Torah « MessianicMusings.com

Archive for the ‘Torah’ Category

My 2010 Sh’mot Commentary

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

Here is my 2010 commentary on Sh’mot. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah today is “Sh’mot,” a Hebrew word that means “names,” and covers Exodus chapter 1, through chapter 6, verse 1. With the ending of Genesis and the beginning of Exodus, we bid farewell to Joseph and all his predecessors, and we greet Moses, the man who would become the prophet that Messiah would be compared to in Messianic prophecy. Our introduction to Moses as the greatest prophet can sometimes stir up impressive, yet in accurate, images.

Thanks to the Cecil B. DeMille classic, The Ten Commandments, there is an entire generation of believers who cannot help but envision a young Charlton Heston when they picture Moses. More recently, thanks to the DreamWorks animated musical, Prince of Egypt, a new generation is growing up thinking of Moses as an eternal teenager off on a great and grand adventure, someone similar to Aladdin.

Yet Moses as he was is not to be found in any of these false images. While he is the greatest of all the patriarchs and, as the Torah itself memorializes him, “the humblest man who ever lived,” what we find in these opening chapters of Exodus is a man who is exceptionally flawed.

First, after he is weaned, he is raised primarily in the house of a Pharaoh of Egypt, as a child of one of Pharaoh’s daughters. While this means he had access to perhaps the finest level of education available to man in that era, it also means he grew up among people who did not serve the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but among a family who served and worshipped a pantheon of false gods – gods who, as the Torah puts it, are no gods at all, gods his fathers had not known.

In spite of this upbringing, Moses does not lose himself to the pagan influences by which he was surrounded. Somehow, he is made aware that although he being raised by Pharaoh’s daughter, his true heritage lies with the Hebrew slaves that he may have even helped rule over. However, we know Moses does not forsake his Hebrew heritage because, as we read in:

EXODUS 2:11-12
One day, after Moses had grown up, he went out to where his own people were and watched them at their hard labor. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people. Glancing this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.

So here’s our first hurdle; however justified one might feel he was in striking down the Egyptian who was beating the Hebrew, the fact is that Moses is starting off with a pretty serious strike against him: he’s a murderer.

And his own conscience bears witness to his guilt, as we read in:

EXODUS 2:13-15
The next day he went out and saw two Hebrews fighting. He asked the one in the wrong, “Why are you hitting your fellow Hebrew?” The man said, “Who made you ruler and judge over us? Are you thinking of killing me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid and thought, “What I did must have become known.” When Pharaoh heard of this, he tried to kill Moses, but Moses fled from Pharaoh and went to live in Midian,

So now, not only is Moses a murderer, but he is a fugitive from justice! A failure to take responsibility for his actions could be seen as a form of cowardice. So not only is Moses a murderer, but he’s a coward as well.

Does the list get any better?

Well, while Moses is in Midian, he marries the daughter of a priest of Midian, Tzipporah, the daughter of Reuel, also known as Jethro. So he takes a gentile bride, the daughter of a man who does not worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This taking of a gentile bride will later become a point of contention with Moses’ sister, Miriam, but we’ll talk about that another time.

The next note of concern comes up when Moses meets with God at the burning bush, at the time of his calling by the L-RD. There, the L-RD lays out the entire plan for rescuing Israel from Egypt and taking them back to their own land, a land promised to them by God to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. After detailing to Moses this marvelous plan, how does Moses respond? With hesitancy and uncertainty, as we read in:

EXODUS 3:11
But Moses said to God, “Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?”
So the L-RD then reiterates his entire plan to Moses again, detailing even some of the challenges he will face, letting him know it will not be an easy accomplishment. Even so, Moses again expresses his uncertainty to the L-RD, as we read in:

EXODUS 4:1
Moses answered, “What if they do not believe me or listen to me and say, ‘The L-RD did not appear to you’?”

So God shows Moses all the signs and wonders he is to perform to gain the trust of the people, as well as the eventual obedience of Pharaoh. Yet even then, Moses is not satisfied and continues to offer objections to the plan of the L-RD, as we read in:

EXODUS 4:10
Moses said to the L-RD, “O L-RD, I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue.”

Apparently, the L-RD is more patient than me; after this many objections, I might have just said, “Oh forget it. I’ll just do this myself.” And indeed, even the L-RD wasn’t exactly pleased with Moses’ attitude at this point. As we read in:

EXODUS 4:13-14A
But Moses said, “O L-RD, please send someone else to do it.” Then the L-RD’s anger burned against Moses.

God is infinitely more patient with Moses than I might have been. He promises Moses to have his brother Aaron help him with speaking before Pharaoh and the people. The sad part is, God offered to help Moses by curing his slowness of speech and stuttering, yet Moses didn’t trust God enough to allow that, which is why God appointed his brother Aaron as his assistant.

