Those searching for some answers on Mesothelioma have great resources to search out the information they need. Here at MessianicMusings.net, we focus on searching out spiritual answers from the Torah and the Brit haDasha. Here’s my commentary on Mishpatim. Or listen to it!
Shabbat Shalom.
Our parashah for today is Mishpatim, or “Judgments,” and covers Exodus 21:1 through 24:18. It is with this parashah that we begin to journey into the more detailed rulings of law that are to govern the people of Israel. It is what is commonly referred to as “the law of Moses,” and not because Moses wrote them down – these laws still come from God – but because they are a result of a mediation between a holy and perfect God, and Moses.
While The L-RD is still the Lawgiver, it is Moses who negotiated with The L-RD to help determine what would be an acceptable minimum standard of human behavior that would still find that behavior acceptable to The L-RD in His holiness.
It is important to realize that, unlike the Ten Commands, these rulings ARE mediated between God and man; therefore, they do not represent the L-RD’s perfect standard for holiness. They are, instead, the least we can do to show our love and respect for, and obedience to, the living God.
After the lofty principles laid down in The 10 Commands, these new points of law – and there are 613 points of law in all, laid out over the course of the five books of the Torah – seem immediately and obviously different. While The 10 Commands are broad in their scope and universal in their truth, these rulings are far more detailed and specific, but they also require some application to make them relevant to all the experiences one might encounter in life.
Let’s take a look at one of these commands as an example. We read this in:
Exodus 21:28-32
“If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull must be stoned and the owner also must be put to death. However, if payment is demanded of him, he may redeem his life by paying whatever is demanded. This law also applies if the bull gores a son or daughter. If the bull gores a male or female slave, the owner must pay thirty shekels of silver to the master of the slave, and the bull must be stoned.
Well, that’s pretty clear and simple, isn’t it?
You see, the 10 Commands were absolutes, truths spoken by the L-RD Himself directly to the people. Just in the way that they are written, these Mosaic laws have the earmarks of negotiated rulings. But we can also see their connection to the original core ten.
What is this ruling about? Well, it covers “Thou shall not steal,” “Thou shall not covet,” and even “Thou shall not murder.” Those are the most obvious connections to the Ten Commands, and as we know – the 10 are so interrelated and connected that, once you break one of them, you end up being guilty of violating them all.
Let’s consider this point of law for a moment. Why is it needed? Well, one can easily imagine the situation popping up in a rural, agrarian society like that of the people of Israel, can’t you? People keep and raise bulls, but bulls are huge animals with the ability to easily slay a human being. So what does one do when that happens?
This command lays down the guidelines. If it is the animal’s first offense, the animal is to be slain, but not its owner. One could easily imagine a grieving family wanting both animal and owner slain in retribution, so this law sets up a protection for an innocent owner. However, the law goes on to say that if the animal is in the habit of goring, and the owner has made no provision to protect people from the animal, they are to slay both the animal and the owner.
This speaks of taking responsibility for one’s animals. If you know you have a violent animal, you should take some measures to protect people from it, right? But just a second… the command just said that on a bull’s first offense, it is to be slain, so how can it be that an animal would get to a second offense for this command to come into play?
That’s where God’s wisdom is displayed. He knew two things were possible. First, a bull who gores is only to be put to death if it what…? Kills someone. Can a bull show a tendency toward goring and yet have a victim live? Sometimes, sure. Also, I think God anticipated that some people might not obey the command the first time – they might value the bull with a history of goring over the lives of others. That is why, if it is a repeat offense, the life of the owner who has been warned about a bull’s tendency to gore is also forfeit. Yet in this law, God shows His mercy by allowing the owner to ransom his own life, so that the owner may live, but suffer loss.
So, that complex web of possibilities and “what ifs” certainly bears the hallmarks of a negotiated minimum standard, doesn’t it? It lacks the simple clarity of The Big 10. Yet the most obvious question that arises here is… hey, this is great if you’re a farmer or rancher and you own a bull… but how does this apply to my life, today?
