James Trimm

Short segments? I don't think so. They are long and boring (sorry).

Call this Marketing 101: your readers are pulling away. Less people reading means less discussion.

But do it any way you wanna. Maybe others here are enjoying your "short" posts.

Well I will shoot for shorter posts.

The Way said the same thing about the PFAL Class, and the need to have the Way of Power and Abundance because those outside their fold were using that older class to debate them.

I tend to have stopped reading your cut and paste remarks, they are long and rather impersonal, as it seems you're speaking "AT" us rather than "TO" us. To do this so much makes me think that you believe we are not worth your personal time and consideration. You can argue this point, saying that you are spending great effort in selecting just-the-right sections to "cut & paste" to us, but it still comes off as terribly impersonal to me, as though we're not really worth the time it might take you to type it today.

It's just my opinion.

I have been posting on the internet on this topic since 1993 and even before that on computer bulletin boards (remember those? remember 300 baud modems?)

My dad was an engineer and always taught me that there is only one most effective (efficient) way to do something. Over the years I have sought to create the most effective response to any given issue on Hebrew/Aramaic NT Origins (as well as other issues). I have refined the material debating over the years, as Scripture says, "iron sharpens iron". Now I could start over redesigning each argument each time an issue comes up, or I could depend on over 20 years of refinement end present the most effective argument my 20 years of experience has developed. Bit that refined argument has been presented somewhere else before...

+1

James, why don't you post a link or attach a thumbnail document and save the real estate on the actual post for your comments?

My intent was to stimulate conversation, for which links to PDF's would be much less effective. I am attempting to post in short segments that deal with very specific issues.

Timothy, Tychicus, Aristarcus, Trophimus, Onesimus, Appollos, Tryphinia, Triphosa, Hermogenous, Erastus, Philemon, Rufus, Peter, Paul, Silas, Phoebe, Epinetus, Andronicus, Hermes, APpelles, Narcisus, Lucius, Jason, Tertius, Gius, Quartus, Mark, Demas, Chloe.

If the early church was so full of Hebrew converts who rejected Greek, why were nearly all their names Greek and Latin? (you very, very rarely see Hebrew names like Bartholemew, Simon, Jacob in the epistles or Acts) And why were several of them even named after Greek gods (Apollos, Hermes)?

And why did Paul say to the Jews in Corinth, "your blood be on your own heads! I am clear of my responsibility. From now on I will go to the Gentiles!" (Acts 18:6)

Most Hebrews in the world in the first century used the Greek Septuagint Old Testament, not Hebrew. But the Jews came to see it as "the Christian Bible," so at the end of the first century a Rabbi wrote a Greek translation of the OT to replace the Septuagint among the Hebrews. There would be no need for either of them if Hebrews didn't speak Greek like everyone in the towns in which they lived. Today the Hasidic (ultra-orthodox) Jews who live in America speak English, just as the Pharisees in Thessolonica spoke Greek in their daily life and knew it more fluently than Hebrew.

Well there were a lot of Greek names and also many Hebrew names. The Greek names came into Jewish culture becuse when Alexander the Great first gained control of Judah, he enacted speacial laws protecting the Jews and their rights to continue in their culture, language and religion. This made Alexander and Hellenism initially popular with the Jewish people (but this was for a short time, over 300 years BEFORE the NT was written) Once names enter a culture, they are there for a long time. Also at the time many Hebrews had two names, a Hebrew name and a Greek one. As for being named after Greek gods, that is a misconception. The Greeks worshiped nature. Their gods were things in nature. Apollos just means "sun" and Hermes just means "message".

In fact many Rabbis in the Mishna, Tosefta, Talmuds and Midrashim also had Greek names, but no one would claim Greek as the original language of these books. When I grew up one of my best friends was Alexander and a Jewish friend in Synagogue was named Christopher .

>And why did Paul say to the Jews in Corinth, "your blood be on your own heads!

>I am clear of my responsibility. From now on I will go to the Gentiles!" (Acts 18:6)

Up until Acts 11:19-20 (c. 41 CE) they took the message “to the Jews only” Paul goes out to the Gentiles in Acts 18:6 (c. 54 CE) nearly 20 years into his ministry (Acts 9 is around 35 CE). \

Moreover the first Gentile believers were at Antioch (Acts 11:19-20) which is in Syria where they spoke Syriac (A dialect of Aramaic).

Paul and Tarsus

In addressing the issue of the Pauline Epistles, we must

first examine the background of Tarsus. Was Tarsus a Greek speaking

city? Would Paul have learned Greek there? Tarsus probably began as

a Hittite city-state. Around 850 B.C.E. Tarsus became part of the

great Assyrian Empire. When the Assyrian Empire was conquered by the

Babylonian Empire around 605 B.C.E. Tarsus became a part of that

Empire as well. Then, in 540 B.C.E. The Babylonian Empire, including

Tarsus, was incorporated into the Persian Empire. Aramaic was the

chief language of all three of these great Empires. By the first

century Aramaic remained a primary language of Tarsus. Coins struck

at Tarsus and recovered by archaeologists have Aramaic inscriptions

on them .

Regardless of the language of Tarsus, there is also great

question as to if Paul was actually brought up in Tarsus or just

incidentally born there. The key text in question is Acts 22:3:

I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city of Cilicia,

but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel,

taught according to the strictness of our father's Torah.

and was zealous toward God as you all are today.

Paul sees his birth at Tarsus as irrelevant and points to his

being "brought up" in Jerusalem. Much argument has been given by

scholars to this term "brought up" as it appears here. Some have

argued that it refers only to Paul's adolescent years. A key,

however, to the usage of the term may be found in a somewhat parallel

passage in Acts 7:20-23:

At this time Moses was born, and was well pleasing to God;

and he was brought up in his father's house for three months.

And when he was set out, Pharaoh's daughter took him away

and brought him up as her own son.

And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians...

Note the sequence; "born" (Greek = gennao; Aramaic =

ityiled); "brought up" (Greek = anatrepho; Aramaic =

itrabi); "learned/taught" (Greek = paideuo; Aramaic = itr'di).

Through this parallel sequence which presumably was idiomatic in the

language, we can see that Paul was born at Tarsus, raised in

Jerusalem, and then taught. Paul's entire context is that his being

raised in Jerusalem is his primary upbringing, and that he was merely

born at Tarsus.

Was Paul a Helenist?

The claim that Paul was a Hellenistic is also a

misunderstanding that should be dealt with. As we have already seen,

Paul was born at Tarsus, a city where Aramaic was spoken. Whatever

Hellenistic influences may have been at Tarsus, Paul seems to have

left there at a very early age and been "brought up" in Jerusalem.

Paul describes himself as a "Hebrew" (2Cor. 11:2) and a "Hebrew of

Hebrews" (Phil. 3:5), and "of the tribe of Benjamin" (Rom. 11:1). It

is important to realize how the term "Hebrew" was used in the first

century. The term Hebrew was not used as a genealogical term, but as

a cultural/linguistic term. An example of this can be found in Acts

6:1 were a dispute arises between the "Hebrews" and

the "Hellenistic." Most scholars agree that the "Hellenistic" here

are Helenist Jews. No evangelistic efforts had yet been made toward

non-Jews (Acts 11:19) much less Greeks (see Acts 16:6-10). In Acts

6:1 a clear contrast is made between Helenists and Hebrews which are

clearly non-Helenists. Helenists were not called Hebrews, a term

reserved for non-Helenist Jews. When Paul calls himself a "Hebrew"

he is claiming to be a non-Helenist, and when he calls himself

a "Hebrew of Hebrews" he is claiming to be strongly non-Helenist.

This would explain why Paul disputed against the Helenists and why

they attempted to kill him (Acts. 9:29) and why he escaped to Tarsus

(Acts 9:30). If there was no non-Helenist Jewish population in

Tarsus, this would have been a very bad move.

Paul's Pharisee background gives us further reason to doubt

that he was in any way a Helenist. Paul claimed to be a "Pharisee,

the son of a Pharisee" (Acts 23:6) meaning that he was at least a

second generation Pharisee. The Aramaic text, as well as some Greek

mss. have "Pharisee the son of Pharisees," a Semitic idiomatic

expression meaning a third generation Pharisee. If Paul were a

second or third generation Pharisee, it would be difficult to accept

that he had been raised up as a Helenist. Pharisees were staunchly

opposed to Helenism. Paul's claim to be a second or third generation

Pharisee is further amplified by his claim to have been a student of

Gamliel (Acts 22:3). Gamliel was the grandson of Hillel and the head

of the school of Hillel. He was so well respected that the Mishna

states that upon his death "the glory of the Torah ceased, and purity

and modesty died." The truth of Paul's claim to have studied under

Gamliel is witnessed by Paul's constant use of Hillelian

Hermeneutics. Paul makes extensive use, for example, of the first

rule of Hillel. It is an unlikely proposition that a Helenist would

have studied under Gamliel at the school of Hillel, then the center

of Pharisaic Judaism.

The Audience and Purpose of the Pauline Epistles

Paul's audience is another element which must be considered

when tracing the origins of his Epistles. Paul's Epistles were

addressed to various congregations in the Diaspora. These

congregations were mixed groups made up of a core group of Jews and a

complimentary group of Gentiles. The Thessalonian congregation was

just such an assembly (Acts 17:1-4) as were the Corinthians . It is

known that Aramaic remained a language of Jews living in the

Diaspora, and in fact Jewish Aramaic inscriptions have been found at

Rome, Pompei and even England. If Paul wrote his Epistle's in Hebrew

or Aramaic to a core group of Jews at each congregation who then

passed the message on to their Gentile counterparts then this might

give some added dimension to Paul's phrase "to the Jew first and then

to the Greek" (Rom. 1:16; 2:9-10). It would also shed more light on

the passage which Paul writes:

What advantage then has the Jew,

or what is the profit of circumcision?

Much in every way!

To them first, were committed the Words of God.

- Rom. 3:1-2

It is clear that Paul did not write his letters in the native tongues

of the cities to which he wrote. Certainly no one would argue for a

Latin original of Romans.

One final issue which must be discussed regarding the origin

of Paul's Epistles, is their intended purpose. It appears that Paul

intended the purpose of his Epistles to be:

1) To be read in the Congregations (Col. 4:16; 1Thes. 5:27)

2) To have doctrinal authority (1Cor. 14:37)

All Synagogue liturgy during the Second Temple era, was in Hebrew and

Aramaic Paul would not have written material which he intended to

be read in the congregations in any other language. Moreover all

religious writings of Jews which claimed halachic (doctrinal)

authority, were written in Hebrew or Aramaic. Paul could not have

expected that his Epistles would be accepted as having the authority

he claimed for them, without having written them in Hebrew or

Aramaic.

>Most Hebrews in the world in the first century used the Greek Septuagint

>Old Testament, not Hebrew. But the Jews came to see it as "the Christian Bible,"

>so at the end of the first century a Rabbi wrote a Greek translation of the OT to

>replace the Septuagint among the Hebrews. There would be no need for either of

>them if Hebrews didn't speak Greek like everyone in the towns in which they

>lived. Today the Hasidic (ultra-orthodox) Jews who live in America speak English,

>just as the Pharisees in Thessolonica spoke Greek in their daily life and knew it

> more fluently than Hebrew.

This is not true, in fact the largest Jewish population of the time lived in the area of the old Babylonian Captivity (from which the Babylonian Talmud would later come, in Aramaic the language of the land at the time. (The Gentile Christians of that region continue to use the Aramaic Pedangta as THE New Testament top this very day. It is generally accepted that the LXX was used by Hellenist Jews who were a minority in Judea but a majority in Alexandria Egypt. Oddly there is little mention in the NT of an early Messianic movement in Alexandria, the seat of Jewish Hellenism, where there certainly would have been had it been a Hellenistic movement. In fact the version by Aquila was not done at the end of the First Century at all but around the middle of the Second Century. Aquila was a disciple of Rabbi Akiva and was anything but a Hellenist. It is generally accepted that Aquila’s version was created primarily for the purpose of having a Greek version with which to use in debating with Christians, and the Septuagint had fallen into distrust because the Christians used it. (See Old Testament Textual Criticism by Ellis R. Brotzman p. 75)

Language of First Century Israel

The Middle East, through all of its political turmoil, has in

fact been dominated by a single master from the earliest ages until

the present day. The Semitic tongue has dominated the Middle East

from ancient times, until the modern day. Aramaic dominated the

three great Empires, Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian. It endured

until the seventh century, when under the Islamic nation it was

displaced by a cognate Semitic language, Arabic. Even today some few

Syrians, Assyrians and Chaldeans speak Aramaic as their native

tongue, including three villages north of Damascus .

The Jewish people, through all of their persecutions,

sufferings and wanderings have never lost sight of their Semitic

heritage, nor their Semitic tongue. Hebrew, a Semitic tongue closely

related to Aramaic, served as their language until the great

dispersion when a cognate language, Aramaic, began to replace it.

Hebrew, however continued to be used for religious literature, and is

today the spoken language in Israel.

The Babylonian Exile

Some scholars have proposed that the Jews lost their Hebrew

language, replacing it with Aramaic during the Babylonian captivity.

The error of this position becomes obvious. The Jewish people had

spent 400 years in captivity in Egypt yet they did not stop speaking

Hebrew and begin speaking Egyptian, why should they exchange Hebrew

for Aramaic after only seventy years in Babylonian captivity? Upon

return from the Babylonian captivity it was realized that a small

minority could not speak "the language of Judah" so drastic

measures were taken to abolish these marriages and maintain the

purity of the Jewish people and language One final evidence rests

in the fact that the post-captivity books (Zech., Hag., Mal., Neh.,

Ezra, and Ester) are written in Hebrew rather than Aramaic.

Hellenization

Some scholars have also suggested that under the Helene

Empire Jews lost their Semitic language and in their rush to

hellenize, began speaking Greek. The books of the Maccabees do

record an attempt by Antiochus Epiphanies to forcibly Hellenize the

Jewish people. In response, the Jews formed an army led by Judas

Maccabee This army defeated the Greeks and eradicated Hellenism .

This military victory is still celebrated today as Chanukkah, the

feast of the dedication of the Temple a holiday that even Yeshua

seems to have observed at the Temple at Jerusalem in the first

century . Those who claim that the Jews were Hellenized and began

speaking Greek at this time seem to deny the historical fact of the

Maccabean success.

During the first century, Hebrew remained the language of the

Jews living in Judah and to a lesser extent in Galilee. Aramaic

remained a secondary language and the language of commerce. Jews at

this time did not speak Greek, in fact one tradition had it that it

was better to feed ones children swine than to teach them the Greek

language. It was only with the permission of authorities that a

young official could learn Greek, and then, solely for the purpose of

political discourse on the National level. The Greek language was

completely inaccessible and undesirable to the vast majority of Jews

in Israel in the 1st century.70a Any gauge of Greek language outside

of Israel cannot, nor can any evidence hundreds of years removed from

the 1st century, alter the fact that the Jews of Israel in the 1st

century did not know Greek.

The Testimony of Josephus

The first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-c.100

C.E.) testifies to the fact that Hebrew was the language of first

century Jews. Moreover, he testifies that Hebrew, and not Greek, was

the language of his place and time. Josephus gives us the only first

hand account of the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. According

to Josephus, the Romans had to have him translate the call to the

Jews to surrender into "their own language" (Wars 5:9:2)) . Josephus

gives us a point-blank statement regarding the language of his people

during his time:

I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the

learning

of the Greeks, and understanding the elements of the Greek

language although I have so long accustomed myself to speak

our own language, that I cannot pronounce Greek with

sufficient exactness: for our nation does not encourage those

that learn the languages of many nations. (Ant. 20:11:2)

Thus, Josephus makes it clear that first century Jews could not even

speak or understand Greek, but spoke "their own language."

Archaeology

Confirmation of Josephus's claims has been found by

Archaeologists. The Bar Kokhba coins are one example. These coins

were struck by Jews during the Bar Kokhba revolt (c. 132 C.E.). All

of these coins bear only Hebrew inscriptions. Countless other

inscriptions found at excavations of the Temple Mount, Masada and

various Jewish tombs, have revealed first century Hebrew inscriptions

Even more profound evidence that Hebrew was a living language

during the first century may be found in ancient Documents from about

that time, which have been discovered in Israel. These include the

Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Bar Kokhba letters.