Are we still seeing the heroic image of Charlton Heston in our minds as we read about this Moses? Do we still see the Aladdin look-alike in our heads, the dashing and fearless young man with a quick wit?

Well, we’re still not done counting Moses’ flaws. After finally convincing Moses to do as He commanded, Moses sets out for Egypt to meet his brother Aaron when this odd episode takes place, as we read in:

EXODUS 4:24-25
At a lodging place on the way, the L-RD met Moses and was about to kill him. But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it. “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me,” she said.

So, Moses has been so caught up in his life in the household of Pharaoh, and then his life as a son-in-law of a priest of Midian, with a gentile bride, that He forgets to circumcise his own son in keeping with the traditional sign of the covenant God made with his ancestor, Abraham. Can you imagine the outcome if Tzipporah, his gentile wife, hadn’t been there and known what to do? As the eldest male, Moses was responsible to be the priest of his own household, and yet he had shirked his duties so much that his wife had to perform the circumcision, rather than Moses himself.

This is the Moses of history. Not some romanticized movie hero like Charlton Heston in The Ten Commandments; not some fun-loving prankster like in Prince of Egypt; but a deeply flawed man, hesitant to obey the L-RD, unsure of himself and his abilities, and lax in his observance of the commands of the L-RD. Surely not someone worthy of becoming the greatest of all the patriarchs. Surely not someone worthy of knowing the L-RD face-to-face. Surely not the greatest prophet who ever lived.

Or was he?

You see, the L-RD does not look at a person the way man does, based on the outward appearances; he judges us on our hearts, on our inmost being. He judges us on who we truly are on the inside.

So, yes, Moses was a murder, a coward, took a Gentile bride, married into a family that served a false God, was hesitant to trust the L-RD, slow to obey and so caught up in his life that he was lax in his observance of the L-RD’s commands.

Which is what makes Moses so perfect for the role the L-RD has carved out for him. For, as we read in:

II CORINTHIANS 12:9-10
But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Messiah’s power may rest on me. That is why, for Messiah’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

We find a similar sentiment expressed in:

ISAIAH 40:29
He gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak.

You see, this week’s reading goes on to relate how Moses’ first appearance before Pharaoh was an absolute failure. His actions only caused Pharaoh to work the Hebrew people harder and increase their suffering. And I believe this is because God wanted to ensure that when deliverance came, one thing was clear: this deliverance came from God, not Moses.

While we look back on the life and testimony of Moses and what God accomplished through him with awe and reverence today, often what we lose sight of is just how unworthy he was for the task he was given; and yet, that is exactly how the L-RD planned it, for the L-RD was not trying to build a people up for Moses to be exalted, but who would exalt the L-RD and not man.

If Moses had been a strongly moral man all his life, handsome and a persuasive public speaker, a master of politics and confident in all he did, married to the best bride from the best bloodlines of the Levites only, then would he have been humble enough to give the glory to the L-RD?

You see, the L-RD does not measure success as we do; he does not look at the same things we do when it comes to being qualified. As we read in:

II SAMUEL 16:7
But the L-RD said to Samuel, “Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The L-RD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the L-RD looks at the heart.”

When the L-RD examines our hearts, may he find in us what he found in Moses; not hearts that are eager to make a name for themselves in service to the L-RD, but hearts that are eager, in all we are given to do, to give the L-RD the credit and glory. May we all be found to be as “woefully unqualified” as Moses, for that is what our Messiah Yeshua looks for in those who would serve Him.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Sh'mot
Posted in sermons and commentaries, Torah | No Comments »

My 2009 VaYeshev Commentary

Monday, December 14th, 2009

Here’s my 2009 VaYeshev Commentary! Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for today is VaYeshev, a Hebrew word that means “And he settled.” It covers Genesis chapters 37 through 40.

Now, a lot happens in this week’s portion and one could do at least four commentaries with the material, but what I’ve decided to focus on this week is chapter 39. As this chapter opens, we see that from the moment Joseph is sold as a slave in Egypt, the L-RD proves His faithfulness by blessing Joseph in all he does. In fact, he becomes such a worthwhile worker for his first owner, Potipher, that Joseph is placed in charge of everything Potipher is responsible for. We read this in:

Genesis 39:6-7
So he left in Joseph’s care everything he had; with Joseph in charge, he did not concern himself with anything except the food he ate. Now Joseph was well-built and handsome, and after a while his master’s wife took notice of Joseph and said, “Come to bed with me!”

Keep in mind that at this time, it is believed that Joseph is a young man still in his late teens – perhaps eighteen or so. As anyone who is the parent of a teenager, or at least has watched teen comedies, can tell you, this is not a time in a young man’s life when he is necessarily at his most mature and self-controlled, especially in the area of sexual temptation. And the danger of this situation is already hinted at in these very verses. As we read in:

Weekly Midrash, vol. 1, pg 193:
Ramban writes: Why does the verse call her here the wife of his master (39:7)? To show us that even though she was his master’s wife, and Joseph ought to have been afraid to disobey her, yet in this matter he was unafraid and feared God alone.

