Scroll to Scroll:

Todays Parsha #18: Mishpatim (The Judgments)

Member Q &A Feedback Topics:
1) More information about the Diatessaron (extemporaneous).
2) Yes, the book I mentioned about the Diatessaron is currently available from
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Saint-Ephrems-Commentary-TatiansDiatessaron/dp/0199221634/ref=sr_1_1?
s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1454642218&sr=11&keywords=carmel+mccarthy+saint+ephrem
3) Recap on why the Biblical calendar is a month sooner than the Rabbinic calendar.
ANSWERS TO LAST WEEKS STUDY QUESTIONS (Yitro):
1) Where is the pattern of Jethros advice repeated in the NT?
24

So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25 Moses
chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, leaders of
thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. (Exodus 18:24-25 NAU)
(Mar 6:38) And he said to them, "Go see how much bread you have here." And
when they saw, they said to him, "Five loaves of bread and two fish." (Mar 6:39)
And he commanded them to seat everyone by groups upon the grass. (Mar 6:40)
And they sat by groups of hundreds and fifties. (Mar 6:41) And he took those
five loaves of bread and two fish, and he looked to heaven and blessed and broke
the bread and gave it to the disciples to place before them. And those two fish
they divided to all. (Mar 6:42) And all ate and were satisfied. (Mar 6:43) And
they took up the fragments, twelve baskets full, and of fish. (Mar 6:44) And there
were five thousand men of those who ate.
Note how 5,000 evenly divides into groups of hundreds, fifties and tens!
2) If you know the answer to #1, how is the leadership aspect of Jethros advice mirrored
in the NT?
While the text doesnt directly tell us, it certainly seems logical that the eyewitnesses
who were fed the bread and fish, like so many others who were miraculously healed
by Yshua, went out and proclaimed their experience to many others, spreading the
word across the entire Middle East. As such, those who were seated in thousands,
hundreds and fifties in a sense became leaders or apostles by relating what they
experienced.
3) What do the most ancient translations of part of this Haftorah portion tell us that later
Rabbinic versions deny?
1 | Page

The Hebrew in Isaiah 7:14 says Behold an ALMAH will conceive, bear a son
and call him Immanuel. Matthew himself interpreted ALMAH as virgin and
applied the term to Maryam, Yshuas mother. In doing so, Matthew was agreeing
with the learned Rabbis who translated Tanakh into Aramaic (Peshitta Tanakh)
and into Greek (the Septuagint), from Babylon and Alexandria, Egypt,
respectively. In both translations, the redactors understood ALMAH to mean
virgin and only virgin. The Greek rendered it as PARTHENOS and the
Aramaic as BEYTOOLAH). It is only AFTER Yshuas and his controversy
that the Rabbis decided ALMAH meant young woman of marriageable age
rather than virgin.
4) If you know the answer to #3, what is one example from Genesis that disproves the
Rabbinic theory?
16

The girl (NEARA) was very beautiful, a virgin (BEYTOOLAH) , and no man
had had relations with her; and she went down to the spring and filled her jar and
came up. (Genesis 24:16 NAU)
NEARA means the exact same thing as ALMAH, and yet Rebekah is also called a
VIRGIN because a young woman is ASSUMED a virgin when she is unmarried
unless it is otherwise stated directly in the text. Without such a direct statement,
there is no way any NEARA or ALMAH would not also be a VIRGIN. Bad job,
rabbis!
5) Using the Renewed Covenant portion as a guide, name one religious leader who fits most
closely as much criteria on how NOT to lead as possible. There are MANY possible right
answers, but the key is to line up the instructions with a real life example.
My choice is Jim Jones, killer of 900 people in Guyana as head of the Peoples
Temple.
(1Ti 3:1) It is a faithful saying that if a man desires the eldership, he desires a
good work. (1Ti 3:2) And an elder should be such that no blame can be found in
him; and he should be the husband of one wife, with a vigilant mind and sober
and reliable (in his behaviors), and affectionate to strangers, and instructive, (1Ti
3:3) and not a transgressor in regard to wine, and whose hand is not swift to
strike; but he should be humble and not contentious, nor a lover of money.
Jones became a preacher early and abused alcohol and drugs. He also milked his
followers for millions of dollars.
(1Ti 3:4) And one that guides well his own house and holds his children in
subjection with all purity. (1Ti 3:5) For if he knows not how to guide his own
house well, how can he guide the assembly of Elohim? (1Ti 3:6) Neither let him
be of recent discipleship, or else he be uplifted and fall into the condemnation of
Satan.
2 | Page

Again, Jones was a young man when he started and fell into Satans condemnation.
He neither guided his house nor anyone elses well.
(1Ti 3:7) And there should be good testimony of him from those without; or else
he fall into reproach and the snare of Satan. (1Ti 3:8) And so also the assembly
servants should be pure and not speak double, nor incline to much wine, nor love
base gains; (1Ti 3:9) but should hold the mystery of the faith with a pure
conscience. (1Ti 3:10) And let them be first tried and then let them serve if they
are without blame.
More greed and more lust for power and therefore, tons of blame.
(1Ti 3:11) So also should the wives be chaste and of vigilant minds; and they
should be faithful in all things; and they should not be slanderers. (1Ti 3:12) Let
the assembly servants be such as have each one wife and guide well their children
and households. (1Ti 3:13) For they who serve well (as assembly servants),
procure for themselves a good degree and much boldness in the faith of Y'shua
the Mashiyach.
Joness female lovers were just pawns and in some cases, abusers in their own
rights. As I said, many other answers are possible!!!
1) Meaning of Parsha title/summary of contents.
The Judgments concerns a list of rules and regulations that Abba YHWH is giving
to Israel. Generally they involve practical examples from the root commands given at
Sinai. However, there is much more going on here than a mere laundry list of
obligations. Sandwiched between these rules are some of the most powerful insights
that Abba YHWH has ever imparted to man. Its as if we have to wade through the
rules to get to the reward of these insights. Hey, that sounds a lot like life too!
2) Read Parsha (English-Exodus 21:1-24:18). Play by Play commentary.

Ve'eleh hamishpatim asher tasim lifneyhem.

Ki tikneh eved ivri shesh shanim ya'avod uvashvi'it yetse lachofshi
chinam.
Im-begapo yavo begapo yetse im-ba'al ishah hu veyatse'ah ishto imo.
Point out key Hebrew words/terms. Color Commentary.
KI TIKNEH EVED IVRI (21:2) = if you acquire a Hebrew slave. The text says come
into possession or gain rather than purchase, because this rule directly relates to the
3 | Page

contingency of a robber being caught in the act and having to make restitution (Exodus
22:2, Leviticus 25:39 and Deuteronomy 5:12). It is the act of thievery, rather than the
exchange of money for work, that causes the robber to be put into service. This is also
implied with the word TIKNEH, derived from QANEH, the same as Cains name! So this
is someone like Cain, who has broken the rules in the hopes of profit.
VEHIGOSHO ADONAV EL-HA-ELOHIM (21:6) = the master must bring him before
Elohim. However, some rabbis believe that elohim refers to mighty ones in the form
of men, hence, bring him before the judges is often a suggested reading. However,
since it is the tent of meeting that is directly mentioned here, the former reading is
preferred, that the man is brought before the presence of Abba YHWH. Some think
Exodus 222:7 is also using Elohim to refer to judges but I am not certain of this, as we
will see in that passages commentary.
EL HA-MEZUZAH (21:6) = against the doorpost. Actually the full reading is against
the door or the doorpost. Nevertheless, the use of MEZUZAH here is very interesting,
because it is on the mezuzah that one places the Shema prayer (Deuteronomy 6:4-11).
The commonality may relate to us admitting that we are servants to Abba YHWH against
the mezuzah even as we have our servants admit they are submitting to us also against the
mezuzah.
Note on Exodus 21:7-8: This is a very challenging provision to interpret properly. If
lines 7-8 are addressing the same man, who is a father, how then does verse 8 have it that
the father should take his daughter as a bride, which violates Leviticus 18?
The answer I think, and I am open to other suggestions to be sure, is as follows:
1) Verse 21:7 allows a father to rent out his daughter as a laborer to another house in
times of desperate need. Because she is his daughter, special rules apply to getting
the girl back.
2) Verse 21:8 has then shifted to the man the father sold the daughter to. Upon
entering the new mans house, the man must designate her as a provisional
wife. This does not mean he has carnal relations with her, nor does it mean the
girl is a true wife, equal to anyone man #2 would have married before acquiring
her.
3) Instead, the provisional wife is for the girls own protection. Assuming she is
not related to man #2 (in which case familial responsibilities would attach), the
woman is made his wife so that she is treated properly in the new house.
4) But the assumption that man #2 is not a relative to the girl I believe is proven by
the next provision. Man #2 is NOT allowed to rent or sell the girl out to anyone
else because he does not have a familial claim on her.
5) So if man #2 is displeased with her, he cannot keep her as a servant. His choices
then are either to redeem her (decide she makes a better wife than a servant and
pay the bride price to the father) or send her back home.
6) However, if the man has had sex with the girl under his roof, he has also de facto
made her his wife, and that is also why he cannot sell her, for she has the rights of
a wife. The rule is in place to avoid excessive chains of custody for the girl, that
she cannot be sold and re-sold to men who are increasingly foreign to her. Instead,
she is either made a wife or sent home. (Thats my best shot at it anyway!)
4 | Page