The Dead Sea Scrolls consist of over 40,000 fragments of more

than 500 scrolls dating from 250 B.C.E . to 70 C.E.. Theses Scrolls

are primarily in Hebrew and Aramaic. A large number of the "secular

scrolls" (those which are not Bible manuscripts) are in Hebrew.

The Bar Kokhba letters are letters between Simon Bar Kokhba

and his army, written during the Jewish revolt of 132 C.E.. These

letters were discovered by Yigdale Yadin in 1961 and are almost all

written in Hebrew and Aramaic. Two of the letters are written in

Greek, both were written by men with Greek names to Bar Kokhba. One

of the two Greek letters actually apologizes for writing to Bar

Kokhba in Greek, saying "the letter is written in Greek, as we have

no one who knows Hebrew here."

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bar Kokhba letters not only

include first and second century Hebrew documents, but give an even

more significant evidence in the dialect of that Hebrew. The dialect

of these documents was not the Biblical Hebrew of the Tenach (Old

Testament), nor was it the Mishnaic Hebrew of the Mishna (c. 220

C.E.). The Hebrew of these documents is colloquial, it is a fluid

living language in a state of flux somewhere in the evolutionary

process from Biblical to Mishnaic Hebrew. Moreover, the Hebrew of

the Bar Kokhba letters represents Galilean Hebrew (Bar Kokhba was a

Galilean) , while the Dead Sea Scrolls give us an example of Judean

Hebrew. Comparing the documents shows a living distinction of

geographic dialect as well, a sure sign that Hebrew was not a dead

language.

Final evidence that first century Jews conversed in Hebrew

and Aramaic can be found in other documents of the period, and even

later. These include: the Roll Concerning Fasts in Aramaic (66-70

C.E.), The Letter of Gamaliel in Aramaic (c. 30 - 110 C.E.), Wars

of the Jews by Josephus in Hebrew (c. 75 C.E.), the Mishna in

Hebrew (c. 220 C.E.) and the Gemara in Aramaic (c. 500 C.E.)

Yeah, that's a pretty good statement..

I think a problem that many people have, especially coming from a Christian standpoint, is they don't understand the Torah. Torah means teaching or instructions more than it means laws in our language. It's purpose is not to bind people to a requirement, but to teach and instruct. Being under the law doesn't mean you are required to do the law, that's a misunderstanding of being "under" something. It instead means that you are under it's covering. Just as being under a rock puts you under it's cover. The rock doesn't require you to do anything to it, it is just the relation you have to your current position or standing. We are not under the law. The law provides ZERO cover for us, instead it is Christ who is our cover, the one who has made us clean. That is, if we decide to make Christ so..

The other problem, especially for dispensationlists, is they think there is no benefit to knowing the Torah.. And I'm not talking about keeping the TORAH to the nTH degree, I mean, how much common sense, and understandable, and the purpose behind the 613 teachings of the TORAH, as instructions in righteousness. As guides to the blind, not as requirements that stifle. You don't get that without understanding the purpose. Just as the tithe. If you just think of it as, they were taught to give 10% to the Levites, it does you no good. But when you understand why, the purpose and heart, you realize there is a reason, and something that can be related to today. The heart of the tithe, was to take care of those in need. The fatherless, the poor, the Levites who had nothing. That was it's purpose, it's heart. It was not a religious thing. It was the heart to love your neightbor and care for others which is EVERYONE's responsibility and not the church leadership to decide. Which is why things get so screwed up cause people then give to churches thinking they're doing a required thing (as if a law) instead of from the heart and the true heart to give to those in need. And every teaching(Torah) is like this. Common sense when broken down and as Galatians says, loving your beighbor and loving God is keeping the torah, because they all stem from those 2.

What I forgot to mention also was, the thinking in TWI was that in old times, people weren't saved, cause of the law. But that's not true. They were. The same way we are today. By believing. This why Abraham is the Father of those who believe. He believed unto righteousness. Heb 11, those who believed God.. The Torah was a teacher, and still is, that's all. Was never a way for salvation. Never a way for righteouness. Just teachings of God, his ways. Christ, or The Messiah, was taught from the start, by Moses and David, etc. They trusted(believed) God to send the Messiah, and that was accounted to them for righteousness. They didn't trust in the law to become righteous. What Romans talks about, those people under the law, isn't talking about Israelites or Jews only. It is talking about anyone who wants to try and work at their righteouness. Saying our works are our covering our salvation. Yet God has always promised salvation to those who trust in Him, grace. It's not just a today or this administration thing, Abraham believing unto righteousness should tell you that..

Ok, well, then again, those are my thoughts.. You know, my usual disclaimer, cause really, I know so little, and I'm learning like the rest. So feel free to share your thoughts, disagreements..

The Tithe of YHWH

The Cost of the Covenant

By Jame Scott Trimm

So you are excited about Torah. So you are ready to say "we will hear and do".

Not so fast… there is a disclosure to be made first.

In Rabbinic Judaism Gentiles seeking conversion are discouraged. Gentiles

seeking conversion are turned away three times. Then after being turned away

three times it is required to make a full disclosure of the financial

obligations of the Covenant. It is said that few Gentiles would willingly enter

the Covenant once they know the cost.

To begin with we must understand that EVERYTHING belongs to YHWH (Ex. 9:29; 2Kn.

19:15; Is. 66:1-2; Jer. 27:5; Job 12:9-10; Ps. 89:11; 95:3-5; Dan. 4:7; Neh.

9:16; 1Chron. 29:13-14). He owns this universe, all of its resources, all of its

energy, and he owns YOU. YHWH is entitled to ask for 100%. In His CHESED, in His

undue favor, He allows us to keep 90%.

Now one might ask: Where in the Mosaic Torah is the commandment "Thou shalt

tithe?". The answer is, nowhere. When Moshe went up on Mount Sinai to receive

the Torah, he did NOT receive a commandment to tithe. Nowhere in the Mosaic

Torah is there the Tithe instituted. Instead the very first mention of the tithe

in the Mosaic Covenant is not until the end of Leviticus where we read:

30 And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the

fruit of the tree, is YHWH's: it is Set-Apart unto YHWH.

31 And if a man will redeem aught of his tithe, he shall add unto it, the fifth

part thereof.

32 And all the tithe of the herd, or the flock, whatsoever passes under the rod,

the tenth shall be Set-Apart unto YHWH.

33 He shall not inquire whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it.

And if he change it at all, then both it, and that for which it is changed, shall be

Set-Apart; it shall not be redeemed.

34 These are the commandments, which YHWH commanded Moshe for the children of

Yisra'el in mount Sinai.

(Lev. 27:30-34)

Notice that this first mention of the "tithe" does not initiate the tithe, it

simply recognizes the fact of the tithe saying "it is Set-Apart unto YHWH".

Notice also this first passage says nothing about Levites or Priests. It does

not say that the tithe belongs to the Levites, but rather to YHWH.

When next we read on the Tithe in the Mosaic Torah is in the book of Numbers:

And unto the children of Levi, behold,

I have given all the tithe in Yirae'el for an inheritance,

in return for their service which they serve,

even the service of the tent of meeting.

(Num. 18:21)

Notice that these are two different precepts of Torah. Lev. 27:30 recognizes

that the Tithe belongs to YHWH, while a separate commandment in Num. 18:21 tells

us that the Levites were to be paid out of the tithe, for their service in the

Tabernacle (later Temple). The tithe was not directly paid to the Levites, it

was paid to YHWH and from that "fund" the Levites were paid. This was so that

the Levites could devote themselves to full time Torah Study (2Chron. 31:4-5) so

that they could in turn teach Torah to the people of Israel (Deut. 14:22-23;

Ezek. 44:23-24).

Nowhere are we told to pay the Tithe to the Levitical priesthood. We are told

only that the Tithe is paid to YHWH and YHWH gave the Levites payment from the

Tithe "for their service."

THE SECOND AND THIRD TITHES

Now before moving on from the Mosaic Torah we should also cover the second and

third tithes. Some lump these together as "the second tithe" because they are

never paid on the same year.

There are actually two tithes in the Mosaic Covenant which were tied to the

seven year cycle of the Land. The first tithe (Masserot) is due every year.

The second tithe (Maaser Sheni) was converted to money and used to make a

personal pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The "pilgrim" could spend this money however

he liked on the pilgrimage but was expected to treat the Levites to a feast as

well upon his arrival and any surplus was given to the Levites (Deut. 14:22-27).

Every third year however the tither used this second tithe (some all this third

year tithe as a "third tithe") to feed the needy and local Levites (Deut.

14:28-29). Thus the Mosaic tithing schedule goes like this:

Year

1. First Tithe: Levites; Second Tithe: Pilgrimage and Levites

2. First Tithe: Levites; Second Tithe: Pilgrimage and Levites

3. First Tithe: Levites; Third Tithe: Feeds the needy and Levites

4. First Tithe: Levites; Second Tithe: Pilgrimage and Levites

5. First Tithe: Levites; Second Tithe: Pilgrimage and Levites

6. First Tithe: Levites; Third Tithe: Feeds the needy and Levites

7. The Sabbath of the land, only the First Tithe was paid on any volunteer crop

and on other non-planted produce.

(The first tithe could only be converted into money by paying a 20% penalty

(Lev. 27:31) however the second tithe was generally converted to money as a

matter of course (Deut. 14:25).)

The three Tithes are laid out in the book of Tobit as follows:

6 And I went to Yerushulayim at the appointed times as it is written in the

Torah of YHWH concerning Yisrael in firstfruits and tithes and firstlings.

7 To the priests, sons of Aharon and new wine and fat and labors and

pomegranates and from all fruits of the ground to the sons of Levi, ministers

before, the presence of YHWH in Yerushalayim, and the second tithe. (8) And the

third tithe to the stranger, to the orphan and to the widow. And I would go in

every year with all these, to Yerushalayim by the commandments of YHWH and

according to that duty upon me, Devorah mother of my Father.

(Tovi (Tobit) 1:6-7 HRV – From our ongoing work :-) )

ABRAHAM TITHED

Now as we have shown, the Tithe was not initiated in the Mosaic Torah. Instead

the first mention of the Tithe in the Mosaic Covenant only acknowledges that the

Tithe is YHWH's. The principle of tithing did not originate in the Mosaic

Covenant. Avraham tithed in Genesis 14 long before the Mosaic Covenant (or even

the Abrahamic Covenent) was entered into.

Lets examine Gen. 14 and see what the Torah tells us about this pre-Mosaic

tithe.

18 And MalkiTzadek, king of Shalem, brought forth bread and wine, and he was a

cohen of El Elyon.

19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Avram, of El Elyon--Maker of heaven

and earth.

20 And blessed be El Elyon, who has delivered your enemies into your hand. And

he gave him a tenth (tithe) of all.

(Gen. 14:18-20 HRV)

Who was this Melchizedek and why did Abraham pay the tithe to him? The answer

may be found in the Book of Jasher also known as Midrash Sefer HaYashar. The

Book of Jasher contains this same account but with some important additional

information:

And Adonizedek king of Jerusalem, the same was Shem,

went out with his men to meet Abram and his people,

with bread and wine, and they remained together

in the valley of Melech.

And Adonizedek blessed Abram, and Abram gave him

a tenth from all that he had brought from the spoil of

his enemies, for Adonizedek was a priest before God.

(Jasher 16:11-12)

Now according to the Book of Jasher Abraham tithed to Melchizadek (or

Adonizadek) because he was a "priest". How is it that Melchizadek is called a

"priest"? Although Melchizadek was not a Levite (there were not yet any Levites)

we do have a clue in Jasher as to why he is called a "priest". Jasher reveals

the identity of Melchizadek saying

"the same is Shem" (this identity of Melchizadek is also recorded in the Talmud

in b.Ned. 32). Now this is very important because the Book of Jasher also

records the fact that Shem had been Abraham's Torah teacher:

And when Avram came out from the cave, he went to Noach and his son Shem, and he

remained with them to learn the instruction of YHWH and his ways, and no man

knew where Avram was, and Avram served Noach and Shem his son for a long time.

And Avram was in Noach's house thirty-nine years,

and Abram knew YHWH from three years old, and he went in the ways of YHWH until

the day of his death, as Noach and his son Shem had taught him;

(Jasher 9:5-6)

Thus Abraham paid the tithe to Shem because Shem had been his personal Torah

teacher. (If you do the "Bible Math" you will find that Noach and Shem died

AFTER Avraham was born, a point that surprises some people.)

Note that Abraham's tithe in Gen. 14 was not being made on agricultural produce

but on "all" (Gen. 14:20) and specifically in this case the "spoils of his

enemies" (Jasher 16:12; also Hebrews 7:4). This dispels the theory taught by

some, that the Tithe is only paid on agricultural produce.

Now some have taught that the tithe Melchizadek paid was not the same Tithe

mentioned in the Mosaic Torah from which the Levites were paid. This is also not

true, as Paul argues in the book of Hebrews:

4 Consider and see his greatness, which also Avraham our father, gave to him a

tenth from the spoil.

5 And also the sons of L'vi collect for the priesthood, having received a

commandment to collect the tithe from the people, according to the decree of the Torah. And

this is of their brothers, although having come from the loins of Avraham.

6 Truly he who is not from their tribe, has received the tithe from Avraham, and

blessed those, who are blessed, to him.

7 And behold, this no one disputes: that the lesser is blessed by the greater.

8 Behold here, sons of man which die, receive tithes: but sleep received he of

whom it is said that He lives.

9 For so to say, that to he who was accustomed to take the tithe, he also tithes

through Avraham.

10 For He was yet in the loins of the Father, when He met, he who was called

Malki-Tzedek.

(Heb. 7:4-10 HRV)

The whole logic of Paul's argument here is based in the fact that the tithe that

Avram paid to Melchizadek was EXACTLY the same tithe that the Levites were paid

from.

Another example of the pre-Mosaic tithe is the vow Jacob made to tithe saying to

Elohim "and of all that you shall give me I will surely give the tenth onto you"

(Gen. 28:22). Note that Jacob tithed on all that Elohim had given him and not

simply on agricultural produce. In fact Jacob even tithed from his sons. In the

Midrash Rabbab there is an important story related to Jacob's tithe told by

Rabbi Joshua of Sikaan in the name of his teacher Rabbi Levi:

A certain Curthean (Samaritan) attempted to trap Rabbi Mier

in a question concerning Jacob's vow to HaShem to give a

"tithe of all."

You Jews teach that Jacob gave a tenth of all to HaShem;

yet Jacob had twelve sons: Jacob also said, 'Ephraim and Manasseh are mine.'

That makes fourteen sons of Jacob, yet Jacob gave only one son to HaShem and

that was Levi," spoke the Curthean, implying that Jacob the Jew had broken his

vow to HaShem.

"How," continued the Curthean, "can only one of fourteen sons

be reconciled as a tithe of fourteen sons?"

Rabbi Mier replied, "How many matriarchs of Jacob's sons were there?"

"Four," answered the Curthean," Leah, Rachel, Bilhah and Zilpah."

'True," answered Rabbi Mier. "Then how many were sanctified by Pid-yon-ha Ben or

the Redemption of the Firstborn?

"Four," responded the Curthean.

"True," responded Rabbi Mier. "And what is redeemed as holy

need not be sanctified again. Therefore, since there were four

firstborn sons sanctified by the redemption of the firstborn,

they need not be sanctified by the tithe of Jacob's sons.

Hence, Levi, who was not the firstborn of Leah; was given

by Jacob of his nine remaining sons: Jacob gave more than

one ninth, he gave one tenth of his sons, more than fulfilling

his vow to "give a tenth of all."

(Midrash Rabbab, 70:7-8, page 640)

YESHUA UPHELD THE TITHE

Yeshua also upheld the principle of Tithing:

Woe to you, scribes and P'rushim; hypocrites--who tithe mint, and rue, and

cumin, and have neglected those things which are weightiest in the Torah: judgment,

lovingkindness, and trust. Those things ought you to have done, neither to have

rejected these.

(Matt. 23:23 HRV)

When Yeshua says "neither to have rejected these" he is speaking in part of

tithing even on produce of garden herbs.

THE LABORER IS WORTHY OF HIS WAGE

But let us look to see what the Scriptures say about this very important matter.