So it is clear that Joseph, despite his hardships, is made of sterner stuff that many young men his age; he fears the L-RD more than he desires to give in to temptation, for he turns down Potipher’s wife. But I believe there’s more than a “Just Say No To Temptation” message in this tale about this period in Joseph’s life, so let’s examine how he says no. We read this in:

Genesis 39:8-10
But he refused. “With me in charge,” he told her, “my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.

Did you catch that? Not only did he refuse to go to bed with her, but he refused to even “be with her.” The Hebrew here suggests that this means not only did Joseph refuse to have sex with her, but he avoided situations of even being alone with her.

How could a young man show such restraint? Was it as shallow a reason as he didn’t find Potipher’s wife attractive? I don’t think so.

But perhaps it’s this. Perhaps it is because our current culture is incorrect when they suggest that one cannot expect obedience and restraint from young people. Some have called this “the soft bigotry of low expectations” and too often, I believe, we don’t expect enough from young men and women when it comes to restraint and a willingness to obey the L-RD. The Sages also suggest an additional motive, as we read in:

Weekly Midrash, vol. 1, pg 193:
Joseph did not want to lie with her in This World, and then again be her companion in the World to Come. For he who lies with another man’s wife goes to Gehinnom together with her.

Now, Gehinnom is a Hebrew word that has the same connotative meaning as the word, “hell.” It is a place of suffering and complete separation from the L-RD. And unlike the popular Hollywood images of hell today, there is no aspect of Gehinnom that is desirable or fun. It’s not a party.

Yet is a fear of hell or punishment enough to banish temptation from anyone’s minds, young or old? In all honesty, that seldom works. If it did work, no child would ever grab a cookie from the cookie jar without permission – at least, they would not grab one the second time.

Could it be that Joseph’s ability to resist Potipher’s wife comes because of his deeply-rooted belief in the promises of the L-RD for his life? Let’s remember that from an early age, Joseph has received prophetic promises from the L-RD, dreams that depict him at being destined for great things. These are the dreams that caused his brothers to be so jealous of him that they sold him into slavery in the first place. Yet despite being sold into slavery, being moved to Egypt against his will, and serving in the house of a man who did not worship the same God Joseph worshipped, he does not allow bitterness and disillusionment to overcome him. He clings to the promises of the L-RD on his life, even when his life circumstances seem to be leading him further away from fulfillment of those promises.

So the question is, can promises of a desirable future motivate young people to put aside distracting influences in order to achieve a goal? I believe so.

In fact, the examples are many. One need only study the lives of dedicated Olympic and professional athletes to find examples of sacrificing the pleasures of the moment to achieve a desirable goal. The top achievers in athletics seldom have prolific romantic and social lives; they seldom have additional hobbies and outside interests; they remained focused on achieving their goal to the exclusion of such distractions.

Certainly, not all athletes pull this off. Tales of those who get in trouble with drugs or sex and other distractions abound. You can read about it on just about any sports page. And yet, these distractions either are not found in the lives of the top athletes, or such distractions creep in after they’ve achieved the top level of success and they no longer feel challenged.

In a similar way, one could view Joseph’s focus on God’s promises for his life as being analogous to the young woman who practices for hours on end, each day, in order to make the U.S. Olympic gymnastics team; or the young man who “doesn’t have time for parties and girlfriends” because he’s so focused in making it to the NFL or the NBA.

God has set lofty promises before Joseph and, like a dedicated athlete, when the distraction of sexual temptation comes to him in the form of Potipher’s wife, Joseph so desires the goal God has promised him, he has no time for, nor interest in, the distraction that could keep him from achieving that goal.

I believe this focus on God’s promises is what gives even a young man like Joseph the ability to say no to temptation. And he doesn’t just say no once, does he? No, the Torah teaches that Potipher’s wife sought him out daily, trying to tempt him, hoping to catch him in a weak moment.

You know, much is made of “weak moments.” They are a frequent excuse given by those who give in to temptation. “Oh, I wouldn’t normally do that, but I was caught in a weak moment.” Joseph avoids such a weak moment, but how?

I believe a lot of it has to do with how he avoids temptation. Already we’ve read that Joseph avoided even “being with her.” He tried to avoid being alone with her, even though she was his master’s wife. And there’s more to his strategy of resistance. Let’s read on in:

Genesis 39:11-12
One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. She caught him by his cloak and said, “Come to bed with me!” But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house.

So there we have it, the moment in this entire episode during which even well-intentioned young people could fall back into the excuse of having a weak moment, and allow themselves to give in to temptation. The Torah tells us Joseph was on the job and none of the other servants were there that day. In all the other circumstances, Potipher’s wife had approached him while others were around, and the fear of discovery could have been a sobering factor.

