedly answered my question to him, “Do you choose to worship of the God of Israel alone, do you forsake the worship of all other Gods? Do you acknowledge that Yeshua the King Messiah is Imanu with us El God?” his response was a resounding “I do!” When we turn to God in Messiah we are in one sense taking a wedding vow, “I cleave to You alone, forsaking all others…” “For in You there is mercy, compassion for the fatherless.” An acknowledgement that only the Greatest of father’s the Creator of the universe can truly understand and gift compassion for the fatherless. 4 [5] Erpa I will heal, repair meshuvatam their turning away, ohaveim I will love them nedavah freely, voluntarily, kiy Because shav afiy turned away is My flaring nostril (anger) mimenu from them. “I will heal, repair their turning away” This is a certain promise. YHVH will heal, repair, cure Israel of her turning away. In short, turning away from God is an illness that leads to death. Through His Son the King Messiah He has provided the cure for that illness and with it wholeness and eternal life. “I will love them freely, voluntarily” The Calvinists avoid this verse because it describes free will as an attribute of God and is therefore one of many Scriptures that refute their false supposition. In fact, without free will there is no love, only mindless robotic subjugation. “Because turned away is My flaring nostril (anger) from them.” God will yet turn away His wrath from His people because His purpose has always been to discipline them unto repentance and restoration. “I will remedy their backsliding Said the prophet: So has the Holy Spirit said to me. After they say this before Me, I will remedy their backsliding, and I will love them with My charitable spirit. Although they do not deserve the love, I will love them charitably since My wrath has turned away from them.” -Rashi 5 [6] Eyeh It will be chatal like night mist (dew) leYisrael to Israel; kashoshanah He will blossom like the lily, veyach And he will cast forth sharashayv his roots kalevanon like Lebanon (whiteness from lavan). “It will be like night mist (dew) to Israel” Here, it’s the wrath of God that will disperse like the dew. This is the counterpoint to Ephraim’s temporal reign and Israel’s (northern tribes) fading prosperity in the land (v.3). “He will blossom like the lily, and he will cast forth his roots kalevanon like Lebanon (whiteness, from lavan).” Whiteness, purity, is multiplied here (Lilly [white] & Lebanon [whiteness]). This is an allusion to the purity that will blossom and put down roots as a result of the salvation that comes through Yeshua the King Messiah from YHVH the Deliverer of Israel. "they shall dwell in the strength of their land, as a tree of Lebanon, which sends forth its branch.'' -Targum Yonatan There is also a picture of strength such as that of the strong well rooted trees of the northern region (not the modern state of Lebanon). “and it shall strike I.e. the dew shall strike its roots and cause them to prosper like the Lebanon like the roots of the trees of the Lebanon, which are large.” -Rashi 6 [7] Yeilechu And he will send out yonekotayv his young branches, vihiy like chazayit an olive tree hodo in its beauty, vereiyach lo and his aroma kalevanon like Lebanon (whiteness). "they shall multiply or increase with sons and daughters:'' -Targum Yonatan When Israel returns to HaShem through the King Messiah, he will send out his branches like an olive tree and his aroma will draw the nations to the purity (Lebanon/whiteness) of Messiah in him. This has a correlation to the olive tree imagery of Rav Shaul (Romans 11). “Its branches shall go forth Sons and daughters shall increase and it shall be Their beauty shall be like the beauty of the menorah of the Temple, and their fragrance like the fragrance of the incense.” -Rashi 7 [8] Yashuvu yosheveiy They shall return and dwell vetzilo in His shadow yechayu they will revive dagan grain veyifrechu and sprout forth chagafen like a grape vine. Zichro keyeiyn His remembrance, memorial like wine levanon of Lebanon. “They shall return and dwell in His shadow” This is a reference to God and is also seen by our ancient Jewish forebears as a reference to the King Messiah. Therefore, acknowledging an intrinsic link between the two. "and they shall be gathered out of the midst of their captivity, they shall dwell under the shadow of their Messiah;'' -Targum Yonatan “they will revive grain and sprout forth like a grape vine. His remembrance, memorial like wine of Lebanon.” Redeemed Israel (chosen, ethnic, religious, empirical) will be revived in Messiah and produce fruit, the fruit that Ephraim should have produced but did not. The true King will be of Judah and will be the Vine Who breaks forth and spreads in righteousness. His Name/Remembrance will be like whiteness/purity, the strength of the trees of Lebanon (the northern mountain ranges of ancient Israel). “its fragrance shall be like the wine of Lebanon Jonathan renders: Like the remembrance of the blasts of the trumpets over the old wine poured for libations in the Temple. For they would blow the trumpets over the libations when the Levites would recite the song.” -Rashi 8 [9] Efrayim, mah-liy od says what more have I to do la’atzabiym with idols? Aniy I aniytiy I answer va’ashurenu and watch over you. Aniy kivrosh I am like a juniper ra’anan luxuriant, green. Mimeniy From Me peryecha your fruit nimtza is attained. "they of the house of Israel shall say, ‘what is it to us to serve idols anymore?’ ‘I by my Word will receive the prayer of Israel, and will have mercy on him:’'' -Targum Yonatan Redeemed Ephraim (kings and tribes of the north) who will come under the kingship of Judah over all Israel, will say “What more do I have to do with idols?” In short, “I’m forever done with idolatry!” “Ephraim will say, ‘What more do I need to follow the images?’ And they will turn away from idolatry. I will answer him I will answer him from his trouble.” -Rashi “I, yes, I answer and watch over you.” YHVH will answer redeemed Ephraim in her repentance and say “I hear and answer you with mercy and protection!” “I am like a juniper luxuriant, green. From Me your fruit is attained.” This is the only instance in the Tanakh where God is figuratively compared to a tree and it is not a cedar but a juniper (a fruit bearing evergreen tree). We note that the fruit of redeemed Ephraim is not of Ephraim but of God. Ephraim in her sinful state bore fruit of destruction but through the King Messiah she has been created anew to bear the fruit of God’s character. “Therefore if anyone be in Messiah, he is a new creation: the old has gone; behold, pay attention, all things have become new.” -2 Corinthians 5:17 (Author’s translation) Our righteousness is in God and not of ourselves. Our right actions proceed from the Spirit of God in us through the King Messiah Yeshua. 9 [10] Miy Who chacham is wise, veyavein let him understand, discern, consider eileh these things; Navon understand, ve’yeida’eim and they will know, comprehend. Kiy For yeshariym straight, right darcheiy are the ways YHVH of the Lord (Mercy), vetzadikiym and the righteous ones yeilechu will walk vam in them, ufoshe’iym and rebels, transgressors yikashelu shall stumble vam in them. This final challenge is issued to all who have ears to hear. It is much like the former challenge of HaShem to the tribes of Israel as they entered the land: 15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, and death and evil. 16 What I am commanding you today is to love Adonai your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His mitzvot, statutes and ordinances. Then you will live and multiply, and Adonai your God will bless you in the land you are going in to possess. 17 But if your heart turns away and you do not listen, but are drawn away and bow down to other gods and worship them, 18 I tell you today that you will certainly perish! You will not prolong your days on the land, where you are about to cross over the Jordan to go in to possess. 19 “I call the heavens and the earth to witness about you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Therefore choose life so that you and your descendants may live, 20 by loving Adonai your God, listening to His voice, and clinging to Him. For He is your life and the length of your days, that you may dwell on the land that Adonai swore to your fathers—to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob—to give them.” -D’varim (Deuteronomy) 30:15-20 TLV “Who is wise and will understand these Who among you is wise and will ponder to put his heart to all these and return to Me?” -Rashi “Who is wise, let him understand, discern, consider these things; understand, and they will know, comprehend.” Only those who take the time to pause and consider these things will gain the understanding required to act on the warning of God in repentance. Today many pass on information they have no real knowledge of, spreading rumours and falsehoods on social media, email, message boards and the like without bothering to consider, discern, investigate and learn the truth of a mater. We would do well to take pause here and allow the Spirit of God to expose our hearts, and with sober judgement to access the state of our being and repent. “For straight, right are the ways YHVH of the Lord (Mercy), and the righteous ones will walk in them, and rebels, transgressors shall stumble in them.” To the wicked the Instruction/Ways of YHVH (the Torah) are an indictment that condemns them to death, but that same Way/Instruction (Torah) points the righteous to its Goal Yeshua (Romans 10:4). How does one know that he is redeemed? The evidence of Messiah in us is seen in our halakhah (the way we walk), “For straight, right are the ways of Mercy (YHVH), and the righteous ones will walk in them!” The same fire that warms the righteous consumes the wicked. Copyright 2021 Yaakov Brown If you keep the Shabbat out of obligation you have failed to keep the commandment. Obligation is hard work, there is no rest (Shabbat) in obligation. The Coptic New Testament begins with the book of Yochanan (John), and for good reason, both the first book of the Tanakh (OT) Genesis and the Gospel of John begin with the same words, “In the beginning”. Both the beginning of creation and the new beginning have their origin in God, Father, Son and Spirit.
בְּרֵאשִׁית הָיָה הַדָּבָר וְהַדָּבָר הָיָה אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים וְהוּא הַדָּבָר הָיָה אֱלֹהִים׃ 1:1 הבשורה על-פי יוחנן בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ 1:1 בראשית Within the Hebrew text of the first verse of both books appears the sign of the definite direct object “את” which is not translated in English versions but is a contracted form of the Hebrew word “אות” meaning “miraculous sign”. Yochanan (John) 1:1 explains not what but Who the sign “את” is. בְּרֵאשִׁית הָיָה הַדָּבָר וְהַדָּבָר הָיָה אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים וְהוּא הַדָּבָר הָיָה אֱלֹהִים׃ 1:1 הבשורה על-פי יוחנן בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ 1:1 בראשית At the goal (end) of the HaBrit HaChadashah (New Testament) we read the words of Yeshua: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” -Yeshua (Revelation 22:13) The Hebrew equivalent reads: ““I am the Aleph “א” and the Tav “ת”, the first and the last, the beginning and the goal.” -Yeshua (Revelation 22:13) Yeshua is the Aleph and the Tav, the Author and the Goal of the Torah. He is the Author of the beginning, the all-existing God, the Son (John 1:1), present as the creating Word, and the sign to all creation (Genesis 1:1). He is the Author and the Spirit of the Torah, the Word (Deuteronomy 30:14). He is also the Goal of the Torah: “For Messiah is the Goal of the Torah for righteousness to everyone who believes.” –Rav Shaul’s Letter to the Roman Believers 10:4 If we fail to understand that Yeshua is “את” the Author and Goal of Torah (Not just the books of Moses but all of the Instruction of God), then we will fail to properly interpret and understand the written word of God (Tanakh [OT] & HaBrit HaChadashah [NT]). We must accept that God does not change His mind (Num. 23:19), and that the King Messiah Yeshua has come not to remove or change the Torah but to fill it up, illuminate it (Matthew 5:17). God Does NOT Change His Mind: It is impossible for an omniscient (all-knowing) God to change His mind. In spite of mistranslations into English, the Scripture in its original language affirms God’s omniscience (All Knowing Nature) Exodus 32:14 “So the Lord changed his mind about the terrible disaster he had threatened to bring on his people.” NLT “And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” KJV What the Hebrew text actually says, a literal translation: “The YHVH sought to console concerning the evil He had declared to do to His people.” “God is not a man who lies, or a son of man who changes his mind! Does He speak and then not do it, or promise and not fulfil it?” -Bamidbar (Numbers) 23:19 TLV Yeshua Did NOT Remove or Change the Torah: “17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Torah or the Prophets! I did not come to abolish, but to fulfil. 18 Amen, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or serif shall ever pass away from the Torah until all things come to pass. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of *these commandments, and teaches others the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever keeps and teaches them, this one shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven..” -Mattisiyahu (Matthew) 5:17-19 TLV *Note, that in the context of this passage all the commandments pretexted by the words “*these commandments” in the proceeding verses are moral commandments (incumbent on all human beings). Yeshua is NOT saying that commandments of distinction given specifically to Jews (ethnic, religious, chosen, set apart) are incumbent on Gentiles. This is a grave misunderstanding of the text and of first century Jewish theology. Understanding Torah: The Torah (Books of Moses) are divided into three distinct categories:
Historical Narrative: The story of creation, humanity, and the chosen people Israel. Moral law: Laws that expose the lawlessness of all human beings. Laws of Distinction: Laws commanded specifically to ethnic, religious, chosen, set apart Israel (the Jewish people), incumbent on Israel alone for the purpose of setting the Jewish people apart unto the goal of all things. Purpose of Torah Distinctions: Historical Narrative: Teaches all humanity that God is Creator and King of all things, and that He has chosen an ethnic people as His everlasting possession. Moral law: Exposes the lawlessness of all human beings. These laws are incumbent on all people. To those without Messiah these laws bring condemnation, and to those who receive Messiah these same laws are the loving instruction of the Father. Laws of Distinction: Laws commanded in order to set ethnic Israel apart as a people and possession belonging to God. These laws are NOT incumbent on people of other nations, Messiah followers or not. Some Examples of Moral Laws and Laws of Distinction: Moral Laws: • You shall have no other gods before Me! • You shall not make graven images… nor bow down to worship them • You shall not misuse the Lord’s Name (YHVH) • Honor your Father and Mother • You shall not Murder • You shall not commit adultery • You shall not steal etc. Laws of Distinction: • The children of Israel shall keep the Shabbat throughout their generations… • Kosher food (Lev.11) • Don’t cut the hair around the sides of your head… • Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together. • Tefillin (Ex. 13:9, 16) • Tzitzit (Numb. 15:38) Moral Law: From the earliest days our Rabbis understood that only the moral laws were applicable to non-Jews. The only exception was when non-Jews joined and lived within the ethnic Jewish community and eventually married into Israel’s bloodline (e.g. Exodus 20:8-10). Knowing this, and being guided by the Holy Spirit the early Jewish Fathers of the body of believers (Ecclesia) required nothing more of the Gentile believers other than adherence to four primary laws which summed up the Noachide (moral laws) of the Torah (Acts 15:1-35; 21:24-25). “Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke (laws of distinction) on the neck of the Gentile disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Yeshua, just as they will.” -K’fa (Peter) Acts 15:10-11 “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” -Rav Shaul (Paul) Galatians 3:10-11 Sadly, many Messianic Jews and Gentiles decontextualize and seek to reinterpret the following words, written by Jews, followers of the King Messiah Yeshua, the fathers of our faith communities. A Religious Community that Does Not Soberly Critique Itself is a Cult! Laws of Distinction Have Never Been Incumbent on Non-Jews: Among Messianic believers today, and in particular among so called Messianic Gentile believers (Christians who hate being called Christians), there is a growing number who seek to impose laws of distinction (intended specifically for Jews, and not for Gentiles) upon Gentile Christians. They use spiritual blackmail in conjunction with decontextualized Scriptures in order to guilt-trip others into focusing on law observance rather than on Yeshua our King Messiah. In doing so they commit the same error that early believers perpetuated until the refutation of their false practices by the Rav Shaul HaShaliach (Paul the Apostle) [Galatians 3:10-11]. One of the great and tragic ironies of the zealous law keepers in the Messianic and Hebrew roots movements today, is that by insisting Gentile Christians keep the laws of distinction (intended specifically for Jews, and not for Gentiles) they are quit literally practicing the “Replacement Theology (Continuationism, Successionism etc.)” that they themselves claim to detest. “For freedom, Messiah has set us free—so stand firm then, and do not become burdened again by the yoke of slavery.” -Rav Shaul HaShaliach Letter to the Galatian Believers 5:1 What did Peter the Apostle call a “yoke” that Jews have been unable to “bear”? The yoke of slavery Shaul refers to concerns the obligatory observance of the laws of distinction (commanded to Jews alone). This is the same yoke Peter refers to in Acts 15:10-11) Is the Shabbat Incumbent on Gentiles? Among the most prominent misteaching's of zealous law keepers in the Messianic and Hebrew roots movements is the insistence that Gentile Christians are obligated to keep the Sabbath and cease worshipping on Sunday (First Day of the week) [A day they claim to be a day attributed to Sun worship, as if days belong to anyone or anything other than God our Creator]. When these law keeping zealots say that Sunday worship is wrong/idolatry, they are in fact impugning the character of the disciples of Yeshua and both the Jewish and Gentile believers of the early Ecclesia (body of believers). In fact, the disciples of Messiah gathered together on a Sunday only days after Yeshua’s crucifixion and continued to gather regularly on the first day of the week (Sunday) [John 20]. “On the first day of the week (Sunday), when we were gathered together to break bread, Shaul (Paul) talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.” –Acts 20:7 Observe the Day or Not, Unto the Lord: “One person esteems one day over another while another judges every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes that day does so to the Lord. The one who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and the one who abstains, abstains to the Lord, and he gives thanks to God.” –Romans 14:5-6 TLV Rav Shaul wrote these words to a mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles who were arguing over the keeping of days and over kosher eating among other things. The Sabbath was one of the days in question. Rav Shaul’s admonishment clearly understands Gentile believers as being free from the obligation to keep the Shabbat commandment. His emphasis is on doing all in and toward God and NOT on law keeping. We are fools to argue over the keeping of days while worshipping a God Who is beyond days! What does “Keep the Shabbat” Mean? The phrase “keep the Shabbat” (Ex. 31:13) in Hebrew does not mean what many think it does. The Hebrew root “שמר” shamar means to guard, to keep safe, to protect from defilement. In the Beit Midrash we’re taught that we are to Shomeir HaShabbat guard, protect the Shabbat. We will learn that the ethnic, religious children of Israel are given the Shabbat as a sign “אות” upon them alone, and that they are to “guard, protect, keep” it from defilement, desecration etc. throughout their generations (Exodus 31:16-17). The Command to Keep Ha-Shabbat (the Sabbath) is a Law of Distinction: The principle of regular rest is for the good of all humanity but the specific command to rest on the Shabbat is given to Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical, chosen) as a generational sign “אות” on the ethnic people of Israel, a sign between ethnic Israel (the Jewish people) and God (Exodus 31:16-17 ). The command to keep the Sabbath day is NOT incumbent on Gentile believers! Shabbat is a Sign “אות” Between God & the Jews (Israel) “So Bnei-Yisrael is to keep the Shabbat, to observe the Shabbat throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign “אות” between Me (YHVH) and Bnei-Yisrael forever, for in six days ADONAI made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He ceased from work and rested.’” -Exodus 31:16-17 (TLV) *As observant Jews we pray this very Scripture as part of the “V’shamru” (And You Shall Guard) prayer every Shabbat. There are those who misuse the following passage to support general Gentile Christian observance of Shabbat: “Remember Yom Shabbat, to keep it holy. You are to work six days, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Shabbat to ADONAI your God. In it you shall not do any work—not you, nor your son, your daughter, your male servant, your female servant, your cattle, nor the outsider that is within your gates.” Exodus 20:8-10 (TLV) Note that this commandment, given specifically to Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical) is to be observed by all Jews but only by foreigners (Gentiles) who live within the Jewish community: specifically among the people of Israel on their way to and within the land of Israel. This does not apply to today’s Christians who worship the God of Israel but live outside of Israel and further still, outside of the Jewish communities within the diaspora (dispersion). *Attending a Messianic or Hebrew roots congregation does not constitute living in the Jewish community. The commandment to keep Shabbat is specifically a sign “אות” on the ethnic, religious chosen people of Israel (Jews): “So Bnei-Yisrael is to keep the Shabbat, to observe the Shabbat throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between Me (YHVH) and Bnei-Yisrael forever, for in six days ADONAI made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He ceased from work and rested.’” -Exodus 31:16-17 (TLV) We note that the Shabbat is a sign between God and the ethnic, religious people of Israel (Jews). It is not a sign upon the nations. Therefore, those Gentiles who appropriate this sign under obligation are literally practicing Replacement Theology. Some seek to use Yeshua’s words from Mark’s Gospel to support the idea that Gentile Christians must keep the Shabbat. However, even if one ignores the context of Yeshua’s words the fact remains that He spoke of the purpose of rest and not of obligation to keep the Shabbat commandment given specifically to the Jewish people. “the Shabbat was made for man and not man for the Shabbat” (Mark 2:23-28) The only “men” present were Jews. Further, He used an example from the Tanakh (OT) in which only Jews participated. If we interpret His words to apply to all human beings, we are ignoring the historical and Scriptural context of what He said and are also impugning His character by suggesting that He contradicted the Torah (Exodus 31:16-17) of which He is the Author. To the contrary, He is making a drash (comparative teaching) on a commandment given specifically to Israel (ethnic, religious , empirical) and not to the nations. Thus, when He says “man” He means “man” within the context of Israel (Jews) and not humanity in general. If we go further and interpret His words figuratively to apply the Shabbat to all nations, we must by reason of logical progression be speaking of the eternal Shabbat at the end of the age, that is the Olam Haba (world to come) [Hebrews 4:9] and not to the literal weekly Shabbat commanded specifically to the Jews. All figurative interpretation must submit to the plain meaning of the text. In the context of Yeshua’s words the command to keep Shabbat is not made incumbent on Gentile Christians, (who did not yet exist at the time Yeshua spoke), rather He was explaining to the Pharisees that the sign of the Shabbat upon Israel’s “men” was one of rest and restoration through the work of God and was not a form of rest purchased by either the restraint or the actions of Jewish “men” (and women). That is, not by obligation. All this is done to keep the Shabbat as a sign on the ethnic, religious Jewish people until the end of the age, when: “‘it will come to pass, that from one New Moon to another, and from one Shabbat to another, all flesh will come to bow down before Me,’ says ADONAI.” -Isaiah 66:23 (TLV) The prophet Isaiah is clearly prophesying a time yet future (it will come), and is not, as some suggest, inferring that all nations should keep the Shabbat in the present age. This is also seen in Zechariah 14:16 where, at the end of the age (not now), the survivors of the defeated nations will repent and go up to Jerusalem to join with ethnic, religious Israel in celebration of the festival (signs) placed on the Jews. Neither passage denotes a requirement for weekly Shabbat observance by Gentile Christians. When Yeshua says “The Son of Man is Lord of the Shabbat” He is alluding to the Messianic title given to the Messiah in the prophecy of Daniel (Dan. 7:13-14) in order that He might be recognised as the Messiah by His disciples and any among the Pharisees who might understand and repent. While it is true that He is the Messiah over all men, we do not glean this understanding from the context of Mark 2:23-28. “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God,” –Hebrews 4:9 Some decontextualize and misuse this Scripture to promote obligatory Sabbath observance. They are in grave error. The context of Hebrews 3 and 4 concerns Israel’s escape from bondage in Egypt and her subsequent rest within the promised land (HaAretz), which is a figure for the Olam Haba (World to come). The Kohen (priest) who wrote Hebrews is making a drash using Israel’s rest from bondage and revealing the future rest for all believers in the Olam Haba (World to come), which he calls a “Sabbath rest”. Therefore, the Sabbath rest that remains for all the people of God is the Olam Haba (World to come), and not the temporary weekly Sabbath observed in the sin affected world. Misusing Scripture is wrong, but worse still is misusing Scripture in order to force obligation and bondage upon other believers. This is Abhorrent to God and contrary to the Gospel of our Messiah. Those who teach that Gentile Christians must keep the Shabbat are in fact teaching Gentile Christians to usurp and appropriate one of the signs that sets ethnic, religious, chosen, empirical Israel (the Jewish people) apart from the nations. Ironically, as I’ve said previously, in doing so, “Hebrew roots Christians” and so called “Messianic Gentiles” are literally practicing the “Replacement Theology” they claim to detest. I stand in opposition to those movements who seek to place Gentile Christians under bondage to commandments that were never incumbent upon them. The Shabbat, like the other commandments given to distinguish Israel (the Jewish people) as a unique people, is not a moral commandment and is therefore not incumbent on humanity as a whole. According to the Scripture it is a commandment, a sign, given to and upon the chosen ethnic, religious people of Israel. Any attempt to appropriate it is practiced in direct opposition to the Scripture, and therefore, in opposition to the Author of the Scripture. At Beit Melekh we are Jews and Gentiles who together are followers of Yeshua the King Messiah. He has set us free for freedom, that we might not return again to bondage(Galatians 5:1). This is not to say that Gentile Christians can’t choose to keep the Shabbat as free members of the body of Messiah Yeshua, rather it is to say that the weekly Shabbat is NOT incumbent upon Gentile Christians. The principle of regular rest is for all human beings but the specific command to keep the weekly Shabbat is a sign upon the ethnic, religious, chosen, empirical people of Israel, the Jewish people, throughout their generations (Exodus 31:16-17 ). Those who keep the letter of the law at the expense of the Spirit of the Law will be judged according to the Law and found wanting. If you keep the Shabbat out of obligation you have failed to keep the commandment. Obligation is hard work, there is no rest (Shabbat) in obligation. We wish you a Messiah filled Shabbat of rest, peace and freedom. May you know the present peace of the King Messiah Yeshua and understand that He is enough. Yeshua is our message! “You say that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into this world, to testify, bear witness to the immutable truth. Everyone who is of the immutable truth hears in My voice.” The beginning of the so called “Passion Narrative” John 18:1-19:42 (Matthew 26:30-27:61; Mark 14:26-15:47; Luke 22:39-23:56)