That is where we get into what is known as halakha. Halakha is a Hebrew word that most literally is translated as, “the path, or the way of walking.” In practical use, it is used to refer to the collective body of Jewish law, including the Biblical laws of Moses, as well as later Talmudic and rabbinic interpretations. Often, halakha is translated simply as “the Law.”
However, in the context of our study today, what I mean by halakha is how adding in the interpretations of man – whether they be the mediations of the rabbis, the commentaries of Christians scholars or even the sermons of one’s favorite rabbi, pastor or teacher – become necessary to apply a law like this to make it relevant to modern situations.
For example, we in America today have many people who live in large cities. They will never own a bull. But we do own pets, don’t we? And how often do we hear about one pet owner or another being sued because, let’s say, their pit bull or their German shepherd attacked and either injured, or even killed, someone?
If one takes a purely literal reading away from this law, it can only apply to bulls. However, by applying halakhic principles, one can easily see how the principle of this law can be applied to all sorts of animal ownership, and therefore be applied to modern dog owners, as well as all sorts of other animals, be they pets or livestock.
So you see, halakha is not always a bad thing. At its best, it is simply the efforts of people who do fear God and respect His commands, to understand how best to apply God’s instructions to all aspects of their daily lives.
So where does halakha sometimes go wrong? We have an example of that as well in this week’s Torah portion. We read, in:
Exodus 23:19
Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.
Over the centuries, this simple, 10-word law has become the subject of volumes upon volumes of the mediations of man. The original command was simple: do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk. What was the purpose of this command? It reflects God’s mercy, which extends even to the animals; the principle is that the very substance that gave that animal life – its mother’s milk – ought not be used to take its life at the moment of its death.
And we know that this is consistent with the character of God; that He does indeed care for the animals He created. We know this because He had Noah build an ark to preserve not only human, but animal life, in the time of the Great Flood. This compassion for animals is also reflected even in the book of Jonah, which ends with this word from The L-RD in:
Jonah 4:11
But Nineveh has more than 120,000 people living in spiritual darkness, not to mention all the animals. Shouldn’t I feel sorry for such a great city?”
Yet what has become of this simple command, meant as a show of compassion to animals? It has been expanded and expounded upon so much that the core meaning of the original command has nearly been forgotten.
Now, instead of focusing on animal cruelty, this command is the central point of reams of dietary laws that call for the complete separation of meat and dairy products. That means no cheeseburgers, no meat-and-cheese pizzas. Some even take it so far as to purchase separate sets of dishes and silverware… separate refrigerators, pots and pans… some even operate two separate kitchens out of a fear of inadvertently violating the command by having a spec of meat come into contact with a spec of dairy. In Israel today, most restaurants are either meat establishments or dairy establishments.
The expansions of meaning that have been added to this simple command about animal cruelty have gone so far beyond the original meaning that it is almost unrecognizable in practice.
Worse yet, it makes the command nearly impossible for all but the very wealthy to observe; if a poor person can barely keep a roof over their head, and is fortunate to own one set of dishes, can they observe this command in the way it has been expanded upon? It would seem unlikely, wouldn’t it? This is an example of how halakha can snowball out of control and become nearly impossible to observe.
And this is what Yeshua was referring to when he said, in:
Matthew 23:2-4
“The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
And again in:
Luke 11: 46
Yeshua replied, “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.
So you see, while halakha can be a good thing, it can be carried too far. The mediations of the rabbis were nowhere near as developed in the time of Yeshua, and even then he called them a burden no one can bear. Since then, the volumes that have been added to the Talmud, the Tosefta and the Mishnah could flood this stage.
And Christians are not exempt from this, as any survey of a Commentary section in the average, well-stocked Christian bookstore will demonstrate. And the teachings found there often stray just as far from the written word of the L-RD as does anything in the oral traditions of the rabbis.