But now, that excuse is gone. There is no one else to see them, no one who could discover them; it’s just Joseph and Potipher’s wife, all alone in the house. And she doesn’t merely proposition him, but grabs him by his clothing, an aggressive gesture meant to control Joseph.

So does he surrender to temptation? No, Joseph is still valuing the promises of the L-RD over a temporary moment of pleasure with another man’s wife. So what’s his response?

Does he spend time sharing about the plan of God for her life out of the Torah?

Does he offer to pray with her?

Does he say no, but stick around and allow her to continue grabbing at him?

No! He does none of these things! What does he do? He flees! He runs! He gets himself out of the house entirely!

And he flees so eagerly, he doesn’t even care when Potipher’s wife doesn’t let go of his cloak! In fact, we’re told his cloak is ripped off his body and he still runs away!

You see, too often people resist sin only half-heartedly. They say they want to choose the path of righteousness, but they keep themselves in the path of temptation, rather than getting out of its way. In fact, some believers consider it a form of proving their character to plunge themselves right into the middle of temptation and then try to resist it.

In the middle of the third century of the Common Era, one Byzantine community of believers was discovered testing their level of purity by having single men and women, including a bishop, sleep and cohabit together without having sex. Cyprian condemned the practice and put an end to it, but it is still considered an ideal in the minds of some ascetic-minded people, even though the results of such a foolish test is often out-of-wedlock pregnancies, rather than spiritual growth.

And we see a similar lack of wisdom today? New believers are often rescued by the L-RD out of habitual sins, such as drinking, and yet, in their zeal to share their newfound faith, where is the first place they want to go? Back to the bars to share their faith, when that’s the last place they should be!

That’s not the Torah’s advice for avoiding temptation, is it? What does the Bible say?

1 Corinthians 6:18
Flee sexual immorality.

In the L-RD’s Prayer, Yeshua tells us to pray, “Lead us not into temptation.” Does God lead us into temptation? No, but he does lead us out! We either lead ourselves into temptation, or we flee it. That’s how Joseph avoided sexual immorality with Potipher’s wife. He didn’t stick around to prove he was super-spiritual or especially holy. He knew he was as prone to temptation as anyone… so he ran the other way.

Of course, choosing righteousness rarely is rewarded by the world, and we all know how Joseph’s story plays out. Despite doing the right thing, a false accusation is made against him by the spurned wife of Potipher, and he’s jailed for doing the very thing he made sure not to do!

Some would say his comfort is in knowing this accusation is false, but does Joseph alone know the truth, apart from God? Perhaps not. The crime Joseph was accused of was usually punishable by death, yet Joseph is only jailed. Why?

Here’s a clue from the:

Weekly Midrash, vol. 1, pg 194:
Chizkuni writes: Why did they not put him to death? Because there were no witnesses.

Had Joseph given into temptation, none of the promises the L-RD had made to him would have been fulfilled through Joseph. The L-RD would have found another way. By fleeing temptation, Joseph proves even a hormonal teenage male can obey the L-RD and not submit to temptation. By obeying the L-RD, his life became a shining example, and indeed, our best shadow of the promised Messiah – the Messiah Yeshua.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Torah commentary, VaYeshev
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

Parables parables parables

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

While I have been saying for a while that I believe the theme for my upcoming two-part sermon (and the other than that will be a condensed form of the same message) might be Making It Real, I’m not closing in on writing time for these messages and I now believe my topic, while still thematically linked to that idea, will revolve around a pair of parables from Rabbi Yeshua himself.

Of course, parables are tricky things, so this is no small undertaking, but I like the idea of drawing the message out of these parables, rather than imposing a theme and searching for support. So this is probably the way I’ll be going.

Here’s a preview: one of my messages will focus in on the parable of the talents; the other may focus on the parable of the debtor. Unless the Ru’ach haKodesh guides me otherwise, of course.

Tags: parables, Rabbi Yeshua
Posted in parables, Torah | No Comments »

Final commentary before I write my sermons nearly done

Monday, November 30th, 2009

I have one more commentary to finish writing before I can dig into my sermons, and it’s nearly done! In fact, were I not blogging tonight – which I need to since it’s deadline week – I would have finished it by now.

One of the things I enjoy is the chance to teach the same topic again from a different emphasis. This final Torah portion I’m teaching before writing my sermons is like that.

I taught this portion last year and focused on the shadows of Messiah found in the life of Joseph. This year, I’m focusing on what we can learn from Joseph when it comes to resisting temptation; not just that he does it, but how he does it.

I’m still leaning toward my sermons focusing on the topic of Making It Real, but I’m remaining open in my prayer life for the L-RD to direct me to another topic if He wishes. We should know soon.