Introduction: Yeshua’s words to the disciples following the Pesach (Passover) Seder (John 13) and prior to crossing the Kidron valley to Gat Sheminim (Gethsemane), which included an open prayer to the Father concerning protection and reassurances of purpose, now come to a conclusion. What follows takes place across the Kidron valley (east of Jerusalem) in the garden of Gethsemane at the base of the Mount of Olives. It’s interesting to note that the author of Yochanan’s gospel doesn’t include Yeshua’s anguished prayers in the garden or the inability of the disciples to stay awake and keep watch. However the reference to the cup of suffering (v.11) corresponds to the prayers in the garden (Luke 22:42). John’s gospel which has been focused from the beginning on the all existing nature of the Messiah now reveals “God with us” as Lamb to slaughter. The impressive supernatural occurrence that results from Yeshua’s powerful declaration of identity in response to those seeking to arrest Him affirms His authority and illuminates further the convergent theme of Creator as Word having entered His creation. Among other things the gospel writer focuses on the actions of his dear friend Kefa (Peter), a man who is fiercely protective of Yeshua and also suffers great emotional and spiritual turmoil over the denial of Him. The motives of Pilate are illuminated in John’s gospel which implicitly alludes to his involvement in the arrest of Yeshua (v.3, 12), his nonchalant attitude toward Yeshua’s kingship (v.37-38) and his provocation of the Judean leaders (v.39). It’s worth noting that history records Pilate as a man who sought to provoke the Jews in order to justify harsh military response. He was not the innocent bystander that so many Christian commentators make him out to be. 1 Yeshua[H] (Iesous[G], Joshua, YHVH Saves, Jesus) spoke (epo[G]) these words, then He went forth with His disciples (talmidim[H]) over the valley (ravine) of the Kidron[H] (dark, from the root “kadar” to mourn) , where there was a garden (Gat Sheminim[H], press of olives), in which He entered with His disciples (talmidim[H]). 2 Now Y’hudah[H] (Praise, Judas Iscariot) also, who was betraying Him, knew the place, for Yeshua[H] had often met there with His disciples (talmidim[H]). “These words” refers to the words taught, spoken, prayed over the last several preceding chapters (from chapter 13 to the present chapter) as Yeshua and His talmidim had walked through Jerusalem from the location of the Passover Seder meal, to the other side of the city (the east side). The Kidron was known at least in part as a valley of refuse. The Levites had once cast the unclean things which had been cleaned out of the Temple into the Kidron valley at Hezekiah’s command to cleanse the Temple of idolatrous elements (2 Chronicles 29:16). There is a correlation here. Yeshua’s death and resurrection will ultimately cleanse the Temple to such a degree that God Himself and the Lamb will dwell in place of the Temple (Rev. 21:22). “Kidron” means “darkness and mourning” and may be the physical valley that acts as figure for the “valley of the shadow of death” described in Psalm 23.“Gat Sheminim” means “press of olives (crushing of olives), an olive press”. It is fitting that Yeshua walk through “the valley of the shadow of death” to that place where He would firmly decide to drink the cup of wrath that the Father had given Him to drink. As a result of Yeshua being crushed He would resurrect, return to the Father and pour out the oil of His Spirit upon all who would believe. There is a correlation to be made between the crossing of the Kidron by Yeshua and His disciples and the crossing of the Kidron made by king David and his retinue (2 Samuel 15:23). In the wake of Absalom’s betrayal of David (a prefigure of Y’hudah’s betrayal of Yeshua), David crosses the valley of darkness and mourning (Kidron) and into exile. In some respects this is what Yeshua is doing here: He will go into a temporary exile through death, but like David before Him He will return a conquering King and Ruler. Gethsemane was a favourite meeting place of Yeshua and His talmidim. It was located not far from Bethany (the town of Lazarus, Mary and Martha) and was close to the city of Jerusalem (approx. 2.5 km away) so as to be a convergent point in the many travels of Yeshua and His talmidim. There is another correlation here with respect to the garden. Just as the first Adam received sin into the world in Gan Eden (the garden of Eden [delight]) so too the Last Adam Yeshua (1 Corinthians 15:45) firmly decided to bring about the removal of sin from this world in and through Gat Sheminim (the pressing of olives [oil]). 3 Y’hudah[H] (Praise, Judas Iscariot) then, having received the 600-1000 strong cohort (speira[G], spiral) and servants from the chief priests (archiereus[G], hakohaniym[H]) and the P’rushiym[H] (Separate, distinct, chased ones, Pharisees), came there with torches (phanos[G]) and oil lamps (lampas[G]) and weapons. “Speira” describes a Roman cohort. This means that Pilate was at least tacitly involved in the arrest of Yeshua. The cohort could not have been deployed without his full knowledge and approval. The Jewish Temple guard was smaller in number and thus could not qualify as a “cohort”. Further the cohort is said to be accompanied by the servants of the chief priests (predominantly Sadducees, some of whom would have been Temple guards) and representatives of the Pharisees (the sect controlling religious politics among the wider Jewish community). The Pharisees did not have their own guard, they were there purely as religious leaders. The full number of those who came to arrest Yeshua was approximately 1200. Matthew’s gospel calls those who came to arrest Yeshua “a great multitude” armed with “swords and long spears” (Matt. 26:47). 4 So Yeshua[H], seeing, perceiving (eido[G]) all the things that were coming upon Him, went forth and said to them, “Whom do you seek?” Yeshua had already seen these things completed outside of time and space in His position as Word Essence within the Godhead (John 1:1). 17 For this reason the Father (ho Pater[G], ha Av[H]) loves (oheiv[H]) Me, because I lay down My life, breath, soul existence (et-nafshiy[H]) so that I may take it up again. 18 No one, nothing (oudeis[G]) has taken it away from Me or separated (apo[G]) Me from it, but I lay it down on My own initiative, in My Own power, by My Own choice (exousia[G]). I have authority, power, choice (exousia[G]) to lay it down, and to take it up again. This commandment (entole[G]) I received from My Father (Pater mou[G], Aviy[H]).” -Yochanan (John) 10:17-18 The Messiah was prophesied to lay down His life for the people of Israel (Isaiah 53:1-12; Psalm 16:8-11). Yeshua knew Whom they sought. His question was for their sake. We might understand Yeshua’s question as “You come in the authority of Rome and the Jewish religious politicians, but do you truly realise the authority of the Person Whom you seek?” This is partially revealed to them in the power that emanates from Yeshua in the proceeding verse. 5 They answered Him, “Yeshua[H] the Nasraya[A] (Nazarene, HaNatzriy[H], consecrated, devoted one, from netzer - branch).” He said to them, “I Am, I Exist (ego eimi[G]).” And Y’hudah[H] also, who was betraying Him, was standing with them. 6 So when He said to them, “I Am, I Exist (ego eimi[G]),” they drew back and fell to the ground. 7 Therefore He again asked them, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Yeshua[H] the Nasraya[A] (Nazarene, HaNatzriy[H], consecrated, devoted one).” It is literally true to say that based on the residence of His middle years Yeshua was from the town of Nazareth and was therefore, a Natzriy (Nazarene). It is also true to say that He is the Netzer (Branch) at the root of Natzriy and is come to fully fill prophecy concerning the Mashiach. Although the speakers do not comprehend what they are saying, the response they give to Yeshua’s question, “we seek Yeshua the consecrated, devoted Branch”, is a prophetic statement of affirmation concerning the role that Yeshua fills as prophesied by the prophet Isaiah: “Then a shoot will come forth out of the stem of Y’shai, and a branch (nezter) will bear fruit out of His roots. 2 The Ruach of Adonai will rest upon Him, the Spirit of wisdom and insight, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Adonai” -Y’shayahu (Isaiah) 11:1-2 Zechariah the prophet speaks a similar word concerning the Messiah but uses a different word for branch “tsemach”. “Listen well, Joshua kohen gadol, both you and your companions seated before you, because they are men who are a miraculous sign—behold, I will bring forth My servant the Branch.” -Zakhariya (Zechariah) 3:8 “Then speak to him saying, “Thus says Adonai-Tzva’ot: Behold, a man whose Name is the Branch will branch out from his place and build the Temple of Adonai.” -Zakhariya (Zechariah) 6:12 TLV By using different Hebrew words each prophet describes the strength of the branch at different stages of His ministry. He said to them, “I Am, I Exist (ego eimi[G]).” (Ehyeh asher Ehyeh) [I have been Who I AM, I will be Who I AM, I AM Who I AM] By this statement Yeshua identifies as YHVH present within humanity and demonstrates power and authority over all things (Exodus 3:14; John 6:35; 8:58). As Yeshua speaks these words power goes out from Him and causes those who have come to take Him to stagger backward and fall to the ground. In Hebrew tradition the phrase “fall to the ground”, or “Strike to the ground” can refer to striking a person dead immediately, and is ascribed to God, who performs such acts via His angels, in particular Gabriel (Mighty One of God): "let the master of thoughts come, (the blessed God,) and take vengeance on you; immediately Gabriel came, והבטן בקרקע, "and struck them to the ground"; and they died immediately.'' -Rav Simeon Ben Shetakh [F. Bavliy. Sanhedrin, fol. 19. 2.] "if you transgress your father's command, immediately comes Gabriel, and "strikes to the ground".'' -Shemot Rabba, sect. 1. fol. 91. 2. Therefore, among the religious Jews represented there would have been great fear at the blowing down of those who approached Yeshua. This fear would have been equally present among the superstitious Roman soldiers who witnessed the event. Those who had come to arrest Him were made acutely aware that they would not be successful in their endeavour unless Yeshua allowed them to bind him. All power was in Yeshua’s hands. 8 Yeshua[H] answered, “I told you that I Am, I Exist (ego eimi[G]); so if you seek Me, let these go their way,” 9 to make full (pleroo[G]) the word (ho logos[G], hadavar[H]) which He spoke, “Of those whom You have given Me I lost not one.” Yeshua declares “I AM” a second time but withholds the power which He had levelled at His pursuers in the first stating of His Divine nature. This is an act of mercy toward His jailors and a clear expression of His decision to lay down His life: Re: John 10:17. Note that Yeshua lays down His life of His own fruition and power. Neither the thief, nor the wolf, nor any other power is able to take the life of the Messiah except that He allows it. The giving of His life is entirely His decision. “Of those whom You have given Me I lost not one.” A quoting of John 6:39 which makes an exception of Y’hudah [Judas Iscariot] (who himself chose not to be chosen [given]). 10 Shimon K’fa[H] (Simon [heard] Peter [rock]) then, having a short sword (machaira[G]), drew it and struck the high priest’s (archiereus[G], hakohen hagadol[H]) servant (doulos[G]), and cut off his right ear; and the servant’s (doulos[G]) name was Malchus[H]([kingly] alt. Malchut[H] [kingdom]). The so called synoptic gospel accounts of this event: Matthew 26:51-52; Mark 14:47; Luke 22:50. John’s gospel is the only account to name both the perpetrator Peter and the victim Malchus. There are at least two reasons for this. First, John was known to the high priest [v.15-16] and his court and thus was probably personally acquainted with Malchus. Second, John loved and admired Peter’s tenacity and courage in seeking to physically defend Yeshua. John did not act in the same way, perhaps out of fear. 11 So Yeshua[H] said to K’fa[H] (Peter, rock) “Put the short sword (machaira[G]) into the sheath; should I not drink the cup (kos[H]) which the Father (ho Pater[G], Aviy[H]) has given Me?” “should I not drink the cup which the Father has given Me?” Fits with the account of Luke 22:42. The cup Yeshua must drink is the cup of God’s wrath against sin. This is the cup we sinners should drink from and yet He (the sinless One) chose to drink it on behalf of all who would receive His atoning work through death on a Roman cross and through His resurrection. “God made him who had no sin to be a sin offering for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” -2 Corinthians 5:21 “Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him!” -Romans 5:9 NIV 12 So the 600-1000 strong cohort (speira[G], spiral) and the commander (chiliarchos[G]) and the servants of the Jewish religious leaders, Judeans (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]), arrested Yeshua[H] and bound Him, The Greek “chiliarchos” translated “commander” refers to the Roman commander of a cohort of 1000 men. Thus, the Roman commander, the Jewish Temple guards and the religious leaders were jointly responsible for binding Yeshua. In short all present represented the major political and religious interests of both Jerusalem and the Roman Empire and therefore, were all equally culpable. It should be reiterated therefore, that Pilate was complicit in the arrest of Yeshua making His pretence at the subsequent trial all the more abhorrent. We further note that at approximately 33 years of age Yeshua had shown that He had power to prevent His arrest and yet allowed them to bind Him. This correlates to Isaac, who at the same age allowed Abraham to bind him for sacrifice (Ha Akeidah [The Binding] Bereishit [Genesis] 22). 13 and led Him to Chananyah[H] (Gracious Yah [God], alt. Annas[G], humble) first; for he was father-in-law of Kayafa[A] (Caiaphas, attractive: Yoseph Ben Caiaphas), who was high priest that year. John’s gospel alone tells of this preliminary hearing held before Annas (Chananyah) the father in law of the High Priest Caiaphas (Kayafa). Once again this makes sense given John’s relationship to the priestly class (v.15-16). “High priest that year” is an indication that something other than Torah commanded priesthood was being practiced. The high priest of the Torah must be a descendant of Aaron and would be high priest until his death. In the early first century C.E. the priesthood had been defiled by Roman influence and the greed of certain Jewish religious power brokers, thus there was an albeit tenuous political relationship between the Jewish authorities of the time and the Roman Empire via her governor in Judea. Annas had become high priest in 6 C.E. and reigned in that position until 15 C.E. In addition to Caiaphas many members of Annas’ family became high priest after him, including five of his sons. This was an apostate priesthood that existed in conjunction with Roman rule and was a desecration of the rightful priesthood of Israel. This in part is why Yeshua had set up His own Sanhedrin (Luke 10:1). Yeshua had confirmed the line of His priesthood (of all believers under Messiah) in His talmidim (disciples) as He ritually washed there feet during the Seder meal (John 13:4-17 see my article and note). Caiaphas (Kayafa) [A.K.A Yoseph Ben Caiaphas] was appointed (contrary to Torah law) by Roman governor Valerius Gratus and served under him from 18 C.E. to 26 C.E. He then served under Pontius Pilate from 26 C.E. to approximately 37 C.E. In order to maintain his position political ties and compromise would have been necessary. He was not a legitimate (according to Torah law) high priest. He was chairman of the Sanhedrin which was made up predominantly of Sadducees. Ultimately Caiaphas held the position of high priest at the behest of Rome, making Pilate’s complicity in the arrest of Yeshua undeniable. 14 Now Kayafa[A] (Caiaphas, attractive: Yoseph Ben Caiaphas) was the one who had advised the Jewish religious leaders, Judeans (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]) that it was expedient for one man to die on behalf of all the people (kol-ha’am[H]) [11:49-52]. 15 Shimon K’fa[H] (Simon [heard] Peter [rock]) was following Yeshua[H], and so was another disciple [the author John]. Now that disciple was known (gnostos[G]) to the high priest (haKohen hagadol[H]), and entered with Yeshua[H] into the courtyard of the high priest (haKohen hagadol[H]), God honoured the prophetic nature of the words spoken by Caiaphas (11:49-52) not because Caiaphas was a legitimate high priest but because the role of high priest was one of mediation and revelation to the people of Israel. In fact the legitimate line of Aaron seems to lead us to Yochanan the Immerser as a more likely candidate for a legitimate high priest. Regardless, Yeshua will be raised the Highest Priest of an everlasting priesthood that both precedes and supersedes the priesthood of Aaron. Verse 14 gives clear evidence in support of translating “Ioudaios” as “Jewish religious leaders or Judeans [in the sense of a sectarian noun]”. The text calls the nation of Israel (all Jews in the land) “the people” and explains that Kayafa (Caiaphas) had advised the Ioudaios (Jewish leaders) on behalf of all Jews Ioudaios (the people). Therefore, the word Ioudaios must be translated according to context and not in an arbitrary manner. The most obvious candidate for the unnamed disciple is the author Yochanan (John). Based on the inference of the text we can deduce that John was not only in relationship with some members of the Sanhedrin but was also known to the high priest personally. The fact that John was allowed entry based on his relationship to the priesthood and that he was afforded the right to gain entry for Peter (v.16) shows that there were those among the Sanhedrin and Pharisaic sect that remained sympathetic to Yeshua. As is so often the case this pretrial of Yeshua was subject to the loudest voices rather than the correct mode of Torah justice. It is very likely that many in the room disagreed with how Yeshua was treated. 16 but K’fa[H] (Peter) was standing at the door outside. So the other disciple [the author John], who was known (gnostos[G]) to the high priest (hakohen hagadol[H]), went out and spoke to the doorkeeper (thuroros[G]), and brought K’fa[H] (Peter) in. 17 Then the young girl (paidiske[G]) who kept the door (thuroros[G]) said to K’fa[H] (Peter), “You are not also one of this man’s disciples (talmidim[H]), are you?” He said, “I am not.” Many are quick to pass judgement on Peter for his denial, and of course it was to his shame, however, who among us would have confessed our allegiance to a man accused of capital crime while we stood among his many accusers and at the risk of losing our lives? Peter had just risked his life for Yeshua by cutting of the servant Malchus’s ear in the midst of close to 1000 Roman soldiers and 200 Temple servant guards and Pharisees, was this the act of a coward? Was John questioned? Did John make an effort to physically protect Yeshua? And yet we laud John and decry Peter. Nonsense! Both were righteous, both acted according to their roles. It is a mistake to presume that John’s gospel seeks to show Peter as a coward. To the contrary, John depicts his dear friend Peter in all the fullness of his humanity and with admiration. 18 Now the servants and the attendants were standing, having made a fire of coals, for it was cold and they were warming themselves; and K’fa[H] (Peter) was also with them, standing and warming himself. 19 The high priest (hakohen hagadol[H]) then questioned Yeshua[H] about His disciples (talmidim[H]), and about His teaching, doctrine, instruction (didache[G]). The pretrial that follows is illegal according to both Roman and Torah law. There were no legitimate witnesses as to a crime, the accused was not treated with respect or given an advocate, two or three corroborating witnesses were not presented and so on. That a man of such religious authority and political influence as Annas would conduct such a trial shows a lack of integrity and is an abhorrent misuse of power, compounded by the fact that Annas had recently been in the role of high priest and would surely influence Caiaphas in regard to Yeshua’s conviction at the hands of Pilate. 20 Yeshua[H] answered him, “I have spoken openly, unreservedly, without ambiguity (parrhesia[H]) to the world (ho kosmos[G], ha olam[H]); I always taught in the gathering places, the synagogue (sunagoge[G]) and in the house of the temple (ho hieron[G], beiyt hamikdash[H]), where all the Jews (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]) come together; and I spoke nothing in secret. 21 Why do you question Me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them; they know what I said.” Due to context we see that “Ioudaios” is used here to refer to all Jews (Israelis), this being an exception to its more regular usage as a reference to the Jewish religious leaders and or the Judean religious sect of first century Judaism. Yeshua shines a bright light on the illegitimacy of the pretrial and invokes Torah instruction with His answer. “Do not spread false reports. Do not help a guilty person by being a malicious witness.” -Shemot (Exodus) 23:1 A judge “must not commit unrighteousness!” -Vayikra (Lev.) 19:15 A judge “must not show favour to or be partial to a litigant!” -Vayikra (Lev.) 19:15 A judge “must not take vengeance or bear a grudge!” -Vayikra (Lev.) 19:18 22 When He had said this, one of the attendants standing nearby struck Yeshua[H], saying, “Is that the way You answer the high priest?” 23 Yeshua[H] answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, testify of the wrong; but if rightly, why do you strike Me?” Yeshua had not disrespected the authority (albeit illegitimate) of Annas, rather He had simply demanded that Torah law be followed and appropriate witnesses be presented in order to validate any accusations being levelled against Him. Note that the One Whose word had sent men reeling and falling to the ground less than 40 minutes prior nonetheless allows himself to be struck. “Like a lamb to the slaughter…” For the powerless man humility comes easy, but true humility is proved in the gentle response of a strong man. The striking of one who speaks the truth warrants a weighty fine according to Mishnaic law: The servant of the high priest who struck Yeshua should have been corrected by the Council, and made to pay the two hundred zuzim, fine required by Mishnaic law for such an offence, this fine could be substantially higher if the dignity of the person abused was deemed laudable. Perhaps in this case as much as 400 zuzim? (Mishnah Bava Kama, c. 8. sect. 6.) It is interesting to note that the Mishnaic fine due Peter for cutting a man’s ear was four hundred zuzim. (Mishnah. Bava Kama, c. 8, sect. 6.) Given Yeshua’s status the unpaid fine due His offender might be considered to cancel out Peter’s debt. 24 So Chananyah[H] (Gracious Yah [God], alt. Annas[G], humble) sent Him bound to Kayafa[A] (Caiaphas, attractive) the high priest (hakohen hagadol[H]). 25 Now Shimon K’fa[H] (Simon [heard] Peter [rock]) was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You are not also of His disciples (talmidim[H]), are you?” He denied it, and said, “I am not.” Interestingly Yochanan (John the gospel writer) doesn’t record the details of the trial before Caiaphas nor the subsequent meeting of the Sanhedrin the following morning. It seems that Yochanan is more interested in conveying the meta-narrative of Yeshua’s Divinity and redemptive purpose than he is in giving a blow by blow account. He is clearly aware that there are others who have recorded the detail of these events (Matthew 26:59-68, 27:1-2; Mark 14:55-65, 15:1; Luke 22:66-23:1) and is content with conveying the gospel according to the inspiration that the Holy Spirit has afforded him. It seems that Annas was at least partially convicted by Yeshua’s words. The act of sending Yeshua to Caiaphas places the responsibility of His conviction in the hands of another. However, like Pilate, Annas is complicit and will ultimately be held to account by God. Sadly the Talmud Bavliy outright lies concerning the events of Yeshua’s trial claiming that after Yeshua was found guilty, a herald went before him forty days declaring his crime, and signifying, that if anyone knew anything worthy in him, to come and declare it (Talmud Bavliy Sanhedrin, fol. 43. 1.). Ironic that this is written in the tractate “Sanhedrin”. This is an unqualified revisionist lie concerning the history of events surrounding Yeshua’s trial. Our rabbis should be ashamed for this false witness against our King Messiah! The polemic nature of their lie is palpable. Peter’s second denial comes as the trial of Yeshua begins to heat up and the stakes become clearer. This is a life and death moment in time for all associated with Yeshua. 26 One of the servants of the high priest (HaKohen Hagadol[H]), being a relative of the one whose ear K’fa[H] (Peter) cut off, said, “Did I not see you in the garden with Him?” 27 K’fa[H] (Peter) then denied it again, and immediately a rooster crowed. The final denial by Peter comes in the face of direct confrontation by a witness to his act of defence in the garden of Gethsemane. One has great compassion for Peter at this point given the compounding of the accusations against him and the very real threat of death by association. The rooster crows according to Yeshua’s prophetic words (13:38). Note that Yochanan does not dwell on Peter’s denial. He simply records it as fulfilling the prophetic word of Yeshua. Peter is dear to Yochanan. 28 Then they led Yeshua[H] from Kayafa[A] (Caiaphas, attractive) into the Praetorium [praitōrion[G]] (Governor’s court room), and it was early, daybreak (proia[G]); and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled, become ritually unclean (miaino[G]), but might eat the Pascha[G] (Paskha[A] Passover sacrifice). The ritual uncleanness or defilement mentioned here is not to do with Torah observance but with extrabiblical law that considered an observant Jew to be unclean after entering the home of a gentile. This is why Peter was given the vision of the heavenly cloth filled with all kinds of animals (Acts 10:28). "the dwelling houses of Gentiles", or idolaters, "are unclean" - Mishnah Oholot, c. 18. sect. 7. "if the collectors for the government (Romans) enter into a house to dwell in, all in the house are defiled.'' - Maimonides. Mishcab & Mosheb, c. 12. sect. 12. According to both the Mishnah and Yarhci it was unlawful to to rent out a house in Judea to a pagan or to assist in building a Basilica for them. The Basilica is explained to be a palace, in which judges sit to judge men. (Mishnah. Avoda Zara, c. 1. sect. 8; Yarchi & Bartenora in ib. sect. 7.) The “Paskha” or festival offering mentioned here is not the Passover meal of the previous evening but the Chagigah (festival sacrifice) made on the day of the Passover during the first century Temple period. Therefore, those who claim that the Seder meal in John’s gospel is not a Seder meal are in error based on a lack of understanding of first century Temple practice (Mishnah Pesachim 6:4 re. the eating of the Chagigah until the intervening night [15 Nisan]). As further evidence of my assertion: King Josiah is said to offer for the Passovers (plural) three thousand bullocks, and the priests three hundred oxen, and the Levites five hundred oxen (2 Chronicles 35:7). Yarchi interprets these as the peace offerings of the Chagigah (Festival offering), which in second book of Chronicles are called Passovers (plural). 1 Esdras 1:7-9 mentions three thousand calves, besides lambs, that Josiah gave for the Passover; and three hundred by some other persons, and seven hundred by others: Deuteronomy 16:2, is explained of the "Chagigah", in both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Hieros. Pesacb. fol. 33. 1. Talmud Bavliy Pesachim, fol. 70. 2.) Therefore, besides the Passover lamb, other sacrifices were slain, "in the name of the Passover” (Mishnah Pesachim, c. 6. sect. 5.) The present text then is referring to the aforementioned Passover sacrifices which the observant first century Jewish men in question were to eat that day, and therefore were being careful not to defile themselves according to the Mishnah. It should also be noted, that all the seven days of the festival were called the Passover; and those who eat the matzot (unleavened bread), say: "Let everyone that is hungry, let him come and eat all that he needs, "and keep the Passover".'' - Haggadah Shel Pesach. p. 4. Ed. Rittangel. 29 Therefore Pilate (Pilatos[G], meaning: armed with a spear) went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” Knowing what we do about Pilate’s actions during his role as governor of Judea and the fact that a Roman cohort was sent to arrest Yeshua (this could not have happened without Pilate’s approval), it is extremely difficult to take Pilate’s words as a genuine enquiry. He clearly already knew what some of the religious leaders who opposed Yeshua wanted. Therefore, Pilate’s question is a deception. In short, Pilate is a fraud and is complicit in the plan to put Yeshua to death. Spotlight on Pilate Pilate had sought to offend and provoke the Jews from the outset. His modus operandi was to provoke and then decimate those whom he saw as the Jewish agitators in Roman occupied Israel. Josephus tells us that Pilate provoked both Jews and Samaritans to riot “in order to abolish Jewish laws,”. The gospel records Pilate mixing the blood of Galilean Jews with their sacrifices (Luke 13:1). This desecration alone was abhorrent but it was not the only action of its kind perpetrated by Pilate. (see appendix A. for more details of Pilate’s actions) 30 They answered and said to him, “If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you.” The religious leaders and their adherents had no evidence of evil doing. This was a false and unsupportable claim. 31 So Pilate (Pilatos[G]) said to them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your Torah[H], law (nomos[G]).” The Jewish religious leaders, Judeans (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]) said to him, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death,” One must hold in a loud and sardonic guffaw (gut wrenching laugh) at the reading of this. Pilate, whose modus operandi was to seek to “abolish Jewish laws” (Josephus), says “Judge Him according to your Torah”. Seriously, you couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried. Pilate is a two faced hypocrite, a liar, and a hater of both the idea of a Jewish Messiah and the Jewish people as a whole. “We are not permitted to put anyone to death,” According to first century Roman law the Jewish leaders were not authorised to carry out the death penalty except in very rare cases. Therefore, because their false accusation concerned a crime for which they believed the Torah required capital punishment, they were seeking Pilate’s judgement and sentencing of Yeshua. Bottom line, without Pilate’s approval, tacit or otherwise, Yeshua could not be crucified. The washing of his hands would not be sufficient to clean the guilt of Pilate’s unrepentant soul. 32 to make full the word of Yeshua[H] which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die [John 3:14-15; 12:32]. 