IM ACHERET YIKACH LO SHEERA KSUTAH VEONATAH LO YIGRA (21:11) =

If he takes to himself another woman, he may not diminish (the first womans) food,
clothing or conjugal rights. The editors at Bible.ort.org say outright that polygamy is
allowed in Torah and was not banned officially until the 10th century (CE!) by all the
rabbis in Europe. I am not convinced this is the case and will be offering an alternative
point of view on the matter.
VECHI-YAZID ISH AL-REEHU LEHORGO VEORMAH MEIM MIZBECHI
TIKACHUNU LAMUT (21:14) = If a person plots against his neighbor to intentionally
murder him, then you must take him even from my altar to put him to death. Yshuas
ruling though is meant to prevent this from happening: If you are at the altar and there
remember a grievance against your brother, go first and be reconciled to him and then
return and offer your offering. (Matthew 5:23-24) As a result, bad feelings will be
minimized and there will be no personal revenge.
UMEKALEL AVI V VEIMO MOT YUMAT (21:17) = whoever curses his father or
mother shall be put to death. The word for curse, QALEL, can also mean to be trifling
towards. It is the exact opposite of KAVED/KAVOD, which in the 5th commandment
means honor but also literally give weight to or make heavy, a metaphor for
paying attention. Also though we see the beginnings of the root of the command not to
curse Abba YHWH, because if you must withhold dishonor from your earthly father, how
much more so must that be true of our Heavenly Father? We will explore this aspect in
greater detail in our Torah Thought for the Week!
VECHI YERUVIN ANASHIM VEHIKAH ISH-ET REEHU BEEVEN OVEGROF
VE-LO YAMUT VE-NAFAL LE-MISHKAV (21:18) = When two men fight and one hits
the other with a stone or with his fist, if the victim does not die but is confined to his bed.
The mentioning of two things with a hard surface (rock, fist) naturally extends the
prohibition to using any hard object with intent to do bodily harm. This is so no one can
pervert the law by saying, I didnt strike him with a rock or my fistI just hit him with
a baseball bat so it must be okay. This is a common understanding-mechanism within
Torah law: Multiple examples of a type extend to all possibilities within that category.
Another example, one might wrongfully think that the ban on worshipping idols on earth,
on or under the sea, in the sky does not extend to outer space beyond the earth, but clearly
it does.
NAQAM (21:20) = avenged or vengeance. This is not just the word for to punish
which is how many versions translate the phrase. The term, in both Hebrew and
Aramaic, points to a life being taken for a life.
YESHALAECHENU TACHAT EYNO (21:26) = he shall set him free for the sake of his
eye. Because the blindness in one eye is permanent, the debt between the slave and
masterassuming he is working off the debt by his serviceis automatically considered
paid in full. However the Hebrew also allows for the other kind of slave, even one that
would otherwise have been bonded to the house for the rest of his life (or until the next
Jubilee, depending on the authority/source) would be set free. Again, this is meant to
5 | Page

make masters very careful in the way they deal with their servants since their entire debt
or service could be made forfeit in a single moment of bad temper.
VEIM-SHEN AVDO O-SHEN AMATO YAPIL LACHOFSHI YESHALECHUA
TACHAT SHINO (21:27) = If he knocks out the tooth of his male or female slave, he
must set that slave free. This is unheard of in the ancient world and a prime example of
how Moshe realized that while he could not outlaw slavery altogether, he could
discourage it with rules like this. The rule also served as protection for the slaves, but by
a brilliant tactic. Instead of saying to the owner that he couldnt discipline his slaves,
Moshe instead makes it very costly for the masters unless they are really careful in the
manner they do so.
SHOR (21:28) = ox. Again the prohibition is not just against an ox goring someone, but
any similar animal. Please see the note on 21:18.
VEGAM BEALAV YUMAT (21:30) = the owner shall be (liable) to die. The text here
seems on the surface to say the owner must die, but the implication is actually the
opposite. In this case, because the owner knew the ox was likely to cause injury, he is
guilty of what we now call criminal negligence in our modern courts. The next line will
make clear that the owner must pay a fine to ransom his life, and only if he refuses shall
he die. What this does is open up much of this part of the Torah, that where it seems it is
saying on the surface that a person must die, that only a fine must be paid to RANSOM
the life, but not in the case of intentional murder. Since most anyone would rather pay a
fine than die, the death penalty here is more of a negative incentive than a practical
reality. As a result moderns, especially Christians, might want to take careful thought to
these nuances before oversimplifying the Torah and calling it barbaric.
On the other hand, because life is both precious and priceless, sometimes the death of the
killer is required, under certain circumstances. But if it was unintentional, the slayer can
be spared. Still one must think on this: How can you put a monetary value on a human
life cut short? The best one can do is help the family affected by the loss of the wageearning man. Everything else, love, memories, children, spouses, these things cannot be
replaced.
KESEF SHLOSHIM SHKALIM (21:32) = 30 silver shekels. Ironically, the price for the
accidental death of a slave is the same price paid to Yehuda to betray Yshua! So, when
Yshua said, He who would great among you must become a servant, in a sense this
literally applied to himself, as he humbled himself and was sold to death for the price of a
servant.
IM-BAMACHTERET YIMATZ HAGANAV VEHUKAH VAMET EYN LO DAMIM
(22:1) = if a burglar is caught in the act of breaking in and is struck and killed, he (the
killer) does not have any blood (on him). To not have blood is a metaphor meaning,
there is no guilt from killing him.
IM-ZARECHA HASHEMESH (22:2) = if the sun has risen on him. This prohibition
against killing the thief in daylight is probably because of the assumption that witnesses
6 | Page

will be available to provide evidence in court. Also sometimes a family relative could be
the thief, and if that were known in broad daylight, it would be murder. At night however
it is not clear if the intent is only robbery or murder and so deadly force is authorized
there.
KI YITEN ISH EL-REEHU CHAMOR OSHOR OSEH VECHOL BEHEMAH
LISHMAR UMET (22:9) = If one person gives another a donkey or an ox or a sheep to
watch and it dies. The Rabbis assume that stored items should generally not be watched
for a fee but live animals should be watched for a fee, because it is harder to confine live
animals.
VECHI-YEFATEH IS BETULAH ASHER LO-ORASAH VESHACHAV IMAH
MAHOR YIMEHARENAH LO LEISHAH (22:15) = if a man seduces a virgin who is
not betrothed he must pay a dowry and must marry her. There were two steps to Hebrew
marriage. ERUSIN, or betrothal is the first step, where the couple live separately but
they are legally married in every other respect. The second step, when the husband
brings the wife home, is NESUIN. However, adultery with a woman at either stage of
marriage is punishable by death (Deuteronomy 22:23) and this is the situation Joseph
found himself in with a pregnant Maryam. He had NOT taken her into his house yet as
evidenced by the angel saying Do not be afraid TO TAKE MARYAM as your wife, but
it didnt matter. If Joseph didnt figure out something fast, she would have been liable for
the death penalty either way. Also, even at the ERUSIN/betrothal stage, and official
certificate of divorce (or get) is required to dissolve the marriage.
As a special additional note, what Yshua often is railing against is SENDING WIVES
AWAY WITHOUT A WRIT OF DIVORCE because this gives her no legal right to marry
again and causes the next man who is intimate with her to commit adultery. There is a
very fine legal discussion on these matters that comes up in Matthew 5 and 19 that
concerns whether official divorce procedures happen or not, but this nuances of that are
outside our scope.
MECHASHEFAH LO TECHAYEH (22:17) = Do not allow a sorceress to live. The word
here, KASAPH, referring to a particular form of sorcery of witchcraft seems to almost
always have a negative connotation in Scripture. However, there are synonyms to this
word that are sometimes used in a neutral if not positive sense. For example the word
CHARTUMIM (magicians), from where we get Magi and magic from, is used
positively to describe Daniel as the king of magicians.
In other cases though chartumim/astrologers are ordered executed for paganism, so there
is a case by case situation going on. It seems that since the heavens declare Abba
YHWHs glory (Psalm 19:1) and that Abba YHWH counts the number of stars and gives
names to all of them (Psalm 147:3) that there is a kosher aspect to astronomy so long as
it is divorced completely from star, sun and moon worship. But again, words like
KASAPH (sorceress) and NACHASH (serpent/divination) almost always seem to be
portrayed as evil acts.