Tags: sermons, Torah commentaries
Posted in shabbat, Torah | No Comments »

My 2009 VaYetze Commentary

Monday, November 30th, 2009

If you’ve come seeking Torah wisdom, settle down and read my 2009 Torah commentary on VaYetze. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for today is VaYetze, a Hebrew word that means “And he went out.” It covers Genesis chapter 28, verse 10 through chapter 32, verse 2. This is another Torah portion rich in narrative, symbolism and meaning, and what I’d like to concentrate on is Jacob’s relationship to Leah and Rachel.

As we recall from last week’s Torah reading, Jacob has triumphed over his brother Esau, Rebekah learned that Esau sought to kill Jacob as soon as Isaac was gone, and so both Isaac and Rebekah urged Jacob to leave the area until Esau has forgiven him, and not to take a wife from among the Hittites, as Esau had done, but to return to the family of Rebekah, to her brother – Jacob’s uncle – who has two daughters.

So, as we begin this week’s reading, Jacob has traveled east, beyond the land promised to Abraham, and as Jacob enters the lands where his grandfather Abraham once dwelled, we read this in:

Genesis 29:1-3
Then Jacob continued on his journey and came to the land of the eastern peoples. There he saw a well in the field, with three flocks of sheep lying near it because the flocks were watered from that well. The stone over the mouth of the well was large. When all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone away from the well’s mouth and water the sheep. Then they would return the stone to its place over the mouth of the well.

Jacob has come to the lands belonging to Laban, his mother’s brother, and I find it interesting that what he encounters are sheep, and a well, covered with a stone that must be rolled away for the water to flow. Let’s read on:

Genesis 29:7-8
“Look,” he [Jacob] said, “the sun is still high; it is not time for the flocks to be gathered. Water the sheep and take them back to pasture.” “We can’t,” they replied, “until all the flocks are gathered and the stone has been rolled away from the mouth of the well. Then we will water the sheep.”

Now, on the pashat – the literal level – this is simply what is happening as Jacob enters the land of his mother’s brother, the lands of Laban. Yet I believe that as we begin to search for the sod – the deeper meaning, and begin to remez – to see what this passage brings to mind, we’ll find much more going on in these seemingly mundane actions.

So on seeing what is before him, what does Jacob say? It’s not time for the flocks to be gathered. Water them and send them back out into the fields. But this cannot be, he is told, until what else happens? Until the stone is rolled away. Only then can there be access to the water, and the sheep need to be watered before they can be sent back into the field.

From a Messianic mindset, this entire passage is highly suggestive of the first appearance of Messiah. When Jacob sees the flocks being gathered, he says it is not yet time for them to be gathered. This should remind us of how the Jewish people of the first century were looking for the appearance of the Messiah, and expecting an earthly deliverance – the establishment of an earthly kingdom with Messiah as king. In other words, they were expecting to be gathered and delivered but, as Jacob points out, from the L-RD’s perspective the sun was still high in the sky, the day not yet over, and there was more work yet to be done in the fields.

Would the appearance of Messiah in the first century be the right time to expect Messiah’s earthly reign? No.

Even rabbinic tradition teaches about the seven thousand year plan of the L-RD for His creation; in the first century, they were completing the fourth day of that plan, the fourth one-thousand-year period, and bringing to an end a two-thousand year period the Sages described as the Era of Instruction. And since there was another two thousand year period remaining – the Era of Messiah or Salvation – we can look at Jacob’s words here as a gentle reminder of that.

Yet what ushers in the Messianic era? That is alluded to here as well. “We can’t,” they replied, “until all the flocks are gathered and the stone is rolled away … then we will water the sheep.” Does this align with what we know of Messiah’s time? It does. Under Roman rule, nearly the entire world was under one authority and all the nations to which the tribes of Israel had scattered spoke a common language. So, in a sense, the flocks were gathered; yet that alone was not enough. What else had to happen? The stone had to be rolled away. This clearly alludes to Messiah’s resurrection from the dead.

And what would these conditions being met allow? For the flocks to be watered – refreshed. And then what? Sent back out into the fields. In the same way, Yeshua’s time on earth was a time of refreshing for the people of the L-RD, a long-awaited fulfillment, and something that empowered those who clung to the Messiah – the Living Torah of the L-RD – to complete the work ahead, the work of the dawning Messianic era.

Taken to its deeper meaning and its allusions to Messiah, this seemingly mundane moment from the life of Jacob is suddenly filled up with new meaning and significance. And there’s more to come, as we read on in:

Genesis 29:9-11
While he was still talking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. When Jacob saw Rachel daughter of Laban, his mother’s brother, and Laban’s sheep, he went over and rolled the stone away from the mouth of the well and watered his uncle’s sheep. Then Jacob kissed Rachel and began to weep aloud.