The prophet Malachi writes:

1 Behold, I send My messenger, and he shall clear the way before Me; and the

Adon, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, and the messenger of the

covenant, whom you delight in, behold, he comes, says YHWH Tzva'ot.

2 But who may abide the day of his coming? And who shall stand when he appears?

For he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap;

3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; and he shall purify the

sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver; and there shall be they that

shall offer unto YHWH offerings in righteousness.

4 Then shall the offering of Y'hudah and Yerushalayim be pleasant unto YHWH, as

in the days of old, and as in ancient years.

5 And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against

the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers; and

against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the

fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not Me,

says YHWH Tzva'ot.

6 For I YHWH change not; and you, O sons of Ya'akov, are not consumed.

7 From the days of your fathers you have turned aside from My ordinances, and

have not kept them. Return unto Me, and I will return unto you, says YHWH

Tzva'ot. But you say: 'Wherein shall we return?'

8 Will a man rob Elohim? Yet you rob Me. But you say: 'Wherein have we robbed

You?' In tithes and heave-offerings.

9 You are cursed with the curse, yet you rob Me, even this whole nation.

10 Bring you the whole tithe into the store-house, that there may be food in My

house, and try Me now herewith, says YHWH Tzva'ot, if I will not open you the

windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than

sufficiency.

(Malchi 3:1-10)

Now it is very clear that this is speaking of the last days judgment "And I will

come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness" (Mal. 3:5). In this

context, YHWH calls the Body to return to keeping Torah, and the Body says

"Wherein shall we return" (3:7) in other words "But YHWH, we HAVE been keeping

Torah." Then YHWH informs them to their surprise that they have failed to keep

his Torah because they have failed to tithe, though they did not even realize

that they were not tithing (3:8). The context here is clear, why would YHWH

rebuke his last days people for not tithing, if there is not obligation to tithe

in these last days?

We also get a reminder here. We do not GIVE the Tithe to YHWH, it was already

His. He GIVES the 90% to us. When we do not tithe, we are not simply choosing

not to give, we are actually stealing from YHWH!

Tithing is not restricted to the Mosaic covenant. Those who labor in the Word

and teach the community, are entitled to be supported by the tithes and

offerings of the community. In these last days YHWH says to his people "Return

to my Torah". The people say "But we are Torah observant." YHWH responds, "Then

why are you stealing from Me?". The people say "what do you mean, stealing from

You?" and YHWH says "You have been stealing My tithe".

These are people in the last days who think they are Torah Observant because

they have convinced themselves that they do not need to tithe. They are keeping

the 612 commandments.

But to the contrary, they are oppressing the laborer in His Word, denying him

his wage, when the laborer is worthy of his wage.

Now lets look at the phase "against those that oppress the hireling in his

wages" (3:5).

What does this mean?

Yeshua said:

for nothing you have received,

for nothing you will give.

(Mt. 10:8)

Sadly for years this passage has been quoted out of context and misused by many

to "prove" that those in the ministry should not receive community support for

our efforts.

In fact the verse in question is, in context, saying exactly the opposite of

what these people represent it as saying.

Actually, Yeshua in the next few verses following this statement instructs his

talmidim to request and subsist on community support:

Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor lesser coin in

your belts. Pack not for the journey, either two coats, or sandals, or a staff,

for the laborer is worthy of his food. And into whatever city or town you will

enter, enquire who in it is honorable, and there abide until you go out from

there."

(Mt. 10:9-11)

Some light on this text may be acquired by examining a statement by Josephus

concerning the first century Essene

sect of Judaism:

...and if any of their sect come from other places,

what they have lies open for them, just as if it were their own;

and they go into such as they never knew before,

as if they had been ever so long acquainted with them.

For which reason they carry nothing with them

when they travel into remote parts,

though still they take their weapons with them, for fear of thieves. Accordingly

there is, in every city where they live,

one appointed particularly to take care of strangers,

and provide garments and other necessaries for them.

(Josephus; Wars 2:8:4)

Yeshua's talmidim had for the most part, come from an Essene back ground. It

would appear that they were therefore able to travel within Essene circles from

town to town without having to carry additional supplies. Yeshua felt that his

twelve were entitled to be supported by the community.

Yeshua drives the point home saying "the laborer is worthy of his food." A

saying which Paul later cites to prove that "those who labor in the word and its

teaching" are worthy of "double honor" which in context seems to indicate that

they have the right, like any other laborer, to expect to be paid for their work

in the ministry. In fact he even quoted this statement by Yeshua (Mt. 10:10) to

support the point:

Those elders who conduct themselves well

should be esteemed worthy of double honor,

especially those who labor in the word and

in teaching, For the Scripture says that

`you should not muzzle the ox, while threshing,' (Deut. 25:4)

and `the laborer is worthy of his wage." (Mt. 10:10)

(1Tim. 5:17-18)

Paul also expands on this thought in 1Cor. 9:6-14:

Also, I only, and Bar Nabba, have we not the power not to work?

Who is this who labors in the service (ministry) by the expanse of his nefesh?

Or who is he who plants a vineyard and from its fruit does not eat?

Or who is he who tends the flock and from the milk of his flock does not eat?

Do I say these [things] as a son of man?

Behold, the Torah also said these [things]. For it is written in the Torah of

Moshe,

`You shall not muzzle the ox that threshes.' (Deut. 25:4)

It is a concern to Eloah about oxen? But, it is known that because of us he

said [it] and because of us it was written, because it is a need [that] the

plowman plow unto hope and he who threshes, unto the hope of the harvest. If we

have sown spiritual [things] among you, is it a great [thing] if we reap

[things] of the flesh from you? … those who labor [in] the Beit Kodesh [the

Temple] are sustained from the Beit Kodesh and those who labor for the alter

have a portion with the alter?

So also, our Adon commanded that those who are proclaiming his goodnews should

live from his goodnews."

(1Cor. 9:6-14)

Certainly the context of Yeshua's statement "for nothing you have received, for

nothing you will give." (Mt. 10:8) was that of a society in which all things

were held in common and each person's needs were taken care of by that community

(Mt. 10:9-11 and Acts 2:44 & 4:32) but we do not live in such a society, and so

citing Mt. 10:8 to those in the ministry today, is akin to asking us to make

bricks without straw.

To the contrary Paul quotes the verse shortly afterward (10:10) to reach a

principle by which those who are proclaiming his goodnews should be supported

for doing so, just as those who labor in the Temple and for the alter are

supported for doing so. In other words, Paul draws a midrash from the fact that

Levites and Priests received tithes and offerings to teach a principle that

"those who labor in the word and teach" should be supported with tithes and

offerings.

POURING OUT A BLESSING

"Bring you the whole tithe into the store-house, that there may be food in My

house, and try Me now herewith, says YHWH Tzva'ot, if I will not open you the

windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than

sufficiency."

(Mal. 3:10)

The Old Worldwide Church Of God under Hebert W. Armstrong are a good example of

what tithing can accomplish. From time to time I have been asked my opinion of

Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God. Let me begin by saying

that I do not agree with everything Armstrong taught. However Armstrong taught

many truths that were definitely on the cutting edge for his time.

Armstrong taught seventh day, evening to evening Sabbath observance, while

exposing the pagan origins and nature of Sunday Worship. Armstrong taught the

Scriptural feasts (which also happen to be the Jewish Holidays) while exposing

the pagan origins and nature of the Pagan holidays like Halloween, Christmas and

Easter. Armstrong also criticized pagan customs in general, not just Pagan

holidays and Sunday worship.

And long before the so-called "Two House" movement, Armstrong was teaching:

"The peoples of the United States, the British Commonwealth nations, and the

nations of northwestern Europe are, in fact, the peoples of the Ten Tribes of

the House of Israel. The Jewish People are the House of Judah."

(The United States and Britain in Prophecy, ninth ed. P. 144; Herbert W.

Armstrong)

Not long before his death in 1986, Armstrong finally came to the following far

reaching conclusion:

"Satan has deceived this world's churches into the

belief that God's law was done away-that Jesus, rather than paying the

price in human stead for transgressing the law, did away with

it-"nailing it to his cross." The expression used by Protestants

"nailing the law to his cross" can mean only one thing. This is

Satan's teaching that by being nailed to the cross, Christ

abolished the law, making it possible for humans to sin with impunity.

What actually was nailed to the cross was Christ our sin bearer, who

took on himself our sins, paying the death penalty in our stead, so

that we are freed from the ultimate penalty of sinning, not made free

to sin with impunity. The very basic teaching, belief AND DOCTRINE OF

God's true Church therefore is based on the righteousness of and

obedience to the law of God."

(Mystery of the Ages; Herbert W. Armstrong p. 274)

For this reason I say that in a world that was blind, Armstrong saw with blurred

vision.

The tithe is badly needed to finance the work of teaching the truth of Torah and

Messiah as we "labor in the word". "Bring you the whole tithe into the

store-house, that there may be food in My house" (Mal. 3:10). Back during the

70's and 80's Armstrong's "World Wide Church of God" distributed millions of

free books and booklets and had a disproportionate impact on theology in

America. Their free "Plain Truth" color magazine had a circulation reaching

eight million! More than Time, Newseek and US News and World Report COMBINED at

the time! They had a weekly TV show and owned two colleges, not to mention a

world class auditorium. How was this small sect (they only numbered in the

thousands) able to accomplish so much? Because their members were actually

tithing!

Nazarenes need to get as serious. Nazarenes need to ask themselves if the cost

of the covenant is more than they are willing to pay. Others have paid with

their lives, just read 2nd and 4th Maccabees. They were tortured and killed..

Yeshua said:

Again, the Kingdom of Heaven is comparable to a man that is a merchant, seeking

good pearls: Who, when he had found one precious pearl, went and sold all that

he had and bought it.

(Matt. 13:45-46)

Is the cost of the covenant to high for you?

Nazarenes need to be as serious about tithing as about the Sabbath and eating

kosher.

Bring you the whole tithe into the store-house,

that there may be food in YHWH's house.

(Mal. 3:10)

In a generous spirit pay homage to YHWH,

Spare not freewill gifts.

With each contribution show a cheerful countenance,

and pay your tithes in a spirit of joy.

(Sira 35:8-9 HRV)

There is a spiritual battle taking place. A battle between light and darkness. A battle between truth and deception.

Paul writes:

and put on all the armour of Eloah, so that you may be able to stand against the strategies of 'Akel Kartza,

because your struggle is not with flesh and blood, but with principalities and with authorities and with the possessors of this dark world and with the evil spirits that are under heaven.

Because of this, put on all the armour of Eloah that you may be able to meet the evil one, and being prepared in everything, you may stand firm.

(Eph. 6:11-13 HRV)

Paul goes on to describe the parts of this armour as:

• The Belt of Truth

• The Breastplate of Righteousness

• The Shoes of the Goodnews of Peace (Shalom)

• The Shield of Faith

• The Helmet of Salvation

• The Sword of the Word

Now Paul is making a play on words here. The Aramaic word for "Armour" is ZAYNA while the Aramaic word for for "whiles" is TZEN'TA. Paul is contrasting the ZAYNA with the TZEN'TA. The four fixed (non mobile) pieces of armour correspond to the four whiles of HaSatan which are depicted in the Tanak:

• Deception/Lies (Gen. 3)

(Belt of Truth)

• Temptation/Pride (1Chron. 21:1)

(Breastplate of Righteousness)

• Oppression (Job)

(Shoes of Peace)

• Accusation (Zech. 3:1-5)

(Helmet of Salvation)

Now we will not cover each of the items here, instead we will concentrate only on the belt of truth.

Now it should be understood that the armour Paul is speaking of is not Roman armour, it was not inspired by Roman Soldiers. The armour was originally inspired by the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 11:5; 52:7 and 59:17) as well as the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon (5:17-20). Therefore the subject of this passage is ancient Hebew armour and not Roman armour at all. Now ancient Hebrews wore a skirt like garment. Before going into battle a Hebrew warrior would gird himself with the a belt, he would gather his skirt-like garment up and tuck it up under his belt to allow free movement. This prevented him from getting tripped up in his own garment while trying to fight.

Now when he was on trial before Pilate Yeshua said:

For this I have been born,

and for this I have come into the world,

to bear witness of the truth.

Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice.

(John 18:37-38)

To this Pilate asked the all important question:

What is truth?

(John. 18:38)

Let us look back to the Tanak to find the answer to Pilate's question:

Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness,

and your Torah is truth.

(Psalm 119:142)

You are near, O YHWH,

and all your commandments are truth.

(Psalm 119:151)

This definition explains many phrases in the New Testament:

"Obey the truth" (Gal. 3:1)

"But he that does truth..." (Jn. 3:20)

And I rejoice that I found your children

walking in the truth, as we have received

a commandment from the Father.

(2Jn. 1:4)

The Tanak definition of truth gives whole new meaning to Yeshua's words:

For this I have been born,

and for this I have come into the world,

to bear witness of the truth.

Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice.

(John 18:37-38)

Yeshua came to bear witness of the Torah, those who hear the Torah hear his voice. This leads us to another important saying from Yeshua:

Then Yeshua said to those Jews who believed

on him, if you continue in my word,

then are you my disciples indeed.

And you shall know the truth,

and the truth shall make you free.

(John 8:31-32)

Paul, however, speaks of those "who changed the truth of God into a lie" (Rom. 1:25) Now if Messiah came to bear witness of the truth then what has HaSatan to bear witness to? The scriptures tell us:

He [the devil] was a murderer from the beginning,

and abode not the truth in him.

When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own:

for he is a liar, and ther father of it.

(John 8:44)

...HaSatan, who deceives the whole world...

(Rev. 12:9)

When HaSatan speaks a lie, he is merely speaking his native language.

Now if the Torah is truth, then what is HaSatan's lie? His lie is that there is not a Torah, that the Torah has been done away with. There is a Greek term for this teaching. This term is ANOMOS (Strong's Greek #459). ANOMOS is made up of the Greek prefix A- (there is not/without) with the Greek word NOMOS (Torah). ANOMOS means "without Torah" or "Torah-lessness." While Messiah came to bear witness to the Torah, HaSatan comes to bear witness of ANOMOS (Torah-lessness). Two entire books of the New Testament (2Kefa and Jude) are dedicated to combating this false ANOMOS teaching. Yeshua tells us that these teachers will be called "least" in the Kingdom (Mt. 5:19).

Now lets take a look at how the Bible uses this term ANOMOS:

...I [Yeshua] will profess to them, I never knew you,

depart from me, you that work ANOMOS.

(Mt. 7:23)

...and they [angels] shall gather out of his Kingdom

all things that offend, and them which do ANOMOS.

(Mt. 13:41)

And many false prophets shall rise,

and shall deceive many.

And because ANOMOS shall abound,

the love of many shall grow cold.

(Mt. 24:11-12)

For the mystery of ANOMOS does already work...

And then shall the ANOMOS one be revealed,

whom the Lord shall consume

with the spirit of his mouth,...

whose coming is after the working of HaSatan

with all power and lying wonders,

and with all deceivableness...

because they received not the love of truth...

That they might be damned

who believed not the truth...

(2Thes. 2:7-12)

Many people have been taken in by the ANOMOS teaching. In fact two of Christendom's largest theological sub-sets, Dispensationalism and Replacement Theology, submit detailed theories to explain why they teach that the Torah is not for today.

Dispensationalism is a form of Premillennialism which replaces the eternal "covenants" with finite "ages". Two of these finite ages are "The Age of Torah" which basically encompasses "Old Testament times", and "The Age of Grace" which basically encompasses "New Testament times". According to these Dispensationalists, during "Old Testament times" men were under Torah, but during "New Testament times" men are under grace. Some Dispensationalists, called "Ultra-Dispensationalists", even teach that men were saved by Torah in "Old Testament times," but are saved by grace in "New Testament times." As a result, Dispensationalists teach that "the Torah is not for today" or "we have no Torah."

Replacement Theologians teach that G-d has replaced Israel with the Church; Judaism with Christendom; The Old Testament with The New Testament; and Torah with grace. As a result, they too teach that "the Torah is not for today" or "we have no Torah."