33 Therefore Pilate (Pilatos[G]) entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Yeshua[H] and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews (HaMelekh HaYehudim[H])?” Yeshua’s word prophesying the type of death He would die (John 3:13-15; 12:32) was significant in that He would not die by stoning, the Torah prescribed method of death for the crime of blasphemy (Vayikra [Lev.] 24:16). This was to fulfil the figure of the snake on the pole held up by Moses to offer a means of redemption to those Israelites suffering snake bites during a plague against their disobedience as they wandered the desert toward the land of Israel (Bamidbar [Num.] 21:8-9; John 3:14-15). We note that the previous events had taken place outside the Praetorium and that Pilate now brought Yeshua inside in order to talk to him away from the listening ears of the Jewish religious authorities. Pilate’s question is one that seeks to find grounds for an accusation of insurrection. Anyone claiming to be a king was in direct opposition to the Roman Emperor and was therefore subject to the death penalty. Pilate had already killed Galilean Jews for similar reason (Luke 13:1). It seems clear that Pilate saw killing Yeshua as a win, win. First, he would be putting down a possible Messianic insurrection and second he would gain a large political favour from the subservient Jewish religious authorities, making his job as governor much easier (at least for a time). Of course history tells us that he did not manage to restrain himself after Yeshua’s death, and was reported to the Emperor by the Samaritans whom he had sought to decimate on Mount Gerizim in 36 C.E. 34 Yeshua[H] answered, “Are you saying this from your own soul (men nafshakh[A], alt. on your own initiative), or did others tell you about Me?” 35 Pilate (Pilatos[G]) answered, “I am not a Jew (Ioudaios[G]), am I? Your own people (ethnos[G]) and the chief priests (archiereus[G], HaKohaniym[H]) delivered You to me; what have You done?” Yeshua knows Pilate’s motives and the influence the religious leaders have had upon him. By addressing Pilate’s own soul Yeshua’s question affords Pilate an opportunity to repent but Pilate does not take the opportunity to do so. Pilate’s reaction to Yeshua’s words is disingenuous, he lies to both Yeshua and himself. Pilate had okayed the sending of the cohort to assist the Jewish authorities in arresting Yeshua, therefore, he is lying in his pretence regarding the delivery of Yeshua by the chief priests. Notice that Pilate says “your people”. Pilate’s character as exhibited in the history of his actions as governor of Judea tells us that he detested the Jews, Yeshua being one of them. 36 Yeshua[H] answered, “My kingdom is not of this world (ho kosmos[G], haolam[H]). If My kingdom (malchutiy[H]) were of this world (ho kosmos[G], haolam[H]), then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jewish religious leaders, Judeans (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]); but as it is, My kingdom (malchutiy[H]) is not from this place, not of this side (enteuthen[G]).” Yeshua is King of all and will reign over the renewed heavens and earth, a world devoid of sin. He is not saying that He is not King over this present world, rather He is saying that His Kingdom is not of (born of, seeded by) this sin affected world. His Kingdom is of the heavens, of God Himself. Yeshua will return to reign forever. Pilate was unable to comprehend Yeshua’s response because he was deeply rooted in a kingdom of this world (the temporary Roman kingdom). Note the Hebrew “Malchutiy” My Kingdom. It sounds familiar because it shares its root with the name of the servant of the high priest “Malchus” kingdom. The temporal and fallen kingdom of Malchus (representing the apostate priesthood. A kingdom of idolatry) was deaf to the Word of Yeshua and His Kingdom everlasting. One Jewish commentator agrees that the Messiah is not of this world: "the Messiah is separated from the world, because he is absolutely intellectual; but the world is corporeal; how then should the Messiah be in this world, when the world is corporeal, and ענין המשיח הוא אלהי לא גשמי, "the business of the Messiah is divine, and not corporeal?" - Rav Y’hudah Bezaleel Nizeach Israel, fol. 48. 37 Therefore Pilate (Pilatos[G]) said to Him, “So You are a king?” Yeshua[H] answered, “You say that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into this world (ho kosmos[G], haolam[H]), to testify, bear witness (martureo[G]) to the immutable truth (aletheia[G], haEmet[H]). Everyone who is of the immutable truth (aletheia[G], haEmet[H]) hears in My voice (phone[G], bekoliy[H]).” “So you are a king” Pilate is hoping to confirm a legitimate reason to put Yeshua to death. Yeshua holds Pilate accountable for his assertion “You say I am a King.” Then Yeshua proves Pilate with the words “Everyone who is of the immutable truth hears in My voice.” And Pilate confirms his true nature by saying, “What is Truth?” 38 Pilate (Pilatos[G]) said to Him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jewish religious leaders, Judeans (Ioudaios[G], Yehudiym[H]) and said to them, “I find no reason to punish Him. This performance places Pilate in the ultimate position of power. He has assured himself that he has a legitimate reason to kill Yeshua based on Roman law concerning insurrection and at the same time knows he can achieve this by passing the buck onto the Jewish religious authorities thus killing two birds with one stone. Therefore, Pilate is lying when he says “I find no reason to punish Him”. Pilate had sought the reason by asking that specific question concerning Yeshua’s Kingship. The Talmud asks the same question Pilate has asked but gives an authoritative answer: "What is truth?" and the answer is “the living God, and the King of the World!” - Talmud Hieros Sanhedrin, fol. 18. 1. Therefore, the better question is “Who is Truth”. God defines Truth and truth reflects the character of God. 39 But you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Pesach[H] (Passover); do you wish then that I release for you the King of the Jews (HaMelekh HaYehudim[H])?” This next question of Pilate which is posed to some of the Jewish religious leaders is insidious, duplicitous, he knows that the Jewish religious authorities are already enraged at the idea that Yeshua might be the King of the Jews. Added to this is the specific inference “King of the Jewish religious leaders, the Judean sect Ioudaios”. Pilate is intentionally rubbing their noses in it and provoking the result he wants. He knows that by using this title he will bait the Jewish religious authorities into choosing someone other than Yeshua to set free according to the governor’s Passover concession. Bear in mind that there were not more than a thousand Jews present alongside the Roman cohort and Praetorium staff. By far the majority of Jews in Israel at the time were opposed to the political manipulation of the religious leaders and their plan to put Yeshua to death. The majority of Jews at the time (as testified to by the gospel narratives) if they were not certain that Yeshua was the promised Messiah, they were at least convinced He was Elijah, or the prophet Moses spoke of, or one of the other prophets, risen and active in the land. They believed this based on the miraculous signs He worked and the righteous teaching He proclaimed concerning the reconciliation of the Kingdom. 40 So they cried out again, saying, “Not this Man, but Bar-abbas[A] (Covenant son of the father/daddy).” Now Bar-abbas[A] was a robber (lestes[G]). What a heart wrenching irony that the man set free is named Covenant Son of the Father? As well as dying as a substitution for all who would receive Him, Yeshua literally dies in place of a Jewish robber named Covenant Son of the Father. Copyright 2020 Yaakov Brown Appendix A. Philo of Alexandria, The embassy to Caligula 299-305 Pilate was an official who had been appointed prefect of Judaea. With the intention of annoying the Jews rather than of honouring Tiberius, he set up gilded shields in Herod's palace in the Holy City. They bore no figure and nothing else that was forbidden, but only the briefest possible inscription, which stated two things - the name of the dedicator and that of the person in whose honour the dedication was made. But when the Jews at large learnt of this action, which was indeed already widely known, they chose as their spokesmen the king's [Herod the Great] four sons, who enjoyed prestige and rank equal to that of kings, his other descendants, and their own officials, and besought Pilate to undo his innovation in the shape of the shields, and not to violate their native customs, which had hitherto been invariably preserved inviolate by kings and emperors alike. When Pilate, who was a man of inflexible, stubborn and cruel disposition, obstinately refused, they shouted: "Do not cause a revolt! Do not cause a war! Do not break the peace! Disrespect done to our ancient laws brings no honour to the emperor. Do not make Tiberius an excuse for insulting our nation. He does not want any of our traditions done away with. If you say that he does, show us some decree or letter or something of the sort, so that we may cease troubling you and appeal to our master by means of an embassy." This last remark exasperated Pilate most of all, for he was afraid that if they really sent an embassy, they would bring accusations against the rest of his administration as well, specifying in detail his venality, his violence, his thefts, his assaults, his abusive behaviour, his frequent executions of untried prisoners, and his endless savage ferocity. So, as he was a spiteful and angry person, he was in a serious dilemma; for he had neither the courage to remove what he had once set up, nor the desire to do anything which would please his subjects, but at the same time he was well aware of Tiberius' firmness on these matters. When the Jewish officials saw this, and realized that Pilate was regretting what he had done, although he did not wish to show it, they wrote a letter to Tiberius, pleading their case as forcibly as they could. What words, what threats Tiberius uttered against Pilate when he read it! It would be superfluous to describe his anger, although he was not easily moved to anger, since his reaction speaks for itself. For immediately, without even waiting until the next day, he wrote to Pilate, reproaching and rebuking him a thousand times for his new-fangled audacity and telling him to remove the shields at once and have them taken from the capital to the coastal city of Caesarea [...], to be dedicated in the temple of Augustus. This was duly done. In this way both the honour of the emperor and the traditional policy regarding Jerusalem were alike preserved. Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War 2.169-174 Pilate, being sent by Tiberius as prefect to Judaea, introduced into Jerusalem by night and under cover the effigies of Caesar which are called standards. This proceeding, when day broke, aroused immense excitement among the Jews; those on the spot were in consternation, considering their laws to have been trampled under foot, as those laws permit no image to be erected in the city; while the indignation of the townspeople stirred the countryfolk, who flocked together in crowds. Hastening after Pilate to Caesarea, the Jews implored him to remove the standards from Jerusalem and to uphold the laws of their ancestors. When Pilate refused, they fell prostrate around his palace and for five whole days and nights remained motionless in that position. On the ensuing day Pilate took his seat on his tribunal in the great stadium and summoning the multitude, with the apparent intention of answering them, gave the arranged signal to his armed soldiers to surround the Jews. Finding themselves in a ring of troops, three deep, the Jews were struck dumb at this unexpected sight. Pilate, after threatening to cut them down, if they refused to admit Caesar's images, signalled to the soldiers to draw their swords. Thereupon the Jews, as by concerted action, flung themselves in a body on the ground, extended their necks, and exclaimed that they were ready rather to die than to transgress the law. Overcome with astonishment at such intense religious zeal, Pilate gave orders for the immediate removal of the standards from Jerusalem. Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.55-59 Now Pilate, the prefect of Judaea, when he brought his army from Caesarea and removed it to winter quarters in Jerusalem, took a bold step in subversion of the Jewish practices, by introducing into the city the busts of the emperor that were attached to the military standards, for our law forbids the making of images. It was for this reason that the previous prefects, when they entered the city, used standards that had no such ornaments. Pilate was the first to bring the images into Jerusalem and set them up, doing it without the knowledge of the people, for he entered at night. But when the people discovered it, they went in a throng to Caesarea and for many days entreated him to take away the images. He refused to yield, since to do so would be an outrage to the emperor; however, since they did not cease entreating him, on the sixth day he secretly armed and placed his troops in position, while he himself came to the speaker's stand. This had been constructed in the stadium, which provided concealment for the army that lay in wait. When the Jews again engaged in supplication, at a pre-arranged signal he surrounded them with his soldiers and threatened to punish them at once with death if they did not put an end to their tumult and return to their own places. But they, casting themselves prostrate and baring their throats, declared that they had gladly welcomed death rather than make bold to transgress the wise provisions of the laws. Pilate, astonished at the strength of their devotion to the laws, straightway removed the images from Jerusalem and brought them back to Caesarea. Josephus on Pontius Pilate and the Aqueduct Riots Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War 2.175-177 "On a later occasion he provoked a fresh uproar by expending upon the construction of an aqueduct the sacred treasure known as Corbonas; the water was brought from a distance of seventy kilometres. Indignant at this proceeding, the populace formed a ring round the tribunal of Pilate, then on a visit to Jerusalem, and besieged him with angry clamour. He, foreseeing the tumult, had interspersed among the crowd a troop of his soldiers, armed but disguised in civilian dress, with orders not to use their swords, but to beat any rioters with cudgels. He now from his tribunal gave the agreed signal. Large numbers of the Jews perished, some from the blows which they received, others trodden to death by their companions in the ensuing flight. Cowed by the fate of the victims, the multitude was reduced to silence." Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.60-62 "He spent money from the sacred treasury in the construction of an aqueduct to bring water into Jerusalem, intercepting the source of the stream at a distance of thirty-five kilometres. The Jews did not acquiesce in the operations that this involved; and tens of thousands of men assembled and cried out against him, bidding him relinquish his promotion of such designs. Some too even hurled insults and abuse of the sort that a throng will commonly engage in. He thereupon ordered a large number of soldiers to be dressed in Jewish garments, under which they carried clubs, and he sent them off this way and that, thus surrounding the Jews, whom he ordered to withdraw. When the Jews were in full torrent of abuse he gave his soldiers the prearranged signal. They, however, inflicted much harder blows than Pilate had ordered, punishing alike both those who were rioting and those who were not. But the Jews showed no faint-heartedness; and so, caught unarmed, as they were, by men delivering a prepared attack, many of them actually were slain on the spot, while some withdrew disabled by blows. Thus ended the uprising." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate © 2020 Yaakov Brown Generally speaking the Torah slavery/servitude laws were put in place to alleviate poverty and provide families for orphans and communities for aliens. They are no less than an ancient form of social welfare law. Introduction:
The Torah instructions concerning slavery or servitude are largely concerned with alleviating poverty within the multi-tribal community of Israel during her wandering period and as a precedent set for moral practice when entering the promised land. Set against the backdrop of an ancient world where enemy nations sought to wipe out the people of Israel the regulations regarding foreign slaves/servants differed for good reason. Foreign slaves/servants were often the product of both defensive and offensive warfare. Therefore, different laws were needed for the treatment of foreign slaves/servants because the bitterness of war would often lead to resentment and derision in the hearts of those who had become members of the wider commonwealth (community) of Israel as slaves/servants. God’s plan for Israel as it is revealed throughout the Tanakh (OT) requires her to be a light of morality to the then largely immoral nations who surrounded her. Therefore, as an expression of Israel’s familial tribal unity God made certain that those who were of the tribes of Israel (Hebrews) were given familial treatment when impoverished, whereas those who were foreigners and often enemies of Israel were required to continue to pay their debts to Hebrews while serving the community, and were to be treated justly. God instructed fair treatment of foreigners, reminding Israel that she was “once a slave/servant to Egypt.” Therefore, generally speaking, if the text of the Torah is properly read from the Hebrew or Greek (Septuagint) the conclusion reached concerning the laws of slavery/servitude is one of justice, restitution, charity and distinction. In many ways the differences in the laws for native and foreign slaves/servants is similar to the difference in laws between citizens and non-citizens in modern western democracies. In socialist democracies where a citizen may pay taxes for healthcare and thus receive healthcare without additional payment, a foreigner is nonetheless required to pay for healthcare up front to offset the cost. This is not considered unjust or unreasonable. Much of the modern misunderstanding of the Torah text as it pertains to slavery/servitude comes as a result of viewing history, religion, ethnicity, language, and culture through the lens of a neo-postmodern worldview. This has manifest itself as historical and cultural revisionism and often misapplies new thinking to ancient documents. In this case the Bible. Slavery – Servitude: The Hebrew “eved” can mean “servant, slave, paid servant etc.” Context and qualifying words define its meaning within the text. However, the root “avad” literally means “to serve.” Therefore, when we lack qualifying terms we should always read “servant.” This fact alone defuses many of the misunderstandings surrounding the so called “problematic slavery” passages of the Torah. Correctly reading and understanding Shemot (Exodus) 21:20-21 A Standard English Translation: 20 “If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies [a]at his hand, he shall [b]be punished. 21 If, however, he [c]survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his [d]property. -Exodus 21:20-21 NASB What the Hebrew literally says: Exo 21:20 וכי־יכה אישׁ את־עבדו או את־אמתו בשׁבט ומת תחת ידו נקם ינקם׃ Exo 21:21 אך אם־יום או יומים יעמד לא יקם כי כספו הוא׃ Verse 20 (Transliterated Hebrew and English) Vechiy-yakehH And if/because he (leader of the household/father) strikes iyshH a man et-avdoH the paid male servant of his (v.21 qualifies the specific type of servant in question) o_H or et-amatoH the paid female servant of his (see prev. ref.) basheivetH with a branch umeitH and that one dies tachatH under yadoH his hand (leader of the household/father) nakomH avenge/punish yinakeimH with the most severe punishment. Verse 21 (Transliterated Hebrew and English) AchH Howbeit if im-yomH within a day o_H or yomayimH a period of days ya’amodH continuing to stand (the paid servant) lo yukamH do not punish (the leader of the house) kiyH because chaspoH he (the leader of the house) is the source of money/income hu_H for him (the paid servant). A better reading in modern English would be: And if the father of the household unreasonably disciplines/strikes the paid servant, either male or female with a switch (stick) and kills that one by his own actions, he should be punished to the full extent of the law. However, if in spite of the father’s unreasonable actions the paid servant lives and continues to require financial support and a place to stay. Do not punish the father (leader of the household) to the full extent of the law because the paid servant is reliant upon him (the father) for his or her income, shelter, food and clothing. (Author’s paraphrase) With regard to ancient Israel and her wandering (nomadic) lifestyle surrounded by enemies as she approached the promised land, the subject of the servitude of foreigners cannot be properly understood through the lens of a modern revisionist view of Biblical history. In the context of the passage of Scripture in question the servant is not a “Slave” in any sense, modern or otherwise. We know that the Hebrew root “avad” means “to serve” and the Hebrew noun “eved” means “servant. Therefore. The only question is “What kind of servant are we reading about?” The answer is in verse 21 where we read that the servant is reliant on the household leader for his or her income. Thus the servant in question is a paid servant who is a member of the household. Therefore, this law has more in common with domestic abuse laws in modern western democracies than it does with any form of slavery. In the case of the paid servant it was most common for that person to be considered a member of the ancient Hebrew household and to be reliant on the household leader and the household collectively for shelter, clothing, food and any additional income that might be needed. Therefore, for all intents and purposes this person was no different from the modern live in nanny or gardener. The “striking” yakeh (strike, hit, beat, slay, smite etc.) has so many meanings that it can convey everything from a light slap to a severe beating. This is why we are best to understand the present passage as a situation where an unreasonable disciplining is performed, and in the case that it leads to death is considered a vile act of murder. That is why the Torah requires the most severer of punishments by doubling the Hebrew root nakam meaning “to avenge”. Finally, in ancient Israel a paid servant had few prospects outside of the home in which he or she lived, and in the case of being a foreigner was likely to be devoid of familial connection within the community. Therefore, the very existence of that person was reliant on the provision of the household in which he or she resided and worked. This is why the text says, “If the servant survives the beating the leader of the house should not be put to death or maimed because his status, income and property are the means by which the servant survives…” To remove the servant’s means of income and security because of the foolish actions of the leader of the household would be tantamount to punishing both the servant and the other members of the household. The text does not mean to say that the leader of the household will go unpunished but that he will not be punished to the level of severity prescribed in the case of murder. Thus, he remains to provide for all the household including the servant for whom he has an obligation of care. Correctly reading and understanding Vayikra (Leviticus) 25:45-50 Some complain that the Torah’s treatment of foreigners regarding slavery/servitude in ancient Israel is inequitable and unfair. It is true that it is inequitable and for good reason, as I’ve said previously the majority of foreigners who were living among the Israelites had found their way into the community through warfare and or by fleeing other nations bringing their differing religious views and resentment for Israel with them. God had set Israel apart to be a light of His morality, a light He did not want defiled by false belief and idolatry. Therefore, He made a distinction between the laws concerning the native Hebrew and those concerning foreigners. These laws were intended to protect Israel and teach those foreigners living among her the morality of the One True God. Therefore, it is not true that God’s law in this regard is unfair. A Standard English Translation: 45 Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have [a]produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your [b]countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.47‘Now if the [a]means of a stranger or of a sojourner with you becomes sufficient, and a [b]countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to him as to sell himself to a stranger who is sojourning with you, or to the descendants of a stranger’s family,48 then he shall have redemption right after he has been sold. One of his brothers may redeem him,c]if he prospers, he may redeem himself.50 He then with his purchaser shall calculate from the year when he sold himself to him up to the year of jubilee; and the price of his sale shall correspond to the number of years. It is like the days of a hired man that he shall be with him.” -Leviticus 25:47-50 NASB Given what we have already learned concerning the context of ancient Israel’s servitude laws it is sufficient to use this English translation and illuminate several Hebrew word meanings in order to clarify it for the modern reader. In this passage the Hebrew kanah translated “buy” essentially means “to create, acquire”. Therefore, it is overly simplistic to translate “buy”. The Hebrew “achuzzah” meaning “to possess” from the root “achaz” meaning “to grasp, take hold of,” does not mean “to treat as an object” but rather “to take hold of” as a member of the family. In the context of this passage, to bring into the wider family. To make part of the familial inheritance for future generations. This is why the modern people of Israel are so diverse. It is because other bloodlines married into the Hebrew bloodline and have created a convergent blood line based in Hebrew ethnicity. DNA science has now progressed to show a common DNA marker shared by Jews from the east (Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Morocco etc.) and Jews from Europe (Italy, England, Germany, Russia etc.) this even though they also have other differing DNA markers. The reality is that many of the foreigners being spoken of in these texts eventually became a part of the lineage of Israel. We see this in the case of Rahab the prostitute of Jericho and Ruth the Moabitess among others. Therefore, to read “possession” in the sense of ownership is to entirely misunderstand the text and its context. Leviticus 25:45-47 Line by line Verse 45 45 Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have [a]produced in your land; they also may become your possession. Paraphrase for the modern reader: “Also you may acquire workers (who will eventually become part of your wider family) from the foreigners dwelling among you, and from their descendants too if they need work as servants, because they are with you, and they can become part of all you possess as a people to pass on to the next generation…” Verse 46 46 You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your [b]countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another. Paraphrase for the modern reader: You’re welcome to take them as an inheritance to your children so that your children receive them and hold tight to them (grasp = achaz). And they will become generational employed servants. And (not “but”!) in addition, you shouldn’t rule over your fellow Israelites. NB: the correct translation “And” rather than the mistranslation “But” (which does not appear in the Hebrew) shows that the second clause is entirely separate from the first clause and is a general principal related to the former and following instructions regarding native Hebrews. Verse 47 47‘Now if the [a]means of a stranger or of a sojourner with you becomes sufficient, and a [b]countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to him as to sell himself to a stranger who is sojourning with you, or to the descendants of a stranger’s family, Paraphrase for the modern reader: “If a foreigner living among you as a member of your wider community becomes wealthy and a poor Hebrew sells himself to the foreigner in order to survive…” Verse 48 48 then he shall have redemption right after he has been sold. One of his brothers may redeem him, Paraphrase for the modern reader: “Whenever a foreigner purchases a Hebrew brother or sister, that foreigner must always be willing to immediately allow you to redeem that one.” Verse 49 49 or his uncle, or his uncle’s son, may redeem him, or one of his blood relatives from his family may redeem him; or [c]if he prospers, he may redeem himself. Paraphrase for the modern reader: “That goes for any relative, or even if he himself becomes wealthy enough to redeem himself, the foreigner must allow him his freedom…” Verse 50 50 He then with his purchaser shall calculate from the year when he sold himself to him up to the year of jubilee; and the price of his sale shall correspond to the number of years. It is like the days of a hired man that he shall be with him.” “You Hebrews are to give the appropriate price in payment to the foreign purchaser of your fellow Hebrew, don’t dupe the foreigner out of what is rightfully his…” Conclusion: In most cases within the ancient Hebrew community so called “slaves” were in fact “paid servants”, and were eventually “taken hold of” as members of the family and as part of the inheritance of filial corporate wealth, participating in the receipt of that wealth along with their descendants, they were possessed in the sense that a father possess a son and a son a father and not in the sense of an object possessed in ownership. After all, the Torah clearly teaches that objects are for use but people are for relationship. Generally speaking the Torah slavery/servitude laws were put in place to alleviate poverty and provide families for orphans and communities for aliens. They are no less than an ancient form of social welfare law. In fact, up until recently many western democracies have based their social welfare laws on the principals of the Torah due to the proliferation of Christianity and Judeo-Christian morality throughout the western world. Sadly, the positive affect of the Biblical principal is now being dismantled by a pervasive atheistic neo-postmodern amoral liberalism. The servitude laws of the Torah differed between Israelis and foreigners as a protection against foreign usurping of Israeli nationhood, religion, culture, ethnicity and identity. This is neither unjust or unfair but it does make a just distinction between Hebrew and foreign servants. Finally, to read the ancient text of the Torah in English (often poorly translated) with a neo-postmodern western worldview at the driver’s seat is like attempting to fuel a car by putting sand in the petrol tank. Context: historical, literary, religious, linguistic, cultural, local, global, ancient and otherwise is essential to a correct interpretation of the text, of any text for that matter. Therefore, the Torah does not advocate for slavery but does allow for paid service the redemption of the poor, and the growth of just community as alluded to in Exodus 21 and Leviticus 25. NB: When the just laws of the Bible are replaced by laws resulting from a godless worldview humanity reaps the tragic consequences. Many of the once well-established just laws resulting from the spread of Christianity and Judeo-Christian morality are now being systematically dismantled by the modern amoral agenda of atheistic liberalism and are being replaced by unjust and unbiblical laws that are already producing abhorrent outcomes including but not limited to the lawful ending of the lives of the disabled, elderly and mentally ill, the systematic murder of unborn children up to nine months gestation and into the birth canal, selective murder of unborn children due to the determining of disabilities, the selective murder of unborn children due to determination of sex, and so on. Perhaps instead of seeking to criticize the Torah based on ignorance we would be better to critique the modern worldview through the lens of Torah. Copyright 2020 Yaakov Brown Unless we understand the origin of the Shavuot festival (approx. 1300 BCE), we will never properly understand the beginning of its fullness in the first century CE (Acts 2). Remember that the Goal of Shavuot, like the Goal of the Torah is Yeshua. And Yeshua’s Goal is to do the Father’s will reconciling the repentant to HaShem (God). “Aniy Or Ha-Olam, I am, I exist, am present as the uncreated Light of the world:” -Yeshua Introduction:
With regard to the debate over whether the portion of John’s Gospel from 7:53 to 8:11 is valid Scripture or not: while it’s true that no early manuscripts include this account, it is equally true to say that it’s more than likely a legitimate oral or written tradition passed on by the first century Ecclesia (Body of believers), Church, and included by later scribes. Any believer who has met Yeshua and been filled with His Spirit will testify that the Spirit of God in us witnesses to the inspiration of this portion of the text. Therefore, in keeping with the teaching of Messiah, I trust myself to the unity of Scripture and Power (Born of the Spirit), and consider this account to be Scripture, inspired by God and passed on to us for good purpose. It seems to me that the Yeshua of this story is the Yeshua of the wider body of New Testament writing. He is here, unmistakable, the Teacher of Israel, full of compassion, mercy, tenacity and holy chutzpah. His feet firmly planted on the ground and His Spirit drawing wisdom from the heavens. I invite you to put away the conjecture of scholarship and instead to embrace the incomparable Messiah of Israel. The story of the young woman caught in adultery is one of His most powerfully intimate public moments. 1But Yeshua[H] (YHVH Saves, Joshua, Jesus) walked (halakh[H]) to the Mount of Olives (har-hazeiytiym[H]). Yeshua had clearly walked to the Mount of Olives (Har Ha-zeiytiym) the night before, probably with His disciples in tow. It appears He had spent the night there, or alternatively He may have stayed in the village of Bethany on the lower eastern slope of the mount with His friends Miriyam (Mary), Marta (Martha) and El’azar (Lazarus)[John 11:1-2]. Keep in mind that the walk from the Temple precinct the night before down the hill into the Kidron valley would have taken Yeshua and His disciples past Gat Sh’maniym (Gethsemane) and then up the other side to the summit. The journey to and from the mount of Olives is approximately 1.5km, taking in terrain and the navigating of a clear path. If Yeshua had stayed overnight in Bethany, He would likely have taken a path along the Kidron ravine on the road to Bethany, an estimated further 2 kilometres could be added to each trip if this was His route. Of course, it would have meant that He climbed to the summit of the Mt of Olives from the opposite side the following morning before sunrise and thus ascended from the Mount as described in the text. 2 In the morning, at daybreak (orthos[G], ba-boker[H]) He came again into the temple (hieron[G], ha-mikdash[H]), and all the tribes (ho laos[G], ha-am[H]) were coming to Him (Yeshua); and He sat down (yeishev[H]) and taught, held discourse with them (didasko[G], vay’lam’teim[H]). This event took place early, probably prior to Sacharit (Morning Prayer). Yeshua sat down to teach in the court of women as was the custom of other rabbis of the time. This is unlikely to refer to the court of the Gentiles as some suggest. Those coming to Him were of the “tribes” of Israel, the collected Jewish pilgrims who had made aliyah for the festival of Sukkot, only Jews were allowed in the court of women. As confirmation of this location verse 20 has Yeshua near the treasury which is situated in the court of the women. The Greek “didasko” perfectly conveys the rabbinical method of teaching which involved discourse rather than a Greco-Roman style lecture and rhetoric format. Keep in mind that the Jewish day had begun after the previous sundown and it would continue to be the seventh day of Sukkot until after sundown that evening. Therefore, Sh’mini Atzeret (the eighth day Sabbath following Sukkot was yet to occur). It is important to note that the great lamps of the court of women had been put out for the final time at the conclusion of the last full night of Sukkot (The previous night). This gives context to Yeshua’s “I am the light of the world” statement later in the text. 3 Some of Ha-Soph’riym The Scribes (of Torah & commentary; often Sadducees) and the P’rushiym[H] (Separate, distinct, chased ones, Pharisees) brought a woman caught in adultery, and had her stand (histemi[G]) in the centre of the court (of women), 4 they said to Him (Yeshua[H]), “Rabbi [H] (didaskalos[G]), this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now in the Torah[H] (Instruction) Moshe[H] (Moses, drawn out) commands us to stone such women; what then do You say?” “Scribes and Pharisees” is used only here in John’s Gospel, leading some to believe that the textual addition of verses 7:53 to 8:11 is more likely to be connected to Luke’s Gospel account, due to similar language being employed more often by Luke. However, it is equally possible that the author of John’s Gospel simply used a different turn of phrase. The result is the same, it shows the unified front of the two groups who held little theological common ground between them, the Scribes generally being associated with the Sadducees rather than the Pharisees. The first question many ask is, “If the woman was caught in the act of adultery as the text explains, where is the man who had been involved?” Of course, this can be answered by conjecture in many different ways: perhaps the Scribes and Pharisees in question were Patriarchal chauvinists’, happy to let a fellow male go free? It is possible, based on Mishnaic assertions regarding the proliferation of adulterous acts in the first century (ref. note on v.7-6), that several of them might have been guilty of such sin themselves? It is even possible that the man involved in the sinful act was complicit in the plan to trap the girl or that he was simply able to escape while she was being caught? There is no way of knowing for certain. There must however, be two witnesses to this crime according to Torah (Deut. 19:15). What we do know is that the Torah requires that both the man and the woman caught in this type of sexual sin are to be punished (Lev.20:10; Deut.22:22-24 ref. Num. 5:11-31). Therefore, the question that was being posed by the Scribes and Pharisees was already outside the specific guidelines of the Torah, meaning that the response must come in the form of an interpretive halakhic ruling from the rabbi being questioned, in this case, Yeshua. We also know (because the Torah Scribes and Pharisees, specify stoning as the punishment) that the woman was a virgin pledged in marriage prior to the act of adultery. We know this because that is the only situation in which the Torah specifies stoning as the method of punishment for adultery (Deut. 22:23-24). Elsewhere in cases of adultery strangling is the commanded punishment (Lev. 20:10). The fact that this was done publicly was unusual, given that it was illegal for Jews to carry out the death penalty under Roman governance (Though this was not always successfully policed Acts 7:58-59). This was the counter balance to the fact that the Torah required stoning for such an offense, leaving Yeshua in what some of the Torah Scribes (teachers) and Pharisees might have hoped to be an impossible position. It’s important to note that Yeshua’s mother Miriyam (Mary) might just as easily have found herself in this situation if not for the righteous action of Yeshua’s earthly (adoptive) father Yosef (Joseph). The key difference of course being that Miriyam was not guilty of adultery. This correlation may well have made this an especially emotional event for Yeshua. It’s also important to note that throughout His earthly ministry Yeshua sought to honour women and restore their rightful place in God’s creative order. Therefore, the intentional humiliation of this young woman could only have served to anger Yeshua. In light of this, His measured response under the circumstances is without comparison. 6 They were saying this, to try Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Yeshua[H] stooped down and with His finger (daktulos[G]) wrote, (grapho[G], letters as opposed to drawing) on the ground (stone floor of the court of the women). In the midst of this tumultuous scene, Yeshua, calmly bends down and starts to write in the dust on the stone floor of the temple court of the women of Israel. One of our Yeshivah students noted that it reminded her of a child at play. Another student suggested that in doing this He took control of the situation, drawing everyone’s attention to Himself and requiring the Torah Scribes (teachers) and Pharisees to work to His time table, unwilling to be bullied into playing their silly game. Those of us who are old enough to remember might also liken it to a teacher writing on a black board. All eyes and ears are now on Yeshua and what He is writing. We know that He wrote rather than drew. The Greek “grapho” refers to the writing of letters. So, what did He write? We can’t possibly know for certain though there are many suggestions. The only one I have found value in outside of what I will propose is the idea that He may have written the words of Jeremiah 17:13: “Lord, you are the hope of Israel; all who forsake you will be put to shame. Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water.” Perhaps Yeshua began His list of their names here and completed them when He stooped down to write the second time. However, while I like this idea, It seems highly unlikely. I would like to propose another option. I have asked myself, “Did God the Father ever write on stone with His finger?” The answer is “yes”, in fact He did it three times (Exodus 31:18; 34:1; Dan. 5:25). I suggest that the first thing Yeshua wrote in the dust of the stone floor was the Ten commandments. Perhaps He did this, emulating His Father (Exodus 31:18; 34:1). It’s worth noting that the second to last commandment is, “You shall not commit adultery.” Thus, He reminded His audience of the many commandments each one of them had broken, and that they might just as well find themselves standing where the woman was now put on display. 7 But when they stayed to question Him (Yeshua), He rose up, and said to them, “The sinless one (ho-anamartetos[G]) of you, let him be the first (protos[G]) to drop (ballo[G]) a building stone (lithos[G]) on her.” 8 Again He stooped down and wrote (grapho[G], letters as opposed to drawing) on the ground (stone floor of the court of the women). 9 When they heard (akouo[G]) it, they began to leave one by one, beginning with the elderly ones, and He (Yeshua) was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the centre of the court of women. Clearly there were none present who were without sin. Therefore, Yeshua’s statement was intended to bring a right judgment to this situation (Deut.17:7). We note that elsewhere Yeshua calls that generation an adulterous one (Matt. 12:39). If there’s one thing we know about Yeshua it is that He detests hypocrisy. In reference to the time of Roman occupation, during the lifetime of Rabban Yochanan ben Zaccai, the Mishnah records the following: "when adulterers increased, the bitter waters ceased; and Rabban Yochanan ben Zaccai (who was now living) caused them to cease.'' -Mishnah. Sotah, c. 9. sect. 9. In other words, adultery had become so prolific among the people of that generation that the practice of the Torah concession regarding trying a suspected adulteress with “bitter waters” (Num. 5:11-31) was stopped due to the fact that many of the husbands in question were already guilty of adultery themselves. By responding as He did Yeshua was not breaking the Torah, as some suggest, to the contrary, He was upholding its finer requirements. Both offenders were not present, nor was this being done in a court of Jewish rulers. Yeshua therefore, was making a halakhic ruling based on the fact that the Torah could not possibly be honoured by this illegitimate trial. After speaking He then stooped down to write for the second time. The result being that one by one the woman’s accusers walked away in defeat. I suggest that this time He wrote the words that the finger of God wrote on the wall of Belshazzar’s palace in Babylonian: “Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end. Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting. Uparsin (Peres): Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.” In other words, to these particular Scribes of the Torah and the Pharisees He was saying, “God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end. You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting. Your kingdom is divided and given to your oppressors (not the Medes and Persians but the Romans).” Therefore, in all of Scripture God has written directly on stone three times plus one (Yeshua in the present account). Whatever Yeshua wrote, it seems that it was what He said that moved them to leave. After all, the scripture says, “When they heard it, they began to go out one by one.” This likely refers to His challenge “Let the one among you who is without sin drop the first building stone…” Although, given that the chronology places the second writing before the description of their leaving, it may be that Yeshua spoke while He wrote, or even spoke out loud what He wrote. Now Yeshua is left standing with the young woman, an intimate moment emphasized by the tender words that follow. 10 Rising up, Yeshua[H] (YHVH Saves, Joshua, Jesus) said to her, “Dear woman (gune[G]), where are they? Is there no one to give judgement (katakrino[G]) against you?” 11 She said, “No one, Lord (Adonay[H], kurios[G]).” And Yeshua[H] said, “Neither do I pass judgement on you. Separate (apo[G]) yourself now and miss the mark (sin) no more hereafter.” Yeshua looks upon this humiliated and broken woman and with great mercy and compassion He shows her that social justice is but a tear in the vast ocean of God’s eternal justice. “Does anyone condemn you?” He says, to which she responds in a somewhat shaky but surprised voice, “No one, Adonay.” And in keeping with what John’s Gospel says about Him Yeshua says, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.” I hear it this way, “Your sin has been covered, you’re free to start again child, don’t go back to that self-destructive lifestyle.” And, just maybe, He was also thinking, We need to get my mum to set you up with a nice Jewish boy with the character of my adoptive dad Yosef (Joseph), someone who will honour you and treat you the way a woman should be treated. It’s important to note that Yeshua did not validate the woman’s sin, rather He showed her that she had great worth in God’s sight in spite of her sin. Therefore, “Continue to live, and turn away from your sinful practices…” Yeshua upheld the Torah and the redemptive grace of God. 12 Again (palin[G]) therefore (oun[G]) Yeshua[H] spoke to them, saying, “Aniy Or Ha Olam[H] I am, I exist, am present as (eimi[G]) the uncreated Light of the world (kosmos[G]); the one who follows, joins, accompanies (akoloutheo[G]) Me will not, not in the smallest way (ou me[G]) continue to walk (haholeikh[H], peripateo[G]) in the darkness (bachosheikhah[H], skotia[G]), but will have the Light of the life (phos ho zoe[G]).” This must have taken place sometime later given that “they” had all walked away prior to Yeshua’s closing words with the woman caught in adultery. Therefore, verse 12 begins a separate discussion held later that day (still Hoshanah Rabah) in the court of women near the treasury or treasury receptacles that surrounded that place. This was not heard by non-Jews. Yeshua’s claim to being the light of the world is made with the backdrop of the Sukkot lamp stands in mind. Further, it is made in the court where those same lamp stands had stood shining light into all Jerusalem for the seven days of Sukkot. There were great Menorah-like four branched candle stands in the Temple precinct. At sundown on the first day of the feast, they went down to the court of the women where golden candlesticks had been erected, and at the head of them four golden basins, and four ladders to every candlestick, and four young priests had four pitchers of oil, that held a hundred and twenty logs (an ancient measure of oil), which they put into each basin. Wicks were made from the old breeches and girdles of the priests, and it was these oil soaked wicks that the priests would light. There was not a court in Jerusalem which was not lit up with that light, and religious men, and men of good works, danced before them, with lighted torches in their hands, singing songs and hymns of praise, which continued for the following six nights (Mishnah. Succah, c. 5. sect 2, 3, 4; Maimon. ib. c. 8. sect. 12.). “Aniy Or Ha-Olam” I am, I exist, am present as the uncreated Light of the world:” This is a statement of Deity and an allusion to the light through Whom God spoke all things into existence. It’s interesting to note that unlike other occasions the Pharisees did not immediately seek to take hold of Yeshua for what they may well have understood to be a blasphemous statement. It may have been because they were still smarting from the theological defeat they had experienced earlier that day. “…the one who follows Me will not, not in the smallest way continue to walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of the life.” A flood of Scripture comes to mind: “The people who walk in darkness Will see a great light; Those who live in a dark land, The light will shine on them.” -Isaiah 9:1 [2] NASB ““But for you who [b]fear My name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall.” -Malachi 4:2 (3:20) NASB “He says, “It is too [a]small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light [b]of the nations So that My salvation may [c]reach to the end of the earth.” -Isaiah 49:6 NASB Each of these Scriptures and many more throughout the New Testament testify to Yeshua being the light of the world. This is revealed first and always first to the Jews and also always to the nations. We note that it is the one “who follows” who will not walk in darkness. Following is the fruit of true belief, trust, faith. By nature following Messiah proves faith because it is an act of faithfulness. 13 So some of the P’rushiym[H] (Separate, distinct, chased ones, Pharisees) said to Him, “You are testifying about Yourself; Your testimony is not true, valid, faithful (ne’emanah[H], alethes[G]).” If they consider Yeshua’s statement to be blasphemy they may also consider Him on trial and therefore cite Torah in relation to the need for witnesses to establish a matter (Deut.17:6; 19:15). However, it’s not clear why they say this, they may simply be invoking a sense of accountability (Prov.27:2). Regardless, it is not true to say that simply because a person speaks of themselves that the person is lying or that their testimony is unfaithful/invalid. If it were, the complaint of the Pharisees would be equally inadmissible. 14 Yeshua[H] answered and said to them, “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true, valid (emet[H], alethes[G]), for I see, perceive (eido[G]) My place of origin (pothen[G]) and where I am going; but you do not see, perceive (eido[G]) My place of origin (pothen[G]) or where I am going. This re-establishes the former conversation regarding false judgement by sight as opposed right judgement by the relational knowledge of God (John 7:24). Yeshua being God with us, has every right to testify on His own behalf because He has come from God, is in God, is One with God. God Who is faithful and cannot lie is the origin and the present person of Yeshua. 15 You all according to the flesh (ha-basar[H], sarx[G]) separate, choose, discern, esteem, prefer, judge (tishpotu[H], krino[G]); I am not separating, choosing, discerning, esteeming, preferring, passing judgement (eshpot[H], krino[G]) on anyone. “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” -John 7:24 “I am not separating, choosing, discerning, esteeming, preferring, passing judgement on anyone.” Yeshua was not at that time acting as Judge, however, He will in the future judge everyone (5:22, 27-30). 16 But even if I do separate, choose, discern, esteem, prefer, judge (eshpot[H], krino[G]), My judgment (mishpatiy[H]) is true, valid (emet[H], alethes[G]); for I am not alone in it, but I and the Father (Aniy ve’ha-Av[H]) Who sent Me (shelachaniy[H]). The unity of God as unique manifestations of Himself, Father and Son, is self-evident here. Yeshua is qualified to judge because the Judge (the Father) is with Him and His judgement is truth. 17 Even in your Torah (be’torat’chem[H]) it is written (katuv) that the testimony of two men is true, valid, faithful (ne’emanah[H], alethes[G]). 18 I am He who testifies about Myself, and the Father (ve’ha-Av[H]) Who sent Me (shelachaniy[H]) testifies about Me.” Some say Yeshua is distancing Himself from the Torah by saying “Your Torah”. This is utter nonsense. He is the Author and goal of the Torah, why would He distance Himself from it? In fact, saying “Your Torah” is intended as an admonition to accountability. “If you cite the Torah, then be prepared to abide by it.” When a Prime Minister speaks to the nation and says “Your country needs you”, that same Prime Minister is not saying “It’s your nation, not mine” rather the statement is a call or challenge that is being made with the intention of uniting the nation. Something similar is happening here. Yeshua offers two witnesses according to the Torah as a concession to their disbelief, Himself and God the Father. 19 So they were saying to Him (Yeshua), “Where is Your Father (Aviykha[H])?” Yeshua[H] answered, “You see, perceive (eido[G]) neither Me nor My Father; if you see, perceive (eido[G]) Me, you would see, perceive (eido[G]) My Father also.” 20 These words He spoke in the treasury (nishkah[H], gazophulakion[G]), as He taught (didasko[G]) in the temple precinct (hieron[G]); and no one seized Him, because the certain, definite, time, hour (hora[G]) for Him had not yet come (lo bai to[H]). As is the case elsewhere, they had obviously misunderstood Yeshua and had concluded that He was speaking of His adoptive earthly father. Yosef is not mentioned in the Gospels following Yeshua’s youth and it is likely that he had passed away. So when Yeshua, referring to God, says “You see neither Me nor My Father; if you see Me, you would see My Father also.” They presume He is speaking of an earthly father whom they have not seen. In fact, Yeshua is clearly alluding of their spiritual blindness. NB: The Septuagint text of Neh. 13:7 uses the same gazophulakion[G] to translate the Hebrew nishkah[H], meaning “storeroom”. The Temple treasury may be a reference to a storeroom in the court of the women or to the treasury receptacles for financial offerings which were positioned in the colonnade which surrounded the court. Either way, these things were being said in a place where only Jews could enter. We note the now familiar refrain: “…and no one seized Him, because the certain, definite, time, hour for Him had not yet come.” 21 Therefore, He (Yeshua) said again to them, “I go away, and you will seek (zeteo[G]) Me, and will die in your sin (missing the mark); For the first time in the Gospel of John dying in sin without a vicarious means of redemption is alluded to. This is not an idea foreign to Torah but it is an idea that is beyond the scope of the first century Jewish understanding of atonement as it pertains to a transcendent application. where I am going, you’re not able, nor do you have the power (dunamai[G]) to come.” 22 So the Religious Judean leaders (Yehudiym[H]) were saying, “Surely He will not kill Himself, will He, since He says, ‘Where I am going, you’re not able, nor do you have the power (dunamai[G]) to come.’”?” Ref. 7:34 Once again they understand Yeshua literally and ironically conclude at least part of the whole. See my commentary of John 7:34 for further clarification of what Yeshua is alluding to. 23 And He was saying to them, “You are from below (kato[G]), I am from above (ano[G]); you are of this world (ha-olam[H], kosmos[G]), I am not of this world (ha-olam[H], kosmos[G]). “You are from below, I am from above” Not, “you are from under the earth” but, “Your origin is of the earth”. Whereas, “My origin is above in the heavens, of God Himself”. Yeshua was born into time and space from an eternal existence outside of time and space, being a manifestation of the person of God seeded in a human womb and thus fully God and fully man. “you are of this world, I am not of this world” Once again this concerns origin. Yeshua is quite clearly in the world but He originates from within God whereas those who are hearing His words originate from within the sin affected creation. 24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins (missing the mark); for unless you believe, are persuaded (pisteuo[G]) that I Am (ego eimi[G]), you will die in your sins (missing the mark).” Therefore, as alluded to previously, without a saving knowledge of Yeshua they will die in their sin. In fact, the Greek text essentially says “Unless you believe that I AM (God with you), you will die in your sins.” 25 So they were saying to Him (Yeshua[H]), “Who are You?” Yeshua said to them, “What have I been saying to you from the beginning? It’s possible that those questioning Him were wondering who could have devised this strange new teaching and therefore, asked “Who are You?” Alternatively, some of them had begun to feel a pricking of awe and were seeking an explicit revelation in order to decide whether or not to accept Yeshua and His teaching. Finally, those who hated him were challenging His claims by saying “Who are You?” 26 I have many things to speak and to judge (lishpot[H]) concerning you all, but He who sent Me (sholchiy[H]) is true, faithful (ne’eman[H], alethes[H]); and the things which I heard from Him, these I speak to the world (ha-olam[H], kosmos[G]).” Yeshua is essentially saying, “You don’t get to know all the details now, I will say only what the Father has given Me to say, the rest will be revealed at the proper time.” 27 They did not realize that He had been speaking to them about the Father (Ha-Av[H]). 28 So Yeshua said, “When you lift up the Son of Man (Ben Ha-Adam[H]), then you all will know (yoda’tem[H], ginosko[G]) that I Am (ego eimi[G]), and of separation (apo[G]) I Myself make, fashion, produce (poieo[G]) nothing, but according (kathos[G]) to that taught (didasko[G]) to Me of the Father (Ha-Av[H]), these things I speak. “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you all will know that I Am…” Yeshua is referring to the means of His death and inferring that His death will come about as a result of their actions. He is also clearly saying that those listening will come to understand that He is the King Messiah and God with us, upon seeing Him crucified. Therefore, lifting up in the sense of glory is intrinsically connected to His suffering on the cross. Once again Yeshua points to the Father God as the origin of His actions and speech. 29 And He who sent Me is with, after, behind, in the midst of (meta[G]) Me; He is not leaving Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.” Yeshua is saying that He is inseparable from God. The Father Who sent Him is with Him before, after, and in the midst of Him, eternally present and One. Therefore, the foolish popular evangelical notion that the Father turned His face away from Messiah on the cross (Not recorded in Scripture), is untenable and diminishes both the nature and the redemptive work of God in its presumption that the Father did not suffer with the Son. It is tantamount to blasphemy. 30 As He spoke these things, many had come to believe, were persuaded by, put their trust (ya’amiynu[H], pisteuo[G]) in Him (Yeshua). Once again “many”, including some of them Pharisees and Scribes, Sadducees and rulers, had come to believe in Yeshua as they listened to His words. These same ones would later come to have a fulness of understanding regarding His redemptive work following His death and resurrection and the outpouring of the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit). They had begun a genuine journey of faith. This does not, as some Christian scholars presumptively conclude, describe a shallow intellectual assent to faith in Yeshua. It saddens me to hear even some Messianic Jews proliferate this nonsensical idea. The text gives no such indication. Copyright 2020 Yaakov Brown In fact, theology in the traditional Christian Scholarship (Post the original Jewish Ecclesia: Messiah following Jews) sense, does not exist in the Messianic Hebrew faith, because to the Messianic Jew belief not acted on is unbelief. 1After (meta[G]) these (tauta[G]) words, essences, things (ha-devariym[H]) Yeshua[H, A] (Iesous[G], YHVH Saves, Jesus, Joshua) was walking (peripateo[G], halakh[H]) in the land (b’eretz[H]) of the Galilee (ha-Galiyl[H], a circuit), for He was unwilling to walk (halokh[H]) in Judea (Ioudaia[G], b’Yehudah[H]) because the Judeans, religious Jews (Ioudaios[G], Ha-Yehudiym[H]) were seeking to kill Him (Yeshua[H, A]).