Here, Rachel becomes an allusion to Messiah – the Great Shepherd. As she arrives with her father’s sheep – an allusion to those who trust in the shepherd and who belong to the father of the shepherd – this is just rich, isn’t it? – what is Jacob’s response? In this Torah picture, Jacob represents Israel, eagerly rolling the stone away and embracing the Messiah, weeping for joy at Messiah’s arrival.

Now, I’d like to move on to another part of this week’s portion, and explore another part of Jacob’s life and relationship with his wives; we’ll find that it paints a different Torah picture than this one, but one that is still important to notice. Let’s move on to:

Genesis 29:16-17
Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah had weak eyes, but Rachel was lovely in form, and beautiful.

Now many people have speculated as to what is meant when the Torah describes Leah as having weak eyes. Some Bible encyclopedias will talk about poor eyesight being a blemish according to the Near Eastern standards for beauty. Rabbi Stan has suggested it might be an indirect way of saying that Leah was “hard on the eyes.” And one Jewish midrash I read suggested that there had been an original plan between Rebecca and Laban to have Rachel given to Jacob, while Leah, the older of the two sisters, would be given to Esau, the older of the two brothers; as the midrash explains, Leah’s eyes had grown weak from a lifetime of weeping over her fate, horrified she should be promised to such a corrupt man as Esau.

But let’s see what exactly “weak eyes” means in Hebrew. There are two words that represent the concept translated as weak eyes; they are rak and ’ayin. Here’s the insights we gain from the Strong’s:

STRONG’S H7390 rak {rak}
• AV – tender 9, soft 3, fainthearted + 03824 1, one 1, weak 1, tenderhearted + 03824 1; 16
• 1) tender, soft, delicate, weak 1a) tender, delicate (of flesh) 1b) weak of heart, timid 1c) soft (of words) 1c1) gentle words (subst)

STRONG’S H5869 `ayin {ah’-yin}
• AV – eye 495, sight 216, seem 19, colour 12, fountain 11, well 11, face 10, pleased + 03190 10, presence 8, displeased + 03415 8, before 8, pleased + 03474 4, conceit 4, think 4, misc 66; 887

The most common definitions of both words would give us the rough translation of “tender-eyes” or “delicate eyes.” So perhaps this suggests vision impairment. But some of the alternate definitions could suggest here a timid presence; perhaps she was painfully shy.

One possibility I like is that she had a gentle conceit – suggesting humility. And this interpretation would make sense, because although she is not loved, each time she bears Jacob a child, she expresses her hope that maybe this time, she’ll capture her husband’s devotion. Even when that doesn’t seem to happen, she bears the pain of his love for her sister Rachel in relative silence. That would suggest a gentle conceit.
And there’s another possibility.

Growing up, I often would rush home from school to watch my favorite after-school TV show – reruns of Gilligan’s Island, which ran for several years in syndication back then. Anyone who has seen that show will remember that there are two younger women among the castaways; Ginger, the movie star, and MaryAnn, the Kansas farm girl. Now Ginger was the eye-catching beauty on the show; the one everyone would notice first. But as you watched, you began to realize it was humble MaryAnn who seemed more pleasant to be around.

Perhaps that is what the Torah is also telling us about Leah and Rachel; while Rachel is an eye-catcher, could it be that Leah is actually the better wife?

Let’s explore this further and more deeply, because there’s some significance here beyond the debate over which sister – Leah or Rachel – was cuter. So let’s read on in:

Genesis 29:18-20
Jacob was in love with Rachel and said, “I’ll work for you seven years in return for your younger daughter Rachel.” Laban said, “It’s better that I give her to you than to some other man. Stay here with me.” So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.

So, it’s obvious Jacob was in love with Rachel first and foremost. And anyone who has read the parashah knows how the story plays out; after working for Laban for seven years, Jacob ends up with Leah as his wife, rather than Rachel. When he confronts Laban about the deception, Laban gives him this evocative explanation in:

Genesis 29:26-28
Laban replied, “It is not our custom here to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one. Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” And Jacob did so. He finished the week with Leah, and then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife.

Whenever one encounters sevens in Torah, it is significant and naturally brings to mind the time of Jacob’s Trouble. Here, we are told Jacob should finish his bridal week with Leah, then he can have Rachel, his desired bride, in exchange for seven more years of work.

In this Torah picture, Leah becomes representative of those who come to faith in Messiah before the time of Jacob’s trouble – the tribulation period of Revelation – who are taken in the catching away of the righteous to the wedding supper of the Lamb. Jacob becomes the shadow of Messiah, desiring the bride promised to him. Rachel is representative of the Tribulation saints, but especially of the fullness of Israel, those who recognize Messiah after the catching away of the righteous; they endure the time of Jacob’s trouble, but are ultimately united with their bridegroom, the Messiah Yeshua. The wedding week of Leah alludes to the seven year period of Jacob’s trouble at the end of the sixth millennium; the additional seven years of work for Rachel alludes also to this.