So, as we continue to explore the laws of Moses, let’s keep in mind this approach. While it is good to apply the instructions of The L-RD to our life, we must avoid becoming so ambitious in doing so that we lose sight of the original commands.
Shabbat Shalom.
My Mishpatim Commentary
Sunday, February 22nd, 2009
Those searching for some answers on Mesothelioma have great resources to search out the information they need. Here at MessianicMusings.net, we focus on searching out spiritual answers from the Torah and the Brit haDasha. Here’s my commentary on Mishpatim. Or listen to it!
Shabbat Shalom.
Our parashah for today is Mishpatim, or “Judgments,” and covers Exodus 21:1 through 24:18. It is with this parashah that we begin to journey into the more detailed rulings of law that are to govern the people of Israel. It is what is commonly referred to as “the law of Moses,” and not because Moses wrote them down – these laws still come from God – but because they are a result of a mediation between a holy and perfect God, and Moses.
While The L-RD is still the Lawgiver, it is Moses who negotiated with The L-RD to help determine what would be an acceptable minimum standard of human behavior that would still find that behavior acceptable to The L-RD in His holiness.
It is important to realize that, unlike the Ten Commands, these rulings ARE mediated between God and man; therefore, they do not represent the L-RD’s perfect standard for holiness. They are, instead, the least we can do to show our love and respect for, and obedience to, the living God.
After the lofty principles laid down in The 10 Commands, these new points of law – and there are 613 points of law in all, laid out over the course of the five books of the Torah – seem immediately and obviously different. While The 10 Commands are broad in their scope and universal in their truth, these rulings are far more detailed and specific, but they also require some application to make them relevant to all the experiences one might encounter in life.
Let’s take a look at one of these commands as an example. We read this in:
Well, that’s pretty clear and simple, isn’t it?
You see, the 10 Commands were absolutes, truths spoken by the L-RD Himself directly to the people. Just in the way that they are written, these Mosaic laws have the earmarks of negotiated rulings. But we can also see their connection to the original core ten.
What is this ruling about? Well, it covers “Thou shall not steal,” “Thou shall not covet,” and even “Thou shall not murder.” Those are the most obvious connections to the Ten Commands, and as we know – the 10 are so interrelated and connected that, once you break one of them, you end up being guilty of violating them all.
Let’s consider this point of law for a moment. Why is it needed? Well, one can easily imagine the situation popping up in a rural, agrarian society like that of the people of Israel, can’t you? People keep and raise bulls, but bulls are huge animals with the ability to easily slay a human being. So what does one do when that happens?
This command lays down the guidelines. If it is the animal’s first offense, the animal is to be slain, but not its owner. One could easily imagine a grieving family wanting both animal and owner slain in retribution, so this law sets up a protection for an innocent owner. However, the law goes on to say that if the animal is in the habit of goring, and the owner has made no provision to protect people from the animal, they are to slay both the animal and the owner.
This speaks of taking responsibility for one’s animals. If you know you have a violent animal, you should take some measures to protect people from it, right? But just a second… the command just said that on a bull’s first offense, it is to be slain, so how can it be that an animal would get to a second offense for this command to come into play?
That’s where God’s wisdom is displayed. He knew two things were possible. First, a bull who gores is only to be put to death if it what…? Kills someone. Can a bull show a tendency toward goring and yet have a victim live? Sometimes, sure. Also, I think God anticipated that some people might not obey the command the first time – they might value the bull with a history of goring over the lives of others. That is why, if it is a repeat offense, the life of the owner who has been warned about a bull’s tendency to gore is also forfeit. Yet in this law, God shows His mercy by allowing the owner to ransom his own life, so that the owner may live, but suffer loss.
So, that complex web of possibilities and “what ifs” certainly bears the hallmarks of a negotiated minimum standard, doesn’t it? It lacks the simple clarity of The Big 10. Yet the most obvious question that arises here is… hey, this is great if you’re a farmer or rancher and you own a bull… but how does this apply to my life, today?