Now you may be saying to yourself: "Ok, so they teach Torah-lessness, but don't the Torah-less teachers of 2Peter & Jude go so far as to teach sexual immorality? Surely the Torah-less teachers of within the church would never use their "the Torah is not for today" teaching to promote sexual immorality." Wrong! Some of Christendom's teachers have already carried the "the Torah is not for today" reasoning to its fullest and logical conclusion. A sect of Christendom known as "The Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches" has published a tract which does just that. The nameless author of the tract writes:

Another Scripture verse that is used to show

that the Bible condemns the gay lifestyle is found

in the Old Testament Book of Leviticus, 18:22,

"Thou shalt not lie with a man as thou would with

a woman." Anyone who is concerned about this

prohibition should read the whole chapter or the

whole Book of Leviticus: No pork, no lobster,

no shrimp, no oysters, no intercourse during

the menstrual period, no rare meats, no eating blood,

no inter-breeding of cattle, and a whole host of other

laws, including the Law to kill all divorced people who

remarry.

As Christians, our Law is from Christ. St. Paul clearly

taught that Christians are no longer under the Old Law

(for example in Galatians 3:23-24); that the Old Law is

brought to an end in Christ (Romans 10:4); and its

fulfillment is in love (Romans 13:8-10, Galatians 5:14).

The New Law of Christ is the Law of Love. Neither

Jesus, nor Paul, nor any of the New Testament Scriptures

implies that Christians are held to the cultic or ethical

laws of the Mosaic Law.

(Homosexuality; What the Bible Does and Does not Say;

Universal Fellowship press, 1984, p. 3)

Thus the teaching that "the Torah is not for today" is already being used to "turn the grace of our Elohim into perversion." (Jude 1:4; see also 2Pt. 2:18-21)

There is indeed a spiritual battle taking place. It is a battle between the truth and a lie. It is a battle between light and darkness. It is a battle led by the one who came to bear witness to the Torah, and the one who comes to bear witness to Torah-lessness. The Torah is truth. The belt of truth is the belt of Torah. Gird yourselves with the belt of Torah that you may withstand the Torah-less one.

Interestingly it is only comparatively recently that governments got into the marriage racket. In Israel the government does not marry anyone and thus the government does not divorce anyone. If you want to get married you go to your Church, Synagogue or Mosque, and likewise if you want a divorce, you go to the same. Historically marriage was a religious rather than secular act.

Carrying on conversation. Matthew 19:8 and Mark 10:5 carry the idea that the Messiah and his teachings were superseding the Torah.

Thoughts?

From my Hebraic Roots Commentary on Matthew

http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

Unfortunately Hebrew/Aramaic fonts appear as gibberish.

(19:1-12 Yeshua on divorce)

Mt. 19:3-9 Yeshua’s Halacha on Divorce

The Torah passage in question is:

When a man takes a wife and marries her,

and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes

because he has found some unclean matter in her,

and he writes her a bill of divorcement,

puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,...

(Dt. 24:1)

Here Yeshua presents a Yalemmedenu Homiletic Midrash on Gen. 2:24 & Deut. 24:1. The keywords for the midrash are: "man"; "put away" and "wife." The Midrash takes the following format:

Question/dialog:

19:3 And the P’rushim approached him, and tempted him,

saying, “Is it right for a man to put away his wife for every cause?”

Initial passages:

19:4 And he answered and said to them:

"Have you not read that he who made man the beginning,

'made them male and female' (Gen. 1:27)

19:5 And said,

'Wherefore shall a man shall leave his father

and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh' (Gen. 2:24)

Exposition:

19:6 And now then, they are no more two but one flesh

only. What therefore Elohim has joined together

man cannot separate."

Further question/second text:

19:7 But they said,

"And why then did Moshe then command

to give a bill of divorcement, and to put her away

if she was not pleasing in his sight?” (Deut. 24:1, 3)

Exposition:

19:8 And he answered them and said,

"Because Moshe on account of the hardness of your hearts,

allowed you to put away your wives,

but from the beginning it was not so.

19:9 And I tell you,

every man that has put away, or shall put away his wife,

except it be for fornication, and takes another,

commits adultery. And whoever takes the divorced also

commits adultery.

Yeshua's midrash is very relevant to first century Jewish halachic debate on this issue. Yeshua's use of Gen. 1:27 to prove his halachic position is paralleled in the Dead Sea Scrolls:

...they are caught in two traps:

fornication, by taking two wives in their lifetimes

although the principle of creation is:

"male and female He created them."

(Damascus Document Col. 4 line 20 - Col. 5 line 1)

except for the cause of fornication – This halacha of Yeshua is given four times in Scripture (Mt. 5:31-32; 19:3-9; Mk. 10:2-9 & Lk. 16:18) but only in Matthew is this “escape clause” included giving men the right to divorce their wives in a case of the charge of twnz rbd essentially “a word of fornication”.

The Torah passage in question is:

When a man takes a wife and marries her,

and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes

because he has found

some unclean matter (rbd twr() in her,

and he writes her a bill of divorcement,

puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,...

(Dt. 24:1)

In the first century a major debate was ongoing as to the meaning of the words for "unclean matter" (rbd twr() in this text. (The Hebrew word rbd davar can mean “word” or idiomatically “matter”. The debate is recorded in the Mishna as follows:

The House of Shamai say,

"A man should divorce his wife only because

he has found grounds for it

in unchastity (hwr( rbd)

, since it is said,

"Because he has found in her

an unclean matter in anything (Dt. 24:1)"

And the House of Hillel say,

"Even if she spoiled his dish, since it is said,

"Because he has found in her

an unclean matter in anything (Dt. 24:1)"

Rabbi Akiba says,

"Even if he found someone else prettier than she,

since it is said,

"And it shall be if she find no favor in his eyes (Dt. 24:1)"

(m.Gittin 9:10)

The controversy surrounded the ambiguity of the phrase "matter of uncleanness." This phrase in Hebrew can be taken literally, or can be taken as an idiomatic expression for fornication. Yeshua interprets rbd twr( to mean twnz rbd which the Peahitta (both here and in Mt. 19:9) literally translates )twynzd )tlm but which the Old Syriac paraphrases with )rwg hyl( rm)t) “it is said against her ‘adultery’” and in Mt. 19:9 )rwgd )tlm “a word of adultery”.

fornication – Exactly how this offense is to be understood is another question. The Hebrew word twnz can refer to sexual immorality, usually by a woman, but it can have other meanings as well. This word can refer to one who is an idolator (Lev. 17:7; 20:5-6; Deut. 31:16) or to one that goes astray from YHWH (Ps. 73:27). Ben Sira writes:

Allow no outlet to water,

and no boldness of speech in an evil wife.

If she does not go as you direct,

separate yourself from her.

(Ben Sira 25:25-26)

It may be that we are to understand Ben Sira’s qualifier “evil wife” to presuppose a wife who is guilty of twnz or perhaps we to understand twnz to include a wife who “does not go [as her husband] directs” as having gone astray from YHWH on the basis that the Torah statement “and he shall rule over you” (Gen. 3:16).

Now lets examine Yeshua's position. Yeshua uses Gen. 1:27 & 2:24 to argue for the stricter interpretation of "unclean matter" in Deut. 24:1. In Mt. 19:8,Yeshua makes an important observation. Deut 24:1 is not presented in the Torah as the will of YHWH. A careful reading of Deut. 24:1-4 shows that 24:1 is an incidental statement in a larger Law which deals with remarriage of the divorced. However 24:1 says:

When a man takes a wife... and it happens

that she find no favor in his eyes...

Deut. 24:1 simply says matter of factly, "when [divorce] happens" and then discusses the issue of YHWH’s Torah on remarriage. Yeshua points out that this is YHWH's recognition of man's will on the subject and not YHWH's will itself, which he finds in Gen.1:27 & 2:24. All of this he uses to argue for the strictest interpretation of "unclean matter" in Deut. 24:1.

I thougth some of you might enjoy this article: Click Here

It is pretty short and simple to read.

In part, it says:

"Our sages tell us that Torah can be interpreted in four different general ways: peshat, remez, drush and sod. . . . . Within these four methods of understanding Torah, there exist countless possible avenues of understanding"

Yes the Pashat is the literal

The Remez is the implied

The Drash is the homiletic of allegorical

The Sod is the hidden or secret meaning

The four letters spell PaRDeS (Hebrew is written without vowels) meaning "Paradise" :-)

I have already moved the doctrinal discussion.

As for Aramaic NT Origins research, I think it was very much a part of the Way that transcended doctrine. In fact their three volume set and concordance reflect little if any TWI doctrine and are well regarded by Aramaic researchers as academically honest and untainted by TWI doctrine.

Nice post, and glad someone has mentioned the book of Jasher.

There are many other 'books of' as may well know.

The Book of Jasher is one of the so-called "Lost Books" of the Bible.

The Book of Jasher is twice cited in the Tanak:

"Is not this written in the Book of Jasher?" (Joshua 10:13)

"Behold it is written in the Book of Jasher." (2Sam. 1:18)

This fresh Messianic Sacred Name translation from the original Hebrew is st http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

The term "Book of Jasher" is a bit misleading. This was not a book written by someone named "Jasher". In fact the word "Jasher" (Hebrew: Yashar) means "Upright" so that the Hebrew Sefer HaYashar is "The Upright Book". The definite article "Ha" tips us off that this is not a person's name but a modifier for the word "book".

There are two references to Jasher in the Tanak:

"And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had

avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still i

(Joshua 10:13)

(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

(2 Samuel 1:18)

From these two references in the Tanak there are several things we can learn about this mysterious book.

From the usage in Joshua 10:13 we can determine:

1. That Jasher contained the account of the prolonged day mentioned in Joshua 10.

2. That Jasher was in circulation by the time the book of Joshua was written. Since Joshua was written prior to the death of Rahab, Jasher must have been written by that time as well.

3. The Book of Jasher had enough credibility that Joshua would cite it as support for his assertion of the prolonged day.

The usage in 2Sam. 1:18 tells us:

4. The Book of Jasher supported an admonition to teach the son's of Judah "the bow".

The identity of this lost book has been a matter of much speculation over the centuries.

The ancient translations and paraphrases offer little help to us in

identifying the Book of Jasher.

The Greek LXX omits the entire phrase from Joshua 10:13 and translates the the phrase to mean "The Book of the Upright" in 2Sam. 1:18. The Latin Vulgate has in both places "Liber Justorum" "The Book of the Upright Ones". In the Targums the phrase is Paraphrased as "The Book of the Law".

The Aramaic Pedangta Tanak has "The Book of Praises" in Joshua 10:13 and "The Book of the Song" in 2Sam. 1:18. This may have resulted fromma misreading of YUD-SHIN-RESH (Upright) as SHIN-YUD-RESH (Song). And some have speculated that the book in question was actually a book of

songs which included reference to Joshua 10:13 in the lyrics of a

song. This theory also takes "the bow" in 2Sam. 1:18 to be the name of a song.

JASHER AND THE TALMUD

The Talmud discusses the identity of Jasher but also fails to offer us much real direction. In b.Avodah Zarah 25a Several theories for the identity of the Book of Jasher are proposed.

Rabbi Chiyya ben Abba taught in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that it is "the book of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" who are called "righteous". He seems to refer to Genesis since he sites Gen. 49:8 as the reference to Judah being taught "the bow".

Rabbi Eleazar identified Jasher as Deuteronomy based on Deut. 4:18. He cites Deut. 33:7 as the reference to Judah and archery.

Rabbi Samuel ben Nachmani identified Jasher as the book of Judges based on Judges 17:6. He found the reference to Judah and archery in Judges 3:2 & 1:1-2.

None of these explanations offered by the Talmudic rabbis seek to explain how any of these biblical books could have been referenced by Joshua 10:13 (especially Judges which was written AFTER Joshua). Could these Rabbis have used a text of Joshua which agreed with the LXX in omitting reference to the Book of Jasher? At any rate if we accept the reference to Jasher in Joshua 10:13 then we must reject these identifications of Jasher made in the Talmud.

While the Rabbis of the Talmud seem to have lost knowledge of them identity of the Book of Jasher, its identity was known to earlier generations.

LAID UP IN THE TEMPLE

In his own recounting of the event of the prolonged day of Joshua 10 the first century Jewish Roman historian Josephus identifies the Book of Jasher mentioned by Joshua as one of "the books laid up in the Temple" (Ant. 5:1:17). Thus the Book of Jasher was known to Josephus and was known to be among the books laid up in the Temple in the first century.

THREE BOOKS OF JASHER

There are at least three books today with the title "Book of

Jasher"/"Sefer HaYashar".

One of these is a Hebrew book which was never intended to be

identified with the Sefer HaYashar or the Bible. (Remember Sefer

HaYashar means "The Upright Book".

Another "Book of Jasher" is a very bad English forgery published first in 1751 and again in 1829. This version claims the be written by a man named "Jasher". This forgery opens with the phrase "Whilst it was the beginning, darkness overspread the face of nature." Reprints of this forgery still circulate today. If you have a copy of the Book of Jasher you will want to make sure it is not this one.

The last Book of Jasher is the only one with any real potential to be the real "Book of Jasher". This "Book of Jasher" was published in Hebrew in Venice in 1625, translated into English by Moses Samuel and published by Mordechai Noah in New York in 1840 *3*. It was Moses Samuel who first divided the work into chapter and verse (being 81 chapters. A second edition of this translation was published in Salt Lake City by J. H. Parry & Company in 1887. Both editions have been reprinted and republished several times. In 1954 Bible Corporation of America in Philadelphia reprinted the 1840 edition. They also translated it from English into Italian, Spanish, French and German for publication in those languages as well. This Book of Jasher

is the one we will be discussing. There has been some debate as to whether this Book of Jasher is the book mentioned in the Bible or just a Midrash which some have speculated originated in the 13th century. Certainly the book claims to be the same Book of Jasher mentioned in the Bible.

THE REAL BOOK OF JASHER?

The 1625 edition of Jasher has a Preface, which says in part

(translated from the Hebrew):

...when the holy city Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus,

all the military heads went in to rob and plunder, and

among the officers of Titus was one whose name was Sidrus,

who went in to search, and found in Jerusalem a house

of great extent...

According to the preface this Sidrus found a false wall in this

house with a hidden room. In this room he found an old man hiding with provisions and many books including the Book of Jasher The old man found favor with Sidrus who took the old man and his books with him.

The preface says "they went from city to city and from country to

country until they reached Sevilia [a city in Spain]." At that time

"Seville" was called "Hispalis" and was the capital of the Roman province of Hispalensis. The manuscript was donated to the Jewish college at Cordova, Spain.

According to the 1625 edition of Jasher the first printed edition of

the Book of Jasher was published in Naples Italy in 1552. However no copies of the 1552 edition are known to have survived. The earliest surviving Hebrew edition known is the 1625 edition.

The Book of Jasher is a narrative beginning with the creation of man and ends with the entry of Israel into Canaan.

The Book of Jasher passage related to Joshua 10:13 reads as follows:

"And when they were smiting, the day was declining toward evening, and Joshua said in the sight of all the people, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou moon in the valley of Ajalon, until the nation shall have revenged itself upon its enemies.

And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Joshua, and the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and it stood still six and thirty

moments, and the moon also stood still and hastened not to go down a whole day."

(Jasher 88:63-64)

The Book of Jasher passage which relates to 2Sam. 1:18 involves Jacob's last words to his son Judah:

"Only teach thy sons the bow and all weapons of war, in order that

they may fight the battles of their brother who will rule over his

enemies."

(Jasher 56:9)

This reads very similar to the midrash which gives these last words as:

"Thou, my son, art stronger than all thy brethren,

and from thy loins will kings arise. Teach thy children

how they may protect themselves from enemies and evil-doers"

It would seem that the author of Jasher did not create this account to fit with 2Sam. 1:18 since the same account occurs in the midrash (which itself may have been drawn from Jasher).

Certainly many serious scholars have concluded that this Book of

Jasher is authentic. The well known Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar (and translator of the 1840 Book of Jasher) Moses Samuel wrote of Jasher:

"...the book is, with the exception of some doubtful parts,

a venerable monument of antiquity; and that, notwithstanding

some few additions have been made to it in comparatively

modern times, it still retains sufficient to prove it a copy

of the book referred to in Joshua, ch. x, and 2 Samuel, ch. 1."

- Moses Samuel - Hebraist and Rabbinic Scholar

And my old friend and mentor, the late Dr. Cyrus Gordon (who was the world's leading Semitist until his death) said:

"There can be little doubt that the book of Jasher was a

national epic... The time is ripe for a fresh investigation

of such genuine sources of Scripture, particularly against

the background of the Dead Sea Scrolls."