7 | Page

ZOVEACH LA-ELOHIM YOCHORAM BILTI LYAHWEH LEVADO (22:19) =

Whomever sacrifices to a deity other than Yahweh must be condemned. This command
seems to anticipate the Golden Calf worship, since Aaron may have tried to syncretize
Egyptian and Yahwistic worship practices. Abba YHWH does not want sacrifices to idols
of any kind going on even if other sacrifices are being done in His honor or if the idol is
meant to stand as a visual representation of Him. Apparently this concept of an invisible
and singular Deity is very challenging to recently freed Hebrew slaves from Egypt. It is
also why Abba YHWH will complain, after giving this command, They have quickly
turned aside from the commandment I enjoined upon themespecially Aaron, who
presumably should have known better.
NESHEKH (22:24) = interest. The Rabbis at www.bible.ort.org suggest that the kind of
interest that is banned here only refers to pre-paid interest that a person pays up front
before receiving the loan. However, I find absolutely no evidence for this assertion or that
there is in fact a separate Hebrew word that addresses interest in the other way, the fee
one pays over time well after receiving the loan. What is interesting though about that
assertion is that by their definition of NESHEKH the Temple authorities of Yshuas day
were guilty of the service charge they imposed when turning pagan coins into shekels!
Another aspect of this rule is discussed below.
22:25-is the Torah precedent that Yshua reminds the people of, as opposed to inventing
a new rule! You are not supposed to charge interest to your fellow Israeliteincluding
when they exchange Greek coins for shekels at the Temple.
22:26-27 is used ironically when Yshua says, If a man sues you for your tunic, give him
your cloak as well. Israelites only wore two pieces of clothing so that would render them
naked! Here we see the Torah portion remind them of that:
6

"If you ever take your neighbor's cloak as a pledge, you are to return it to him
27
before the sun sets, for that is his only covering; it is his cloak for his body.
What else shall he sleep in? And it shall come about that when he cries out to Me,
I will hear him, for I am gracious. (Exodus 22:26-27)
ELOHIM LO TEKALEL VENASI VEAMECHA LO TAOR (22:27) = Do not curse
Elohim and do not revile a leader from among your people. Again some rabbis think the
Elohim refers to judges or courts, but I believe it is literally about Abba YHWH here
for a few reasons. First, by saying not to revile a NASI, which means leader-judge, that
part of the command is covered. It does not need the first part of the sentence to also
point to judges. Secondly, it is important for commands to have more than one witness.
This one, once understood as not cursing Elohim, is witnessed to further in Leviticus
24:16, which deals with someone cursing in the NAME (YHWH) of Elohim.
Furthermore, 22:27 is used by Rav Shaul when he is accused of disrespecting the high
priest. He responds that he didnt know this was the high priest and quotes the line, you
shall not curse a ruler of your people. This line also contains the short form of the
command not to curse in the name of Abba YHWH, which is a different matter than
8 | Page

banning the speaking of the name of Abba YHWH.

On another related matter, there are TWO words for curse used here: QALAL and
ARAR. The curse to Elohim is QALAL, and this springs from a spirit of defiance;
whereas the curse to the leader is ARAR is believed to be motivated from envy or
jealousy regarding that persons position.
23: 1-3 is a second witness against bearing false witness! This time we are given more
specifics: "You shall not bear a false report; do not join your hand with a wicked man to
be a malicious witness.
2

"You shall not follow the masses in doing evil, nor shall you testify in a dispute
3
so as to turn aside after a multitude in order to pervert justice; nor shall you be
partial to a poor man in his dispute. (Exodus 23:1-3).
6

Then we get more advice here, a few lines later: "You shall not pervert the justice due
to your needy brother in his dispute.
7

"Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent or the righteous, for
8
I will not acquit the guilty. "You shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the
9
clear-sighted and subverts the cause of the just. "You shall not oppress a
stranger, since you yourselves know the feelings of a stranger, for you also were
strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 23:6-9)
23:4-5 shows the need to be nice even to an enemy, by returning his ox to him if you see
it wander away and other commands. Love your enemies does not start with Yshua!
It is a concept that holds you blameless while, as Proverbs says, burning coals are
heaped on your enemys head!
23:10- 12 -Notice how sevens are always grouped together so all Abba YHWH is really
saying is remember the sevens!
23:13 gives us the real practical interpretation of not taking the Name of YHWH in
vain which we saw last week really means, make desolate through substitution. Here
Abba YHWH says plainly that we do not let the names of false gods be heard from our
mouthseither as a form of worship or equivalence with His Name. However, you can
renounce false gods by name.
BETSET HASHANA (23:16) = at the going out/coming in of the year. This statement
about Sukkot is echoed in 34:22 with the phrase TURN OF THE YEAR or having the
year divide by equinoxes, but in this place its YATZAR which can mean either going
out or coming in. Both terms are needed to recover the beauty of Yahs complete
calendar. In this case, 23:16 helps us by explaining that the Israelites had to have
originally started their year in the fall, that is, at Tishri when this festival must occur. It
also tells us that for civil purposes the year still ran fall to fall, and this is also evident in
9 | Page

the way the Jubilee and Land Sabbaths are counted where both spring and fall based
reckonings work together. But again the main idea is that the civil year both goes out,
or ends and comes in or begins, in the timing of the fall. It also tells us that the
agricultural season was meant to end at the first full moon after the Hebrew civil year
started.
HIFNEH ANOCHI SHOLEACH MALACH LEFANYECHA LISHMORCHAH BADERECH VELAHAVIACHA EL-HA-MAKOM ASHER HACHINOTI (23:20) = Behold
I will send a Messenger from before your face guard you on your way and bring you to
the place that I have prepared. So begins the description of Yshua the Mashiyach in preincarnate form. Note how he is to guard your way because Messiah is the way, truth
and the life. And the place that Abba YHWH has prepared, the same word CHANOKH
means dedicated from where we get the feast of Hanukkah and the man named Enoch.
HISHAMER MIPANAV USHMA VIKOTO VEASITA KOL ASHER ADEBER
VEAYAVTI ET-OVEYCHA VETSARTI ET-TSOREYCHA (23:21) = Guard yourself in
his presence and heed his voice. Do not rebel against him, since My Name is in him. He
will not pardon your disobedience. This is keyno angel can independently forgive sin,
but the Son of Man does have authority on earth to forgive sins normally. Therefore this
angel cannot be ordinary in that sense because there is no reason to even bring the
matter up unless the angel could forgive sin and normally would do so, but he is under
orders not to in this case should Israel rebel. That specialness of this angel is further
explained by the next line, for My Name is in him because all angels have ELthe
title of Elohim in their names but only the Son of Yah has YAH in his name, which makes
him superior to the angels (Hebrews 1:1-5).
Extemporaneous commentary on 23:22-29.
VE-SHATI ET-GVULCHA MI-YAM SUPH VE-AD YAM PLISHTIM U-MI-MIDBAR
AD-HA-NAHAR KI-ETEN BYEDCHEM ET-YOSHVEY HA-ERETZ VEGERASHTAMO MI-PANEYCHA (23:31) = I will set your borders from the Sea of
Reeds to the Philistine Sea, from the desert to the river, I will give the lands inhabitants
into your hand and you shall drive them out before your eyes. It is a very interesting
issue to debate whether the Yam Suph (Sea of Reeds) arm refers to that of the Gulf of
Suez or the Gulf of Akaba. In this case, I think the Gulf of Akaba is intended, as it
provides a nearly straight north-south line from the southern Mediterranean (the northern
boundary) to the very southern end of Israel.
However, it is also fair to point out that some Yam Suph references are clearly for the
Gulf of Suez, such as Exodus 10:19; there is no exclusive in Scripture as to which end
is intended.
I should also mention that Suez separates Egypt from the Sinai Peninsula; but also the
moment the Israelites left Goshen they were out of Egyptian territory, only to very briefly
come back into it at the Sea of Reeds crossing. This may be Abba YHWH baiting
Pharaoh to see if he will fight on his own turf. The other side of Suez though is definitely
out of Egypts borders once more, as is any candidate for Mount Sinai in the Sinai
10 | P a g e