“After these things” Means after the making whole of the lame man on the Sabbath of Purim [John 5:5-16] (which will become poignant in verse 23), after the feeding of the 28,000 (5000 men) [John 6:1-15], after the sign of walking on water and calming the storm [John 6:16-21], after the profession of His identity as the true manna from the heavens [John 6:48-51] and the means of salvation for all who will believe… The Hebrew text of the Ha-Brit Ha-Chadashah (NT) says “Achar ha-devariym” After these words, essences, things… “Yeshua was walking” The Hebrew “halakh” means more than just “physical walking”, it means to walk with spiritual, religious, moral integrity according to the perfect practice of God’s word. In Judaism our “halakhah” the way we practically walk our faith is inseparable from our theology. In fact, theology in the traditional Christian Scholarship (Post the original Jewish Ecclesia: Messiah following Jews) sense, does not exist in the Messianic Hebrew faith, because to the Messianic Jew belief not acted on is unbelief (ref. the book of Yaakov [James]). Therefore, one could understand the text by way of remez (hint) drash (comparative teaching), to say “Yeshua’s halakhah was among the common Jewish people of the Galilee, for He was unwilling to practice the halakhah of religious hypocrites.” Regardless, the reason “Yeshua was not willing to walk in Judea” is clearly stated in the text, it was because the Judean religious leaders “wanted to kill Him”, and while it was His intention to go to the cross, He was determined that His death happen at the “opportune time.” We note that His life was not taken from Him by the authority of men but was given of Him by the authority of God (John 10:17-18). The sign/miracle that became the catalyst for the Religious leaders’ plan to kill Yeshua was the making whole of the man at Beit Chasda (House of kindness/practical love), because Yeshua had performed a miracle on the Sabbath (John 5:5-16). This is affirmed as we read on, in the discussion over Yeshua’s sanity and the hypocrisy of those who claim Moses as their guide and yet do not keep the Torah that Moses gave to them, albeit from God via Moses. How sadly ironic that the miracle which ignited such hatred toward Yeshua was performed in the House of Kindness by the Kindest man Who ever lived. “Because of this therefore the Judeans, religious Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Shabbat, but also was calling the God His own Father, making Himself equal with the God.” -John 5:18 Author’s translation “for He was unwilling to walk in Judea because the Judeans, religious Jews, were seeking to kill Him.” We see here one of the many examples showing why it is foolish to translate the Greek Ioudaios as “Jews” in general. The context of this passage shows clearly that Yeshua was walking among Jews in the Galilee but did not walk among the Jews of the region of Judea because a group of religious Jews from Judea were intent on killing Him. Therefore, in the context of this passage all are Jews, some are Galileans, some Judeans, some religious, some secular, some of one sect, some of another, all Ioudaios but not all Ioudaios from the region of Ioudaia, though most made regular aliyah (going up) to Jerusalem in Judea for the three Regaliym (Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot). It is the foolish general translational choice to equivocate all instances of Ioudaios, that has led to some of the most heinous anti-Semitic theology and action of the so called “Christian Church”. It shames the Name of Christ and has mislead countless people of genuine faith for millennia. 2 Now the feast (Chag[H]) of the Judeans, religious Jews (Ioudaios[G], Ha-Yehudiym[H]), the Feast (Chag[H]) of Sukkot[H] (Shelters), was near. “Now the feast of the Judeans, religious Jews” Because all observant Jews (from all over Israel and not just from Judea) went up to this feast, the “Feast of the Judeans” here refers to a feast all Jews participated in. Once again, context is key to translation, interpretation and understanding. “The feast of Sukkot was near” Much time has passed since the end of chapter 6. The events of chapter seven begin some months later. The feast of Shavuot (Pentecost) has been skipped by the author and we now find ourselves nearing the end of the year at the time of the later harvest heading toward fall and winter. The author of the Gospel of John does not intend his Gospel to relay a blow by blow historical and chronologically detailed account like that of Luke. The theme of this Gospel regards the present deity of the Messiah and His redemptive purpose as the Lamb of God come to give Himself as a vicarious sacrifice for all who would receive Him. Thus, the next point in the revelation of the theme begins prior to Sukkot, that festival which prophecies the future dwelling of God with His redeemed creation. A sound understanding of the festival of Sukkot (Lev. 23:33-43; Num. 29:12-39; Deut. 16:13-16) and its customs is key to a correct interpretation of John 7:37-39 and 8:12. The festival of Sukkot is the backdrop for John chapters 7 and 8. Sukkot begins 5 days after Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) on the 15th of Tishri (Shabbat or seventh month of the Biblical lunar calendar). It is highly likely given Yeshua’s strict observance of the Torah, that He had gone up to Jerusalem for Yom Kippur and had returned to the Galilee for the 5 day interim period between Yom Kippur and Sukkot. He had every intention of going up for Sukkot, in His own timing (according to God’s timing). Sukkot is the festival of the later harvest and is full of completions: seven days, seventy sacrificial bulls etc. It has a long standing connection to the nations, from the time of the giving of the Torah in the presence of seventy elders, to the time of the prophet Zechariyah, and in the Talmud of rabbinical Judaism, and beyond. “16 Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.17 And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Concerning the seventy bulls required by Numbers 29:12-34, which were to be sacrificed over the seven days of the festival of Sukkot, the Talmud Bavliy says: “Rabbi El’azar said, ‘To what do these seventy bulls correspond? To the seventy nations…” (Sukkah 55b) Based on the many correlations between the number seventy and the nations in the Torah, rabbinic tradition teaches that seventy is a number for the nations and that the seventy bulls sacrificed during Sukkot are meant as an atonement for the nations. Jewish Tradition and Practice During First Century CE Sukkot Celebrations at the Temple in Jerusalem: Apart from the continued Torah instructed practice of dwelling, sleeping, eating and drinking, in temporary shelters, first century Jews practiced various other rites during Sukkot in Jerusalem each year. The waving of the four species or Lulav (still practiced today) made up of branches of palm tree, myrtle, and willow, bound up together in a bundle. These were carried in the right hand, with an etrog (citron native to Israel) in the left. The lulav is waved three times first toward the east, then south, east, north, toward the heavens and then toward the lower regions and brought back to rest over the heart of the worshipper. This signifies that God is Creator and sustains of all things. In the first century the priests walked around the altar once, with the lulav in their hands, saying the words "Hoshana Save now, I plead to You, O Lord, O Lord I plead to You, send now prosperity" (Psalm 118:25): and on the seventh day, they went around the altar seven times (Mishnah. ib. c. 4. sect. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Maimon. Hilch. Lulab, c. 7. sect. 5, 6, 9, 23). There were great Menorah-like four branched candles stands in the Temple precinct. At sundown on the first day of the feast, they went down to the court of the women where golden candlesticks had been erected, and at the head of them four golden basins, and four ladders to every candlestick, and four young priests had four pitchers of oil, that held a hundred and twenty logs (an ancient measure of oil), which they put into each basin. Wicks were made from the old breeches and girdles of the priests, and it was these oil soaked wicks that the priests would light. There was not a court in Jerusalem which was not lit up with that light, and religious men, and men of good works, danced before them, with lighted torches in their hands, singing songs and hymns of praise, which continued for the following six nights (Mishnah. Succah, c. 5. sect 2, 3, 4; Maimon. ib. c. 8. sect. 12.). On every day of the festival water was drawn from the pool of Siloach (sent), and was poured along with wine upon the altar as a libation offering, which was celebrated with great rejoicing (simchateinu). During the illumination in the court of the women, many instruments were employed such as harps, psalteries, cymbals, and two priests with trumpets, who sounded them when they were given the signal, and on every day, as they brought water from the pool of Siloach to the altar, they sounded with trumpets, and shouted; the great "Hallel" (Psalms 136), was sung all the eight days (Mishnah. ib. c. 4. sect. 8, 9. & c. 5. 1, 4, 5. & Eracin, c. 2. sect. 3). The whole festival was one of great rejoicing, according to Leviticus 23:40. 3 Therefore His brothers (achiym[H]) said to Him (Yeshua), “Leave here and go into the region of Judea (Ioudaia[G], b’Yehudah[H]), so that Your disciples (talmidim[H]) also may see Your works, deeds (ergon[G], ha-ma’asiym[H]) which You are doing, making (oseh[H]). It seems clear that Yeshua had many disciples outside His intimate retinue and that many of them were not always with Him but were Judean Jews who often spent time in Judea among the religious community there. The suggestion of Yeshua’s biological brothers is a practical one, and in and of itself is not wrong. 4 For no one does anything, word (davar[H]) in secret (kruptos[G], seiter[H]) when he himself seeks to be known (l’hivodeia[H]) publicly, become famous. If You’re going to do these things, show Yourself to the world (kosmos[G], ha-olam[H]).” “no one does anything in secret when, he himself seeks to be known publicly.” Initially the suggestion of Yeshua’s brothers may have been well meaning, a desire to see Yeshua succeed in His role as a great teacher of Israel. However, their disbelief alluded to in the following verse illuminates their true motivation. Like so many others of their generation and like so many human beings throughout the generations, the thought of failing to promote one’s gifts in order to form a mass following seemed ludicrous to them. We are guilty of the same idolatrous sin today: Mega Churches, Media promotion of certain faith leaders, buildings, empires, mass followings, and all contrary to the ministry of Messiah Yeshua. Our motivation has been self-promoting idolatry, whereas Yeshua’s motivation was to walk according to the redemptive purposes of God and in full obedience to the Father regardless of what that meant for His own reputation and well-being. “Secret, hidden” The use of the Greek kruptos, meaning “secret, hidden, concealed” is poignant, given that Yeshua had explained earlier (some months past, but directly precedent to this chapter) that He is the “true bread from the heavens”( John 6:48-51), the manna that had been hidden, kept secret, concealed from the eyes of the Jewish people up to this point in history. Yeshua is the hidden manna in that He can be seen only by those who receive Him. He has no need of popularity because His intent is not to please the public but to honour God His Father. Modern believers would do well to emulate Him. “The one who has an ear, let that one hear what the Spirit says to the body of believers. To that one who overcomes, to that person I will give some of the hidden, secret, concealed (krupto) manna (bread from the heavens), and I will give that person a white stone, and a new name written on the stone which no one knows but the one who receives it.’” -Yeshua’s Revelation to Yochanan 2:17 5 For not even His brothers (achiym[H]) were believing in Him, thought Him true, were persuaded of Him, had faith in Him, trusted Him (pisteuo[G], he’emiynu[H]). Yeshua’s brothers are named in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark as: Yaakov, Yosef, Yehudah, and Shimon. These were sons of Miriyam (Mary) and Yosef (Joseph), Yeshua’s biological mother and earthly but not biological father (Matt.13:55-56; Mark. 6:3). “A stranger I have become to my brothers and a foreigner to the children of My mother…” -Tehilim (Psalms) 69:8 Author’s translation It’s important to note that the disbelief of Yeshua’s brothers did not persist after His death and resurrection. We know for certain that Yaakov became not only a believer in Yeshua but also a leader of the early Messianic Jewish sect (The Way) [Acts. 2:17, 15:13, 21:18, Galatians. 1:19, 2:9, 12]. He is also the most likely author of the book of Yaakov (James) included in the Ha-Brit Ha-Chadashah (NT). Another brother Yehudah is thought to be the author of the NT book of Yehudah (Jude). 6 So Yeshua[H] said to them, “The true measure, opportune time for Me (ho kairos[G]) is not yet here, but your true measure, opportune time (ho kairos[G]) is all the time, any time, always now (pantote[G]). In other words, pursuing popularity, self-promotion and idolatry are always the go to for those who are spiritually blind. In and of itself fame is not wrong, the Scriptures tell us that because HaShem was “with Joshua, and his fame spread throughout the land” (Joshua 6:27), but when the pursuit of fame seeks to promote self rather than the Gospel, or worse, in place of the Gospel, it becomes idolatry. 7 The world (kosmos[G], ha-olam[H]) can’t hate you, but it hates Me because I testify (meiiyd[H]) of it, that its deeds are perpetual, intense, multiples of evil (raiym[H]). The sin affected people of this world love those who tell them what they want to hear, but those who challenge sin and teach the need for sacrifice and repentance are hated by this world. Why? Because our evil actions are perpetual, so much so that evil has become the norm. Therefore, when our long held beliefs are challenged we do what all sin affected people do, we become defensive and attack the one who has exposed the lie of our existence. 8 Go up to the feast (Chag[H]) yourselves; I do not go up to this feast (Chag[H]) because the true measure, opportune time for Me (ho kairos[G]) has not yet (oupo[G]) fully come (pleroo[G]).” 9 Having said these things to them, He stayed in the Galilee (ba’Galiyl[H], b’Galeela[A]). Notice that Yeshua’s brothers were religiously observant Jews who had clearly planned to make aliyah (going up) for the Regaliym Festival of Sukkot (Shelters). Both the context and the grammar tell us that Yeshua was not saying that He wouldn’t go at all, rather He was saying that He would come at the appropriate time. The present tense of the Greek is better translated as “I’m not presently going up”. 10 But when His brothers (achiym[H]) had gone up to the festival (Chag[H]), then He Himself also made aliyah[H] (went up), not openly (b’gelya[A]), but in secret, hidden, concealed (kruptos[G]). 11 So the Judeans, religious Jews (Ioudaios[G], Ha-Yehudiym[H]) were seeking Him at the feast (Chag[H]) and were saying, “Where is He?” Yeshua had always intended to attend. It is likely that He followed soon after His brothers and arrived in time for the beginning of the feast so as to make His chagigah or sacrifice according to first century practice. The journey from the Galilee to Jerusalem was approximately 3 days by foot, with stops to rest each evening). However, the Mishnah allows for the sacrifice to be made at another point during the festival (Mishnah. Chagiga, c. 1. sect. 6. Maimon. Hilch. Chagiga, c. 2. sect. 4, 5, 6, 7). Therefore, regardless of when He went up, He non the less kept the Torah requirement, as was His custom. The anger of the Religious leaders was such that they were actively searching for Yeshua at the festival. However, we note that they at very least considered Yeshua an observant Jew, or else why were they looking for Him at the feast? 12 There was much murmuring, grumbling, secret displeasure (goggusmos[G]) among the crowds concerning Him (Yeshua[H]); some were saying, “He is a good man”; others were saying, “No, on the contrary, He causes people to go astray (planao[G]).” 13 Yet no one was speaking openly of Him for fear of the Judeans, religious Jews (Ioudaios[G], Ha-Yehudiym[H]). The people of Israel were undecided as to whether Yeshua was a good, even truly prophetic figure or a heretic. Some spoke quietly against Him, others spoke quietly in His favour, but such was the power of the religious leaders that none spoke publicly concerning Him for fear of religious persecution or being “Put out of the synagogue”. 14 But when it was now the middle (alt. chol ha-moediym[H] intermediary days) of the feast (Chag[H]) Yeshua[H] (Jesus) went up into the Temple (hieron[G], ha-Mikdash[H]), and began to teach. Some date this Sukkot festival to the year 29 CE, the definitive middle of the festival being at the convergence of yom shiyshiy and the beginning of the only weekly Shabbat of the festival. If this dating is correct the ministry years of Yeshua spanned 27-30 CE. “…into the Mikdash (temple)” means inside the Temple area itself, and does not refer to the outer court of the Gentiles which is not considered part of the Temple proper. In other words, at the time of these events Yeshua’s teaching was made available only to Jews. 15 the Judeans, religious Jews (Ioudaios[G], Ha-Yehudiym[H]) marvelled, were astonished, admired His teaching (thaumazo[G]) saying, “How has this man become knowledgeable, learned in sacred things, having never been educated?” “How has this man become knowledgeable, learned in sacred things, having never been educated?” In other words, “How is this hick from the Kinneret (Galilee) able to clearly articulate Jewish halakhic teaching without ever having attended a yeshivah or studied under a famous rabbi or scholar?” Interestingly the Talmud acknowledges that Yeshua was taught by the great Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Peracyah, the chief teacher of his day (Sanhedrin 107b, Sotah 47a). However, that is utter nonsense, given that the rabbi in question lived a hundred years earlier. Still, the point is that Jewish tradition does not record Yeshua as being ignorant of religious training and knowledge. 16 So Yeshua[H] answered them and said, “My teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me (sholkhiy[H]). 17 If anyone is willing to do His will, that one will know of the teaching, whether it is of the God (ho Theos[G], Elohiym[H]) or whether I speak (adabeir[H]) from Myself. In reality Yeshua’s learning, knowledge, and application were in this world but not of it. His wisdom and practice are from above, the impartation of the Father God. His teaching, perpetual, sacred and transcendent. “…whether it is of the God or whether I speak from Myself.” The beautiful irony here is that in either case the teaching is of God. 18 He who speaks from himself seeks, craves, demands (zeteo[G]) his own judgement, opinion, view, glory (doxa[G], k’vod[H]); but He who is seeking the judgement, opinion, view, glory (doxa[G], k’vod[H]) of the One who sent Him, He is true, faithful, trustworthy (alethes[G], ne’eman[H]), and there is no injustice, unrighteousness (adikia[G]) in Him. Note the intrinsic connection between judgement (discernment, view) and glory (honour). This link between judgement and glory bears fruit in verse 24 where Yeshua challenges the false judgement/glory of His hearers. 19 “Didn’t Moshe[H] (drawn out) give (natan[H]) you the Instruction (Ha-Torah[H]), and yet none among you does, acts out (oseh[H]) the Instruction (Ha-Torah[H])? Why do you seek to kill Me?” In fact Moses gave Israel the Instruction of God, the author and goal of that Instruction being Yeshua Himself. The religious Jewish community of the first century were proud of their connection to the Torah and Moses, and yet they did not do what the Torah required. This is true of so many people of faith today. We are aware of what we should do but non the less act in a contrary fashion. Yeshua is not exposing their inaction but their hypocrisy. 20 The crowd answered, “You have an evil spirit, demon, divinity, god (daimonion[G], sheid[H])! Who seeks to kill You?” In modern terms, “You’re a demonized psycho, a sicko, crazy person…” 21 Yeshua[H] answered them, “I did (poieo[G]) one (echad[H]) deed, work (ergon[G]) and you all admire, marvel (thaumazo[G]). The work Yeshua speaks of is recorded in John 5:5-16, and concerns the making whole of the lame man at the pool of Beit Chasda on the Shabbat of Purim now some months prior. John 5:18 quite literally says that the religious Jewish leaders “sought to kill” Yeshua because of this miraculous sign performed on the Shabbat. Thus, what follows concerns actions that are permissible by first century Jewish halakhah on the Shabbat, even when they contradict the Shabbat commandment. 22 For this reason Moshe[H] (drawn out) has given (natan[H]) you circumcision (ha-miylah[H]) [not because it’s from Moses, but from the fathers (ha-Avot[H], Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov)], and on the Sabbath (Ha-Shabbat[H]) you circumcise (tamulu[H]) a man. “Moses has given you circumcision” Leviticus 12:3 “…not because it’s from Moses, but from the fathers” God originally gave the commandment of circumcision to Avraham in Genesis 17:1-27, which he carried out on Yitzchak in Genesis 21:4, and it was perpetuated by Yitzchak and Yaakov respectively. This occurred centuries prior to the command given through Moses, which was a reiteration of the original command. "we do not circumcise because Abraham our father, on whom be peace, circumcised himself and his household, but because the holy blessed God commanded us by Moses, that we should be circumcised, as Abraham our father was circumcised.'' -Maimon. in Mishnah. Cholin, c. 7. sect. 6. 23 If a male receives circumcision (timol[H]) on the Sabbath (Ha-Shabbat[H]) so that the Instruction (Torah[H]) of Moshe[H] will not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire human being (anthropos[G]) sound, whole, fully restored (hugies[G]) on the Sabbath (Ha-Shabbat[H])? The Torah commands that a Jewish male be circumcised on the eight day (Gen. 17:12; Lev. 12:3), however, it also prohibits work on the Shabbat (Exodus 20:9-10, 23:12, 31:14-15, 34:21; Lev. 23:3; Deut. 5:12-14 etc.) Therefore, if the eighth day of a new born male’s life falls on a Shabbat there is a practical conflict. It is clear from the text that the halakhah of the first century Judean Jews under these circumstances was to practice circumcision on the Shabbat. The Talmud tractate Shabbat 128b-137b records this halakhic practice for posterity. Therefore, that which Yeshua referred to was a well-known and accepted halakhic practice. Yeshua was not denying its validity, rather He was using it as an example so as to expose the hypocrisy of His accusers. Yeshua is using a form of reasoning which in Judaism is called kal ve’chomer or a light and heavy argument. He is essentially saying, “You permit the breaking of the Shabbat in order to circumcise, how much more important is it to make a person whole on the Shabbat?” Jewish tradition agrees with Yeshua’s reasoning. The Talmud Bavliy sites the principle that saving a life suspends the Shabbat: “Rabbi El’azar answered, ‘If circumcision. Which involves only one of the 248 human body parts, suspends Shabbat, how much more must [healing] the whole body suspend Shabbat.” -Talmud Bavliy Yoma 85b "…the preservation of the soul life, suspends the Shabbat…” -Talmud. Bavliy. Shabbat, fol. 132. 1. Put simply, a suffering person cannot rest, therefore, in order for the suffering person to keep the Shabbat that person must first be made whole. After all, Shabbat means “Seventh, blessing, stop, rest, pause, completion, wholeness, sound construction and transcendent peace.” 24 Do not separate, select, prefer, determine, judge (krino[G], tish’petu[H]) according to sight, seeing, appearance (opsis[G], lemareih[H]), but, instead by righteous, innocent, faultless observation (dikaios[G], tzedek[H]) separate, distinguish, make just, right judgment, alt. conclude justly (krisis[G], mishpat[H]).” This verse challenges the false sight of the religious Jewish leaders and those among the crowd who oppose Yeshua’s teaching. He brings to summation the idea seeded in verse 18 concerning the intrinsic connection between judgement and glory, as a means of challenging His hearers to choose a different way of looking at, perceiving, judging, accessing things. If they were to follow His advice they would receive Him and His teaching and find redemption. Every modern believer is promptly challenged to do away with the foolish, decontextualized popular pseudo Christian phrase, “Don’t judge”. While it is true that Scripture indicates elsewhere that we are not in any position to condemn others or pass judgement on them, it is certainly not true that we should not judge. A lack of judgement results in sin. Rather, we are instructed to judge well, truly, rightly, based on Godly sight born of the righteousness purchased for us in Messiah. Therefore, “Stop judging by mere appearances and make a truly just judgement.” Copyright 2020 Yaakov Brown With regard to a Hebrew (religious, cultural) interpretation of the Scriptures, those things that appear contradictory are in fact unbound eternal concepts being understood within the boundaries of time and space. Introduction:
It’s important to remember that the following verses are pursuant to the beginning of Yeshua’s conversation with the Judean religious Jews of Jerusalem following the physical healing and spiritual wholeness of that certain man at the pool of Beit Chasda (House of practical love). Therefore, it’s foolish to apply these words generally without first having understood that Yeshua is speaking them to those religious Jews from Jerusalem who were opposing Him based on their understanding of the Torah and extra Biblical religious law. Many of those opposing Him here later became His followers (John 11:45; 12:41; Acts 2). Once again, the anti-Semitic Sunday school refrain “I don’t wanna be a Pharisee…” comes under scrutiny when faced with the reality that Yeshua’s theology was most like that of the Pharisees and that He had come to save the lost sheep of the House of Israel (including the Pharisees). His love for His enemies, especially those among His own people is one of the character attributes that distinguishes Him as God with us. 25 “Amen[H] [G]Amen[H] [G] (B’emet[H], B’emet[H]), In truth, In truth, It’s certain, it’s certain, I say (Aniy omeir[H]) to you all (lachem[H] PL), an hour, a season, a particular time (hora[G], sha’ah[H]) is coming and now (nun[G], veatah hiy[H]) is, when the dead (nekros[G], ha-meitiym[H]) will hear, comprehend, receive, understand (akouo[G], yishmeu[H]) the voice, sound (ho-phone[G], et-kol[H]) of the Son of God (ho huios ho Theos[G], Ben Ha-Elohiym[H]), and those who hear, comprehend, receive, understand (akouo[G], ha-shomeiym[H]) they will live (zao[G], chayh yichyu[H]). 26 For just as the Father (ho Pater[G], la-Av[H]) has life, living (yesh chayiym[H], chaye[A]) in His substance (baqnumeh[A]), even so He gave (didomi[G], natan[H]) to the Son (ho huios[G], la-Ben[H]) also to have life, living (zoe[G], chayiym[H]) in His substance (baqnumeh[A]); “Amen, Amen, I say to you all, an hour, a season, a particular time is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear they will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in His substance, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in His substance; Put concisely the theme of these verses is that of “realized eschatology”, the idea that God’s goals have already been accomplished in Yeshua outside of the limitations of time and space. However, this is an over simplification that needs to be examined more thoroughly. Suffice to say the conditions of the last days are already being realized at the time of Yeshua’s earthly ministry (first century CE). “a particular time is coming and now is” Just as it was true in the moment Yeshua spoke it, so it remains true today. The coming of the Gospel and the Kingdom of God is now and yet to come. Where the Spirit of the Father and the Son (Ruach Ha-Kodesh) has filled the believer and is at work in the life of that person, the Gospel and the Kingdom are manifest and present, having been seeded into time and space. The Gospel and the Kingdom therefore are a present deposit of eternity found within temporal creation, that await the bursting forth and renewal of creation when time is brought to a new beginning. Like a needle injecting the air outside a bubble into the bubble until the bubble explodes and the air inside becomes one with the air outside. Yeshua is saying something like, “Even as you hear Me speaking the coming redemption you have hoped for is standing before you”. “when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God” The time when the “dead” will hear the voice of the Son is said to be both “coming” and “now”. Therefore, Yeshua is speaking of the present spiritually dead, and all those spiritually dead prior to His death and resurrection (who will hear the redemptive plan of God from the transcendent resurrected Messiah), and those who will be spiritually dead within time and space following His ascension to the Father after His resurrection. This cannot refer to those dead and departed in sheol at the time of Yeshua’s earthly ministry because they will rise either to life or to judgement at the final resurrection, depending on their acceptance or refusal of the Messiah (v.28).[The temporal resurrection which occurred at the time of Yeshua’s death and resurrection is an exception which acts as a sign of God pointing to the yet future and final resurrection and judgement (Matt. 27:51-53)]. We note that those who hear the Son’s voice in this verse will “live”. This is a reference to eternal life. This defines what hearing means, it is the Hebrew concept of “shema” hear, receive, and understand continually. The previous verses (23-24) explain what is required in order to “hear” the voice/word/sound of the Son of God. Put simply, the “dead” being referred to in this verse are those who are spiritually dead, including His hearers the religious Judean Jews of Jerusalem. Yeshua further adds to this an allusion to the coming and final resurrection of the physically dead (v.28). Thus He makes a clear distinction between the two. For just as the Father has life in His substance, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in His substance; This is a statement of divinity. Yeshua has been given the life of the Father and the power to create life according to the Father. Thus, the Son’s Word transforms the sin affected creation into a new and renewed creation through the eternal blood of God shed on the cross as a vicarious sacrifice. The Godhead is not divided or separate as the sadly lacking theological term “trinity” infers, but is echad (a complex unity), the persons of the Godhead being distinct and One. Eternal life is given of God to and through the Son. Therefore, our Salvation is manifest in the fullness of the Godhead. “And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.” -1 John 5:11 (ESV) 27 and He gave Him (The Son) authority (exousia[H]) to make, enact (poieo[H], ) judgment, sentencing (krisis[H]), because He is Son of Man (huios Anthropos[H], Ben Adam). and He gave Him (The Son) authority to make, enact judgment, sentencing, because He is Son of Man. As stated in my commentary on John 5:1-24: With regard to judgement God is no hypocrite, the Father Who is outside all things and in Whom all things exist does not pretend to be a human being or to have the frailty of a human being. However, the Son, the King Messiah (Dan. 7:13: Zohar in Gen. fol. 85. 4. Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 13. fol. 209. 