- Dr. Cyrus Gordon

One major stumbling block in Book of Jasher research has been the lack of real evidence that the Book of Jasher (the one that we have) is truly ancient. There has been no hard evidence to prove that this Book of Jasher existed prior to 1625.

But now the proof has been found!

In the Masoretic Text and Septuagint of Gen. 5:18 has "And Jared lived one hundred and sixty two years". But the Book of Jasher 2:37 has "And Jared lived sixty two years". Amazingly this agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch of Gen. 5:18.

How could the Book of Jasher and the Samaritan Pentateuch share the same scribal error? How could this reading have made its way into the Book of Jasher? If the Book of Jasher were a late compilation made in the Middle Ages, it would certainly have simply copied from the Masoretic Text. Surely a Jewish writer in Europe in the Middle Ages would not have copied data from the Samaritan Pentateuch. This is clear evidence for the ancient origin of the Book of Jasher.

There is also a similar scribal error in Jasher 5:13 where Methuselah begets Lamech at eighty seven. In the Masoretic Text this number is given as one hundred and eighty seven. In the Septuagint it is given as one hundred and sixty seven, and in the Samaritan Pentateuch as sixty seven.

Here the reading agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch in omitting “one hundred” but agrees with the Masoretic Text in reading “eighty seven”. The Book of Jasher is clearly part of the ancient textual tradition here, and not simply borrowing from the Masoretic Text.

Finally we have the proof that the Book of Jasher that we have is of ancient origin!

NEW EDITION OF JASHER

I have in recent months completed work on the new translation of the "lost" "Book of Jasher" (cited in Josh. 10:13 & 2Sam. 1:18) from the original Hebrew. This has been a major project, taking several weeks to complete. This is the first "Messianic", "Sacred Name" version actually translated from the original Hebrew.

(http://www.lulu.com/nazarene). This edition includes a number

of passages which were (for whatever reason) omitted from the 1840 Moses Samuel translation which has circulated as the only available English translation until now. (The version published by Moshe K. is merely a revision of the 1840 English edition without any consultation of the original Hebrew.)

In my work on Jasher I have found that many Hebrew sections (some of them lengthy and important) have been omitted from all current English editions (Including Moshe's K's RSTNE).

I have also found that the english titles of Elohim used in Moses

Samuel's edition do not accurately reflect the Sacred Names used in the actual Hebrew, and therefore the "True Name" edition produced by Moshe K. does not contain the true Sacred Names at all.

The English translation of the Book of Jasher that is in current use

was made my Moses Samuel in 1839 and published in 1840 and again in 1887 and has been published several times since in reprints of those editions.

There is also a "True Name" edition which was produced by

Moshe Koniuchowsky using the Moses Samuel translation as a base text.

Moses Samual's translation was a monumental work in its time, but it does include many errors, and it cannot be used to produce an accurate Sacred Name version of Jasher.

There are several passages in which Moses Samuel failed to include passages, some of them lengthy and inportant, in his translation.

For example Jasher 1:36

Moses Samuel Translates:

1:36 And Irad was born to Enoch, and Irad begat Mechuyael and

Mechuyael begat Methusael.

Moshe Koniuchowsky's "Restoration True Name Edition" has:

1:36 And Irad was born to Chanok, and Irad begat Mechuyael and

Mechuyael begat Methusael.

However upon examining the Hebrew text I found that Moses Samuel had

neglected a line of text and failed to include "and M'tushael begat

Lamech".

The Hebraic-Roots Version of the Book of Jasher reads here as

follows:

1:36 And Irad was born to Chanoch, and Irad begat M'chuyael and

M'chuyael begat M'tushael and M'tushael begat Lamech.

Now lets look at Jasher 3:3

Moses Samuel translates:

3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, whilst he was

serving the Lord, and praying before him in his house, that an angel

of the Lord called to him from Heaven, and he said, Here am I.

Moshe Koniuchowsky's "Restoration True Name Edition" has:

3:3 And it was at the expiration of many years, while he was serving

YHWH, and praying before him in his house, that a malach of the Lord

called to him from ha shamayim, and he said, Hinayni.

However, once again, in examining the original Hebrew I found that

Moses Samuel had failed to include a section of text.

Thus the Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads:

3:3 And it was at the end of many days and years, while he was

serving before YHWH, and praying before YHWH in [his] house, that an

angel of YHWH called to him from Heaven saying: Chanoch, Chanoch,

and he said, Here am I.

In Jasher 3:22 There is an even longer segment omitted by Moses

Samuel.

Here the Moses Samuel Translation reads:

3:22 And the day came when Enoch went forth and they all assembled

and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of the Lord and

he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him

and they said, May the king live! May the king live!

Moshe Koniuchowsky's "Restoration True Name Edition" has:

3:22 And the day came when Chanok went forth and they all assembled

and came to him, and Enoch spoke to them the words of YHWH and he

taught them wisdom and knowledge, and they bowed down before him and

they said, May the melech live! May the melech live!

Once again an examination of the Hebrew demonstrated that Moses

Samuel left out a section of text, this time a fairly lengthy one.

The Hebraic-Roots Version of Jasher reads here as follows:

3:22 And the day came when Chanoch went forth and they all assembled

and came to him, and Chanoch spoke to them all the words [of YHWH]

and he taught them wisdom and knowledge, and he taught them the fear

of YHWH. And all the sons of men feared him greatly and they were

astonished by him concerning his wisdom. And all the land bowed to

his face and they said, May the king live! May the king live!

Another example is in Jasher 10:19

Moses Samuel has:

10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzraim, Phut and Canaan

according to

their generation and cities.

Moshe Koniuchowsky's "Restoration True Name Edition" has:

10:19 And the children of Ham were Cush, Mitzrayim, Phut and Kanaan

according to

their generation and cities.

However the HRV Version of Jasher will restore a LARGE missing section

in this

verse as follows:

10:19 And the children of Ham the son of Noach went also and built to

themselves cities in places where they were scattered and called also

the names of the cities by their names and by their occurrences and

these are the names of all their cities according to their families

which built to them in those days after the tower and the children of

Ham were Kush, Mitzraim, Put and Kanaan according to their generation

and cities.

Moses Samuel in his 1840 translation seems to have omitted everything

between the first and second appearances of "the children of Ham". He

must have taken his eyes off of the text and then found the key phrase

"the children of Ham" in the wrong place.

Another example is in Jasher 19:36

Moses Samuel has:

19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the

like.

Moshe Koniuchowsky's "Restoration True Name Edition" has:

19:36 And in the city of Admah there was a woman to whom they did the

same.

The Hebraic Roots Version of Jasher reads as follows:

19:36 And also in the city of Admah there was a certain girl, a

daughter of a noble of the men of Admah and they did the same thing to

her.

OTHER MISTRANSLATIONS

In Jasher 4:12 Moses Samuel mistakenly translates the phrase "rebelled

against God". Moshe K's version has "rebelled against Elohim" but the

actual Hebrew has "rebelled against the ground" as the HRV version of

Jasher reads.

In Jasher 6:36 Moses Samuel has the phrase "the earth and the heavens"

Moshe Koniuchowsky also has "the earth and the heavens"

The Hebrew actually reads: HaEretz V'HaYamim "the land and the seas"

as the HRV version of Jasher will read.

The Hebrew word ERETZ can mean either "land" or "earth" however Moses

Samuel misread YAMIM ("seas") as SHAMAYIM ("heavens").

A TRUE SACRED NAME EDITION

There are also many passages in which Moses Samuel failed to

accurately translate "Sacred Names". Since Moshe Koniuchowsky's

version simply revises Samuel's translation without consulting the

Hebrew, the result, though called a "True Name Edition" often does

not contain the True Sacred Names which actually appear in the

original Hebrew text of Jasher.

For example:

Jasher 1:10

"...and she transgressed the word of God..."

- Jasher 1:10, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840

"...and she transgressed the word of Elohim..."

- Jasher 1:10, Moshe K. "True Name" version

But the Hebrew actually has:

"...and she transgressed the word of YHWH..."

- Jasher 1:10, Hebraic Roots Version- James Trimm

And again just five verses later:

Jasher 1:15

"...and God turned and inclined to Able..."

- Jasher 1:15, Moses Samuel Translation of 1840

"...and Elohim turned and inclined to Avel..."

- Jasher 1:15, Moshe K. "True Name" version

But the Hebrew actually has:

"...and YHWH turned and inclined to Havel..."

- Jasher 1:15, Hebraic Roots Version

And in Jasher 2:24

"...I obtained him from the Almighty God."

- Jasher 2:24, Moses Samuel

"...I obtained him from the Almighty Elohim."

- Jasher 2:24, Moshe K. "True Name" version

But the text actually reads:

"...I obtained him from El Shaddai."

- Jasher 2:24, Hebraic Roots Version

(These are just a few examples from the first two chapters)

MORE

In Jasher 19:2 we are told that Avraham's servant gave sound-alike

names to the wicked judges of Sodom and Amorah (Gamorrah). In the

editions of Moses Samuel and Moshe K. there is no explaination as to

these sound-alike names. However the HRV version of Jasher has

footnotes to each of these four alternate names explaining their

actual meaining as "word plays" making fun of these wicked judges.

This fresh Messianic Sacred Name translation from the original Hebrew is st http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

Which Way?

(transplanted from another Section since this is doctrinal)

By James Trimm

NAZARENE JUDAISM WAS “THE WAY”

Acts 24:5 reads:

"For we have found this man to be one who is corrupt and stirs up

sedition among all the Jews in all Ha-Eretz (The Land). For he is a

leader of the teaching of the Nazarenes."

(Acts 24:5 ? HRV from the Aramaic Pedangta)

The Greek has "sect" in pace of "teaching".

Then in Acts 24:14 Paul responds to this accusation saying:

"…this I do confess, that in the same teaching about which they are

speaking, I serve [Elohim]?"

(Acts 24:14 ? HRV from the Aramaic Pedangta)

Now while book of Acts was originally written in Aramaic, the only

surviving witness to that original Aramaic text in Aramaic is the

Pedangta (and a few quotations by Syriac "Church Fathers") the more

primitive Old Syriac Aramaic text of Acts has not survived.

We do have indirect witnesses to that text through the Western type

text of Acts preserved in the Western Type Greek manuscripts, and in

the Old Latin. While the Greek is not the original language of Acts,

it can preserve original readings not preserved in the Pedangta, in

much the same way that the LXX can sometimes preserve original

readings which have not survived in the Masoretic Text. In this case

the word "The Way" (a single word in Aramaic) has been omitted from

the Aramaic Pedangta version of Acts, but it is almost certainly

original, since it appears in all other versions of Acts.

The Original Aramaic of Acts most probably read:

"…this I do confess, in this Way, the teaching about which they are

speaking, I serve [Elohim]?"

(Acts 24:14 as it must have read in the original Aramaic)

Here it is clearly stated by Paul that "The Way" is a synonym for "The

Teaching/Sect of the Nazarenes".

So if we can better understand how "The Way" is used, we will better

understand how the term "Nazarenes" was understood.

ESSENE JUDASIM WAS “THE WAY”

The term "The Way" is used to describe believers in Acts 9:2 and Acts

22:4 (which actually recaps the events of Acts 9:2).

Both the Qumran community, and John quoted Is. 40:3 as being a

prophecy foretelling of their work (Mt. 3:3; Mk. 1:3; Lk. 3:4; Jn

1:23; Dam. Doc. viii, 12-14; ix, 20). This verse appears in most New

Testaments as:

The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

"Prepare the way of the Lord;

make straight in the desert a highway for our God."

However, the cantor markings in the Masoretic Text give us the

understanding:

The voice of one crying

"In the wilderness prepare the way of YHWH;

make straight in the desert a highway for our Elohim."

As a result of their use of this verse, both John and the Essenes of

the Qumran community referred to themselves as being "in the

wilderness" and both the Essene Qumran community and the early

believers in Yeshua called their movement "The Way". (Mt. 3:3; Mk.

1:3; Lk. 3:4; Jn 1:23; Acts 9:2; 22:4; 24:14 compared to Manual of

Discipline viii, 12-14; ix, 17-22).

In Acts we read about Paul just before he became a believer in Messiah:

Now Shaul was yet full of the threat and anger of murder

against the talmidim of our Adon. And he asked for letters

from the Chief Cohen to give to Darm'suk (Damascus)

to the synagogues, that if he should find any who follow in

this way, men or women, he might bind and bring them

to Yerushalayim.

(Acts 9:1-2)

Now why would Shaul want to go to Damascus to pursue the followers of

Yeshua?

Damascus was the capitol of Essene Judaism as laid out in the

"Damascus Document" found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The first

Essenes "...went out of the land of Judah and dwelt in the land of

Damascus..." (Damascus Document 6, 5)

As we have demonstrated so many times before (and this is a whole

separate article) the first followers of Yeshua were from the Essenes.

Now while on his way to Damascus Paul encounters the resurrected

Yeshua and himself becomes a believer in Yeshua as the Messiah (Acts

9:3-7). As instructed by Yeshua, Paul enters Damascus and makes

contact with the followers of Yeshua there (Acts 9:8-19). In his

letter to the Galatians Paul describes these events as follows:

And I did not go to Yerushaliyim to the emissaries who

were before me, but I went to Arabia and again returned

to Darm'suk (Damascus), and after three years, I went

to Yerushalayim to seek Kefa and remained with him

fifteen days.

(Gal. 1:17-18)

Why did Paul remain for three years in Damascus? Because it took

three years to be fully admitted into the Essene community. As

Josephus writes:

"But now if any one has a mind to come over to their sect, he is not

immediately admitted, but he is prescribed the same method of living

which they use for a year, while he continues excluded'; and they give

him also a small hatchet, and the fore-mentioned girdle, and the white

garment. And when he has given evidence, during that time, that he can

observe their continence, he approaches nearer to their way of living,

and is made a partaker of the waters of purification; yet is he not

even now admitted to live with them; for after this demonstration of

his fortitude, his temper is tried two more years; and if he appear to

be worthy, they then admit him into their society."

(Wars 2:8:7)

Paul went through the entire process of learning the ins and outs of

Essene Judaism. These studies also shaped Paul's thinking. There are

several Parallels between Paul's teachings and the Essene teachings at

Qumran.

The important point I want to make here is that the term "The Way" was

originally a euphemism for Essene Judaism and became a euphemism for

Nazarene Judaism as an offshoot of Essene Judaism. Thus "Nazarene" is

clearly a designation of a Jewish sect, just as the Essenes, Pharisees

and Sadducees were also Jewish sects.

TORAH OBSERVANCE IS “THE WAY”

It is important to realize that the term “The Way” is drawn from the Torah itself, in which “The Way” is clearly identified as being the Torah and the commandments. No anti-nomian Christian organization that teaches that the Torah is not for today, can honestly call itself “The Way”:

And YHWH said unto me: Arise, get you down quickly from hence, for your people

that you have brought forth out of Egypt have dealt corruptly. They are quickly turned

aside out of THE WAY which I commanded them: they have made them a molten image.

(Deut. 9:12)

For if you shall diligently keep all this commandment which I command you, to do it,

to love YHWH your Elohim, to walk in all HIS WAYS and to cleave unto Him,

Then will YHWH drive out all these nations from before you, and you shall

dispossess nations greater and mightier than yourselves.

Every place whereon the sole of your foot shall tread, shall be yours: from the

wilderness and the L’vanon, from the river--the river Euphrates--even unto the hinder sea

shall be your border.

There shall no man be able to stand against you. YHWH your Elohim shall lay the

fear of you and the dread of you, upon all the land that you shall tread upon, as He has

spoken unto you.

Behold, I set before you this day, a blessing and a curse:

he blessing, if you shall hearken unto the commandments of YHWH your Elohim,

which I command you this day.

And the curse, if you shall not hearken unto the commandments of YHWH your

Elohim, but turn aside out of THE WAY which I command you this day, to go after other

gods, which you have not known.

(Deut. 11:22-28)

See, I have set before you this day, life and good, and death and evil,

In that I command you this day to love YHWH your Elohim, to walk in His WAYS,

and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His ordinances; then you shall live

and multiply. And YHWH your Elohim shall bless you, in the land where you go in to

possess it.