Peninsula.
VAYISHLACH ET-NAAREY BENEY YISRAEL VAYAALU OLOT
VAYIZBECHU ZVACHIM SHLAMIM LYAHWEH PANIM (24:5) = and he sent young
men among the Israelites and they offered burnt offerings and peace offerings unto
Yahweh. Because the priesthood was not set up at this moment, these young menthe
Hebrew word NAAR denotes a person 19 or under--seem to be the representatives of
families or clans under the old system who performed the priestly functions previously,
much like Job did for his sons. It is also clear that the concepts of burnt offerings and
peace offerings was known before Moshe and also therefore how to slaughter an animal
for Pesach or for any other occasion. Furthermore, this may also explain why Moshe did
not go into detail about how to kill the Paschal lamba fact that is falsely used by
Rabbis to justify Oral Lawat the time of the Exodus. Not only does Moshe explain
those details later in Leviticus 17, we also see proof here the Israelites already knew how
to do this procedure.
VAYIKACH SEFER HA-BRIT VAYIKRA BEOZNEY HA-AM (24:7) = and (Moshe)
took the book of the covenant and read it in the ears of the people. Obviously this is not
the entire Torah because it hadnt been written yet. What this book of the covenant would
have covered is all of Genesis and Exodus up to the point of the Ten Commandments
being given, or perhaps a little bit more to get to the 24th chapter we are
now in.
Leviticus 27:34 makes it clear that all its commands were those given while Israel
encamped at Sinai, not after they left there. Since we dont even get to the start of the
next year after Exodus until chapter 40, this means the book doesnt even have the last
third of Exodus, but it may have some parts of Leviticus that chronologically match to
these early months at Sinai.
But it is certain no part of Numbers or Deuteronomy is in this early version of the book of
the covenant.
VAYIRU ET ELOHEY YISRAEL VE-TACHAT REGLAV KEMAASEH LIVNAT
HASAPIR UCHEETSEM HASHAMAYIM LATOHAR (24:10) = and they saw a vision
of the Elohim of Israel and under His feet was something like sapphire pavement, like
that of a pure sky. If the sky is sapphire-shaded, and the same shade of blue is given for
the pavement by Abba YHWHs throne, this might go a long way to proving that the
color of blue for the tzit-tzit was, as Josephus alluded to, the color of the sky. Since the
purpose of the tzit-tzit that is given in Numbers 15 is to remember the covenant and do
Abba YHWHs commands, it stands to reason that the heavenly throne from which those
commandments were issued would be exactly the same shade of blue that Israel used to
remember them! This may be proof positive that tekhelet is literally supposed to be the
shade of sky blue, and with the imagery of sapphire to clarify, specifically a darker shade
of sky blue. It also may be that the stones on which the Ten Commandments were written
were also of this same kind of stone.
LUCHOT HA-EVEN VE-HA-TORAH VA-HA-MITZVAH ASHER KATAVI
11 | P a g e

LEHORATAM (24:12) = the stone tables, the Torah and the commandment that I have
written for the peoples instruction. The /root YARAH is used here and it means to
shoot, as if virtue is an archer who shoots straight and evil is one who misses the mark.
Torah Question of the Week:
Did Moshe support slavery?
END PART 1

12 | P a g e

PART 2: THE HAFTORAH

Torah Question of the Week:
Did Moshe support slavery?
Moshe understood that the upheaval of just getting Israel out of Egypt was hard enough
without upsetting their own social order on top of it. We know that Torah says servants
and slaves of Israel also came with them out of Egypt.
Nevertheless Moshe personally must have opposed slavery. He would have known that
freeing one people so they could enslave others was a fundamental contradiction. We also
know from Jeremiah 34 that the re-enslavement of Hebrew servants after Israels elite let
them go was the last straw of disobedience before YHWH destroyed Solomons Temple.
So, Moshe made slavery as fair and just as he could with counter-balancing rules until
such a time it could be deal with effectively by a more stable nation. Thats why servants
can be let go for relatively minor injuries, go free after seven year or at the Jubilee, and so
on. These rules were unprecedented in the ancient world and planted to seeds for future
generations to realize slavery would never be profitable in the end, and those of us in the
States would be well to remember that we had a much more recent working out of this
th
issue with our own Civil War. What was true for us in the 19 century must surely be
cutting edge 3500 years ago, and that shows Moshes genius more than it shows how far
we progressed since his life and times.
Inside Look: Lo Bashamayim Hi
In todays parsha we read the clear provisions of Exodus 23:1-3:
'You will not spread false rumors. You will not lend support to the wicked by
giving untrue evidence. You will not be led into wrong-doing by the majority nor,
when giving evidence in a lawsuit, side with the majority to pervert the course of
justice; nor will you show partiality to the poor in a lawsuit. (Exodus 23:1-3 NJB)
However, sometimes in the course of Jewish halachic debate it seems the plain wording
of Torah can get lost. In this case it is the twisting of two key Torah passages, so since the
first one is already up there, let me give you the second passage
'For this Torah which I am laying down for you today is neither obscure for you
nor beyond your reach. It is not in heaven, so that you need to wonder, "Who
will go up to heaven for us and bring it down to us, so that we can hear and
practice it?" Nor is it beyond the seas, so that you need to wonder, "Who will
cross the seas for us and bring it back to us, so that we can hear and practice it?"
No, the Word is very near to you, it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to
put into practice. (Deuteronomy 30:11-14)

13 | P a g e

So to begin with, lets just sum up what these easy verses say. Exodus 23:1-3 tells us to
not follow a crowd to do evil or show partiality while Deuteronomy 30:11-4 says the
Torah from Abba YHWH is not difficult to practice.
But, when we turn to the Talmud it seems there is a whole different idea going on
If a man made an oven out of separate coils [of clay, placing one upon another],
then put sand between each of the coils 1such an oven, R. Eliezer declared, is not
susceptible to defilement, while the sages declared it susceptible.2
It is taught: On that day R. Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument,
but the Sages did not accept any of them. Finally he said to them: "If the
Halakhah (religious law) is in accordance with me, let this carob tree prove it!"
Sure enough the carob tree immediately uprooted itself and moved one hundred
cubits, and some say 400 cubits, from its place. "No proof can be brought from a
carob tree," they retorted.
And again he said to them "If the Halakhah agrees with me, let the channel of
water prove it!" Sure enough, the channel of water flowed backward. "No proof
can be brought from a channel of water," they rejoined.
Again he urged, "If the Halakhah agrees with me, let the walls of the house of
study prove it!" Sure enough, the walls tilted as if to fall. But R. Joshua, rebuked
the walls, saying, "When disciples of the wise are engaged in a halakhic dispute,
what right have you to interfere?" Hence in deference to R. Joshua they did not
fall and in deference to R. Eliezer they did not resume their upright position; they
are still standing aslant.
Again R. Eliezer then said to the Sages, "If the Halakhah agrees with me, let it be
proved from heaven." Sure enough, a divine voice cried out, "Why do you dispute
with R. Eliezer, with whom the Halakhah always agrees?" R. Joshua stood up
and protested: "The Torah is not in heaven!" (Deut. 30:12). We pay no
attention to a divine voice because long ago at Mount Sinai You wrote in your
Torah at Mount Sinai, `After the majority must one incline'. (Ex. 23:2)"

1 Fist footnote from Talmud passage: Since each portion in itself is not a utensil, and
the sand between the portions prevents the oven from being regarded as a single
utensil, therefore, according to R. Eliezer, the oven is not liable to defilement. The
sages, however, hold that the oven's outer coating of mortar or cement unifies the
coils so that the oven is liable to defilement.