That is where we get into what is known as halakha. Halakha is a Hebrew word that most literally is translated as, “the path, or the way of walking.” In practical use, it is used to refer to the collective body of Jewish law, including the Biblical laws of Moses, as well as later Talmudic and rabbinic interpretations. Often, halakha is translated simply as “the Law.”
However, in the context of our study today, what I mean by halakha is how adding in the interpretations of man – whether they be the mediations of the rabbis, the commentaries of Christians scholars or even the sermons of one’s favorite rabbi, pastor or teacher – become necessary to apply a law like this to make it relevant to modern situations.
For example, we in America today have many people who live in large cities. They will never own a bull. But we do own pets, don’t we? And how often do we hear about one pet owner or another being sued because, let’s say, their pit bull or their German shepherd attacked and either injured, or even killed, someone?
If one takes a purely literal reading away from this law, it can only apply to bulls. However, by applying halakhic principles, one can easily see how the principle of this law can be applied to all sorts of animal ownership, and therefore be applied to modern dog owners, as well as all sorts of other animals, be they pets or livestock.
So you see, halakha is not always a bad thing. At its best, it is simply the efforts of people who do fear God and respect His commands, to understand how best to apply God’s instructions to all aspects of their daily lives.
So where does halakha sometimes go wrong? We have an example of that as well in this week’s Torah portion. We read, in:
Over the centuries, this simple, 10-word law has become the subject of volumes upon volumes of the mediations of man. The original command was simple: do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk. What was the purpose of this command? It reflects God’s mercy, which extends even to the animals; the principle is that the very substance that gave that animal life – its mother’s milk – ought not be used to take its life at the moment of its death.
And we know that this is consistent with the character of God; that He does indeed care for the animals He created. We know this because He had Noah build an ark to preserve not only human, but animal life, in the time of the Great Flood. This compassion for animals is also reflected even in the book of Jonah, which ends with this word from The L-RD in:
Yet what has become of this simple command, meant as a show of compassion to animals? It has been expanded and expounded upon so much that the core meaning of the original command has nearly been forgotten.
Now, instead of focusing on animal cruelty, this command is the central point of reams of dietary laws that call for the complete separation of meat and dairy products. That means no cheeseburgers, no meat-and-cheese pizzas. Some even take it so far as to purchase separate sets of dishes and silverware… separate refrigerators, pots and pans… some even operate two separate kitchens out of a fear of inadvertently violating the command by having a spec of meat come into contact with a spec of dairy. In Israel today, most restaurants are either meat establishments or dairy establishments.
The expansions of meaning that have been added to this simple command about animal cruelty have gone so far beyond the original meaning that it is almost unrecognizable in practice.
Worse yet, it makes the command nearly impossible for all but the very wealthy to observe; if a poor person can barely keep a roof over their head, and is fortunate to own one set of dishes, can they observe this command in the way it has been expanded upon? It would seem unlikely, wouldn’t it? This is an example of how halakha can snowball out of control and become nearly impossible to observe.
And this is what Yeshua was referring to when he said, in:
And again in:
So you see, while halakha can be a good thing, it can be carried too far. The mediations of the rabbis were nowhere near as developed in the time of Yeshua, and even then he called them a burden no one can bear. Since then, the volumes that have been added to the Talmud, the Tosefta and the Mishnah could flood this stage.
And Christians are not exempt from this, as any survey of a Commentary section in the average, well-stocked Christian bookstore will demonstrate. And the teachings found there often stray just as far from the written word of the L-RD as does anything in the oral traditions of the rabbis.
So, as we continue to explore the laws of Moses, let’s keep in mind this approach. While it is good to apply the instructions of The L-RD to our life, we must avoid becoming so ambitious in doing so that we lose sight of the original commands.
Shabbat Shalom.
Tags: mesothelioma, Mishpatim, Torah commentary
Posted in hallekah, Torah | No Comments »