(Deut. 30:15-16)

127 (57): Then he answered me, and said, This is the condition of the battle, which man that is born upon the earth shall fight;

128 (58): That, if he is overcome, he shall suffer as you have said: but if he gets the victory, he shall receive the thing that I say.

129 (59): For this is the Way of which Moshe spoke unto the people while he lived, saying, Behold I have set before you life and death; the blessing and the curse. Therefore choose life that you may live, you and your seed

(2Esdras 7:127-129 Apocrypha)

THE MESSIAH IS THE WAY

Scripture also tells us that Messiah himself is “The Way” (Jn. 14:6).

To begin with we must understand that this Assembly is also known as the "Body of Messiah" as we read:

"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning,

the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the

preeminence."

(Col. 1:18 - KJV)

"And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head

over all things to the church,

Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."

(Eph. 1:22-23 - KJV)

Now one may ask what "Assembly" is the allegorical Messiah? To find the answer to that question lets look at Matthew 2:14-15:

"When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and

departed into Egypt:

And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled

which was spoken of the Lord

by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son. "

(Matthew 2:14-15 - KJV)

Now here Matthew is citing a prophecy in Hosea 11:1 and applying it to Messiah. Now let us go back and look at this prophecy in Hosea 11:1 in context:

"When Israel was a child, then I loved him,

and called my son out of Egypt."

(Hosea 11:1 - KJV)

Here Hosea is referring to Israel as the son who is called out of Egypt. This points us back to a passage in the Torah:

"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go,

behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn."

(Ex. 4:22-23 - KJV)

From these two passages we learn that Israel is the firstborn son of Elohim who is called out of Egypt. However in Matthew it is Yeshua the Messiah who is called up out of Egypt and in Col. 1:18 Messiah is the "firstborn". Moreover Hebrews speaks of the "church of the firstborn" (Heb. 12:23 - KJV).

Thus Israel is allegorically equivalent to the Messiah. Messiah is “The Way” and His true Assembly, the Assembly of Israel, is also “The Way”.

WHO IS THE WAY?

The Way in the Scriptures is a Torah Observant sect of Judaism known as “Nazarene” with roots in Essene Judaism.

Posted Image

Any organization claiming to be “The Way” and teaching that the Law is not for today, is a false “Way”.

James Trimm

Worldwide Nazarene Assembly of Elohim

A follower of the [True] Way

For All your Generations Forever

Now we have already shown that in studying the New Testament we must ask ourselves "can you get here from there?" ("there" being the Tanak (Old Testament)). If we understand something in the New Testament in such a way that it contradicts the Tanak, then we must be misunderstanding it. Now there are many who understand many New Testament passages in such a way as to believe and teach that the Torah has been abolished. Let us be like noble Bereans and let us look in the Tanak to see if this is so (Acts 17:11). After all Paul tells us that the Tanak is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, [and] for instruction" (2Tim. 3:16). So what does the Tanak say? Was the Torah to be for all generations, forever? or would it one day be abolished? If the Torah would one day be abolished, then we should be able to find this taught in the Tanak. As Noble Bereans we should be checking to see if the things we have been taught can be found in the Tanak. By contrast, if the Torah would not be abolished, but would be for all generations forever, then we should be able to find that information in the Torah as well. Since the Tanak is profitable for doctrine and correction, perhaps we can seek the truth on this issue from the Tanak:

...it shall be a statute forever

to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)

...it shall be a statute forever to him

and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)

...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)

...it shall be a statute forever to them,

to him and to his seed

throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)

It is a sign between me

and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)

There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)

Moreover the Psalmist writes:

Your word is truth from the beginning:

and every one of your righteous judgements

endures forever.

(Psalm 119:160)

Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:

You shall not add to the word

which I command you,

neither shall you diminish a thing from it,

that you may keep the commandments

of YHWH your God which I command you.

(Deut 4:2)

Whatever thing I command you,

observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,

nor diminish from it.

(Deut. 12:32)

So if we are "Noble Bereans" we will find that the Tanak teaches that the Torah will not be abolished but will endure for all generations forever. This teaching from the Tanak is profitable to us for doctrine, for reproval and for correction.

The Messiah echoes this teaching:

Do not think that I have come

to destroy the Torah or the Prophets.

I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.

For assuredly, I say to you,

till heaven and earth pass away,

one yud or one mark will by no means

pass from the Torah till all is fulfilled.

Whoever therefore breaks one of the least

of these commandments, and teaches men so,

he will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven;

but whoever does and teaches them

will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

(Matt. 5:17-19 see also Lk. 16:17).

As does Paul:

Do we then abolish the Torah through trust?

Absolutely not! We uphold the Torah!

(Rom. 3:31)

Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that Elohim should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tenach and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25).

The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call Elohim a liar.

Another popular teaching in the church is a teaching that Elohim only gave the Torah to Israel to prove that they could not keep it. For example one book states:

...Israel, in blindness and pride and self-

righteousness, presumed to ask for the law;

and God granted their request, to show them

that they could not keep his law...

(God's Plan of the Ages; Louis T. Tallbot; 1970; p. 66)

Now lets think this through for a moment. God gives Israel the Torah. He says he will place curses upon Israel if they fail to keep the Torah (Lev. 26 & Deut 28-29). He sends prophets to warn Israel of pending destruction because of their continual failure to keep Torah. Eventually God allows Babylon to invade Jerusalem and the Jews to be taken into captivity, because of their failure to keep Torah. Then he comes along and says "Nah, I was only fooling. I just gave you the Torah to prove you could not do it." What kind of God would that be? Of course as noble Bereans we can simply look in the Tanak to see if this poular teaching is true. Let us see what the Tanak says on this issue:

For this commandment which I command you this day

it is not to hard for you, neither is it far off.

It is not in heaven, that you should say:

" Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us,

and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"

Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say:

"Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us,

and make us hear it, that we may do it?"

But the Word is very near to you, in your mouth,

and in your heart, that you may do it.

(Deut. 30:11-14)

The fact that the Torah can be kept is confirmed as well in the New Testament which tells us that Yeshua was tempted in all things just as we are and he did keep the Torah (Heb. 4:15).

The Nazarenes saw Paul as having been spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah. As we reed in the Ancient Nazarene commentary on Is. 9:1-4 (8:23-93 in Jewish versions) as cited by Jerome:

The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above,

try to explain this passage in the following way:

When Messiah came and his proclaiming shone out,

the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were

freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees

and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke

of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the proclaiming became more dominant, that means the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul who was the least of all the emissaries. And the goodnews of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked

or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the goodnews.

(Note: The "Jewish traditions" in the context of this commentary refer to Rabbinic Halachah of the fourth century CE with which the Nazarenes took issue.)

Now Isaiah 9:1-4 refers to "Galilee of the GOYIM (nations/Gentiles)" but identifies these "Gentiles" as the inhabitants of "the land of Zebulon and Naphtali". Here the House of Israel is being identified as "Gentiles". There are at least two other places in Scripture where the word "Gentile" is used to describe Ephraim (the House of Israel). One of these is Gen. 48:19 where (in the Hebrew) Ephraim is told his descendants will become "a multitude of nations (GOYIM; Gentiles)" (compare Rom. 11:25 where the same phrase is translated in the KJV as "fullness of the gentiles"). The other case is in Rom. 9:24 which refers to "Jews" and "Gentiles" but then goes on (in Rom. 9:25-26) to quote Hosea (Hos. 2:23; 1:10) to identify them which the "Children of Judah" and "the Children of Israel" (Hosea 1:10-11; 2:23).

The Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah understands "you have multiplied the nation" (Is. 9:3) to refer to Paul "the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul... to the most distant tribes". Therefore the ancient Nazarenes understood the "Gentiles" to whom Paul primarily directed his message with the Ephraimite "Gentiles" of Isaiah 9:1-4 and with "the most distant tribes".

This comment in the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah makes it clear that the Ancient Sect of Nazarene Judaism held that Paul was an emissary to the Ephraimites.

We keep the Torah that can be kept. The Torah requires animal sacrifices be made at the appointed place (the Temple) so until the Temple is rebuilt we cannot make these. However the original followers of Yeshua continued to make them. Hebrews teaches that the offerings continued each year as a remembrance (Heb. 11:2-2). Paul made offerings at the Temple long after Yeshua's death (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21; Acts 24:17-18 see also Acts 18:18/Num 6:13-21). And the offerings will be made at the Millennial Temple (Ezek. 43:18-27). BTW there was no standing Temple in the days of Daniel, yet he was Torah Observant.

Matt. 5:17 Think not that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets, I have come not to abolish, but to fulfill. – This is the only passage from the New Testament which is actually quoted, or more correctly paraphrased, in the Talmud. In the Talmud a certain Nazarene Judge is cited as having quoted the following phrase from a book called the ”The Good News”.

I have not come to take away from the Torah of Moshe

and I have not come to add to the Torah of Moshe

(b.Shabbat 116)

This passage refers to a Torah command which forbids adding to, or subtracting from, the Torah (Deut. 4:2; 12:32). The Tanak states clearly that the Torah would never be abolished:

...it shall be a statute forever

to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)

...it shall be a statute forever to him

and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)

...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)

...it shall be a statute forever to them,

to him and to his seed

throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)

It is a sign between me

and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)

There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)

Moreover the Psalmist writes:

Your word is truth from the beginning:

and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.

(Psalm 119:160)

Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:

You shall not add to the word

which I command you,

neither shall you diminish a thing from it,

that you may keep the commandments

of YHWH your God which I command you.

(Deut 4:2)

Whatever thing I command you,

observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,

nor diminish from it.

(Deut. 12:32)

Similarly Paul writes:

Do we make the Torah of no effect by trust?

Absolutely not! On the contrary, we uphold the Torah!

(Rom. 3:31)

Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that God should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tanak and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25). The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call YHWH a liar.

Abolish/destroy…fulfill – In Hebrew and Aramaic these are idiomatic expressions. To “fulfil” the Torah means to keep and teach the Torah according to its true meaning. To “destroy” the Torah is to teach its meaning in correctly and to violate Torah. Yeshua came to teach the true meaning of Torah, thus in 5:21f he will teach the true meaning of various commandments of the Torah.

“love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength,”

This is nothing new… this is what the Totah says (Deut. 6:4)

and your neighbor as yourself.

This is also nothing new, it is a commandment in the Torah (Lev. 19:18)

I will try to respond to the rest of this timorrow, as I am about to head off to bed for th rnight.

However you mentioned Yeshua telling Paul to eat unkosher food.

I assume you refer to the common misunderstand of Acts 10 (though this is Peter/Kefa) not Paul.

The following is my commentary on Acts. unfortunately the Aramaic fonts appear as "gibberish" English letters:

10:1-2 Now there was one man in Caesarea; a centurion, and his name was Cornelius; from the band of soldiers that was called Italian. And he was righteous and feared Eloah, he and his entire house. And he did much tzedakah among the people, and all the time was entreating Eloah.

This is probably the same Centurion who once came to Yeshua seeking healing for his servant (see Mt. 8:5-13 = Lk. 7:1-10). If so, this is he of whom the people told Yeshua:

…he is worthy that you do this for him:

For he loves our people,

and also has built for us a synagogue.

(Lk. 7:4b-5)

“feared Eloah” )hl) Nm )wh lxdw literally “feared he from Eloah”. The Greek has foboumenoj ton Qeon “feared Eloah”. This may have been a technical term for Gentiles who sere semi-converts to Judaism, who accepted the Noachide laws but had not yet been circumcised into the Mosaic Covenant. (See Acts 13:16)

10:3 at nine hours into the day – See comment to Acts 3:1

10:9b …Shim’on went up to the roof to pray, at the sixth hour.

See comments to Acts 3:1

10:11 and a kind of garment being held by four corners,

and it was like a great linen cloth, The implication is that the garment was a tallit (prayer shawl) being lowered by the tzitzit on the four corners (Numbers 15:37-41).

10:12 And there were in it, all four-footed animals, and creeping things of the earth, and birds of heaven. Later we are told that these animals represent the three Gentiles who came to see Kefa (Acts 11:5-12). In 1Enoch 85-90 these animals are used to represent various groups of Gentiles.

10:13 arise, kill and eat – Kefa was not being unstructed to arise kill and eat the animals mentioned in verse 12. First of all this was not real, it was a vision. Secondly we know from Acts 11:5-12 that the Animals represented Gentiles. Kefa was not being told to kill the Gentiles. Instead he was being instructed to greet them as guests by arisng, killing an animal and eating (see for example Gen. 18:1-8 when Avrham greeted three men as guests).

10:14 I have never eaten anything that is defiled (bysm) or unclean ()m+) – The two words here in the Aramaic have different shades of meaning. bysm or as it appears in the dialect of the Jerusalem Talmud b)sm is used in the phrase b)sm )® “defiled land” referring to land outside of Israel, the land of the Gentiles (Y.Kil, IX, 32c). Whereas )m+ refers to that which is unclean, such as unkosher food.

10:15 That which Eloah has cleansed do not regard as defiled. Only the word “defiled” is repeated in this verse (see the previous verse). The voice does not say not to call food unclean, but not to call that which the food represents (Gentiles) “defiled” (see comments to verses 12, 12 and 14).

10:25-26 And while Shim’on was entering, Cornelius met him, and fell down; worshipped at his feet. And Shim’on raised him up and said to him, Stand up! I also am a son of man. Kefa did not respond with “Kiss my ring, I’m the first Pope!”

10:28 And he said to them, You know that it is not lawful, for a Jewish man to associate with a strange man, who is not a son of his kindred: The word “lawful” here (spm) refers not to the Torah, but to something that is allowed or permitted as a custom. strange ()yrkwn) man the term is used in the Targums to refer to foreigners, for example Targum Onkelos uses this word to render the phrase “you may not set a foreigner over you” in Deut. 17:15.

but Eloah showed me, that I should not say concerning a man, that he is unclean or defiled. As shown in the comments to Acts 10:11-15.

Paul is greatly misunderstood as having taught that the Torah is not for today. I have met a great many who feel uncomfortable with his writings. Some of these have even, like the Ebionites of ancient times, removed Paul's from their canon (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:27:4). This belief that Yeshua may not have abolished the Torah, but that Paul did, has been propagated since ancient times. The "Toldot Yeshu" for example, an ancient hostile Rabbinic parody on the Gospels and Acts, accuses Paul of contradicting Yeshua on this very issue (Toldot Yeshu 6:16-41; 7:3-5). At least one modern Dispensationalist, Maurice Johnson, taught that the Messiah did not abolish the Torah, but that Paul did several years after the fact. He writes:

Apparently God allowed this system of Jewish

ordinances to be practiced about thirty years

after Christ fulfilled it because in His patience,

God only gradually showed the Jews how it was

that His program was changing.... Thus it was

that after God had slowly led the Christians

out of Jewish religion He had Paul finally

write these glorious, liberating truths.

(Saved by "Dry" Baptism! ; a pamphlet by

Maurice Johnson; pp. 9-10)

Kefa warns us in the Scriptures that Paul's writings are difficult to understand. He warns us saying:

...in which are some things hard to understand,

which those who are untaught and unstable

twist to their own destruction,

as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

(2Pt. 3:15-16)

Paul knew that his teachings were being twisted, he mentions this in Romans, saying:

And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?

-- as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm

that we say." (Rom. 3:8)

Paul elaborates on this slanderous twist of his teachings, saying:

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin

that grace may abound? Certainly not!..."

(Rom. 6:1-2)

and

What then? Shall we sin because we are not

under the Torah but under grace? Certainly not!"

(Rom. 6:15).

So then, Paul was misunderstood as teaching that because we

are under grace, we need not observe the Torah.

Upon his visit to Jerusalem in Acts 21 Paul was confronted with this slanerous twist of his teachings. He was told:

You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews

there are who believe, and they are all zealous

for the Torah; but they have been informed about

you that you teach all the Jews who are among

the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they

ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk

according to the customs.