2Second footnote from Talmud passage: The oven discussed was the oven of Akhnai.
14 | P a g e

R. Nathan met [the prophet] Elijah3 and asked him, "What did the Holy One do at that
moment?" Elijah: "He laughed [with joy], saying, 'My children have defeated Me, My
children have defeated Me.'"
Babylonian Talmud, Baba Metzia 59b, excerpted from: H.N. Bialik and Y.H.
Ravnitzky, eds., Sefer Ha-Aggadah (The Book of Legends), translated by William G.
Braude, Schocken Books, NY, 1992). page 223.
So notice these two revisions at the end? The first is that phrase in Hebrew again, lo
bashmayim hi, or it is not in heaven. The context of the phrase is given in
Deuteronomy 30:14, that you may hear it and do it. There is no mention of rabbis,
learning academies or traditions here. The average person, because again the Torah is
NOT hard, can grasp it, understand it and perform it.
Instead however, the rabbis use the phrase to justify their right to CHANGE Torah. They
cry No fair in response to Abba YHWH interfering with THEIR right to tell the other
rabbis what to do, regardless as to how Abba YHWH feels about it.
Next, lets look at Exodus 23:2, because I think the situation there is even worse! Lets
look at the tale of the tape:
Torah:
You will not be led into wrong-doing by the majority nor, when giving
evidence in a lawsuit, side with the majority to pervert the course of justice.
Talmud:
R. Joshua stood up and protested: "The Torah is not in heaven!" (Deut. 30:12).
We pay no attention to a divine voice because long ago at Mount Sinai You
wrote in your Torah at Mount Sinai, `After the majority must one incline'.
(Ex. 23:2)"
So the first Scripture (Deuteronomy 30:12) is misapplied in the rabbis favor, and I think
thats an understatement and the second Scripture (Leviticus 23:2) is deliberately
misquoted and turned into its opposite! It says, after the majority DO NOT INCLINE to
do evil.
And thats not all of the issues either. Note that the rabbis said, We do NOT listen to a
divine voice? Since the justification for that decision was based on a flawed reading of
Exodus 23:2, we need to go deeper and see what really happened with the Israelites and

3 Third footnote for Talmud passage: [3] It was believed that Elijah, who had never
died, often appeared to the sages.

15 | P a g e

the divine voice. Is it really true they were not supposed to pay attention to Abba
YHWHs voice? Well, lets see what the Scripture says
Of all these people who have seen my glory and the signs that I worked in Egypt
and in the desert, who have put me to the test ten times already and not
obeyed my voice, not one shall see the country which I promised to give their
ancestors. Not one of those who have treated me contemptuously will see it.
(Numbers 14:22-23 NJB)
Apparently, two years after Moshe wrote Exodus 23 down, Abba YHWH was still
holding people accountable for not hearing HIS VOICE! Lets see this again
Then Yahweh said to me, "What they have said is well said. From their own
brothers I shall raise up a prophet like yourself; I shall put my words into his
mouth and he will tell them everything I command him. Anyone who refuses
to listen to my words, spoken by him in my name, will have to render an
account to me. (Deuteronomy 18:17-19 NJB)
40 years now out from Exodus, first generation is now all dead except for Moshe, Joshua
and Caleb, and yet apparently hearing His Voice is still important to Him. Okay, maybe
things changed after Moshe and Joshua died
Yahweh's anger then blazed out against Israel, and he said, Since this people has
broken the covenant which I laid down for their ancestors, since they have not
listened to my voice, in future I shall not drive before them any one of those
nations which Joshua left when he died, in order, by means of them, to put
Israel to the test, to see whether or not they would tread the paths of Yahweh as
once their ancestors had trodden them.' (Judges 2:20-22 NJB)
Doesnt look like it. In fact, Jeremiah made a similar complaint (22:21) and Daniel tells
us that to ignore His Voice invites disaster:
"While the word was in the king's mouth, a voice came from heaven, saying,
'King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is declared: sovereignty has been removed from
you. (Daniel 4:31 NAU)
Even Yshuas kingship was certified also by a very similar heavenly voice (Matthew
17:5).
But heres the really odd part. The rabbis, elsewhere in their own traditions, contradict
this assertion! Lets see just one example:
Our Rabbis taught: Since the death of the last prophets, Haggai, Zechariah and
Malachai, the Holy Spirit [of prophetic inspiration] departed from Israel; yet they
were still able to avail themselves of the Bath-kol. Once when the Rabbis were
met in the upper chamber of Gurya's house at Jericho, a Bath-kol was heard from
16 | P a g e

Heaven, saying: 'There is one amongst you who is worthy that the Shechinah
should rest on him as it did on Moses, but his generation does not merit it.' The
Sages present set their eyes on Hillel the Elder. And when he died, they lamented
and said: 'Alas, the pious man, the humble man, the disciple of Ezra [is no more].'
Sanhedrin 11a
The Bat Kol literally means daughter voice but it specifically refers to a heavenly voice
which, in this case, the rabbis are clearly accepting instruction from. Therefore the
teaching on lo bashamayim hi goes even against the Talmud itself, in addition to the
Scripture!
So this for me is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. We cannot turn and cling to
traditioneven if it is very good traditionif that same tradition is self-contradictory.
More than that though, if it doesnt line up with the Torah, then the tradition is not doing
a good job of what its creators intended it to do, as the rabbis also taught three main
principles
1) Be not hasty in judgment; 2) Make many disciples; 3) Make a fence around the
Torah.
Now weve talked about the problems with fences before at length so let me just say this:
a fence that contradicts what it is supposed to protect is not a fence at all!
3)

Haftorah portions (English), and discuss common themes with Torah

portion. (Jeremiah 34:8-22; 31:31-34).
Our linguistic commentary
DEROR (34:8) = release. Even though the release of the captives is not related to
the land sabbath or Jubilee but dated from when each individual servant begins
working, the nation had so lapsed out of the practice that they all decided to correct
the problem at the same time. DEROR is a word that normally is related to either
letting the crops lay fallowit literally means let dropor resetting property and
releasing captives at the Jubilee year.
Note: The terms used in 34:13 and 16 indicate that neighbor and fellow
Hebrew are synonymous terms. Later of course Messiah Yshua will expand the
definition of neighbor to include all humanity, but the people of his day were
probably thinking about Jeremiahs text and definitions here.

5) Renewed Covenant
commentary)

Portion

(English)

Hebrews

9:15-22

(extemporaneous

Hebrews 9:19
54) Critics of Hebrews sometimes claim this statement is inaccurate because the
17 | P a g e

sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in Exodus 24, nor the mixture stated therein.
However, take a closer look: Lev_14:6 mentions scarlet yarn, referencing the color, not
the material. Most experts assume "thread" is implied (Gen_38:28), just like the Hebrew
does not say "hand" directly when Benyamin is interpreted literally as "son of my right"
but everyone knows it is "right hand." Wool is, of course, white in its natural state, but
Torah commands it to be dyed scarlet, which is why Isaiah uses the metaphor in the first
place. And where did Rav Shaul get the idea that the scarlet material was wool?
Probably from Exo_26:31; Exo_26:36 which indicates the tentway is made of (a)
"scarlet (insert material of choice here)" and (b) "fine twisted linen." In other words,
the linen is not dyed and material (a) is clearly not linen. What's left if not wool? Scarlet
goat hair? No! The fact is, specific material is not mentioned in Torah unless required,
as is in Lev_13:47-48 and Deu_22:11 which forbids the making of garments from more
than one material; but there are two issues. "You shall make a breastpiece of judgment,
the work of a skillful workman; like the work of the ephod you shall make it: of gold, of
blue and purple and scarlet (material) and fine twisted linen you shall make it"
(Exo_28:15). If it were all linen it would say so, and though it is possible to weave linen
and wool into one yarn, this is clearly not being done here, either. Garment (A) 100%
wool yarn, and garment (B) 100% fine twisted linen. The linen certainly does not have
wool in its thread, or vice versa.
55) There are two separate issues here. First, there is a clear telescoping of two events
we know to be separated by the monthly timetable established by the Tanakh. Two
events are being taught together at one time to establish a spiritual point; the seams are
quite evident. Event #1 in Heb_9:19-20 teaches that the blood is for atonement. Event #2,
the blood being sprinkled on the tabernacle later. This appears to suggest the blood from
that day lasted eight to nine months and then was sprinkled on the tabernacle, but again,
this is how events are combined to make a spiritual point. Clearly Paul knew, as did his
audience, that additional blood prepared in the same manner was required in Exo_40:138. Although the reading may appear as "this same blood" the meaning is more like
"blood derived from this same manner." This becomes clear when we realize that
Exo_24:5 refers to burnt offerings and sacrificed bulls, whereas Exo_40:29 refers to burnt
offerings and meal offerings. We could be much more demanding and ask where is the
specific reference to the sacrificed bull in Exo_40:1-38, but that is hardly the smoking
gun against Hebrews. Again, telescoping does not mean this is one flowing event; the
details from both events are being used in a spiritual discussion, something sages and
rabbis have done from the beginning.
On the other hand, blood is still involved with the burnt offering: "The priest shall also
put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of fragrant incense which is before YHWH
in the tent of meeting; and all the blood of the bull he shall pour out at the base of the
altar of burnt offering which is at the doorway of the tent of meeting" (Lev_4:7). The
second issue is that there are multiple references to the altar being sprinkled with blood,
and the people having themselves sprinkled with blood from the same sacrifice.
Therefore, it would not be inaccurate to conclude, given the book's placement by the
altar, that it also received an amount of blood.
6) Apply these themes/issues to modern issues in the Netzari faith. (Previous parsha was
18 | P a g e