Now, one can overthink such Torah pictures. For example, does Rachel’s theft of her father’s household gods allude if Israel’s unfaithfulness to the L-RD or not? Does Leah’s vast fertility – she personally bears half of the twelve tribes of Israel – signify that the pre-Jacob’s Trouble believers are superior to those who come to faith in Messiah in that time, or simply that they had longer to work in the field, as in the parable Yeshua told of those who labored in the final hour of the day were paid the same as those who labored from the start of the day?

When considering these questions, we must always keep in mind that these are shadows, not fulfillments; they are the lives of real people, as well as allusions to future events. Because of this, not all details may fit; but that is the way of shadows, as compared to the reliable consistency of our Fulfilled Promise, the Messiah Yeshua.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Torah commentary, VaYetze
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

My 2009 Toldot Commentary

Thursday, November 26th, 2009

Here’s my commentary on Toldot. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for today is Toldot, a Hebrew word that means “generations,” and covers Genesis chapter 25, verse 19 through chapter 28, verse 9. Now, this week’s Torah portion is rich with events that are deep, meaningful, full of symbolism and significance. We witness the birth of the twins who are so unlike each other – Esau and Jacob – and their struggle with each other for position from their birth well into their adult lives. And while there is a lot to learn from their story, today I would like to concentrate on a less explored and often overlooked aspect of this week’s Torah portion.

The situation I would like to spend our time on today begins in:

Genesis 26:7-11
When the men of that place asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” because he was afraid to say, “She is my wife.” He thought, “The men of this place might kill me on account of Rebekah, because she is beautiful.” When Isaac had been there a long time, Abimelech king of the Philistines looked down from a window and saw Isaac caressing his wife Rebekah. So Abimelech summoned Isaac and said, “She is really your wife! Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’?” Isaac answered him, “Because I thought I might lose my life on account of her.” Then Abimelech said, “What is this you have done to us? One of the men might well have slept with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.” So Abimelech gave orders to all the people: “Anyone who molests this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.”

Now, does this story sound familiar at all? It should, because very similar episodes took place in the life of Isaac’s father, Abraham – not just once, but twice. In Genesis 12, Abram conspires with Sarai to tell the Egyptians he is her brother rather than her husband, because he fears they will kill him if he reveals himself as her husband rather than her brother, due to Sarai’s great beauty. Sure enough, Pharaoh abducts Sarai and attempts to take her as his wife, but the L-RD intervenes. The fact that Sarai was abducted despite Abram’s lie should have shown Abram that trusting in the L-RD, not in deception, was the key to his safety. After all, Abram’s lie did not prevent Sarai’s abduction, but it was the L-RD Himself who inflicted the house of Pharoah to prevent him from violating Sarai.

But did Abram learn his lesson? No, for in chapter 20, Abraham runs the same gambit while in Gerar. The leader there, Abimelech, responds more righteously than Pharaoh, but is offended by Abraham’s deception once he learns the truth.

So, lesson learned, right? No, for we see in this passage from Genesis 26 that Isaac has followed in the footsteps of his father Abraham, and tells Abimelech of Gerar that Rebecca is his sister and not his wife!

Now, this raises a lot of questions. Let’s begin with one of the simplest ones: who is this Abimelech, and just how old is this guy who is around long enough to be offered the same fib by both Abraham and Isaac, father and son? Well, we learn this from the:

Strong’s H0040 ‘Abiymelek
• Abimelech = “Melek is father” or “my father is king” 1) king of Gerar in Abraham’s time 2) king of Gath in David’s time; maybe title of Philistine kings

So, it could be that both Abraham and Isaac attempted the same deception on the same king of Gerar – for Abimelech was indeed a Philistine king – or, if the name is indeed a title rather than a name – like Pharaoh or Caesar – the perhaps Abraham and Isaac dealt with different men bearing the title of Abimelech – which means “my father is king.”

Now that this source of possible confusion is dealt with, let’s explore what this pattern teaches us. The pattern begins with Abraham, who lies not just once, but twice, about his wife being his sister. Of course, this is apparently a half-truth, for, as we read in:

Genesis 20:11-12
Abraham replied, “I said to myself, ‘There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.’ Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife.

So, Abraham’s wife was his half-sister; it wasn’t a complete lie, but it wasn’t exactly the truth, either. However, this is not the case with Isaac and Rebecca. You see, Abraham had a brother, Nahor, and with his wife, Milcah, they had a son, Bethuel. Rebekah was the daughter of Bethuel. That means she’s the daughter of Abraham’s brother’s son. So Bethuel is Isaac’s cousin, and therefore Bethuel’s daughter Rebekah is Isaac’s second cousin – I think. All that first cousin, second cousin stuff has always made my head hurt.