(Acts 21:20-21)

In order to prove that this was nothing more than slander, Paul takes

the nazarite vow and goes to make offerings (sacrifices) at the Temple (Acts 21:22-26 & Num. 6:13-21) demonstrating that he himself kept the Torah (Acts 21:24). Paul did and said many things to prove that he both kept and taught the Torah. He:

• circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1-3)

• took the nazarite vow (Acts 18:18; 21:17-26)

• taught and observed the Jewish holy days such as:

• Passover (Acts 20:6; 1Cor. 5:6-8; 11:17-34)

• Shavuot (Pentecost) (Acts 20:16; 1Cor. 16:8)

• fasting on Yom Kippur (Acts 27:9)

• and even performed animal sacrifices

in the Temple (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21;

Acts 24:17-18)

Among his more notable statements on the subject are:

• "Neither against the Jewish Torah,

nor against the Temple, nor against Caesar

have I offended in anything at all." (Acts 25:8)

• "I have done nothing against our people

or the customs of our fathers." (Acts 28:17)

• "...the Torah is holy and the commandment

is holy and just and good." (Rom. 7:12)

• "Do we then nullify the Torah through faith?

May it never be! On the contrary, we maintain

the Torah." (Rom. 3:31).

Was Paul a Hypocrite?

Being confronted with the various acts and statements of Paul which support the Torah, many of the "Torah is not for today" teachers accuse Paul of being hypocritical. Charles Ryrie, for example, footnotes Acts 21:24 in his Ryrie Study Bible calling Paul a "middle of the road

Christian" for performing such acts. Another writer, M.A. DeHaan wrote an entire book entitled "Five Blunders of Paul" which characterizes these acts as "blunders." "These teachers of lawlessness" credit Paul as the champion of their doctrine, and then condemn him for not teaching their doctrine. If Paul was really a hypocrite, could he honestly have condemned hypocrisy so fervently (see Gal. 2:11-15). Consider some of his own words:

For now do I persuade the sons of men or Eloah? Or do I seek to please the sons of men? For if until now I had pleased the sons of men, I would not have been a servant of the Messiah.

(Gal. 1:10 HRV)

And you know, my brothers, that our entrance unto you was not in vain,

but first we suffered and were dishonored, as you know, in Philippi, and then with great struggle we spoke to you with the boldness of our Eloah the good news of the Messiah.

For our exhortation was not from deception nor from impurity nor with treachery.

But as we were approved of Eloah to be entrusted with his Good News, thus we speak, not so as to please the sons of men, but Eloah, who searches our hearts.

For we never used flattering speech, as you know, nor a pretext of greediness; Eloah [is] witness.

(1Thes. 2:1-5 HRV)

If Paul was a hypocrite, he must have been one of the slickest con-men in history!

Galatians 4:21-5:6

In prompting this study I will begin with Gal. 5:2:

Behold, I Paul say to you, that if you be circumcised,

Christ shall profit you nothing.

Gal. 5:2 KJV

At first glance one might think after reading this verse that this one verse disproves the entire case made throughout the book you are now reading. But the key is that we must take the verse in context. One basic rule of hermeneutics is to ask yourself "who is speaking?" and "who is being spoken to?" Now we know that Paul is the speaker, but who is the "you" in Gal. 5:2? Is it the Galatians in general? Is it all mankind? Is it the modern reader? The answer to all of these questions is "no". If we look up just a little bit in Paul's letter here we will see that Gal. 5:2 is the summary of an argument that he initiates in Gal. 4:21 and which he illustrates in Gal. 4:22-31. Gal. 4:21 tells us exactly who the "you" in 5:2 is. He writes:

Tell me, you that desire to be under the law,

do you not hear the law?

Gal. 4:21

Note that "you" is defined in 4:21 as "you that desire to be under the law" Thus Gal. 5:2 should be understood to mean:

Behold, I Paul say

to you, [that desire to be under the law]

that if you be circumcised,

Christ shall profit you nothing

What does the phrase "Under the Law" mean?

Much of the confusion about Paul's teachings on the Torah involves two scripture phrases, which appear in the New Testament only in Paul's writings (in Rom. Gal. & 1Cor.). These two phrases are "works of the law" and "under the law", each of which appears 10 times in the Scriptures.

The first of these phrases, "works of the law", is best understood through its usage in Gal. 2:16. Here Paul writes:

knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law but by faith in Yeshua the Messiah,

even we have believed in Messiah Yeshua,

that we might be justified by faith in Messiah

and not by the works of the law;

for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

Paul uses this phrase to describe a false method of justification which is diametrically opposed to "faith in the Messiah". To Paul "works of the law" is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a heresy that has never been true.

The term "works of the Torah" has shown up as a technical theological term used in a document in the Dead Sea Scrolls called MMT which says:

Now we have written to you some of the

works of the law, those which we determined

would be beneficial for you...

And it will be reckoned to you as righteousness,

in that you have done what is right and good before Him...

(4QMMT (4Q394-399) Section C lines 26b-31)

The second of these phrases is "under the law". This phrase may best be understood from its usage in Rom. 6:14, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." Paul, therefore, sees "under grace" and "under the law" as diametrically opposed, one cannot be both. The truth is that since we have always been under grace (see Gen. 6:8; Ex. 33:12, 17; Judges 6:17f; Jer. 31:2) we have never been "under the law". This is because the Torah was created for man, man was not created for the Torah (see Mk. 2:27). "Under the law" then, is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a false teaching, which was never true.

There can be no doubt that Paul sees "works of the law" and "under the law" as categorically bad, yet Paul calls the Torah itself "holy, just and good" (Rom. 7:12), certainly Paul does not use these phrases to refer to the Torah itself.

The phrase "under the law" therefore, does not refer to the Torah itself but to a false teaching that was never true. So Paul is telling these people who are ready to apostatize and seek salvation through the false "under the law" doctrine, that their circumcisions will profit them nothing. Following the context then the rest of Gal. 5 is addressed to the "you that desire to be under the law" of 4:21.

Now let us examine the midrash Paul gives in Gal. 4:22-31. Remember now, we know from Gal. 4:21 that Paul is going to be illustrating a contrast between the Torah and the "under the law" teaching. The parable may be illustrated in a chart as follows:

The Torah

Abraham’s son by the freewoman(Isaac) (Gal. 4:22)

Born by promise(Gal. 4:23)

Jerusalem which is above which is free,the mother of us all. [sarah](Gal. 4:26)

the liberty where with Messiah has made us free(Gal. 5:1)

Under the Law

Abraham’s son by the bondwoman(Ishmael) (Gal. 4:22)

Born after the flesh (Gal. 4:23)

from mount Sinai genders to bondage Hagar

entangled again with the yoke of bondage"(Gal. 5:1)

The Torah is freedom. False teachings such as the ANOMOS teaching, the "works of the law" teaching and the "under the law" teaching bring only bondage.

Many have asked "Why have the Jews rejected Jesus?"… well let me make this clear, the only "Jesus" that most Jewish people have ever been exposed to is the "Jesus" that supposedly came to "free them from the bondage of the Law". Yes, they have rejected this Torahless Jesus, and rightly so. But most of them have never been exposed to the real Yeshua.

In coming years you will see many Jewish people embracing Yeshua as the Messiah. But the Yeshua that they accept will be the real Yeshua and not the Torahless "Jesus" that Christendom has adopted from pagan sources. The Jewish people know that an anti-Torah Messiah is no Messiah at all, they know better than to accept the rank paganism attached to Gentile Christianity.

The truth is that a great number of Orthodox Jews (even Rabbis) already know that Yeshua is the true and only Messiah, some of them have even confided this to me. At present they have no intention of disclosing this fact because they believe it would unite them with an anti-Torah Christianity which is overflowing with pagan customs and

practices, and a disdain for the Torah which is seen as "bondage".

The Jewish people will also come to realize that the books known as the "New Testament" (More correctly called the Ketuvim Netzarim, the "Writings of the Nazarenes") in their original Hebrew and Aramaic rather than their Greek translations, are as much a "Jewish Book" as the Tanak ("Old Testament")

It is not Christianity that the Jewish people will ultimately embrace, it is the ancient Nazarene sect of Judaism.

Read Romans 11, Paul says that if you thought wild branches being grafted in was a blessing to the world, wait until you see natural branches grafted into their own olive tree!

(Rom. 11:11-12, 15, 23-24)

Don't get me wrong, I do NOT teach that Torah observance earns salvation, absolutely not!

The following is taken from our statement of faith:

III. MESSIAH

We believe that Y'shua HaMashiach has come and with great joy we anticipate his return, and even though he may delay, nevertheless we endeavor to think about his return every day. We believe that the Messiah is the Word made flesh. We believe he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life in accordance with the Torah, performed miracles, was crucified for the atonement of his people in accordance with the Scriptures, was bodily resurrected on the third day. ascended to heaven and currently sits at the right hand of YHWH. He will return at the end of this age to usher in the Kingdom of Elohim on earth and will rule the world from Jerusalem with his people Israel for one thousand years. We also believe that the Messiah Yeshua is the Torah incarnate. Just as the Torah is the way, the truth and the light, the Messiah is also the way, the truth and the light.

IV. SALVATION

We believe that through the death of Messiah, because of his blood covenant with us, we receive salvation by way of inheritance. This salvation comes by faith through grace alone and is not earned by Torah observance.

V. TORAH

The Torah of Truth the Almighty gave to His people, Israel, through Moshe. He will not exchange it nor discard it for another until heaven and earth pass away. We believe that Torah observance is man's moral obligation and expression of love to YHWH. The Torah is freedom and not bondage. The Torah is the way, the truth and the light and is for all of our generations forever.

I have been asked to continue this thread henceforth in the doctrinal section. I will reopen it there.

Well the difference is Duet 6:4 (NIV) says "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. [a] 5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength."

and Jesus added (unless I missed this from the OT..

Luke 10:27 (New International Version)

He answered: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

Yea that's quoted from the Torah also (Lev. 19:18)

Torah...Kosher...Nazarene sect...Observances...laws...Sacrifices... nah, I'll just continue sticking with "loving God with all my heart, soul, mind & strength" Most of the other stuff is covered by that, thanks anyway James

"loving God with all my heart, soul, mind & strength" is Torah... you are quoting the Torah (Deut. 6:4)

You are saying "Torah... nah I'll just continue (and then you quote the Torah)" this makes no sense...

This and some other of James Trimm's topics are very interesting - but need to be in Doctrinal, surely, not in About The Way?

The Which way thread should perhaps be doctrinal, but the original language of the NT is not necessarily "doctrinal"...

I would love to see a sub-forum for Aramaic Research or something....

In The Way Magazine GMIR section Karen Masterson wrote an article (March-April 1984 p.17)

An Aramaic Approach to the Church Epistles

She was with the 9th way corps and also gave the material in a presentation at TWI HQ in 1983

I am very interested in this area of research and would love to make contact with her.

James Trimm

The research on Aramaic NT Origins continues without TWI...

I would be very interested in connecting with Karen Masterson or any ex-TWI people involved in this kind of research.

I have never been a member of TWI but am very interested in this kind of research.

I am the author of the book The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament

http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

and the translator of the Hebraic Roots Version Scriptures (The NT of which is translated from the original Hebrew and Aramaic sources).

Man was created in the image of Elohim. One of the ways that man was created in the image of Elohim was in being “male and female” (Gen. 1:26-27). But there is also another way in which man was created in the image of Elohim.

In Gen. 9:6 we are told that killing a man is a sin because man is “in the image of Elohim”. The preceding verses (9:2-5) tell us that man may kill and eat animals. Since many animals are “male and female” there must be more to man being “in the image of Elohim” than his being “male and female”. What is it that distinguishes man from animals?

The element about man that makes man “in the image of Elohim” while animals are not “in the image of Elohim” is the gift of speech.

The first two verses of Book of Jasher read:

1:1 And Elohim said, let us make man in Our image, after Our likeness,

and Elohim created man in his own image.

1:2 And YHWH Elohim formed man from the ground,

and he blew into his nostrils the breath of life,

and man became a living soul, endowed with speech.

(Jasher 1:1-2)

Note that Jasher 1:1 parallels Gen. 1:26-27 and Jasher 2:7 parallels Gen. 2:7 but adds the phrase "endowed with speech".

Now Targum Jonathan to Genesis 1:26 has "And the Word of YHWH said, let us make man in Our image." And Targum Onkelos to Gen. 2:7 adds a phrase at the end "and man became a spirit with speech".

Thus it would appear that man's gift of speech is the difference between man and animals so that man is "in the image of Elohim" while animals are not. It should also be noted that man was GIFTED with speech, Adam did not have to learn speech.

Isaiah prophesied about the manifestation of tongues:

Paul quoted directly from this scripture while teaching the assembly at Corinth about the gift of tongues. (1 Cor 14:21-22).

The gift of the manifestation of tongues is well known in the Rabbinic literature. The Talmud and midrashim both speak of this gift.

The “tongues of fire” event of Acts chapter two was a repetition of an event that took place at the first Shavuot (Shavuot is the aniversary of the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai). According to the Midrashim when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai the Torah message was divided up into the seventy languages of the Gentiles:

"Elohim's voice, as it was uttered, split into seventy voices,

into seventy tongues [leshonoth], so that all the nations should understand."

(Midrash from Exodus Rabbah 5:9)

The Midrash also describes this event in even more detail:

In the occasion of Matan Torah [the giving of the Torah], the Bnai Yisrael [children of Israel] not only heard Hashem's Voice but actually saw the sound waves as they emerged from Hashem's mouth. They visualized them as a fiery substance. Each commandment that left Hashem's mouth traveled around the entire Camp and then to each Jew individually, asking him, "Do you accept upon yourself this Commandment with all the halochot [Jewish law] pertaining to it?"

Every Jew answered "Yes" after each commandment. Finally, the fiery substance which they saw engraved itself on the luchot [tablets].

(The Midrash Says; Rabbi Moshe Weissman. Benei Yakov Publications (1980) p. 182)

Thus the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh and the manifestation of tongues in Acts chapter 2 was a repetition of the gift of Torah and the manifestation of tongues that took place then.

Moreover the Talmud tells us that Yosef (Joseph) the patriarch was also given the gift of “kinds of tongues”:

Rabbi Hiyya ben Abba said in the name of Rabbi Johanan: "At the moment when Pharaoh said to Joseph, And without thee shall no man lift up his hand, Pharaoh's astrologers exclaimed: 'Wilt thou set in power over us a slave whom his master bought for twenty pieces of silver!' He replied to them, 'discern in him royal characteristics.' They said to him, 'in that case he must be acquainted with the seventy languages.' Angel Gabriel came and taught [Joseph] the seventy languages, but he could not learn them. Thereupon [Gabriel] added to his name a letter from the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, and he knew [the languages]..."

(b.Sotah 36b)

The same story appears in the Book of Jasher:

And the angel roused him from his sleep, and Joseph rose up and stood upon his legs, and behold the angel of the Lord was standing opposite to him; and the angel of the Lord spoke with Joseph, and he taught him all the languages of man in that night, and he called his name Jehoseph.

(Jasher 49:14)

The name Yosef is sometines spelled in the Tanak Yahusef. According to the Talmud the extra letter “H” (hey) from the name of YHWH was added to his name thus giving him the knowledge of the seventy languages which he had been unable to learn. It is significant that in Jewish tradition the first HEY in the name of YHWH represents the Ruach HaKodesh. Thus Yosef received the Ruach HaKodesh and the gift of tongues.

TZERUF: Permutations of Letters

Each of the 22 Hebrew letters represents one of twenty two paths which connect the Sefirot of the Tree of Life. Each of these 22 letters represents a relationship between two of the Sefirot and a combination of two of the Sefirot. These 22 letters are part of the image of Elohim and they took part in the creation. Messiah said that he is the ALEF and the TAV. The ALEF and the TAV are the first and last letters of the Hebrew Alphabet and are intended as an abbreviation to indicate that Messiah the incarnate "Word" embodied the 22 letters. When Elohim created the heavens and the earth he did so through words. Elohim "said" things and they were so. Elohim created the universe

by his Word.

Each Hebrew word is more than a word, it is a matrix of dynamic relationships within the Godhead. Hebrew letters are also the building blocks of creation. In the upper worlds all things exist in their prime-material state as the strings of Hebrew letters and words

which were the building blocks of creation. As we read in the Sefer Yetzirah:

Twenty-two Foundation letters: He engraved them,

He carved them, He permuted (TZIRUF) them,

He weighed them, He transformed them,

And with them, He depicted all that was formed

and all that would be formed.