about leaders, but this one is about, in part, servants recognizing the benefits of their
situation.)
7) Relate to all or part of an Appendix portion from AENT (Read: Turn Thy Cheek, p.
813-814).
Bonus Teaching: Confronting the Unexpected Enemy
We all live in a world where, lets face it, our Biblical beliefs are under constant attack.
Sometimes our adversaries are obviouslike atheists or Satanists evenand other times
they are more subtle. There is, for example, what I call the liberal sigh-shrug where
someone, usually someone who is either attractive, successful or both, finds out what you
believe and basically says, Oh, youre one of those people, or words to that effect. Such
people wont confront you head on per se, but they might suggest your beliefs are old
fashioned, out of step. After all, no one in the 21st century really believes in all that
supernatural stuff right?
But every once in a while, I get unpleasantly surprised, when a normally well balanced
source really gets off track. When this happens it is a totally different animal than either
a blatant or subtle dismissal of our faith; it is instead a shock to the system, as a source
that I have come to rely on over the years (and probably will still rely on while checking
out their claims vigorously) really drops the ball. That source is one of my very favorite
magazines so it pains me to report on this, but the source I am talking about is Biblical
Archaeology Review.
Before explaining directly what I mean, a little background is in order. Biblical
Archaeology Review started in 1974 by Herschel Shanks, but the same company had a
sister magazine called Bible and Spade, which basically took a line from the
archaeologist William Albright that he would have a Bible in one hand and a spade in
the other. Albright may have borrowed and adapted that phrase from Heinrich
Schliemann, the guy who found Troy by having a copy of Homer in one hand and a
spade in the other.
In any case, Bible and Spade pulled no punches whatsoever when it came to being a firm
advocate for Scripture based archaeology. But, it also got into a ton of controversy as
even some pro-Biblical archaeologists thought the advocacy had gone too far, becoming
evangelism with a shovel. Others felt the archaeology was not well explained and the
conclusions they had were not arrived at by purely scientific means.
Enter Biblical Archaeology Review, which endeavored to fix the problems people said
Bible and Spade supposedly had. From now on the archaeology was supposed to be topnotch, the articles being able to pass rigorous peer review, and the editorial outlook was
supposed to become a bit more disinterested in the sense that the reader got clear
instruction on what archaeology could and could not do.
For example, a Bible and Spade approach might have been (I dont know if they did this,
but its just an example) to insist that the Noahs ark had been definitively found on one
19 | P a g e

of the mountains of Ararat. Since this is my imaginary hypothesis I will even name the
peak, Kardo, because thats the one given in the Aramaic OT. Ron Wyatt was right, they
would have proclaimed, heres solid proof (without documentation) that all is a perfect
fit.
By contrast, Biblical Archaeology Review would have been open to the possibility that
Noahs ark had been found but wouldnt say so directly until more tests were done on the
charcoaled wood to make sure it was about 4500 years old, make sure the dimensions
matched those in the Torah and so on. Even if those tests went relatively well, BAR
would neither proclaim nor discredit the idea that Noahs ark could still exist. That boat
on Kardo may be it or it may not be, or it may be on another Armenian peak altogether,
but in neither case is the Torah ridiculed. For years I loved this middle of the road
approach that also explained archaeologys limitations. Imagine then my disappointment
when this came into my inbox and please note that I will try my best to hold my tongue
until after I am done reading this. Prepare yourself though because this communication is
Rated Ufor UGLY.

Should We Take Creation Stories in Genesis

Literally?
Finding multiple truths in Biblical myths
Robin Ngo 01/31/2016

What purpose did creation stories in Genesis serve? Were they Biblical myths? Pictured here is The
Garden of Eden with the Fall of Man (c. 1617) by Flemish painters Peter Paul Rubens and Jan
Brueghel the Elder.

Were the creation stories in Genesis meant to be taken literally? Maybe not, says
Biblical scholar Shawna Dolansky in her Biblical Views column The Multiple
20 | P a g e

Truths of Myths in the January/February 2016 issue of Biblical Archaeology

Review.
Our world is very different from the world in which the Biblical authors lived
over 2,000 years ago. The ancient world did not have Google, Wikipedia and
smartphonesaccess to information on human history and scientific
achievements developed over millennia at the touch of their fingertips.
Many scholars believe that the ancient Israelites had creation stories that were told
and retold; these stories eventually reached the Biblical authors, who wrote them
down in Genesis and other books of the Bible. Creation stories in Genesis were
etiological, Shawna Dolansky and other Biblical scholars argue.1 That is, the
creation stories in Genesis served to provide answers to why the world was the
way it was, such as why people wear clothes and why women experience pain
during childbirth. Creation stories in Genesis were among the many myths that
were told in the ancient Near East. Today we may think of myths as beliefs that
are not true, but as a literary genre, myths are stories that convey and reinforce
aspects of a cultures worldview: many truths, writes Dolansky. So to call
something a mythin this sensedoes not necessarily imply that it is not true.
Scholars argue that Biblical myths arose within the context of other ancient Near
Eastern myths that sought to explain the creation of the world. Alongside Biblical
myths were Mesopotamian myths in which, depending on the account, the creator
was Enlil, Mami or Marduk. In ancient Egyptian mythology, the creator of the
world was Atum in one creation story and Ptah in another.
Like other ancient peoples, the Israelites told multiple creation stories, writes
Shawna Dolansky in her Biblical Views column. The Bible gives us three (and
who knows how many others were recounted but not preserved?). Genesis 1
differs from Genesis 23, and both diverge from a third version alluded to
elsewhere in the Bible, a myth of the primordial battle between God and the
forces of chaos known as Leviathan (e.g., Psalm 74), Rahab (Psalm 89) or the
dragon (Isaiah 27; 51). This battle that preceded creation has the Mesopotamian
Enuma Elish as its closest analogue. In Enuma Elish, the god Marduk defeats the
chaotic waters in the form of the dragon Tiamat and recycles her corpse to create
the earth.
21 | P a g e

In what other ways do Biblical myths parallel ancient Near Eastern myths? What
can we learn about the world in which the ancient Israelites lived through the
creation stories in Genesis? Learn more by reading the full Biblical Views
column The Multiple Truths of Myths by Shawna Dolansky in the
January/February 2016 issue of BAR.

Notes:
1. For example, see Ziony Zevit, Was Eve Made from Adams Ribor His
Baculum? BAR, September/October 2015; Mary Joan Winn Leith, ReViews:
Restoring Nudity, BAR, May/June 2014.
Now bear in mind this isnt even the full article yetthis is the synopsis or teaser that
is meant to get you to want to read the article! And yet, for me at least, this little write up
is fraught with problems.
This lady scholar says outright that Genesis is a myth and the very title and the first
sentence tell us plainly not to read the Scripture as literal history. We then are assailed by
a clinical explanation about how primitive the Biblical writers were and how we, with our
modern technology, know so much more than the ancients did. And then, like a bad
episode of Lets Make a Deal we are thrown the proverbial bone that says, just because
Genesis isnt history, does not mean it is devoid of all truth. Uh thanksbut no thanks.
The moment an unbeliever tries to tell me what real truth is supposed to look like is
usually the same moment I bolt for the nearest exit.
The next shot across our biblical bough is even worse. Now still reeling from the idea
that the experts have ruled Genesis to be fiction with a few useful moral lessons at its
unhistorical core, next we have to deal with that Genesis is not even supposed to be
oldest, most original or best version of that myth! Instead, we got the equivalent of
Mesopotamian hand-me-downs as sure as if ancient stories could somehow be picked up
at the Goodwill store.
And yet, as the host from Lets Make a Deal might also say Wait, theres more. Not
only is the Scriptural account of creation a Mesopotamian hand-me-down, its not even
an internally consistent one! In fact its a sloppy 80s band music video editing job gone
22 | P a g e