4. Jarchi & Saadiah Gaon in Dan. vii. 13. & R. Jeshuah in Aben Ezra in ib.), God with us, experiences all things as we have and is therefore fully qualified in His own frailty to judge humanity (Phil. 2:5-7; Heb.4:15). Not that God the Father is unqualified, but that He perfects His qualification in the Son Who was crucified before the creation of the world in anticipation of humanity’s decision to sin. Therefore, God remains Judge in the sense that He gives judgement over to the Son in order that the Father might outwork His perfect justice. “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.” -Hebrews 4:15 (NASB) 28 Do not marvel, wonder, be amazed (thaumazo[G], titmehu[H]) at this; for behold, pay attention, beware (kiy hineih[H]), an hour, a season, a particular time (hora[G], sha’ah[H]), is coming in which all who are in the tombs, graves (mnemeion[G], kever[H]) will hear, comprehend, receive, understand (akouo[G], yishmeu[H]) His voice, sound (phone[G], kolu[H]), 29 and will depart from (the tombs), come forth, burst, flow out, be spread abroad, rise (ekporeuomai[G]); those the good (ho agathos[G], ha-tov[H]) having done, made, constructed (poieo[G], oseiy[H]) to resurrection, standing upright, rising (anastasis[G], lakum[H]) of life, living (zoe[G], lachayiym[H]), those the evil (ho phaulos[G], ha-ra[H]) having performed, accomplished, exacted, required (prasso[G]) to resurrection, standing upright, rising (anastasis[G], lakum[H]) of judgment, sentencing, condemnation (krisis[G], ladiyn[H]). Do not marvel, wonder, be amazed at this; for behold, pay attention, beware, an hour, a season, a particular time, is coming in which all who are in the tombs, graves will hear His voice, sound, 29 and will depart from, come forth, burst, flow out, be spread abroad, rise; those, the good, having done, made, constructed to resurrection, standing upright, rising of life, those the evil having performed, accomplished, exacted, required to resurrection, standing upright, rising of judgment, sentencing, condemnation. Notice that all rise together, the “Good” to a reward of life and the “Evil” to a judgement of condemnation. One resurrection, and one judgement distinguished by two outcomes over a period of time (season, hour) called “Ha Din” (The Judgement). The dead in Messiah will rise first in the order of resurrection (1 Thess. 4:16) but this does not negate the continuation of that singular resurrection event over a period of time. Like so many Hebraic Biblical concepts, the resurrection and judgement are seen here in a future prophetic view that employs a yet to be present continuous tense. This is consistent with the Revelation, which teaches a single multifaceted judgement (Rev. 20:4-6; 11-15). We note that based on the Greek protos the “First resurrection” of the book of Revelation is first in order (rank) and that the Hebrew concept of the number 1000 is figurative, referring to perpetuity and is both a literal term and an everlasting beginning. The text of Revelation 20:5 should be read as “But the remaining dead did not live again until the thousand years were filled up. This is the first in order of resurrection”. “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” -Daniel 12:2 (ESV) With regard to a Hebrew (religious, cultural) interpretation of the Scriptures, those things that appear contradictory are in fact unbound eternal concepts being understood within the boundaries of time and space. “those, the good, having done, made, constructed to resurrection, standing upright, rising of life, those the evil having performed, accomplished, exacted, required to resurrection, standing upright, rising of judgment, sentencing, condemnation.” Note carefully that the Greek text does not place emphasis on the deeds of the person but on the nature that produces the person’s actions. The nature of those who rise is called “ho agathos” (those the good Heb. Ha-tov) and “ho phaulos” (those the evil Heb. Ha-ra): in both cases the nature of the person precedes their deeds. In other words, it is the person’s relationship status with God that determines their deeds and not the other way around. Many mistake this verse to infer that it is the actions of a person that determine their eternal fate, this is not the case. In the Greek the meaning is clear, it is the nature of the person (be it redeemed or unredeemed) that determines their eternal destiny and the actions that are born of the person’s nature testify to it (the nature), be it redeemed in Messiah or unredeemed through a refusal of Messiah. The idea of a voice that raises the dead is common to the Zohar but is misunderstood to be the voice of the forerunner rather than the Messiah: "there are three things which do not come into the world but "by voices"; there is the voice of a living creature, as it is written, (Gen 3:16), "in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children", and as it is written, (Gen 30:22), "and God hearkened to her"; and there is the voice of rains, as it is written, (1Kings 18:41), "for there is a voice of abundance of rain", and it is written, (Psalm 29:3), "the voice of the Lord is upon the waters"; and קול תהיית המתים, "there is the voice of the resurrection of the dead", as it is written, (Isaiah 40:3), "the voice of him that cries in the wilderness";'' - Zohar in Gen. fol. 70. 4. 30 “I can do, make, construct (poieo[G], la’asot[H]) nothing of Myself (emautou[G]) [Heb. Alt. lo uchal la’asot davar minafshiy], word, essence do I construct, make from My soul alone]. As I hear, understand, receive (akouo[G], shema[H]), I judge, decide, distinguish (krino[G], umishpatiy[H]); and My judgment, decision, sentence (krisis[G) is just, righteous (dikaios[G]], tzedek[H]), because I do not seek My own will (retzoniy[H]), but the will of the Father (ha-Av[H]) who sent (pempo[G], shelachaniy[H]) Me. “I can do, make, construct nothing of Myself, word, essence do I construct, make from My soul alone. As I hear, understand, receive, I judge, decide, distinguish; and My judgment, decision, sentence is just, righteous, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of the Father who sent Me. Although the Father has given authority for judgement to the Son, the Son cannot judge except by the will of the Father. Therefore, the Father and the Son are echad (a complex unity), unique and inseparable. This answers the question, “Why does the Tanakh (OT) say that God judges but the Brit HaChadashah (NT) says that all authority to judge is given to Yeshua?” "there were three courts of judicature; one that sat at the gate of the mountain of the house; and one that sat at the gate of the court; and another that sat in the paved chamber: they go (first) to that which is at the gate of the mountain of the house, and say, so have I expounded, and so have the companions expounded; so have I taught, and so have the companions (or colleagues) taught: אם שמעו, ‘if they hear’” - Mishna. Sanhedrin, c. 10. sect. 2. Maimonides explains it, “if they know the law, and hear, or understand the sense of the law; in such a case they declare what they know; if not, they go to them that are at the gate of the court, and say (as before).—And, "if they hear", they tell them; but if not, they go to the great sanhedrim in the paved chamber, from whence goes forth the law to all Israel.'' - Maimon. in ib. The point being that Yeshua is challenging Israel’s judges at the place of highest authority and is identifying Himself fully submitted to God’s will, as Israel’s Judge. 31 “If I testify, give evidence, bear witness (martureo[G], mei’iyd[H]) about Myself, My testimony (marturia[G]) is not true, unconcealed, admissible, faithful, trustworthy (alethes[G], ne’emanah[H])32 There is another who testifies, bears witness, gives evidence (martureo[G]) of Me, and I know (eido[G], yadatiy[H]) that the testimony (marturia[G]), eiduto[H]) which He gives about Me is true, unconcealed, admissible (alethes[G]). “If I testify, give evidence, bear witness about Myself, My testimony is not true, unconcealed, admissible, faithful, trustworthy 32 There is another who testifies, bears witness, gives evidence of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is true unconcealed, admissible, faithful, trustworthy. “If I give evidence, My testimony is not admissible” “My testimony is not true” This does not mean “untrue” as being contrary to the “truth” nor in relationship to secular legal proceedings but rather “true” in this case being synonymous with “admissible” in respect to Torah law. If Yeshua were to give testimony of Himself it would be quite literally true. Therefore, the meaning here denotes eligibility according to Torah law (of which He is the Author). The same Law that Yeshua’s audience demanded adherence to (albeit amended by the so called “Oral Law” and the commentary of their scribes and teachers etc.). "for no man may give witness of himself" - Maimon. Issure Bia, c. 18. sect. 19. “but no man is to be believed for himself: says R. Zechariah ben Hakatzah, by this habitation (swearing by the temple) her hand was not removed from my hand, from the time the Gentiles entered Jerusalem, till they went out: they replied to him, ‘no man bears witness of himself’.” - Misn. Cetubot, c. 2. sect. 9. T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 27. 2. Juchasin, fol. 56. 1. Yeshua has just finished explaining that the Father has given Him authority to judge and that in fulfilling this role He will present the case for His Messiahship according to the Torah requirements. In instances of judicial Torah law any capital case (which might result in the death of the accused), must be tried in the presence, or upon the testimony of two or three witnesses (Deut. 17:6; 19:15). Yeshua is being accused of a capital crime by these particular Judean religious Jews of Jerusalem. Therefore, sufficient witnesses are called upon. Yeshua goes on to produce 5 witnesses that testify of His good character, identity and innocence:
“There is another Who gives evidence of Me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about Me is admissible, faithful, trustworthy.” This “other” who testifies is not a reference to John the Immerser (Baptist), who is mentioned in the following verse because although John the Immerser has testified to the truth of Who Yeshua is, the testimony that Yeshua is speaking of as being valid and admissible is “not from man” (v.34). Therefore, the “other” (v.32) Who testifies of Yeshua is in fact God the Father. 33 You have sent (apostello[G], shelachtem[H]) to Yochanan[H] (YHVH is gracious, John the Baptist), and he has testified (martureo[G], hei’iyd[H]) to the truth (alethes[G], emet[H]). 34 But the testimony (marturia[G], eidot[H]) which I receive is not from man, human beings (mei’adam[H]), but I say these things so that you may be saved, preserved, rescued (sozo[G]). You have sent to Yochanan and he has testified to the truth 34 But the testimony which I receive is not from human beings, but I say these things so that you may be saved. It is important to remember that Yeshua is still speaking to the Judean religious Jews of Jerusalem and any other bystanders. He is saying these things that they (Judean religious Jews) “may be saved”. That is, He is pointing to the testimony of John the Immerser (Baptist) for their sake because they cannot comprehend the testimony of the Father at this point in time. This may infer that those listening were among the Perushiym (Pharisees) who had gone out to hear John the Immerser speak (John 1:19). 35 He was the lamp, light, flame (luchnos[G], ha-nir[H]) that was burning, igniting, consuming (kaio[G]) and was shining, shedding light (phaino[G]) and you were willing to rejoice (agalliao[G]) for a while, time, season (hora[G]) in his light (phos[G], leoro[H]). He was the lamp that was igniting and was shedding light and you were willing to rejoice for a time in his light. We note that this is an acknowledgement of the fact that some of the Judean religious Jews of Jerusalem had indeed rejoiced in the light of John the Immerser’s teaching, at least for a time. To call a Jewish religious leader, sage, rabbi a “Light” or “Lamp” is familiar to the Jewish student of rabbinic and esoteric Jewish literature. On a number of occasions the book of Zohar calls Rabbi. Simeon ben Yochai, בוצינא קדישא, "the holy light": "R. Simeon, כבוצינא דשרגא דאדליק, is as "the lamp of light which burns above", and "burns" below; and by the light which burns below all the children of the world are enlightened: woe to the world, when the light below ascends to the light above.''- Zohar in Exod. fol. 79. 1. Rabbi Abhu is called בוצינא דנהורא, "the lamp of light" - T. Bavli. Cetubot, fol. 17. 1. Of Shuah, Judah's father-in-law, that he was בוצינא דאתרא, "the light of the place" - Bereshit Rabba, sect. 85. fol. 74. 4. & Mattanot Cehunah in ib. 36 But the testimony (marturia[G], eidot[H]) which I have is greater (megas[G], gedolah[H]) than Yochanan[H] (YHVH is gracious, John the Baptist); for the works, actions, tasks (ergon[G], ha-ma’asiym[H]) which the Father (ho-Pater[G], ha-Av[H]) has given Me (natan liy[H]) to accomplish—the very works that I do, enact (poieo[G], oseh[H])—testify, bear witness, give evidence (martureo[G], meiydiym[H]) about Me, that the Father (ho-Pater[G], ha-Av[H]) has sent (apostello[G], shelachaniy[H]) Me. But the testimony which I have is greater than Yochanan; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish—the very works that I do—give evidence about Me, that the Father has sent Me. This profession is similar in theme to that concerning Abraham (John 8:48-58) and the Queen of the South (Luke 11:31; Matt. 12:42) The works of the Father manifest in the Son are greater than all the testimony and works of fallen human beings. The works of God are both transcendent and physically present simultaneously. They are signs for the redemption of the people and at the same time evidence of the legitimacy of the Messiah. Proof that He is sent of the Father. 37 And the Father (Pater[G], ha-Av[H]) Who sent Me (shelachaniy[H]), He has testified (martureo[G], meiydiym[H]) of Me. You all have neither heard (akouo[G], shema’tem[H]) His voice, sound (phone[G], kolu[H]) at any time, ever (popote[G]) nor seen, looked upon, experienced, perceived, discerned, of (horao[G], reiytem[H]) His form, shape, appearance (eidos[G]). 38 You do not have His word, essence (logos[G], devaru[H], miltha[A]) abiding, remaining, staying in you (meno[G]), for you do not believe, have faith in, trust in (pisteuo[G], ma’amiyniym[H]) Him Whom He sent (apostello[G], lishlucho[H]). And the Father Who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You all have neither heard His voice, sound at any time, ever nor have you seen, looked upon, experienced, perceived, discerned, of His form, shape, appearance 38 You do not have His word, essence abiding, remaining, staying in you, for you do not believe, have faith in, trust in Him Whom He sent. The testimony of God the Father concerning the Son spans the entirety of the Tanakh (OT) from Genesis 3:15 through to Malachi 3:1. “Now therefore, O kings, show discernment; Take warning, O [j]judges of the earth. 11 [k]Worship the Lord with [l]reverence And rejoice with trembling. 12 [m]Do homage to the Son, that He not become angry, and you perish in the way, For His wrath may [n]soon be kindled. How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!” -Psalm 2:10-12 (NASB) “I will declare the decree of Adonai. He said to me: “You are My Son-- today I have become Your Father.” -Psalm 2:7 (TLV) “and behold, a bat kol voice from the heavens said, “This is my beloved Son, with Whom I am well pleased.” -Matthew 3:17 “He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” -Matthew 17:5 (ESV) “We accept human testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son.” -1 John 5:9 (NIV) “nor have you seen, looked upon, experienced, perceived, discerned, of His form, shape, appearance” While it is true that Moses and Jacob among others saw manifestations of God and lived, none the less, no one has ever seen God in all the fullness of His glory except the Son. “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.” -John 3:13 (NASB) “You do not have His word, essence abiding, remaining, staying in you, for you do not believe, have faith in, trust in Him Whom He sent.” In one sense Yeshua is referring specifically to Himself as the “Davar (logos)” Word essence of God. His hearers do not yet have the Word of God living in them because they have not acknowledged the Word Himself, that is Yeshua, Who stands before them. This is pretext for what follows regarding the written word (Tanakh). The Judean religious Jews have the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings and yet do not recognize the Author (Yeshua, the Word essence of God). “Him Whom He sent” is Yeshua. 39 You diligently search (ereunao[G], direshu[H]) the Scriptures, Writings (graphe[G], vaketaviym[H]) because you think (dokeo[G]) that in them you have life (zoe[G, chayeiy[H]) everlasting (aionios[G], olam[H]); it is these (ekeinos[G]) that testify bear witness, give evidence (martureo[G], hameiydiym[H]) about Me; You diligently search the Scriptures, Writings because you think that in them you have life everlasting; it is these that testify bear witness, give evidence about Me; “Scripture” (graphe[G], ketuviym[H]) refers to the Tanakh (OT) as a whole rather than the Ketuviym (poetry books) only. Therefore, the wealth of canonical Jewish literature of the first century CE is meant. Yeshua does not deny that the Tanakh points to eternal life, rather He accuses His hearers of failing to listen to the Tanakh and instead making the text itself an object of worship. The text points to Yeshua as the Goal and Mediator through Whom God brings eternal life to human beings (Romans 10:4). To this day many of our people misappropriate the Torah, continuing to misread and misuse it. The Zohar calls the Torah itself “eternal life” (Zohar in Gen. fol. 100. 3.). However, the commentator Maimonides is correct in saying: “he that begins to read in the book of the law is obliged to bless after this manner: blessed be he that has chosen us above all nations, and hath given us his law.--And he that finishes blesses after him in this manner: blessed is he who hath given us his law, the law of truth, and has planted "eternal life" in the midst of us.'' - Maimonides. in Misn. Megilla, c. 4. sect. 1. After all, the seed of the Messiah is planted securely in the text of the Torah and is therefore awaiting the revelation of the Spirit of God at the appointed time when the fullness of the nations have come in (Romans 10:4; 11:23-27). 40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life, living (zoe[G], chayiym[H]). 41 I do not receive glory, renown, honour (doxa[G], kavod[H]) from men (anthropos[G], adam[H]); and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life. 41 I do not receive glory, renown, honour from men; The specific Judean religious Jews in question were unwilling at that time to come to Yeshua in order to receive life. Yeshua assured them that He did not require their approval or the approval of any human being in order to fulfil His purpose and carry out the works of God’s Kingdom. He need not receive glory from men because He knew that He shared in the glory of the Father before the creation of the world. “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world came to be.” -John 17:5 (TLV) 42 but I know (ginosko[G], yada’tiy[H]) you, that you do not have the benevolent love (agape[G], ahavat[H]) of the God (ho-Theos[G], Elohiym[H]) in yourselves. 43 I Behold, now, take note, beware (Hineih[H]) have come in the name (en ho onoma[G], be’sheim[H]) of My Father (Pater[G], Aviy[H]), and you do not receive (lambano[G], kibaltem[H]) Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive (lambano[G], tekabeilu[H]) him. but I know you, that you do not have the benevolent love of the God in yourselves. 43 I Behold, now, take note, beware have come in the name of My Father, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him. Yeshua knows the hearts of His accusers. He knows that they prefer to put their trust in men of their own sect and have deluded themselves through the pursuit of the theological ideas and rules of their priests, scholars, teachers, and rabbis. In this respect many in the believing community (Church) today are equally guilty. Knowing the text but misinterpreting it through a lack of knowledge of the Author. Yeshua exposes the hypocrisy of His accusers by pointing out that they would rather follow a man who glorifies himself than a man who points others to the Father as He does. 44 How can you believe (pisteuo[G], leha’amiyn[H]), when you receive glory, honour, renown (doxa[G], kavod[H]) from one another and you do not seek the glory (doxa[G], ha-kavod[H]) that is from the One (monos[G], hayachiyd[H]) (Theos[G], ha-Elohiym[H]) God? How can you believe, when you receive glory, honour, renown from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one God? Because his hearers were seeking honour and prestige among their fellow religious Jews in Jerusalem, they were unable to see what was right in front of them. It is common to human beings to be distracted by beautiful lies and self-deification, a form of gazing that it is extremely difficult to be loosed from. 45 Do not think (dokeo[G]) that I will accuse (kategoreo[G], eton[H]) you before the Father (ho-Pater[G], ha-Av[H]); the one who accuses (kategoreo[G], ha-toein[H]) you is Moshe[H] (drawn out, Moses), in whom you have set your hope (elpizo[G]). Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moshe, in whom you have set your hope. The ultimate irony in this situation is that the “hero” of these specific Judean’s and indeed of many Jews of Yeshua’s time, is Moses, the human recorder of the Words of Hashem (Yeshua). Moses who himself points to Yeshua as the “prophet like me” (Deut. 18:15). Therefore, it is Moses who is best qualified to accuse those Jews who deny Yeshua. (Keeping in mind that many Jews believed Yeshua, and that many of us are today returning to HaShem through our King Messiah Yeshua). Our rabbis agree that the Messiah, when He comes, will rebuke the students of Israel’s sages: "R. Zeira says, that R. Jeremiah bar Aba said, that in the generation in which the son of David shall come, there will be קטוגוריא בתלמידי חכמים, "accusations against the disciples of the wise men".'' - Talmud Bavli. Cetubot, fol. 112. 2. 46 For if you believed, trusted in, had faith in (pisteuo[G], ta’amiynu[H]) Moshe[H] (drawn out, Moses), you would believe, trust in, have faith in (pisteuo[G], ta’amiynu[H]) Me, for he wrote (grapho[G], katav[H]) about Me. 47 But if you do not believe, trust in, have faith in (pisteuo[G], ma’amiyniym[H]) his written words (gramma[G], lichtavayv[H]), how will you believe My spoken words (rhema[G], lidvaray[H])?” For if you believed Moshe, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his written words, how will you believe My spoken words?” The writings of Moses are widely believed to be prophetic of the Messiah by the vast majority of our rabbis and sages. We need only take God at His Word (Davar, Logos). “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, [a]Until Shiloh comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.” -Genesis 49:10 (NASB) “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near; A star shall come forth from Jacob, A scepter shall rise from Israel, And shall crush through the [a]forehead of Moab, And [b]tear down all the sons of [c]Sheth.” -Numbers 24:17 (NASB) “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your [a]countrymen, you shall listen to him. 16 This is according to all that you asked of the Lord your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.’ 17 The Lord said to me, ‘They have [b]spoken well. 18 I will raise up a prophet from among their [c]countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.” - Deuteronomy 18:15-18 (NASB) Copyright 2020 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 Yochanan writes as a common fisherman seeing the world through galaxy stained glasses. Introduction: The purpose of this introduction is not to debate the many theories as to authorship, dating, theological intent and historical record or lack thereof, but rather to offer a single collation of the most reasonable answers to these questions relative to spiritual guidance, textual evidence and current scholarship. In addition, I will seek to refute modern scholarship where it has either disregarded the Jewish mind (as in the case of some Modern Christian Scholarship) or has sought to label the text of Yochanan “Anti-Semitic” (as in the case of some Modern Jewish Commentators and a number of liberal Christian scholars). Author: Compilation of the complete manuscript and scribal transmission aside, the author of this scroll is almost certainly Yochanan (John) the Shaliach (Apostle, sent one) and Talmid (Disciple) of Yeshua (Jesus) the King Messiah. Yochanan was present and instrumental in the development of the early body of Jewish believers in Yeshua, “the disciple whom Yeshua loved” (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20, 24). He was the son of Zebedee (Mark 1:19-10), and is also the most likely choice for authorship of the 1st through 3rd letters of John and the Revelation of Yeshua given to John: making him a significant contributor to the collected works of the Brit HaChadashah (New Testament). Yochanan (John) is not mentioned by name in this work (Nor in the 1st through 3rd Letters of John, where the author is simply referred to as “The Elder”), which would be natural if he were the author but entirely inexplicable were he not the author. This fact alone refutes all the other theoretical assumptions made to the contrary. The author had an intimate knowledge of Jewish life, religious custom (7:22), and popular Messianic expectation (1:21; 7:40-42), and obviously had first-hand experience of the uneasy relationship between the Jews (Judeans) and Samaritans of the first century CE (AD) [Chap. 4]. In addition to this the author shows his familiarity with locations in first century Israel (Under Roman occupation), such as Bethany (11:18) and Cana (a village which is not referred to in any earlier historical documentation) [2:1; 21:2]). Specific details in the account of this Gospel are evidence of an eye witness (12:3 etc.), and early writers such as Irenaeus (140-203 AD) and Tertullian (150-222 AD) claim that Yochanan (John) is the author. The author of the Gospel according to Yochanan (John) clearly sees the writings of the prophets Ezekiel, Zechariah and Daniel as significant, and seems to place some emphasis on the reunification of the Northern and Southern tribes under God’s chosen King (Ezekiel 37:16; John 10:16). Other themes from Ezekiel include the Good Shepherd delivering Israel from the neglectful shepherds (Ezekiel 34:1-31; John 10:11), and the “Son of Man” instructing God’s Spirit to come and resurrect the people of Israel (Ezekiel 37:9-10; John 16:7). The frequent use of transliterated Aramaic and Hebrew terms is evidence of the Hebrew thought patterns and Jewish religious understanding of the author. While the text comes to us in Greek, the lingua franca, common tongue of the business world of the first century, it is none the less written by a Jew (an Israelite) who thinks as a Jew living under the oppression of Roman occupation and not as a Hellenized Jew of compromised alliances (as was the case with the historian Josephus). With this in mind, and although there is no physical evidence to date (no preserved Hebrew or Aramaic manuscripts that date earlier than the Greek texts), it is possible that there were earlier manuscripts of Yochanan’s Gospel recorded in Hebrew and Aramaic. Regardless, the Greek text is inspired and trustworthy and does not work against Hebrew thought but rather illuminates it in the same way that the Greek Septuigant illuminates the Hebrew Tanakh. We trust in the infallibility of God with regard to Scripture and its codification and not in the fallibility of men or their subjective debates over the reliability of Scripture. Our text is reliable because God is reliable. Date: While the traditional view places the dating of this Gospel at the latter part of the first century (after 85 AD), I am inclined to disagree for a number of reasons. Clement of Alexandria who died approx. 216 AD, claimed that John wrote his Gospel to supplement the other Gospels (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6,14.7). It is suggested therefore, that John’s Gospel relied on the manuscripts of the other Gospels and was written at a later date. Some have also argued that the theology of John is more developed than that of the other three Gospels. It seems clear however from a reading of John’s Gospel, that he wrote quite independently from the other Gospel writers, while supplementing their accounts with his own unique eye witness account of the events of Yeshua’s life and ministry. This does not contradict the words of Clement, rather it simply concludes an earlier dating for the writing of John’s Gospel. To say that John’s developed theology is proof of a late writing is ridiculous, given that Paul the Apostle exhibits equally developed theology in his letter to the Roman body of believers, a work that is confidently dated 57 AD. Additionally, John 5:2 states that there “is (present tense) a pool near the sheep gate”, meaning that the Gospel must have been written prior to 70 AD and the destruction of Jerusalem. Therefore, I conclude that the Gospel of John must have been written sometime between 50 and 70 CE (AD). Audience: Many and varied original recipients for the Gospel of John have been suggested. Some say it was intended in part as a polemic against Gnosticism and those who put undue emphasis on the ministry of John the Baptist, others say that it was written in order to promote unity between the Jews and the Samaritans, still others that it was intended for a variety of Israelite groups within the Judean region. While some say that it was intended for Greek believers. It seems probable that John’s Gospel, while intended for all believers (Jews, Samaritans, Greeks etc.) was originally written for John’s own Jewish people both in the land of Israel and throughout the Diaspora. The use of the very specific “Ho Ioudaioi” (Huy ee-u-dayo, the Judeans) as a supplement to the more general use of “Ioudaios” (ee-u-da-yos, Jews), seems to indicate that at least in part, John was seeking to make a distinction between those Jews that followed the teaching and ideology of the first century Religious leaders based in Jerusalem and representing Judea, and the wider body of Jews living under Roman occupation in the land of Israel. Additionally, John emphasizes the fact that Yeshua is an Ioudaios Judean, unlike Matthew, Mark and Luke, who all focus on the fact that Yeshua is a Galilean. We add to this the detailed typography and unique locations mentioned in John’s Gospel, which speak to a group of people well familiar with the land, rather than a wider audience of non-Jewish origin. He also uses numerous Aramaic and Hebrew terms in transliteration, which he explains by way of translation, almost as an afterthought. With these things in mind, much of the contention regarding accusations of anti-Semitism within this Gospel is resolved. After all, when speaking to one’s own people concerning one’s own people, one is obligated to call things as they are and not to hide the flaws which are apparent within the humanity of one’s tribe, culture and religion. Therefore, in the same way that it is wrong for an American of European descent to tell jokes at the expense of an African American, while entirely appropriate for an African American to tell a self-deprecating joke about African American’s, so it is with John’s Gospel, where he both praises his Jewish people and their intrinsic relationship to their own Messiah Yeshua (A Jew), while also rebuking their disbelief. The ancient prophets of Israel were tasked with the very same thing, to draw a line between the believing remnant and the apostate community. In this regard John is no different from any of the prophets of Israel, nor for that matter from Moses himself. Therefore, if John’s Gospel is anti-Semitic, so is the entire Tanakh (Hebrew Bible, OT). Style, Purpose & Emphasis: John’s Gospel is quite different from the other Gospels in a number of ways. He does not follow a literal chronology of events but uses a more transcendent Hebraic mode of writing that relies on cosmological ideas and emotive expression. There is something almost poetic about John’s account that makes it read like a divine romance set in a very tactile, physical dimension. He writes like a man seeing the world through galaxy stained glasses. The author seems to favour a connection between the ministry of Yeshua (The Word made flesh) and that of the prophets Ezekiel, Zechariah and Daniel. This is seen in both the actions of Yeshua and His fulfilling of certain elements of the prophecies of these three prophets of God. It is therefore wise to read John’s account with the prophecies of Ezekiel, Zechariah and Daniel in mind. John bridges the perceived gap between spiritual and physical realities in a very Hebraic way. The consciousness of John’s Gospel is held in the tension between time and space and the God of the universe Who lives beyond time and space but in Whom all things exist. John has not bowed to the Greco-Roman need for a point a and point b directed by a beginning and a conclusion, rather he sees the “kingdom” and its opposition “the world (fallen)” as a story of beginning and goal, birth and re-birth, not in an eastern esoteric transient impersonal way but in a redemptive, permanent, perpetuity. In laymen’s terms, he does not promote the idea of multiple lives (reincarnation) but that of one life renewed (the rebirth of the present incarnation). This in fact means that John’s thinking begins and then, begins again in Messiah Yeshua the Son of God, God with us, the Word-Essence that holds the universe together. Beginning with the divinity of Messiah as the Devar (Word, Essence, Matter, Thing), pre-existing, the author goes on to expound the mystery of the manifest human nature of that same divine essence and the convergence of heavenly power and earthly frailty. John introduces Yeshua as the “Son of God” and emphasizes the signs of Yeshua’s ministry (2:11) along with Yeshua’s professed goal of finishing His Father’s work of redemption (4:34). God’s Own kavod (Glory) is made manifest in the person of Yeshua (10:30; 14:9). The “I AM” statements of Yeshua in the book of John, echo God’s proclamation concerning Himself (Exodus 3:14; John 6:35; 8:12; 8:58; 9:5; 10:7, 9, 14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5). At the same time Yeshua is the Servant of God Who acts with absolute humility, coming as the substitutionary Lamb Who takes away the sins of the World. Many have sought to posit extra-Biblical reasons for the writing of John’s Gospel, but the author himself expresses his motivation succinctly and clearly: “But these things have been written so that you may believe that Yeshua is Mashiach Ben-Elohim, and that by believing you may have life in His name.” -John 20:31 Tree of Life Version (TLV) NB: My translation of the text seeks to combine the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic versions of John’s Gospel into one cohesive English translation. I have used the Greek text as the primary, the Hebrew as secondary, and have noted the Aramaic only where there is a discernible difference between it and the Hebrew text. [G] = Greek [H] = Hebrew [A] = Aramaic [TH] = Talmudic Hebrew [RA] = Pre and Post 1st Century Rabbinical Aramaic Joh 1:1 In the beginning (En arkhay[G] In the Origin, Be’reishit[H] In the head/front/Leader) was the Word, Essence, Substance, Utterance, Manifestation (Logos[G], Davar[H], Memra[RA], Miltha[A]) and the Word was with the God (Ho-Theos[G], Ha-Elohim[H]), and God was that Word. Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with the God. Yochanan firmly anchors his Gospel account in the Torah (Books of Moses) and the wider body of Hebrew Scripture the Tanakh (OT). Both Genesis (Tanakh) and John (NT) begin (no pun intended) with the phrase “In the Beginning”. This is why the Hebrew title of the book of Genesis is Be’reishit, which is the first word of Genesis, a compound word made up of Ba (In the) and Reishit (From Rosh, meaning head, leader, front). It is interesting to note that this theme of beginning influenced the Egyptian Coptic order of the New Testament, which places John at the beginning. The Egyptian Coptic New Testament Gospels book order being John, Matthew, Mark, Luke. With regard to the Hebrew text of both Be’reishit (Genesis) and Yochanan (John), we may read Be’reishit as, “In the Head”, the “Head” of the Universe (All creation) being YHVH, God Himself. Therefore, as in the case of Genesis, John’s Gospel begins in God, the Creator and Head of all things. This is of significance to Messiah followers, who have accepted that Yeshua our King Messiah is the “Head” of the body of believers (Ephesians 5:23). “In the beginning was the Word” (John. 1:1) is synonymous with “In the beginning… Elohim said (spoken Word)” (Gen. 1:1, 3). Thus, John establishes the uncreated, pre-existent nature of the Word. The Word being the manifest essence of God Himself, anthropomorphically issuing from God’s mouth. The Hebrew text of Genesis 1:1 reads: “Be’reishit In the beginning (head) bara creating (from nothing), Elohim God (Judge) et (Aleph-Tav, the Alphabet, that which forms all words), ha-shamayim the heavens v’et (and Aleph-Tav) ha-aretz the earth (land).” “I am the Aleph and the Tav, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the goal… I, Yeshua, have sent my messenger to give you this testimony for the believing communities. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” Revelation 22:13, 16 (Author’s translation) Therefore, the remez (hint) found in the “et” (Aleph-Tav) of Genesis 1:1, is a further illumination of the words of Yochanan (John) 1:1. The alternative Orthodox Jewish English translation of Genesis 1:1, which reads, “When God began to create…” further establishes the existence of the Word prior to all of the created order. God is seen throughout the Tanakh (OT) creating, calling, instructing and relating through His Word. Yishayahu (Isaiah) says: “Kiy ka’asher yeireid For as the coming down of hageshem the rain vehasheleg and the snow min-hashamayim from the heavens ve’shamah and there lo yashuv do not return kiy until they hirvah satiate, satisfy the thirst of et-haaretz the earth (land), veholiydah and it brings forth vehitzmiychah and sprouts, venatan and gives zera seed lazoreia to the sower velechem and bread laocheil to the eater, Kein yihyeh So will it come to pass that Devariy My Word asher yeitzei which goes out mipiy from My mouth; lo-yashuv will not return eiliy to Me reiykam void, empty, vainly, kiy for im-asah rather, it will accomplish, make, fashion (asah, from something) that which chafatztiy I delight in, desire, am pleased with, take pleasure in, vehitzliyach and will rush, advance, prosper, succeed in asher that for which shelachtiyv I sent it.” -Isaiah 55:10-11 (Author’s translation) “the Word was with the God, and God was that Word.” The writer is clear, the Word is both with God and at the same time God. Contrary to popular teaching, this was not an entirely alien concept in first century Judaism. The idea of the Word (Logos[G], Davar[H] Memra[RA], Miltha[A]) being intrinsically linked to God was not a foreign concept to first century Judaism. Philo of Alexandria or Yedideyah Ha-Cohen (Jedidiah the priest), a Jewish philosopher who lived from 20 BCE (BC) to 50 CE (AD) wrote: “The most universal of all things is God; and in second place, the word of God.” -Philo of Alexandria Allegorical Interpretation II, 86 The Aramaic Jerusalem Targum, codified in the second century CE (AD) renders the text of Genesis 3:8 as: “…they heard the voice of the word of the Lord God walking in the garden… and Adam and his wife hid themselves from before the Lord God among the trees of the garden.” -Jerusalem Targum (Genesis 3:8) Using the Rabbinical Aramaic word Memra in place of the Hebrew Davar in the same Aramaic Targum, the writer renders Genesis 19:24 as: “And the Word (Memra) of the Lord Himself had made to descend upon the people of Sodom and Gomora… fire from before the Lord from the heavens.” -Jerusalem Targum 19:24 The Talmud also understands the Messiah as pre-existent, though not uncreated: “It was taught that seven things were created before the world was created; they are the Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden, Gehinnom, the Throne of Glory, the Temple, and the name of the Messiah… The name of the Messiah, as it is written: ‘May his name (Messiah) endure forever, may his name produce issue prior to the sun’ (Psalm 72:17).” -Pesachim 54a, N’darim 39a; and Midrash on Psalm 93:3 The Jewish convert and commentator Onkelos wrote the following paraphrase (110 CE/AD): "if the word of the Lord will be my help, and will keep me, the word of the Lord shall be my God:” -Paraphrase Genesis 28:20 Onkelos (35-120 CE/AD) The second century Targums of Yonatan and Yerushalayim paraphrase certain texts as referring to the Memra (Word): "I will cause the glory of my Shekinah to dwell among you, and my word shall be your God, the Redeemer;” -Targum Yonatan Leviticus 26:12 "out of thee, before me, shall come forth the Messiah, that he may exercise dominion over Israel; whose name is said from eternity, from the days of old.” -Targum Yonatan Micah 5:2 "ye have made the word of the Lord king over you this day, that he may be your God:” -Targum Yerushalayim Deuteronomy 26:17 In stating that “the Word was with the God, and God was that Word” Yochanan is expressing the Hebrew understanding of “both and” rather than the limited Greco-Roman thinking of “either or”. In this respect Yochanan’s Gospel establishes itself in Biblical Hebrew thought from the outset. Therefore, failing to understand Yochanan’s words from a Hebraic mindset will lead to misinterpretation and limited understanding on the part of the student of this Gospel. “He (Yeshua) is wrapped in a garment immersed in blood, and He is called by the name Ho-Logos[G] (Ha-Davar[H]) the Word, Ho-Theos[G] (Ha-Elohim[H]) the God.” -Revelation 19:13 (Author’s translation) Yeshua (YHVH Saves), Ha-Davar (the Word, Essence) Ha-Elohim (the God, Judge, Ruler) Imanu (With us) El (God). Joh 1:3 All things, individually, collectively (Pas[G]) the everything (Ha-col[H]) were made, came into existence (Ginomai[G]) through (Dia[G]) Him, upon His hand (Al-yadayv[H]); and without, apart from, separate from (Khoris[G]) Him not one thing was made, came into existence (Ginomai[G]) that has been made (exists). The subject of this verse is the Word Himself, Whom we know to be Yeshua the King Messiah (John 1:14-18). Once again. This idea was not entirely foreign to first century Judaism: "and the word of the Lord created man in his likeness.” -Targum Yerushalayim Genesis 1:27 "and the word of the Lord God said, behold the man whom I have created, is the only one in the world.” -Targum Yerushalayim Genesis 3:22 "the eternal God is an habitation, by whose word the world was made.” -Onkelos "yea, by my word I have founded the earth:” -Targum Yonatan Isaiah 48:13 “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” -Hebrews 11:3 KJV Joh 1:4 In Him was life, soul existence (Zoe[G]) living (Chayim[H]); and the life, living was the light (Ho-Phos[G], Ha-Or[H]) of the human being, humanity, mankind (Anthropos[G]). Alt. Hebrew trans. To the children of the Adam (Livneiy ha-adam[H]). “In Him was life, soul existence, living”. Not just Chai “life” but Chayim “Living” “and the life, living was the light to the children of Adam” Therefore, the last Adam (Yeshua) is also the Word which spoke the light that gives the first Adam and his progeny life. “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” -1 Corinthians 15:45 NIV Light is frequently employed in representing the manifest presence of God (Isa. 2:5; Ps. 257:1; 36:9). Later in Yochanan’s Gospel account Yeshua says of Himself “I am the Light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5). Genesis 1:3 reads “And commanded (vayomeir), Elohim, ‘Be light (Or)’, and light (Or) was:” This verse begins a literary rhythm that uses a trifold pattern to convey the process of creation and the way it continues to unfold in our daily lives. 1. God commands (Vayomeir) 2. God Sees/Observes (Vai’re: from ra’ah) 3. God Proclaims/Calls/Names (Vayikra) God commands creation, He sees that it is good and He gives all created entities unique names and roles in the order of the universe. From the view of humanity, God has created us in love, observes us with pleasure and imparts to each of us a unique and fulfilling identity and purpose in Him. The light which is commanded in Genesis 1:3 is essential to the remainder of creation. Yochanan understands this light (Or) to be the product of the Father through the Word (Davar, Yeshua), it illuminates the formless and empty elements and acts to ignite both the inanimate matter and the living souls which are to come. Genesis goes on to say: “And saw, Elohim, the light (Or), that it was good, and made a distinction, Elohim, between the light (Or) and the darkness (choshekh):” -Genesis 1:4 (Author’s translation) Before distinguishing between light and darkness, God sees that the light is good. The light is a representation of all that is good. Distinctions are made throughout the creative processes of God. In Hebrew thought the distinguishing of things is not the same as the separation of things. Darkness is not the absence of light, rather it is a creation of The Light of God: “If I say, ‘surely the choshekh (darkness) shall cover me’; even the layla (night, spiralling darkness) shall be Or (light) surrounding me.” –Psalm 139:11 (Author’s translation) Joh 1:5 And the light (Ho-Phos[G], Ha-Or[H]) shines in darkness (Bachoshekh[H]); and the darkness cannot comprehended, lay hold of, take possession of, overcome (Katalambano[G]) it. In one sense the Light that emanates from the mouth of God in the Word of Yeshua at the beginning of creation, as it pertains to God with us (Yeshua), is the ignition present in the creation of darkness, making darkness subject to the Light of God. Therefore, the order of creation illuminates (no pun intended) the nature of light and darkness. Yochanan uses this imagery here to make a drash (comparative teaching) concerning good and evil, light representing good and the true knowledge of God, and darkness, representing evil and ignorance toward God. The conclusion is that ignorance toward God can neither understand nor overcome the light (true knowledge) of God and His redemptive purposes for humanity and creation as a whole through the Light Bearer (Creator) and Redeemer, the King Messiah Yeshua. Joh 1:6 It came to pass that there was a man sent (Apostello[G], Shaluach[H]) from God (Theos[G], Elohim[H]), whose name was Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist, YHVH gracious giver). Joh 1:7 The same man came to testify, to bear witness of the Light (Ho-Phos[G], Ha-Or[H]), in order that all, individually, collectively (Pas[G]) the whole (Ha-col[H]) through Him, by the means of Him, by His hand (Dia[G], N’haymen[A]), might believe, have faith, trust, have security, be made confident, be persuaded (Pisteuo[G], Ya’amiynu[H]). The author of this Gospel, having begun at the beginning of all things, now presents the forerunner who will declare the coming of the King Messiah and the fulfilment of all things (as it were). Jews (Israelites) had been looking forward to the coming of Elijah as the one who would hail the coming King Messiah (Malachi 4:5). Seemingly unbeknownst to the Jews of Israel in John’s generation, Yochanan the Immerser had come in the spirit of Elijah (Mark 9:12-13; Luke 1:11-17) to do that very thing. The man Yochanan (The Baptist) is “sent from God”. This is the premise for Yochanan’s later statement “but He (God) that sent me to immerse with water, the same (God) said to me, ‘Upon Whom you shall see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, the same is He Who immerses with the Holy Spirit.’”(John 1:33) Yochanan is given the title “the Baptist” in order to distinguish him from the writer of John’s Gospel, Yochanan the talmid (disciple) of Yeshua. The term Baptist from the Greek baptizo is a reference to the Jewish mikveh (ritual pool or body of water) practice of tevilah (immersion), a full immersion in a ritual pool or body of water symbolizing purification. With regard to the theological baggage associated with baptism, sprinkling etc. It is better to understand Yochanan as Yochanan the Immerser. The baptisms he performed for those who came to him in repentance toward God would never have involved sprinkling, this is a Greco-Roman Gentile Church syncretistic practice that muddies the waters (pun intended) of true full immersion baptism, or in Hebrew tevilah. Yochanan the Immerser is also known to secular history via the writings of Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 18:116-119). “in order that all, individually, collectively, the whole, through Him (The Light), might believe” The nearest subject is “the Light” that John the Immerser had come to bear witness to. Therefore, it is through the Light of Yeshua that human beings will come to believe. Verse 6-8 are pre-text for the historical/spiritual narrative concerning Yochanan the Immerser’s ministry described in verses 19-34. Rabbinic literature calls the promised Messiah by the name “Light.” "light is his name"; as it is said in Daniel 2:22 and the light dwelleth with him;” - Echa Rabbati, fol. 50. 2. Philo of Alexandria or Yedideyah Ha-Cohen (Jedidiah the priest), the Jewish philosopher who lived from 20 BCE (BC) to 50 CE (AD) describes the Logos, (Word), as light, and calls Him the “intelligible light; the universal light, the most perfect light;” Philo even goes so far as to depict Him as full of divine light; and says, “He (Logos) is called the sun.” Meaning that with regard to created light (metaphorically speaking), the Logos is the brightest of all light. Joh 1:8 He (John the Baptist) was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of the Light. Joh 1:9 That was the Light (Ho-Phos[G], Ha-Or[H]) by nature, true (Ho Alethinos[G], Ha-amitiy[H]), which gives light, illuminates (Photizo[G], Ha-mei’ir[H]) everyone individually, collectively (Pas[G]) the whole of (Ha-col[H]) humanity (Anthropos[G], l’col-adam[H]) that comes into the world (Kosmos[G], Ha-Olam[H]). “He (John the Baptist) was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of the Light.” The author of John’s Gospel goes to great pains to be very specific about his subjects and their respective roles. The Light brings redemption but Yochanan is not the Light, rather he is the promised forerunner of Malachi 4:5, who is “sent to bear witness of (to) the Light.” “That was the Light by nature, true, which gives light, illuminates everyone individually, collectively the whole of humanity, that comes into the world”. The Light, that by its very nature carries the truth that emanates from God, is the same light mentioned previously, being the giver of light and life to every human being that comes into the world (affected by sin and death), has also Himself, come into the world in order to illuminate the darkness of the ignorant sinful minds of human beings and deliver those who would receive Him from the darkness of perpetual death. Joh 1:10 He was in the world (Kosmos[G], Ha-Olam[H]), and the world was made by, through (Dia[G]) Him, and the world did not know Him. Joh 1:11 He came to His own things (Idio[G] neuter), those things of Him (Shelo[H]) and His own (Idios[G] masc.), those which were for Him (Asher lo[H]) did not receive Him. “the world (kosmos) was made through Him, and the world (kosmos) did not know Him.” The word Kosmos is used in two ways. It is used of creation as a whole, and more specifically in regard to sin affected humanity and the fallen creation which has been in darkness (ignorant). The Light comes into the world He created but the world He created has been affected by sin and death as a result of the freewill decision of humanity, for freewill is that which makes a love relationship between Creator and creation possible. "and the word of the Lord created man in his likeness.” -Targum Yerushalayim Genesis 1:27 "and the word of the Lord God said, behold the man whom I have created, is the only one in the world.” -Targum Yerushalayim Genesis 3:22 "the eternal God is an habitation, by whose word the world was made.” -Onkelos "yea, by my word I have founded the earth:” -Targum Yonatan Isaiah 48:13 “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” -Hebrews 11:3 KJV “He came to His own things, those things of Him and His own, those which were for Him did not receive Him.” Firstly, verse 10 explains the need for the neuter use of Idio (own things) in the present verse by speaking of all creation, kosmos in general: Secondly, while it is true that Yeshua was rejected by some of His own tribe (The Jews), it is also true that every human being is “His own”, something that is made clear by John 1:4 “In Him was life, soul existence; and the life was the light To the children of the Adam”. It is not true to say (as many Jewish Scholars and not a small number of Liberal Gentile Christian Scholars falsely assert) that this is an intentional plot tool for setting up the Jewish people in general as the enemies of Yeshua. Given the fact that Yeshua and His disciples were all Jews, and that thousands of Jews believed in and followed Him, it is ludicrous to say that the Gospel writers, or specifically the writer of the Gospel of John were anti-Semitic. As I stated previously, it is simply a case of context and proper qualification. Yochanan the disciple and author of John’s Gospel felt secure as a Jew in both honouring the Jewish people of his day while also rebuking those who acted in a manner contrary to the Torah and the good news of the King Messiah Yeshua. As I have already said, this makes Yochanan’s Gospel and ministry no different from that of Israel’s prophets, none of whom have ever been called anti-Semitic for making the same accusations and refutations that Yochanan makes in his Gospel account. “You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from Ho Ioudaios the Jews (Plural).” -Yeshua (John 4:22) Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave power (of choice), liberty (freedom) of doing, authority (Exousia[G]) to become offspring (children) of God (Teknon Theos[G], Baniym Leilohim[H]), even to them that believe, have faith, trust, have security, be made confident, be persuaded (Pisteuo[G], Ya’amiynu[H]) on (in) His name (Onoma[G] Proper Noun, B’shmo[H]): “But as many as received Him, to them He gave power to become offspring (children) of God.” Notice the counterpoint to John 1:4 “to the children of Adam”. All human beings are children of creation (Adam), but in a saving and eternal sense, only those who receive the light of the Creator, the King Messiah Yeshua, can become “B’nai Elohim” children of God. “B’nai Elohim” then is a spiritual designation. In fact we read from the beginning of the Torah of two distinct groups of people, “B’nai Elohim” the sons of God (God worshippers) and “Banot Ha-Adam” the daughters of men (those who rejected God) [Genesis 6:4]. Therefore, while it is true, as the Bible teaches, that we are all children of God with regard to creation (Acts 17:28; Genesis 1:26-27; James 3:9), only those who receive Yeshua become children of God with regard to salvation and everlasting life. “to them that believe on (in) His name” In the ancient world a person’s name was more than just a title, it was representative of character, nature, action, integrity, and honour, or the lack thereof. In the case of Yeshua (YHVH Saves), belief in His Name is continued trust in His person made evident in right action. Filling out a commitment card at an evangelistic rally, may be an indication of one’s desire to believe in His Name, but it does not, in and of itself constitute “belief in His Name”. The “Sinners prayer” mentality of the modern evangelical Church must change and come in line with the Biblical text! Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the desire (Thelema[G]) of the flesh (Sarx[G]), nor of the desire, sex drive of man, but Fathered (Gennao[G]) of God (Theos[G], Elohim[H]). Those who become children of God through Yeshua have been “born again” of God’s Spirit. Therefore, while they are born initially of the flesh, they are born again of the same life giving Spirit that created their flesh. Flesh which they had previously given over to death through sin. Yeshua explains this very thing to Nicodemus: “Yeshua replied, ‘Amen, amen, It’s certain, it’s certain I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of Elohim unless they are born again.’ ‘How can someone be born when they’re old?’ Nakdimon asked. ‘Surely they can’t enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!’ Yeshua answered, ‘Amen, amen, It’s certain, it’s certain I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of Elohim unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.’” -John 3:3-6 (Authors translation) Joh 1:14 And (Kai[G]) the Word, Essence, Substance, Utterance, Manifestation (Logos[G], Davar[H], Miltha[A]) became flesh (Sarx[G]), and dwelt, made His home (Skenoo[G], Shakhan[H]) among us, and we beheld his glory, brightness, splendour, judgement, manifest presence, dwelling, settling (Doxa[G], Kevod[H], Shekhinah[TH]), the glory as of the One (Ekhadaya[A]) only begotten (Monogenes[G] Singular in kind, Yachiyd[H]) of the Father (Pater[G], Av[H]), full of grace (Charis[G], Chesed[H]) and truth (Aletheia[G] objective truth, Emet[H] absolute truth). “the Word, Essence, Substance, became flesh, human, and dwelt among us” This is a paradox only to the Gnostics and their modern pseudo learned progeny. If the Word is the very substance that makes up all things, then His becoming flesh is simply His birth into that which exists of Him and in Him. It is not the case that spirit is good and matter is evil, rather, the Creator is good and the created chose evil, both the created spirits (Satan, demons etc.) and the created flesh (humanity). Therefore, nothing makes more sense than that the Creator of all things, Who loves His creation sacrificially, would give of His essence, enter the sin affected creation and lay down His life for her. After all, two foundational aspects of love are freewill and sacrifice. We note that the Word “Shakhan” dwelt, tabernacled among us, is an allusion to the Mishkan (Tent of Meeting, Tabernacle [Exodus 25:9]) and the dwelling of the divine presence (Kavod HaShem, Shekhinah) with the Jewish people as they travelled from Egyptian bondage to freedom in the promised land. “and we beheld his glory, manifest presence, dwelling, settling (Doxa[G], Kevod[H], Shekhinah[TH])” This is yet another allusion to the manifest presence of God seen on the Tent of Meeting (Exodus 16:10) in the desert and in the Temple of Solomon at its inauguration (1 Kings 8:10-12). “the glory as of the One (Ekhadaya[A]) only begotten (Monogenes[G] Singular in kind, Yachiyd[H]) of the Father (Pater[G], Av[H]), full of grace (Charis[G], Chesed[H]) and truth (Aletheia[G] objective truth, Emet[H] absolute truth).” We note that Yeshua (The Word, the Light), is singular in kind. He is of the Father in that being God with us He carries the attributes and character of the Father in submission to the Father. Thus, Yeshua is full of grace and truth. In order to become flesh, Yeshua had to give up the glory He had with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5). “He emptied himself, laid aside His privileges, taking the very nature of bond servant, being made in human likeness.” (Philippians 2:7, Author’s translation) “For what the Torah couldn’t do, in that it was weakened through the flesh, Elohim did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,” -Romans 8:3 Author’s translation “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.” -Hebrews 4:15 NASB Therefore, it is God the Word Who became flesh and not Yeshua the man who became a god! “For in Him (Yeshua) all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form,” Colossians 2:9 The Tanakh (OT) is full of instances of God appearing in human form, to Abraham (Gen. 18), Jacob (Gen. 32:24-33), Moses (Ex. 3), Joshua (Josh. 5:13-6:5), the people of Israel (Judges 2:1-5, Gideon (Judges 6:11-24), and to Manoah and his wife the parents of Samson (Judges 13:2-23). In all of these portions of Scripture, Elohim (God), YHVH (Adonai), and Ha-Malakh Elohim (The Messenger [Angel] of God) are used interchangeably and in some cases YHVH or Elohim is spoken of as a man (iysh). Therefore, the Tanakh (OT) teaches that the all-powerful, all knowing, all sufficient God of creation is able, if He chooses, to appear as a man. In other words, the idea that God might manifest Himself as a man to redeem His people is a very Jewish one. Our rabbis have tried to exclude Jewish followers of Messiah Yeshua by adding theological statements to our traditions and prayers in order to make it difficult for Jews who follow Yeshua to remain in the Jewish community. One such example is the thirteenth statement of Rambam’s creed, the third article of which reads: “I believe with perfect faith that the Creator, blessed be His Name, is not a body, that He is free from all material properties, and has no form whatsoever.” This statement contradicts the Tanakh, as I have just proven, however, in another sense, a Messiah following Jew can agree that God the Father can be seen in this statement without negating God the Son as a manifestation of the invisible immutable God YHVH. Other rabbis, such as Meir Loeb Ben Yechiel Michael and Menachem Mendel Schneerson, have come extremely close to explicitly affirming the idea of incarnation. They have certainly agreed with the idea implicitly in their writings and teachings. Joh 1:15 Yochanan (John the Baptist) bore witness of Him, and cried, saying, “This was He of Whom I spoke, He that comes after me is preferred, ranked before (Emprosthen[G]) me: He existed (Ginomai[G]) first (Protos[G] first in time or place in any succession of things) before I was (Liy Hayah[H]).” “Him” The subject is the manifest Word become flesh. It is this person, Who is God with us to Whom Yochanan is referring. The Word through Whom Yochanan was created is now entering creation following Yochanan. Thus, Yochanan is second to the first Who comes after him. Joh 1:16 And of His fulness we have all received, and grace (Charis[G], Chesed[H]) in place of grace. Joh 1:17 For the Law, Torah[H] (Nomos[G]) was given through (Dia[G]) Moshe[H] (Moses), the grace (Charis[G], Chesed[H]) and the truth (Aletheia[G], Emet[H]) came through (Dia[G]) Yeshua[H] [A] (Iesous[G] YHVH Saves) the Messiah (Christos[G] Anointed One, Mashiach[H]). “Grace in place of grace” means, common grace (the grace that allows the created order to continue for a time in spite of the fact that it is sin affected) is being both preceded and superseded by saving grace (the grace made possible through the substitutionary sacrifice and resurrection of the King Messiah Yeshua). We note that in spite of the fact that the majority of English translations read “The Law was given by Moses BUT grace and truth…” The Greek word “dia” is better translated “through” rather than “by”, and more importantly, there is no “but” in the Greek text! When read correctly the Torah given by God through Moses is the Instruction that directs the people of Israel toward the Chesed (grace) [Rom. 10:4] that comes through the promised King Messiah, the Living Word (Ha-Devar). Thus, it is Messiah Who writes the Torah on the hearts of believing Israel (ethnic, religious, chosen) [Jer. 31:33]. Therefore, it is not “Torah was but now grace is”, rather it is “Torah reveals the redemptive purpose and Messiah fills that purpose with grace”. The Torah (Law) has never been the opposite of grace (as many Christian theologians claim), this is utter nonsense. The opposite of Law is lawlessness and the opposite of grace is the lack of grace. Therefore, The Author of the Torah (The Word, Yeshua) sent the Torah through Moses (Drawn out), so as to draw out the children of God from among the wicked and point them to the One Who provides salvation by grace through faith in Him. From his treatment of the Torah, Moses and the patriarchs, it is clear that the author of the Gospel account of John is sufficiently comfortable (as a Jew) with the continued importance of Torah as it is illuminated in Yeshua the King Messiah. Joh 1:18 No one has seen the God (Ho-Theos[G], Ha-Elohim[H]) at any time; [Hebrew Alt. Et Ha-Elohim lo ra’ah iysh meiolam[H]: The definitive God, has not been seen by any human (man) from the world] the One (Yichiydaya[A]) only begotten (Monogenes[G] Singular in kind, Yachiyd[H]) Son [Hebrew Alt. Ha-Ben Ha-yachiyd[H]: the Son, the only one], God (Theos[G]) the Being (Ho Oan[G]) Who is in the bosom, chest, folds of the garment (kolpos[G]) of the Father (Ho-Pater[G], Ha-Av[H]), He has declared, gone before, unfolded, told (Exegeomai[G]) of Him [Hebrew Alt. Hu asher hodiyo[H]: He has made Him known] . “No one has seen the God at any time;” Many have seen God in part [Exodus 33:19-23; Isaiah 6:1; Exodus 24:9-11], but none have ever seen Him in the fullness of His glory. The fullness of God’s person and glory is what Exodus 33:20 is speaking of: “And (God) said, ‘You cannot see My face, for no one can see Me and live.” Therefore, God reveals Himself through His Son Yeshua, the Word, Who is YHVH with us: "the word of the Lord God said, ‘lo, the man whom I created, the only one in my world, even as I am, the only one, in the highest heavens.’” -Genesis 3:22 Targum Yerushalayim "there is none that can declare the name of his Father, and that knows him; but this is hid from the eyes of the multitude, until he comes, ‘and he shall declare him’.” R. Moses Haddarsan in Psal. 85. 