(Sefer Yetzirah 2:2)

This brings us to what is called in Rabbinic Judaism "Khokhmat HaTziruf" (Wisdom of Permutation) or simply "Tziruf" (permutation). This practice utilizes the letters of the alphabet in various permutations. By immersing oneself in various permutations of letters

and names one empties ones mind of the carnal thoughts that might interfere in focusing on the things of Elohim. Thus ones nefesh (soul), neshoma and ruach are freed from their natural constraints and opened to the influx of the Ruach HaKodesh. Through this process the believer is communing directly with the upper worlds and accessing the permutations of letters which are the creative substance of the universe, thus connecting with the worlds of formation and creation and the "Word", the ALEF and TAV through which all was created.

This practice is described in the Talmud:

Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: Bezalel knew how

to combine (TZIRUF) the letters by which the heavens

and earth were created. It is written here, And He hath filled

him with the spirit of God, in wisdom and in understanding,

and in knowledge (Ex. 35:31), and it is written elsewhere,

The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding

He established the heavens (Prov. 3:19), and it is also written,

By His knowledge the depths were broken up (Prov. 3:20).

(b.Ber. 55a)

And in the Zohar:

R. Eleazar began here with the verse, “Ask thee

a sign [Hebrew: OT “sign” or “letter”] of the Lord thy God,

ask it either in the depth or in the height above” (Isa. 7:11).

He said: ‘We have compared the former with the latter

generations, and found that the former were conversant with

a higher wisdom by which they knew how to combine (TZIRUF) the letters that were given to Moses on Mount Sinai,

and even the sinners of Israel knew a deep wisdom contained in the letters and the difference between higher and lower letters, and how to do things with them in this world.

For every letter that was transmitted to Moses used to

ascend as a crown upon the heads of the holy celestial Hayyoth, who with them flitted through the ether which is

under the refined and unknowable supernal ether. There

were large letters and small letters; the large letters came

from the most high and hidden Temple (hekhal) and the

smaller letters from another lower Temple; and both kinds

were transmitted to Moses on Sinai, along with their

hidden combinations. (Zohar 3:2a)

Tzeruf is comparable to "machine language" in computer programming.

The Hebrew word for "tongue" (LASHON) and the Hebrew word TZIRUF (permutation) have the same gematria (numerical value) (386) which is also the gematria for the word YESHUA.

It is the practice of Tziruf which Paul speaks of when he writes:

For he who speaks in a tongue

does not speak to the sons of men but to Eloah,

for no man understands a thing that he speaks;

yet in the spirit he speaks a mystery.

(1Cor. 14:2)

If I were to pray in a tongue, my spirit prays,

but my understanding is without fruit.

(1Cor. 14:14)

When man was created he was given the gift of speech that he might manifest the image of Elohim. Through the manifestation of the gift of tongues man is able to manifest the image of Elohim on an even deeper level.

Wonder how many of the old TWI Research Team Aramaic folks are still out there? The research on the Aramaic origins of the NT need not end, it can continue without TWI.

If you are interested in this kind of research check out the following resources:

The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-hebrew-and-aramaic-origin-of-the-new-testament/5616601

B'sorot Matti The Goodnews according to Matthew from an Old Hebrew Manuscript

(Hebrew and English on facing pages)

(Paperback)

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/bsorot-matti-the-goodnews-according-to-matthew-from-an-old-hebrew-manuscript/5616553

(hardback)

http://www.lulu.com/product/hardcover/bsorot-matti-the-goodnews-according-to-matthew-from-an-old-hebrew-manuscript/5616577

The Letter to the Hebrews from an Old Hebrew Text

(Hebrew and English on Facing Pages)

http://www.lulu.com/product/hardcover/the-letter-to-the-hebrews-from-an-old-hebrew-text/5611693

The Hebraic Roots Version:

PRINTED EDITION

http://www.isr-messianic.org/pubs/hrv.shtml

E-TEXT

http://www.lulu.com/product/ebook/hebraic-roots-version-revised-e-book-ed/4901935

ON CD ROM

http://www.lulu.com/product/cd/hrv-on-cd-rom---revised-text/4901961

Although the Greek version of the Epistle to the Hebrews has become

the standard text used in Christendom, the "Church Fathers" of

Christendom openly admitted that the Letter to the Hebrews had been

originally written in Hebrew and was later translated into Greek.

Eusebius in the fourth century referred to a now lost writing by

Clement of Alexandria wrote around the year 200 C.E. which Eusebius

cites as follows:

In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up

the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria]

has given us the abridged accounts

of all the canonical Scriptures, the Epistle

to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul,

to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue;

but that it was carefully translated by Luke,

and published among the Greeks.

(Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes (c. 200 CE) referred to by

Eusebius in Eccl. Hist. 6:14:2)

And Eusebius himself testifies:

For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews

in the language of his country;

some say that the evangelist Luke,

others that Clement, translated the epistle.

(Eusebius (4th Cent.); Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)

Finally Jerome writes:

He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew,

that is, his own tongue and most fluently

while things which were eloquently

written in Hebrew were more eloquently

turned into Greek.

(Jerome (4th Cent.); Lives of Illustrious Men, Book V)

Now as many of you may know, in 1537 Munster had published Hebrew

Matthew which he had obtained from the Jews (this Hebrew text was

very similar to the Hebrew Matthew published in 1553 by Jean

DuTillet). Twenty years later, in 1557, a second edition of

Munster's Hebrew Matthew was printed, this time also containing the

complete Hebrew text of the Letter to the Hebrews in an appendix.

This second edition went largely unnoticed and soon forgotten. The

lost Hebrew text of Hebrews has only been "rediscovered" since this

second 1557 edition of Munster's Hebrew Matthew has (in recent

months) come to our attention.

This Hebrew text of Hebrews (which had never before been translated

into English) served as the primary text of the Hebraic Roots Version

of the Letter to the Hebrews as published in the HRV complete

Scriptures.

Sometimes I am asked in the Hebrew or Aramaic NT texts differ from

the Greek texts. I would like to give an example of such a

difference as found in Hebrews 6:1-2:

The KJV translates the Greek version of Hebrews 6:1-2 as follows:

Therefore leaving the principles of

the doctrine of Christ, let us go on

unto perfection; not laying again

the foundation of repentance from dead works,

and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of

baptisms, and of laying on of hands,

and of resurrection of the dead,

and of eternal judgment.

In Greek Hebrews it is layed out that one leaves the "principles of

the doctrine of Christ" and "goes onto perfection" by "not laying

again the foundation" of a list of six "principles of the doctrine of

Christ".

But Hebrew Hebrews reads somewhat differently in this passage:

Therefore it is time to leave the word concerning

the word of the beginning of the life of Messiah

for so we grow in maturity to move again to establish

a foundation of repentance from dead works by faith in

Elohim. [A foundation] of immersions, of teaching,

of laying on of hands, of resurrection from the dead

and from everlasting judgment.

In the Hebrew version of Hebrews one leaves the mere study of the

life of Messiah and moves onto maturity by establishing a foundation

of seven areas that move us on to maturity.

Now this is a big difference. The Greek text says that we

should "leave the principles of the doctrine of Christ" ?!?! while

the Hebrew only says that we should move beyond a mere study of the

life of Messiah.

The Greek points us to move on from a study of six items while the

Hebrew tells us we should continue in studying seven items. Of

course in the Scriptures seven is normally the number of perfection

while six is generally the number of man (created on the sixth day)

and imperfection.

The Greek translator mistook the phrase "of immersions, of teaching"

as "of teachings of immersions" (i.e. of doctrines of baptisms) thus

leaving out "teaching/study" as one of seven foundational items that

help us move onto maturity.

The Hebrew points us in the direction of maturity while the Greek

tells us that the very things we need to grow in maturity are things

we should leave behind (and leaves out "teaching" entirely).

The Hebraic Roots Version is available at http://www.messianic.co.za

The E-Text version is at http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

Nah,... I wrote Peter, and the post hasn't been edited, and thanks for answwering that part.

Sorry, my mistake.

As for capitol punishment, we do not have that authority any longer, and will not until the Messiah returns to re-establish the Kingdom of Israel theocracy.

We keep the Torah that we can keep, so in the absence of the Temple we cannot make animal sacrifices until it is rebuilt.

Paul is greatly misunderstood as having taught that the Torah is not for today. I have met a great many who feel uncomfortable with his writings. Some of these have even, like the Ebionites of ancient times, removed Paul's from their canon (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:27:4). This belief that Yeshua may not have abolished the Torah, but that Paul did, has been propagated since ancient times. The "Toldot Yeshu" for example, an ancient hostile Rabbinic parody on the Gospels and Acts, accuses Paul of contradicting Yeshua on this very issue (Toldot Yeshu 6:16-41; 7:3-5). At least one modern Dispensationalist, Maurice Johnson, taught that the Messiah did not abolish the Torah, but that Paul did several years after the fact. He writes:

Apparently God allowed this system of Jewish

ordinances to be practiced about thirty years

after Christ fulfilled it because in His patience,

God only gradually showed the Jews how it was

that His program was changing.... Thus it was

that after God had slowly led the Christians

out of Jewish religion He had Paul finally

write these glorious, liberating truths.

(Saved by "Dry" Baptism! ; a pamphlet by

Maurice Johnson; pp. 9-10)

Kefa warns us in the Scriptures that Paul's writings are difficult to understand. He warns us saying:

...in which are some things hard to understand,

which those who are untaught and unstable

twist to their own destruction,

as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

(2Pt. 3:15-16)

Paul knew that his teachings were being twisted, he mentions this in Romans, saying:

And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?

-- as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm

that we say." (Rom. 3:8)

Paul elaborates on this slanderous twist of his teachings, saying:

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin

that grace may abound? Certainly not!..."

(Rom. 6:1-2)

and

What then? Shall we sin because we are not

under the Torah but under grace? Certainly not!"

(Rom. 6:15).

So then, Paul was misunderstood as teaching that because we

are under grace, we need not observe the Torah.

Upon his visit to Jerusalem in Acts 21 Paul was confronted with this slanerous twist of his teachings. He was told:

You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews

there are who believe, and they are all zealous

for the Torah; but they have been informed about

you that you teach all the Jews who are among

the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they

ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk

according to the customs.

(Acts 21:20-21)

In order to prove that this was nothing more than slander, Paul takes

the nazarite vow and goes to make offerings (sacrifices) at the Temple (Acts 21:22-26 & Num. 6:13-21) demonstrating that he himself kept the Torah (Acts 21:24). Paul did and said many things to prove that he both kept and taught the Torah. He:

• circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1-3)

• took the nazarite vow (Acts 18:18; 21:17-26)

• taught and observed the Jewish holy days such as:

• Passover (Acts 20:6; 1Cor. 5:6-8; 11:17-34)

• Shavuot (Pentecost) (Acts 20:16; 1Cor. 16:8)

• fasting on Yom Kippur (Acts 27:9)

• and even performed animal sacrifices

in the Temple (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21;

Acts 24:17-18)

Among his more notable statements on the subject are:

• "Neither against the Jewish Torah,

nor against the Temple, nor against Caesar

have I offended in anything at all." (Acts 25:8)

• "I have done nothing against our people

or the customs of our fathers." (Acts 28:17)

• "...the Torah is holy and the commandment

is holy and just and good." (Rom. 7:12)

• "Do we then nullify the Torah through faith?

May it never be! On the contrary, we maintain

the Torah." (Rom. 3:31).

Was Paul a Hypocrite?

Being confronted with the various acts and statements of Paul which support the Torah, many of the "Torah is not for today" teachers accuse Paul of being hypocritical. Charles Ryrie, for example, footnotes Acts 21:24 in his Ryrie Study Bible calling Paul a "middle of the road

Christian" for performing such acts. Another writer, M.A. DeHaan wrote an entire book entitled "Five Blunders of Paul" which characterizes these acts as "blunders." "These teachers of lawlessness" credit Paul as the champion of their doctrine, and then condemn him for not teaching their doctrine. If Paul was really a hypocrite, could he honestly have condemned hypocrisy so fervently (see Gal. 2:11-15). Consider some of his own words:

For now do I persuade the sons of men or Eloah? Or do I seek to please the sons of men? For if until now I had pleased the sons of men, I would not have been a servant of the Messiah.

(Gal. 1:10 HRV)

And you know, my brothers, that our entrance unto you was not in vain,

but first we suffered and were dishonored, as you know, in Philippi, and then with great struggle we spoke to you with the boldness of our Eloah the good news of the Messiah.

For our exhortation was not from deception nor from impurity nor with treachery.

But as we were approved of Eloah to be entrusted with his Good News, thus we speak, not so as to please the sons of men, but Eloah, who searches our hearts.

For we never used flattering speech, as you know, nor a pretext of greediness; Eloah [is] witness.

(1Thes. 2:1-5 HRV)

If Paul was a hypocrite, he must have been one of the slickest con-men in history!

I will try to respond to the rest of this timorrow, as I am about to head off to bed for th rnight.

However you mentioned Yeshua telling Paul to eat unkosher food.

I assume you refer to the common misunderstand of Acts 10 (though this is Peter/Kefa) not Paul.

The following is my commentary on Acts. unfortunately the Aramaic fonts appear as "gibberish" English letters:

10:1-2 Now there was one man in Caesarea; a centurion, and his name was Cornelius; from the band of soldiers that was called Italian. And he was righteous and feared Eloah, he and his entire house. And he did much tzedakah among the people, and all the time was entreating Eloah.

This is probably the same Centurion who once came to Yeshua seeking healing for his servant (see Mt. 8:5-13 = Lk. 7:1-10). If so, this is he of whom the people told Yeshua:

…he is worthy that you do this for him:

For he loves our people,

and also has built for us a synagogue.

(Lk. 7:4b-5)

“feared Eloah” )hl) Nm )wh lxdw literally “feared he from Eloah”. The Greek has foboumenoj ton Qeon “feared Eloah”. This may have been a technical term for Gentiles who sere semi-converts to Judaism, who accepted the Noachide laws but had not yet been circumcised into the Mosaic Covenant. (See Acts 13:16)

10:3 at nine hours into the day – See comment to Acts 3:1

10:9b …Shim’on went up to the roof to pray, at the sixth hour.

See comments to Acts 3:1

10:11 and a kind of garment being held by four corners,

and it was like a great linen cloth, The implication is that the garment was a tallit (prayer shawl) being lowered by the tzitzit on the four corners (Numbers 15:37-41).

10:12 And there were in it, all four-footed animals, and creeping things of the earth, and birds of heaven. Later we are told that these animals represent the three Gentiles who came to see Kefa (Acts 11:5-12). In 1Enoch 85-90 these animals are used to represent various groups of Gentiles.

10:13 arise, kill and eat – Kefa was not being unstructed to arise kill and eat the animals mentioned in verse 12. First of all this was not real, it was a vision. Secondly we know from Acts 11:5-12 that the Animals represented Gentiles. Kefa was not being told to kill the Gentiles. Instead he was being instructed to greet them as guests by arisng, killing an animal and eating (see for example Gen. 18:1-8 when Avrham greeted three men as guests).

10:14 I have never eaten anything that is defiled (bysm) or unclean ()m+) – The two words here in the Aramaic have different shades of meaning. bysm or as it appears in the dialect of the Jerusalem Talmud b)sm is used in the phrase b)sm )® “defiled land” referring to land outside of Israel, the land of the Gentiles (Y.Kil, IX, 32c). Whereas )m+ refers to that which is unclean, such as unkosher food.

10:15 That which Eloah has cleansed do not regard as defiled. Only the word “defiled” is repeated in this verse (see the previous verse). The voice does not say not to call food unclean, but not to call that which the food represents (Gentiles) “defiled” (see comments to verses 12, 12 and 14).

10:25-26 And while Shim’on was entering, Cornelius met him, and fell down; worshipped at his feet. And Shim’on raised him up and said to him, Stand up! I also am a son of man. Kefa did not respond with “Kiss my ring, I’m the first Pope!”

10:28 And he said to them, You know that it is not lawful, for a Jewish man to associate with a strange man, who is not a son of his kindred: The word “lawful” here (spm) refers not to the Torah, but to something that is allowed or permitted as a custom. strange ()yrkwn) man the term is used in the Targums to refer to foreigners, for example Targum Onkelos uses this word to render the phrase “you may not set a foreigner over you” in Deut. 17:15.

but Eloah showed me, that I should not say concerning a man, that he is unclean or defiled. As shown in the comments to Acts 10:11-15.