awry with double or triple stories that contradict each other sloppily jammed together in a
way that will never be coherent or logical. But hey, we get another consolation prize: Its
okay, you see, because the pagan myths that Genesis is supposed to come out of are
themselves equally confused and nonsensical! Thanks, I fell so much better.
Instead, might I suggest an alternative viewpoint? First of all, the Scripture itself does not
have multiple creation accounts. There is only one Creator ever given, and His Name is
Yahweh. If though the scholars still feel there are contradictions between Genesis 1 on
the one hand and Genesis 2 and 3 on the other, there are other ways to deal with and
discuss those issues without pulling the myth card. If you want us to better explain the
ONE creation story we have in Genesis then Im all for it. But the moment you assume
you can break it into two, you have already proven your lack of objectivity, and we
people of faith actually have real answers to this pernicious skepticism.
One popular suggestion is what I used to call the documentary film approach, meaning
that Genesis 1 represents a kind of sweeping long shot of creation while Genesis 2 and 3
are the close ups. I believed this for a long time, but that didnt make my view totally
immune from attacks like the one we are discussing, hence the development of the
Genesis Decoded material which I believe answers a lot more of these objections, but
this is not the time or place to get into all that. The point is, whether one agrees or
disagrees with me on that aspect, I think we can all agree that both explanations are
infinitely preferable than reducing Genesis itself down to a mere myth.
Another suggestion: Why dont these scholars truly entertain the possibility at least that
Father Yah really exists and then ask themselves, how can creation and mankind point
back to its Creator rather than form a false answer to how the world works? In other
words, lets for just a moment, take Genesis at its word.
Lets say, for the sake of argument, that Father Yah created Adam and Eve and then
kicked them out of paradise after sin entered the world. From that point, wickedness
spreads all over the world for another 9 generations until Noah and the Flood comes.
After that it takes another 10 generations before we even get to the first Hebrew,
Abraham, let alone Israelites from Jacob, let alone Jews from Judah.
Now lets imagine that during all those generations, the Almighty Elohim knows what
their future is going to be like and He knows wickedness and confusion is going to
23 | P a g e

dominate the earth. Wouldnt such a Supreme Being also know how to implant a few
truths into what is essentially Satans lie (he travels spreading lies in Job) as a way to
prepare His chosen group for the truth? Isnt the whole point of revelation to pull people
out of a lie and into the truth? Even Hollywood got this aspect of Father Yah right once
when, in the film Time Bandits a proper British actor in a business suit said, Well, I am
the Supreme Being. Im not entirely dim. Some may think I shouldnt use a reference
like thatI understand, but just know that I would prefer to read a scholarly paper on
Genesis from the guy who wrote Time Bandits than I would this person in BAR.
So yes there is confusion in the pagan world, because the pagan world came from the
descendants of monotheistic Adam, not the other way around. Father Yah walked with
Adam in the Garden after all. If the generations expelled from paradise and falling into
wickedness and confusion getwell wicked and confused as Genesis saysis it any
wonder all that shows up in their myths centuries later? But instead, we are to believe the
derivative lies are true and the original truth is a derivative lie. I dont think so.
On the other hand, that doesnt mean archaeology is not extremely helpful in shedding
light on the world of the Scriptures, and in many other cases I have found BAR an
indispensable tool for doing just that. Again, as long as we can have a frank discussion
about what archaeology can do and what is less likely for it to be able to do, we can all
explore the mystery together. But if you bring out the myth labelsorry guysthats a
deal breaker. Come back when you can be objective again, or as Peter put it:
For we have not gone after fables cleverly crafted in making known to you the
power and advent of our Master Y'shua the Mashiyach; but (it was) after we had
been spectators of his majesty. For, when he received from Elohim the Father
honor and glory and, after the splendid glory of his majesty a voice came to him
thus: "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased;" we also heard this
identical voice from heaven which came to him while we were with him in the Set
Apart mount.
And we have furthermore a certain Word of Prophecy; and you will do well if you
look to it as to a light that shines in a dark place until the day will dawn and the
sun will arise in your hearts; you having the previous knowledge that no prophecy
is an exposition of its own text. (2 Pet. 1:16-20 AENT)
While your minds became sanctified by obedience to the truth; and you be full of
love, without respect of persons, so that you love one another out of a pure and
perfect heart; like persons born anew, not of seed that perishes but of that which
does not perish, by the Living Word of Elohim who abides forever.
24 | P a g e

Because all flesh is as grass and all its beauty like the flower of the field. The
grass dries up and the flower withers away; but the Word of our Elohim abides
forever: and this is the Word that is announced to you. (1 Pet. 1:22-25 AENT)
As they said in another Hollywood blockbuster: So let it be written! So let it be done!
STUDY QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED NEXT WEEK
1) What commandment in this Torah portion appears to have been clarified or even
limited in its scope by later regulations?
2) If you know the answer to #1, why was this command modified later?
3) What does the use of the word DEROR in the Haftorah portion help us prove about
Yshuas resurrection?
4) If you know the answer to #3, where is this result of the resurrection predicted
earlier by Yshua in the Gospels?
5) There have been some who have attacked the book Hebrews on several fronts.
One of these is the idea that Paul did not write the letter. Is there evidence within
the Epistle to prove Paul was the author and if so, what is it?
Torah Thought for the Week:
Cursing in the Name of Elohim
Exodus 22:28 reads very simply: You shall not curse Elohim, nor a ruler of your people.
In keeping with the pattern that seems to prevail over much of Mishpatim, this command
seems to be a re-statement or clarification of the Top Ten given last week, in this case of
the Third Commandment, to not make Abba YHWHs Name desolate through
substitution. However, the Hebrew in Exodus 22:28 adds another important detail.
The Hebrew word QALAL, which is generically used for to curse has at its root
structure several deep meanings. The first of these is to be trifling which ends up being
the opposite of KAVOD, to give glory or honor to. It is KAVOD that is used as the
honor in Honor your father and your mother and KAVOD there also means give
weight to or pay heavy attention to.
What that analysis by necessity then leads to is a treatment of the Name of Abba YHWH
that is less than worthy. How that definition manifests is given repeatedly in Tanakh,
and I wanted to use this example from the book of Joshua to highlight this concept most
precisely:
10

Yahweh said to Joshua, 'Stand up! Why are you lying prostrate like this? 11
Israel has sinned; they have violated the covenant which I imposed on them. They
have gone so far as to take what was under the curse of destruction, they have
25 | P a g e

even stolen it; they have actually hidden it; they have put it in their baggage. 12
That is why the Israelites cannot stand up to their foes, why they have turned tail
on their enemies: because they have come under the curse of destruction
themselves. Unless you get rid of the object among you which has been put under
the curse of destruction, I shall be with you no longer.' 13 'Get up, sanctify the
people and say, "Sanctify yourselves for tomorrow, since Yahweh, the God of
Israel, declares: The curse of destruction has now fallen on you, Israel; you will
not be able to stand up to your enemies, until you have rid yourselves of that
object which has been put under the curse of destruction.
14

Tomorrow morning, therefore, you will come forward tribe by tribe, and then
the tribe which Yahweh selects by lot will come forward clan by clan, and the clan
which Yahweh selects by lot will come forward family by family, and the family
which Yahweh selects by lot will come forward man by man. 15 And the man
indicated by lot as regards the object which has been put under the curse of
destruction will be delivered to the flames, he and all his possessions, for having
violated the covenant with Yahweh and for having committed an infamy in
Israel." '
16

Joshua got up early; he made Israel come forward tribe by tribe, and the lot
indicated the tribe of Judah. 17 He summoned the clans of Judah, and the lot
indicated the clan of Zerah. He summoned the clan of Zerah, family by family,
and the lot indicated Zabdi. 18 Joshua then summoned the family of Zabdi, man
by man, and the lot indicated Achan son of Carmi, son of Zabdi, son of Zerah, of
the tribe of Judah.
19

Joshua then said to Achan, 'My son, give glory to Yahweh, God of Israel,
and confess; tell me what you have done and hide nothing from me.'
20

Achan replied to Joshua, 'Yes, I am the man who has sinned against Yahweh,
God of Israel, and this is what I have done. 21 In the loot, I saw a fine robe from
Shinar and two hundred shekels of silver and an ingot of gold weighing fifty
shekels, I set my heart on them and I took them. They are hidden in the ground
inside my tent, with the silver underneath.'
22

Joshua sent messengers; they ran to the tent, and the robe was indeed hidden in
the tent, with the silver underneath. 23 They took the things out of the tent and,
bringing them to Joshua and all the Israelites, laid them out before Yahweh.
24