11. apud Galatin. de Arcan, Cathol. ver. l. 8. c. 2. Philo speaks of the “Logos” saying “He (logos) has come and declared Him (God)” De nominum mutat. p. 1047. “the Son, the only one], God (Theos[G]) the Being (Ho Oan[G]) Who is in the bosom, chest, folds of the garment (kolpos[G]) of the Father (Ho-Pater[G], Ha-Av[H]), He has declared, gone before, unfolded, told (Exegeomai[G]) of Him [Hebrew Alt. Hu asher hodiyo[H]: He has made Him known].” There can be no doubt that the author of John’s Gospel is plainly stating that Yeshua is God with us. He writes “The only Son, God the Being, Who is in the bosom of the Father (God), He has declared, told of Him (The Father).” We note the beautiful imagery of the only begotten Son Who has dwelt in the chest of God the Father, within the folds of the Father’s garment as it were, and now unfolds the garment of God and reveals the Father to creation. It is worth noting that the title “Son of God” is sometimes applied to Israel’s kings in the Tanakh (OT), this is particularly evident in Psalm 2:6-9: “I have set up My king upon Zion, My holy mountain.” 7 I will declare the decree of Adonai. He said to me: “You are My Son-- today I have become Your Father.[a] 8 Ask Me, and I will give the nations as Your inheritance, and the far reaches of the earth as Your possession. 9 You shall break the nations with an iron scepter.[b] You shall dash them in pieces like a potter’s jar.”[c] -Psalm 2:6-9 TLV Joh 1:19 And this is the testimony, evidence, record (Marturia[G], Eiduto[H] witness) of Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist), when the Judeans (Ho Ioudaios[G], Jews from the religious ruling class, Ha-Yehudiym[H]) sent priests (Hiereus[G],Kohaniym[H]) and Levites (Leuites[G], Levi’iym[H]) from Yerushalayim (Flood of Peace, Jerusalem) to ask him (John the Baptist), “Who are you?” As stated in my introduction, the author of the Gospel according to John uses the Greek “ho Ioudaioi” (Huy ee-u-dayo, the Judeans) as a supplement to the more general use of “Ioudaios” (ee-u-da-yos, Jews), which seems to indicate that at least in part, John was seeking to make a distinction between those Jews that followed the teaching and ideology of the first century Religious leaders based in Jerusalem and representing Judea, and the wider body of Jews living under Roman occupation in the land of Israel. In the present verse the use of the definite article “Ho” with “Ioudaiois” is further qualified by the distinct groups within the religious community of Jerusalem, who are directly connected to the Temple Cult and functioning at various levels in the hierarchy of the Levitical priesthood. The “Kohaniym” being priests who were directly involved in sacrificial practices, while the more general title “Levi’iym” refers to those appointed to mundane Temple service within the tribe of Levi. Given that the Sanhedrin (in particular the Pharisaic sect, but also the Sadducees) under the High Priest, had the authority to send these messengers (Priests, Levites), the author can only be using “Ho Ioudaios” to refer to the Leading Religious Authorities in Jerusalem and not to Judeans or Jews in general. Particularly because neither the priests nor the Levites were of the tribe of Judah, and yet those that govern them are referred to as Jews. The point is, everyone involved in this narrative is a Jew, John included. Therefore, the dialogue is between Jews over religious matters and not a record of some imagined conflict between Messiah followers and their Jewish brethren. John the Baptist had an intrinsic connection to the Levitical priesthood through his father Zechariah who was of the clan of Abijah (Luke 1; 1 Chronicles 24). John’s father Zechariah was a descendent of the sons of Aaron and may well have been a rightful heir to the High Priesthood at a time in Israel’s history under Roman occupation when the priesthood of Israel had been bought and paid for by her oppressors, meaning that both Caiaphas and Annas were illegitimate High Priests. With this in mind it seems natural that the religious ruling class and priesthood in Jerusalem would be very interested in John’s ministry. They may well have heard of the miracle of John’s conception and the visions of his father. They came to enquire on behalf of those who feared that the rightful Shepherd of Israel may be coming to expose their apostasy. At the same time there were those among them who genuinely sought the reconciliation of Israel to God and eagerly awaited the prophet Elijah and the coming of the King Messiah. Therefore, John the Baptist was being questioned by both insidious and hopeful men alike. Joh 1:20 And he (John the Baptist) conceded, professed, agreed (Homologeo[G], unified speech/word), and denied not; but conceded, professed, agreed “I am not the Messiah (Christ, Ho-Christos[G], Ha-Mashiach[H]).” Joh 1:21 And they asked him, “What then? Are you Eliyahu[H] (Elijah, My God YHVH is He)?” And he said, “I am not.” “Are you that prophet (Ho-Prophetes[G], Ha-Navi[H])?” And he answered, “No.” “And he (John the Baptist) conceded, agreed and denied not; but conceded, agreed ‘I am not the Messiah’” Yochanan the Immerser knew what the Judean party had come to ask, this is why the text says that he conceded, agreed to speak to the contrary of their assumption. The author wants no confusion, Yochanan the Immerser is not the Messiah. “Homologeo” is a compound word made up of the words homo (together) and logos (Word). Therefore John is in agreement with the Logos (Yeshua) in answering the priests and Levites. “And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he said, “I am not.” According to Malachi 4:5, the Jewish people believed that Elijah (Who had not died) would come as a forerunner to declare the coming of the King Messiah and the great and fearful day of the Lord. “‘Are you that prophet?’ And he answered, ‘No.’” That is the “prophet like me” who Moses spoke of, Whom the people of Israel must listen to and obey (Deut. 18:15, 18). Joh 1:22 Then they said to him (John the Baptist), “Who are you? That we may give an answer to them that sent us. What do you say about yourself?” Joh 1:23 He (John the Baptist) said, “I am the voice (Phone[G], Kol[H]) of one crying (Boao[G], Korei[H]) in the wilderness (Eremos[G], Bamidbar[H] Ba-in and mi-from davar-the Word), Make straight the way (Hodos[G], Derech[H]) of the Lord (Kurios[G], YHVH[H]),” speaks Yishayahu[H] (Isaiah, YHVH He has saved) the prophet (Ho-Prophetes[G], Ha-Navi[H]) [Isaiah 40:3]. Yochanan the Immerser was certain of his role and calling and answered without fear using the words of the prophet Isaiah 40:3: “A voice of one calling: ‘In the wilderness prepare the way for the YHVH; make straight in the desert a way for our Elohim.’” We note that Yochanan the Immerser saw himself as making way for YHVH Himself. This is yet another implicit acknowledgement of the deity of Yeshua. Joh 1:24 And they which were sent were of the Pharisees (Pharisaios[G], Perushiym[H], chaste, abstinent ones). Joh 1:25 And they asked him (John the Baptist), and said to him, “Why do you immerse (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) then, if you are not the Messiah [Christ] (Ho-Christos[G], Ha-Mashiach[H]), nor Eliyahu[H] (Elijah), neither that prophet (Prophetes[G], Ha-Navi[H])? The Pharisees, like John and Yeshua, believed in the resurrection of the dead, angels and demons, healing and miracles, the coming Messiah and His Messianic Reign. They looked eagerly forward to salvation from their Roman oppressors and the glorious reign of Israel’s promised King. They also practised ritual immersion as part of their religious rites and clearly understood immersion as a practise which both Elijah and the King Messiah would emphasize as a symbol of purification and the sanctifying of the people of Israel in order that they might be made spiritually clean for the Messianic reign. Josephus Flavius, a Jewish historian who played both sides of the first century conflict between Rome and the Jewish people, was hired by the Roman Emperor to write the history of Rome’s conquests in the occupied territory of Israel, Judea and Samaria. Josephus records an agreement made between Queen Alexandra of Jerusalem and the Leaders of the Pharisaic sect approximately 141 – 67 BCE: “Under Queen Alexandra of Jerusalem the Pharisees became the administrators of all public affairs so as to be empowered to banish and readmit who they pleased, as well as to loose and bind.” -Josephus, Jewish Wars 1:5:2 Joh 1:26 Yochanan (John the Baptist) answered them, saying, “I immerse (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) with water: but there is one standing among you, Whom you don’t know; Joh 1:27 It is He, Who coming after me is preferred, ranked before me, whose sandal straps I am not worthy to untie. “Yochanan (John the Baptist) answered them, saying, ‘I immerse with water: but there is one standing among you, Whom you don’t know;’” Therefore, Yeshua was standing among them (the Pharisees). This is something that many overlook. If Yeshua was standing among the Pharisees, then it is very likely that He dressed as they did and was not noticeably different in appearance to them. As mentioned previously, much of His teaching corresponded to Pharisaic belief. For all intents and purposes, Yeshua was a Pharisee. However, although Yeshua stood among the group of Pharisees, and may even have walked with them from Yerushalayim to meet Yochanan the Immerser, they neither recognised Him as important nor knew Him as the King Messiah, Logos, Only begotten Son of God, and therefore, the words of Yochanan “Whom you don’t know”. “It is He, Who coming after me is preferred, ranked before me, whose sandal straps I am not worthy to untie.” Yochanan reiterates his previous statement in order to explain to them why it is that they don’t recognize or know Yeshua. It is because they don’t understand or know Him as the “Word Who was with God and Who was God”. In the true humility of a prophet of God, Yochanan boldly announces that he is not even worthy to remove the sandals of the One of Whom he speaks. In other words, “With regard to this One, I am not even worthy to perform the job of the lowliest household servant (that of removing sandals and washing the feet of guests).” Joh 1:28 All (Kol[H]) These things were done in Beth-Anya[A] Bethany (House of Answering) beyond Yarden (Jordan, descender, the river) where Yochanan[H] (YHVH is gracious, John the Baptist) was immersing (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]). It is incredible to think that all the answers Yochanan had given the messengers of the Judeans, the Pharisees, were given to them in a village named “House of answering”, and that he was proclaiming One Who had descended from the heavens in a region named “descender”. This Bethany was not the home town of Lazarus, which was situated near Jerusalem but was a different village beyond the Jordan under the rule of Phillip the Tetrarch. Joh 1:29 The next day Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist) saw Yeshua[H] (Iesous[G], Jesus, Joshua) coming to him, and said, “Behold, see, perceive, pay attention to, examine (Eido[G], Hineih[H]) the Lamb (Amnos[G], Sheh[H]) of the God (Ho-Theos[G], Ha-Elohim[H]) Who takes away, carries away, raises up, causes to cease (Airo[G]) the sin, missing the mark, error, violation, offence (Hamartia[G], Chata’t[H]) of the world (Ho-Kosmos[G], Ha-Olam[H]).” Yochanan the Immerser likens Yeshua to the main sacrificial animal of the Temple sacrificial rites, and in particular the animal most associated to the substitutionary sin offering. At the same time Yochanan is alluding to the Pesach (Passover) lamb, and its blood covering over the houses of Israel during the plague of the death of the firstborn in Egypt (1 Cor. 5:7). Additionally the figure of the lamb connects Yeshua to the Suffering Servant passage in Isaiah 53 (Acts 8:32), and in relation to His death on the tree He is like the “lamb without a defect or blemish” (1 Peter 1:19) as required by the Torah (Exodus 12:5; Lev. 1:3, 10; 9:3; 23:12). In the book of Revelation Yeshua is referred to as the Lamb 29 times. Finally, the Ram that took Isaac’s place on the altar of Mt Moriah was born a lamb, who would one day lay down his life for the people of Israel (Jacob being still in his father’s body [by way of seed] at the time that Isaac was saved from death). It is worth noting that God had always intended to give of His person, His only Son, as the vicarious (substation) sacrifice for the sins of humanity (1 Cor. 15:3; Hebrews 7). Joh 1:30 This is He of Whom I said, “After me comes a man Who is before, in front of (Emprosthen[G]) me: for He was before me. Joh 1:31 And I knew Him not: but in order (Hina[G]) that He should be made manifest, visible, known (Phaneru[G]) to Israel (Yisrael[H]), therefore I am come immersing (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) with water. NB: Verses 30-34 record Yochanan’s account of those events detailed in Matt. 3:11-17; Mar. 1:7-11 and Luk. 3:15-17; 21-22. “And I knew Him not”? Luke’s Gospel shows clearly that Yochanan (The Baptist) and Yeshua were second cousins (Luke 1:34-45). Therefore, when Yochanan (The Baptist) says “I knew Him not” he means, “I did not properly know or understand the divine character of my cousin, thus it was as if I didn’t know Him at all…” “but in order that He should be made known to Israel, therefore I am come immersing with water.” We note that Yochanan the Immerser sees his role as one coming to immerse Jews with water as a symbolic precursor to them receiving and “knowing” the King Messiah Yeshua, Whom Yochanan would immerse, at which time the Holy Spirit would be manifest in a wondrous sign of Yeshua’s identity as God with us. Notice, that like Yeshua, Yochanan’s ministry was first and foremost for the ethnic, religious, chosen people of Israel, the Jews. Yeshua Himself said, “I have come only for the lost sheep of Israel (ethnic, religious, chosen).” And the Father had said, “The days are coming,” declares HaShem (YHVH), ‘when I will make a new covenant with the people of Yisrael and with the people of Yehudah.’” (Jeremiah 31:31) Joh 1:32 And Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist) bore witness (Martureo[G]), saying (lego[G] from logos), “I saw the Spirit, Wind, Breathe (Pneuma[G], Ruach[H]) descending from the heavens like a dove, and it abode with, remained (Meno[G]) upon Him.” John bears witness with his “lego” speech, of the “Logos” speech of God and His unity with the “Pneuma” Spirit, Wind, Breathe of God. The symbolism of the dove as it reflects the Spirit of God and the institution of peace, is seen throughout the Tanakh (OT) [Gen.8; Psa. 68:13; SOS. 2:14; Isaiah 60:8]. In relationship to the Messiah’s immersion by Yochanan, the story of the deliverance of Noah and his family through the flood and the receipt of the dove at its conclusion is intrinsically connected (1 Peter 3:20). The Flood, the crossing of Red Sea, the crossing of the Jordan river, are all immersions that deliver into that which is promised by God. Joh 1:33 And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to immerse (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) with water, the same said to me, “Upon Whom you shall see the Spirit, Wind, Breathe (Pneuma[G], Ruach[H]) descending, and remaining, abiding with (on) Him, the same is He Who immerses (Baptizo[G], Tebiyl[H]) with the Holy Spirit, Wind, Breathe (Pneuma-Hagios[G], Ruach Ha-Kodesh[H]). Yochanan the Immerser reiterates his lack of fullness of knowledge of Who Yeshua truly was in all His glory. It is essential to Yochanan’s testimony that he proclaims the Word of the One Who sent him, that is God Himself. “there was a man sent from God, whose name was Yochanan” -John 1:6 Joh 1:34 And I saw, and bear witness (Martureo[G]) that this is the Son of the God (Ho-Uihos Ho-Theos[G], Ben-Ha-Elohim[H]). Joh 1:35 Again the next day after that Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist) stood, alongside two of his disciples (Talmidim[H]); Joh 1:36 And looking upon Yeshua[H] (Iesous[G], Jesus, Joshua, YHVH Saves) as He (Yeshua[H]) walked, he (John the Baptist) said, “Behold, see, perceive, pay attention to, examine (Eido[G], Hineih[H]) the Lamb (Ho-Amnos[G], Ha-sheh[H]) of the God (Ho-Theos[G], Ha-Elohim[H])!” “The Son of God” is a Messianic title: In Biblical Judaism a man is always identified as the son (ben) of his father. Thus, there is an intrinsic link between father and son. The Hebrew ben (son) can also mean “descendant” or “having the characteristics of.” We note that Yeshua is not called “a son of God”, or “one of the sons of God” as the term is applied more generally in the Tanakh [OT] (Gen. 6:2, 4; Ex. 4:22-23; Psalms. 82:6; Hos. 11:1; ) and NT (Gal. 4:6): rather, He is called “The Son of God”. This makes the title unique and applicable to Him alone. It is also the reason the religious leaders considered the title blasphemous (John 10:33-36). However, it is also apparent that the religious leaders of Yeshua’s day considered the title “The Son of God” to be a Messianic title: “The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” -Matthew 26:63 As did Yeshua’s disciples: “Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”-Matthew 16:16 “the Lamb of the God” As is always the case in Hebrew literature, the doubling of this statement firmly establishes the identity of the Messiah as sacrificial Lamb. Joh 1:37 And the two disciples (Talmidim[H]) heard him speak, and they Followed, joined, attended to, accompanied (Akoloutheo[G]) Yeshua[H][A] (Iesous[G], Jesus, Joshua, YHVH Saves). Joh 1:38 Then Yeshua[H] [A] turned, and saw them following, and said to them, “What, which, Who (Tis[G]) do you seek?” They said to Him, Rabbi[H], [Rhabbi[G], Raban[A]] (which is to say, being interpreted, Teacher,) where do you dwell, abide, remain (Meno[G])?” Rabbi appears 15 times in its transliterated form in the Greek New testament and with the exception of Matthew 23:7-10 where Yeshua discusses the word, it is only used of Yeshua Himself. Rabbi comes from the Hebrew “Rav” meaning great, or great one. A literal translation of Rabbi would be “My Great One”. However, it seems that by the first century the title Rabbi had become synonymous in religious circles with Teacher, or Master. A title of respect. Joh 1:39 He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where He dwelt, and abode with Him that day: for it was about the tenth hour (16:00). Joh 1:40 One of the two who heard Yochanan[H] (John the Baptist) speak, and followed Him, was Andreas[G] (Andrew: manly) Simon Petros[G] (Simon Peter's, Shimon[H] [heard] Keefa[A] [Rock]) brother. The unnamed disciple is thought to be Yochanan the disciple of Yeshua and likely author of this Gospel. This is consistent with his use of the phrase “disciple whom Yeshua loved” in reference to himself. Joh 1:41 He (Andrew) first (immediately) found his own brother Simon (Shimon[H]), and said to him, “We have found the Messiah (Messias[G], Mashiach[H], Anointed) which is, being interpreted, the Christos[G] (Christ). The Greek Messias transliterates the Aramaic Mashicha and or the Hebrew Mashiach. It is found in John 4:25 and 4:29 but nowhere else in the New Testament. This makes John’s Gospel the one most likely to have had a Hebrew or Aramaic original manuscript. The fact that Andrew was so excited to tell Peter that they had found the Messiah denotes the popular Messianic expectation of the time. Joh 1:42 And he (Andrew) brought him (Simon Peter) to Yeshua[H][A] (Iesous[G]). And when Yeshua[H][A] (Iesous[G]) saw him, He said, “You are Shimon[H] (Simon) the son of Yonah[H] (Ioannes[G], Jonah): You shall be called Kephas[G] (Keefa, [A] Stone, Rock), which is by interpretation, a stone, rock. The poetic irony of Simon Peter’s identity is not lost on the Hebrew mind. He is Shimon (hears) Keefa (Rock) the son of Yonah (Dove). He is one who hears the Rock (HaShem) and is born of the Spirit (Dove). Joh 1:43 The day following Yeshua[H][A] (Iesous[G]) would go forth into the Galilee (Ho-Galilaia[G] circuit, Yam Ha-Kineret[H] Lake harp, region) and found Philip (Philipos[G]) lover of horses), and said to him, “Follow, join, attend to, accompany (Akoloutheo[G]) Me (become My Talmid[H] disciple).” Philip, like many other Jews born in Roman occupied Israel (first century AD) had a Hellenised (Greek) common name. Joh 1:44 Now Philip was of Bethsaida (Beit Tzayda[H]), the city of Andrew and Peter. Joh 1:45 Philip found Nathanael (Netanel[H], Given of God) [Natanel[H] Bar[A] Talmay[A][H], Son of Talmay (ridge, accumulation)Mtt.10:3], and said to him, We have found him, of whom Moshe[H] (Drawn out, Moses) in the Torah[H] (Instruction, Nomos[G], law), and the prophets (Ho-Prophetes[G], Ha-Nevi’iym[H]) did write, Yeshua[H][A] (Iesous[G]) the son of Yosef[H] (YHVH Adds, Joseph) of Nazareth (Nazaret[G], Natzerat[H], netzer[H] [shoot] zara[H] [sown]). Bethsaida was a small fishing village on the west shore of lake Galilee. “of whom Moses in the Torah and the prophets did write,” “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of the Lord our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.” 17 The Lord said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him.” -Deuteronomy 18:15-18 NIV “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, 20 and that he may send the Messiah, who has been appointed for you—even Yeshua. 21 Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. 22 For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. 23 Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from their people.’” -Acts 3:19-23 “I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.” -Daniel 7:13 Exodus 12:46 Deuteronomy 18:15-18 Isaiah 49:7; 50:6;53:5-7, 9-10, 12 Psalms 2:7; 16:10-11; 22:8-9, 16-17 41:9; 68:19 69:22 110:1; 118:22 Micah 4:14 Zechariah 11:12-13; 13:7Daniel 7:13; 9:24-26 Nazareth is interpreted a number of ways, but given Matthew’s assertion that Isaiah 11:1; 53:2 and Zechariah 3:8; 6:12 are prophetic of the promised shoot (netzer) coming from Jesse, being from Nazareth the first century village, it seems likely that the compound proper noun Nazareth is made up of the Hebrew words netzer (shoot) and zara (sown). It makes sense that the sower of the seed of the Gospel is the shoot of Jesse, the promised Servant King Messiah, Who, in sowing, will reap many shoots. Joh 1:46 And Nathanael (Netanel[H], Given of God) said unto Him (Yeshua[H] [A]), “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth (Nazaret[G], Natzerat[H])? Philip said to Him, Come and see. Joh 1:47 Yeshua[H] [A] saw Nathanael (Netanel[H]) coming to Him, and said of him (Nathanael), “Behold, see, perceive, pay attention to, examine (Eido[G], Hineih[H]) a true (Alethos[G]), objective truth, Emet[H], absolute truth) Israelite (Israelites[G], descendant of Jacob, a Jew), in whom is no deceit, fraud (dolos[G], Mirmah[H])! Nazareth was not known for Torah scholarship or religious devotion of the standard expected among the religious elite in Jerusalem and surrounding areas. It was considered a town of commoners and less than desirable uneducated people. It is in fact as filthy and uninviting today as it may have been in the first century. However, Yeshua was brought up in Nazareth, and being God with us, keeping in mind that “Only God is good”, the answer to Nathanael’s question is to be a resounding, “Good Himself comes out from Nazareth”. “Behold, a true Israelite, in whom is no deceit!” Yeshua seems to be making a complex drash (comparative teaching), from the story of Jacob the patriarch and ultimate Israelite (Gen. 32:28-29; 27:35); who deceived his father in order to gain what was rightfully his. Nathanael is clearly a man of devotion to God and the study of Torah, a man of integrity and genuine faith. We note that in describing Nathanael Yeshua did not use the term Yehudi or Ioudaioi (Judean, Jew) but Israelites, the Greek transliteration of Israelite (all the tribes, who are now known as Jews). Therefore, it is clear that Yeshua made a distinction between the ruling religious class and their followers, the Ioudaioi (often translated as Jews but better translated depending on context as “Judeans”, or “Jewish religious leaders”) and the wider body of Israel (12 tribes). Based on this fact there are many places in the New Testament and particularly in the Gospel of John where it is not correct to translate Ioudaioi into modern English as “Jew”, because today the term Jew refers to all Israelites, ethnic, religious, empirical and is therefore an inaccurate conveyance of the first century meaning of Ioudaioi. Joh 1:48 Nathanael (Netanel[H]) said to Him (Yeshua[H] [A]). “From where do you know me?” Yeshua[H] [A] answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree (Suke[G]), I saw, perceived, inspected, examined (Eido[G]) you.” The fig tree was a location for rabbinical study (In part due to the shade it provided). It was also a symbol of Israel’s spiritual fruitfulness, and is later cursed by Yeshua (Mark 11:12-25; Matthew 21:18–22). While it is true that Yeshua had allowed Himself to be limited with regard to His manifest divinity, it is also true that by the Holy Spirit He was able to function in time and space as if He were also beyond time and space. He saw Nathanael in a location and time that He (Yeshua) had not been physically present in. Therefore, while Yeshua was fully man, He clearly maintained certain aspects of deity that transcended the abilities of those born of humanity alone. We note that Yeshua not only saw Nathanael before meeting him, He also examined Nathanael’s heart (core being) and saw him devoid of guile. Joh 1:49 Nathanael (Netanel[H]) answered and said to Him, “Rabbi[H], [Rhabbi[G], Raban[A]], You are the Son of God (Ho-Uihos ho-Theos[G], Ben Ha-Elohim[H]); You are the King (Ho-Basileus[G], Ha-Melekh[H]) of Israel (Yisrael[H]).” Nathanael says “My Great One, You are the Son of God, You are the King of Israel!” On the back of having doubted Philip’s news, Nathanael now undone by the intimate majesty of Yeshua, boldly speaks all the Messianic titles that come to his mind. He has anticipated this great day for the entirety of his life of study and devotion. Nathanael is in awe. Joh 1:50 Yeshua[H] [A] answered and said to him, “Because I said to you, I saw, perceived, inspected, examined (Eido[G]) you under the fig tree, you believe. You shall see perceive, inspect, examine (Eido[G]) greater things than these.” This could be a statement or a question. “Now you believe?”, or “Now you believe!”, and “You shall see greater things…” In fact, you shall come to understand that I am the gateway into the Olam Haba world to come, the stairway that makes God accessible to fallen humanity. Joh 1:51 And He (Yeshua[H] [A]) said to him (Nathanael), Amen[H] [G]Amen[H] [G] (B’emet[H], B’emet[H]), In truth, In truth, It’s certain, it’s certain, I say to you, from this point onward you shall see the heavens open, and the Malakhim[H] Messengers (angels) of the God (Ho-Theo[G]s, Ha-Elohim[H]) ascending and descending upon the Son of man (Ho-Uihos Ho-anthropos[G], Ha-Ben Ha-adam[H]). The doubling of the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew “Amein” denotes the Hebrew practice of affirmation used in the Tanakh (OT) and the firm establishment of what is about to be said. The description relating to the Messengers (Angels) of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man is an allusion to the prophetic vision of Jacob when he lay sleeping on the stone/rock in Ha-Makum in the Place (Temple Mount) having made his way there via Beit El (Bethel)[Genesis 28:10-19]. This redemptive vision was a foreshadowing of the salvation that God would provide for all who would receive the King Messiah, Who is prefigured in the stairway/ladder of Jacob’s dream. “Son of Man” as explained previously, “Son of man” is a Messianic title taken from the prophets Ezekiel and Daniel (Bar Enosh). Yeshua frequently uses this title of Himself (Matt. 8:20; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; John 3:13-14; 4:50; 5:27; 6:27 etc.). He fully identifies as human, while also being the unique Messianic heavenly Son of Man of Daniel 7:13-14, the ideal man, the last Adam, the Kinsmen Redeemer of the people of Israel and all humanity. “So then, just as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, in the same way death spread to all men because all sinned. 13 For up until the Torah, sin was in the world; but sin does not count as sin when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in a manner similar to the violation of Adam, who is a pattern of the One to come.15 But the gracious gift is not like the transgression. For if many died because of the transgression of one man, how much more did the grace of God overflow to many through the gift of one Man—Yeshua the Messiah. 16 Moreover, the gift is not like what happened through the one who sinned. For on the one hand, the judgment from one violation resulted in condemnation; but on the other hand, the gracious gift following many transgressions resulted in justification. [a] 17 For if by the one man’s transgression, death reigned through the one,[b] how much more shall those who receive the overflow of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the One, Messiah Yeshua.18 So then, through the transgression of one, condemnation came to all men; likewise, through the righteousness of one came righteousness of life to all men. 19 For just as through the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one man, many will be set right forever.[c]20 Now the Torah came in so that transgression might increase. But where sin increased, grace overflowed even more— 21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness, to eternal life through Messiah Yeshua our Lord.” -Romans 5:12-21 TLV Appendix: A definition of each of the two modes of predominant thought addressed by a Messianic theological discussion: Mode a. Greco-Roman Thought Greco-Roman thought is informed by Greco-Roman gods, which have been devised by men. Therefore, Greco-Roman thought is man teaching himself delusion. It is largely limited to a chronological view of the world Alpha (A) to Omega (Z), start (of both gods and humanity) and finish (of both gods and humanity). Greco-Roman thought inevitably points to man's deification and death. Mode b. Biblical Hebrew Thought Biblical Hebrew thought is informed by the God (all existing) of Israel (ethnic, religious, empirical, chosen), this mode of thought having been adopted via Israel's receiving of God's written word (Torah, Prophets, Writings, New Testament) by the inspiration and revelation of His Spirit. It is perpetual in understanding, seeing a beginning for humanity at the hands of the pre-existing, everlasting Creator God of Israel. Thus the Biblical Hebrew view thinks in terms of Aleph [A] (The Word, Yeshua) creation's beginning, and the goal toward Whom humanity is directed, Tav [Z] (The Messiah, Yeshua), Who has presented to all, not an end but a new beginning. Thus Biblical Hebrew thought is God teaching man the truth about Himself and about humanity's purpose, nature and need of redemption. Therefore, Biblical Hebrew thought points to the Messiah (God with us), resulting in the worship of the One true God (The God of Israel) and in perpetual Living (eternal life). MESSIANIC JEWISH THOUGHT DIFFERS FROM GRECO-ROMAN THOUGHT IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS:
Lit. Word – HaShem (YHVH) “The Word (Devar) HaShem (YHVH) came to him (Abram)…” Gen. 15:4 “The Word (Devar) HaShem (YHVH) came to Shemuel…” 1 Samuel 15:10 “In that night the Word (Devar) HaShem (YHVH) came to Natan…” 2 Samuel 7:4 “The Word (Devar) HaShem (YHVH) came to him (Eliyahu)…” 1 Kings 17:2 And so on, and so on… The phrase, “The Word of The Lord” occurs some 347 times in the Bible (OT: 328 NT:19). The phrase, “The Word of the Lord came to…” occurs 132 times in the Bible (All in the Tanakh [OT]). It is most often written in Hebrew as pictured above. It reads literally as “Word YHVH”. In the Tanakh (OT) the Word YHVH comes to Israel’s Prophets. He (The Word) comes and goes throughout the historical narrative of the Tanakh. John 1 explains that in the first century CE (AD), the Word YHVH came, not just to Miriam (Mary) and Yosef (Joseph), but to all the people of Israel, this time, in the flesh, born a Jew. The Word Himself says, “I have come only for the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 15:24). “These twelve Yeshua sent forth, and commanded them, saying, ‘Don’t go into the way of the Gentiles, and don’t enter into any city of the Samaritans: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” -Matthew 19:5-6 This does not mean that the Gospel would not later be offered to the Gentiles. However, it does mean that the disciples, including John, the author of the Gospel of John, had a mandate to act first in sharing the Gospel with Israel (ethnic, religious, chosen, empirical). Based on this point alone, all the Gospels, written by the disciples of Yeshua must be considered to have been intended firstly for the Jewish audience and only secondarily for Gentiles. © 2019 Yaakov Brown |
Yaakov BrownFounder of the Beth Melekh International Messiah Following Jewish Community, Archives
February 2024
|