Joshua then took Achan son of Zerah and led him up to the Vale of Achor, with
the silver and the robe and the ingot of gold, his sons, his daughters, his oxen, his
donkeys, his sheep, his goats, his tent and all his belongings. All Israel went with
him. 25 Joshua said, 'Why have you brought misfortune on us? Today may
Yahweh bring misfortune on you!' And all Israel stoned him to death (and they
burned them and threw stones at them). 26 Over him, they raised a great mound of
stones, which is still there today. Yahweh then relented from his fierce anger. That
26 | P a g e

was why the place was called the Vale of Achor, as it still is today. (Joshua 7:1026 NJB)
Now granted this is an extreme case with extreme penalties and we have spoken before
on how at certain critical times in history, when a milestone is being reached without
which the Kingdom cannot move forward, the rules are far stricter and the penalties far
more severe than they might be at other times.
And yet the core lesson for us today remains no less graphic or blatant. Achans
confession of guilt gave glory to Abba YHWH and Joshua adjured him by the Name of
Abba YHWH to exact that confession and remove guilt from the rest of Israel. Similarly,
when we confess our guilt, we too give Abba YHWH glory for His Torah, just as when
we curse Him we do the opposite, we make Him trifling or insignificant by using the
Name in a disrespectful way and this is wholly separate from the discussion of not using
the Name at all, which is commanded of us 300 times.
Other times, the curse comes when we are told to do something and yet sell Him short
in terms of what He can do for us, and this was a hard lesson for King Ahaz to learn, as
we see here:
10

Yahweh spoke to Ahaz again and said: 11 Ask Yahweh your Elohim for a sign,
either in the depths of Sheol or in the heights above. 12 But Ahaz said, 'I will not
ask. I will not put Yahweh to the test.' 13 He then said: Listen now, House of
David: are you not satisfied with trying human patience that you should try
my Elohims patience too? 14 Adonai will give you a sign in any case: It is this:
the young woman is with child and will give birth to a son whom she will call
Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:10-14)
So when Ahaz is commanded to ask for a sign to show Abba YHWHs power he refuses
to do so. One might think this is a sign of humility along the lines of what Yshua said to
haSatanYou shall not put Yah thy El to the testbut this is a different situation.
With Yshuas temptation, haSatan was asking Yshua to have his Father prove Himself
through a miracle and that is totally different from Abba YHWH asking for an
opportunity to show a miracle of Ahazs choosing, only to be told no. If thats not a
curse, I dont know what one is, but this is far from the only example that we need to look
at:
21

Moses said, 'The people round me number six hundred thousand foot soldiers,
and you say, "I shall give them meat to eat for a whole month"! 22 If all the flocks
and herds were slaughtered, would that be enough for them? If all the fish in the
seas were collected, would that be enough for them?' 23 Yahweh said to Moses,
'Is the arm of Yahweh so short? You shall see whether the promise I have
made to you comes true or not.' (Numbers 11:21-23 NJB)
Moshe, who witnessed ten miracles just to get his people freed from bondage, should
have known better. And if Abba YHWH could part the waters of the Sea of Reeds surely
27 | P a g e

He could also provide meat for His peopleespecially when He just promised He would
do just that! Therefore, in this instance, Moshe too in a sense cursed Abba YHWH
because again the word for curse means to slight, disregard, treat lightlyand this he
surely did. Fortunately for both him and us, Moshe did not get rebuked for this sin
probably because it was so out of character from his normal humility. In other words,
this seems to be the Scripture equivalent of getting a mulliganor a do over.
And so, we glory in His Name when we obey His commandments and stand on the faith
He requires of us, which would be the point of Shaliach Paul 15 centuries later
(Act 22:14) And he said to me: 'The Elohim of our fathers has ordained you to
know His will, and to behold the Just One, and to hear the voice of his mouth.
(Act 22:15) And you will be a witness for him before all men, concerning all that
you have seen and heard. (Act 22:16) And now, why do you delay? Arise, be
immersed, and be cleansed from your sins, while you invoke His Name.'
(Rom 9:14) What will we say then? Is there iniquity with Elohim? May it never
be! (Rom 9:15) Behold, to Moshe also he said: "I will have pity on whom I will
have pity; and I will be merciful to whom I will be merciful." (Rom 9:16)
Therefore, it is not of him who is willing, nor of him who runs, but of the merciful
Elohim. (Rom 9:17) For in the Scripture, he said to Pharaoh: "For this very
thing have I raised you up; that I might show my power in you, and that my
name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
And the same thing is said by Keefa:
(1Pe 4:14) And if you are reproached on account of the name of the Mashiyach,19
happy are you: for the glorious Spirit of Elohim rests upon you. (1Pe 4:15) Only
let none of you suffer as a murderer or as a thief or as an evil-doer. (1Pe 4:16)
But if he suffers as a Kristianay, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify
Elohim on account of this name. (1Pe 4:17) For it is the time when judgment will
commence with the house of Elohim: and if it commences with us, what will be
the end of those who obey not the Good News of Elohim?
And Yochanan:
(Rev 3:7) And to the Messenger of the assembly which is at Philadelphia, write:
'These things says he that is Set Apart, he that is true, he that has the key of
Dawid, who opens and no man shuts, and shuts and no man opens; (Rev 3:8) I
know your works. And lo, I have set before you an open door which no man
can shut: because you have a little strength, and you have kept my Word and
have not denied My Name.
(Rev 3:9) Behold, I will give them of the Knesset of Satan, who say they are
Jews, and are not, but lie; behold, I will make them to come and do submissions
before your feet; and to know that I have loved you. (Rev 3:10) Because you
have kept the Word of my patience, I also will keep you from the hour of
28 | P a g e

temptation that is to come on all the inhabited world to try them who dwell on the
earth.
(Rev 3:11) I come quickly: hold fast what you have so that no one take your
crown. (Rev 3:12) Him that is victorious, will I make a pillar in the temple of
my Elohim; and he will not again go out: and I will write upon him the name
of my Elohim, and of the new Urishlim which descends from heaven from my
Elohim, and my own new name. (Rev 3:13) He that has ears, let him hear what
the Spirit says to the assemblies.'
Yaakov too
(Jas 5:8) So also be you patient and build up your hearts, for the coming of our
Master (Y'shua) draws near. (Jas 5:9) Have no quarrel one against another, my
Brothers, or else you be judged: for behold, the judgment stands before the door.
(Jas 5:10) For patience in your great sufferings, my Brothers, take hold of the
example of the prophets who spoke in the name of Master YHWH. (Jas 5:11) For
behold, we ascribe blessedness to them who have persevered. You have heard of
the patience of Job; and you have seen the result which Master YHWH created for
him: for Master YHWH is merciful and compassionate.
And that of course brings us to Mashiyach Yshua, who sanctified his Fathers Name in
prayer in Matthew 6:9 and who used that same Name to call down protection on his
apostles in Yochanan 17 on the last night of his life. And then, even at his resurrection he
had one more command
(Mat 28:18) And Y'shua drew near and spoke with them and said to them, "All
authority is given to me in heaven and on earth. And as my Father has sent me, I
send you. (Mat 28:19) Go therefore, make disciples of all nations and immerse
them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Ruach haKodesh. (Mat
28:20) And teach them to keep all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am
with you all the days until the end of the world. Amen."
Of course, as we have also talked about before, that is ONE NAME and not three, since
the Son has the same name as the Father and the Ruach Ha Kodesh is simply another title
for the Father, which is why there is only one Name under heaven by which we are saved,
and it is Abba YHWH, through His Son Yshua, and Yshuas name points to an
affirmation of the Fathers Name and His saving power.
So this is what we need to understand. The mere use of Abba YHWH or Yshuas name
is not meant be avoided altogether but to be reserved for the purposes that are given in
the Word. We use these names call down miracles, proclaim YHWHs glory and raise up
believers. But if we doubt His power, or substitute the Name for political correctness, we
make it SHAV or desolate and we also invoke a curse, because without His protections,
all roads lead to death. Then again, on the other hand
(Joh 12:50) I know that His commands are eternal life. Therefore, these things
that I speak just as my Father told me, thus I speak."
29 | P a g e

Im Andrew Gabriel Roth and thats your Torah Thought for the Week. Next week we
will be exploring Terumah, or Exodus 25:1-27:19. Our Haftorah portion will be from 1
Kings 5:12-6:13 and our Renewed Covenant portion will be Hebrews 8:1-13. Stay tuned!

30 | P a g e