Anyway, what is clear is that Rebekah is definitely not Isaac’s sister, as he claims to Abimelech. So why would Isaac make this completely untrue claim, when at least in his father’s case the claim was partially true?

Well, we do know that much of what people learn about how to interact with others and how to get along in the world is learned first and often most powerfully by the example set by parents. This is supported by this passage from:

Exodus 34:6-7
And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The L-RD, the L-RD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.”

In this passage, where the L-RD is revealing his character to Moses, we see this phrase, that children are punished for the sins of the fathers for several generations from the original sin. A similar phrase shows up in the Ten Commands, which should tell us that the L-RD is sharing with us an important truth; and it’s a truth that goes against the conventional wisdom of the world: no sin is committed in a vacuum; it has consequences that can reverberate down throughout several generations.

The lie we too often tell ourselves when we allow ourselves to slip into a sinful choice is all too familiar, isn’t it? “Oh, well, no one will know. I’m only hurting myself.”

Yet that’s not the truth, is it? And it’s not just that the same sin is repeated, but it snowballs throughout the generations; it gets worse and worse and worse.

Consider the example of David, who is called a man after God’s own heart. His sin with Bathsheba was a major sin, but it was also one of the few times he did not obey the L-RD’s commands to that point in his life.

What was the cost to him? Most people would say that it’s the death of David and Bathsheba’s first-born son, the product of their initial, sinful union. But did it end there? No.

David’s core sins were wanting a woman who was not his wife, and committing murder to get her. Let’s look at David’s sons. One of them, Amnon, lusts after his own sister so much that he rapes her. In response, one of David’s other sons, Absalom, eventually kills Amnon out of a desire for vengeance that David never delivers himself. These are ripples of the same sins David committed, repeated in his sons, only magnified.

To this list, David’s son Solomon adds a sin of his own – worshipping false gods, despite ruling from Israel’s throne is wisdom and fairness and faith in the God of Israel for many of his years, because he disobeyed the L-RD when the L-RD told him not to take too many wives, for they would lead his heart astray and cause him to worship other gods.

By the time we get to the sons of Solomon, virtually none of them follow the L-RD, and sins like rape, murder and incest abound, as well as adding to that a split in the kingdom of Israel. It gets really messy quickly, doesn’t it? I think you get the idea.

And we can see this in our own lives and the lives of those we know, can’t we? A parent might read pornography; their child does that, plus is prone to affairs; the grandchild embraces even worse perversions.

Or perhaps a parent has an occasional drink or experiments with drugs; the child becomes a drunk or an addict and by the time the grandchildren grow up, there’s an unusual tendency toward all that and more – be it selling drugs or abusing loved ones. It continues and it snowballs if left unchecked.

Does the old excuse sound a little hollow yet? “Oh, no one will ever know. And besides, I’m only hurting myself.”

History argues against that; the Bible instructs against it. Abraham’s “little white lie” – telling a half-truth about how he was related to Sarah – is already turning into a full-fledged deception by the time his son, Isaac, is married. So, where does our help come from? Who can deliver us from this “body of sin and death?”

We read this cry for help in:

Psalm 79:8-9
Do not hold against us the sins of the fathers; may your mercy come quickly to meet us, for we are in desperate need. Help us, O God our Savior, for the glory of your name; deliver us and forgive our sins for Your name’s sake.

Those words are inspiring, especially for those of us who know Who our Savior, our Messiah, is. And the L-RD will indeed forgive us, just as He did David, just as He did Abraham and Isaac, just as He has throughout history.

Yet that inspiring Psalm was written by David who, although forgiven by God, saw so much generational corruption seep into the lives of his direct descendants. Sure, David is the “father” of Messiah Yeshua, but he is also the father of Amnon, Absalom and Solomon, isn’t he? What’s the missing element? Is it only trusting in Messiah Yeshua? After all, David lived generations before Yeshua; he didn’t have the Messiah like we do, right?

Not exactly. David had the promise of Messiah; the only difference between David and ourselves is that David looked forward to the promised Messiah, while we look back to the fulfilled promise of Messiah in the person of Yeshua.

So, what is the missing element? What can help us avoid David’s fate and escape our own generational curses? Well, notice that after David’s sin with Bathsheba, after losing his first son to her, his obedience begins to wane; by the time Amnon has raped his own half-sister, it is David’s lack of response, his lack of concern for judging Amnon that drives Absalom to murder. So could it be that he became less and less obedient to the Torah as time went on?

Gaining not just the forgiveness, but the favor of the L-RD has never been a mystery, it’s just challenging to live out, and a key reminder of how to gain the L-RD’s favor is found right here in this week’s parashah, as the L-RD speaks to Isaac in:

Genesis 26:3-5
Stay in this land for a while, and I will be with you and will bless you. For to you and your descendants I will give all these lands and will confirm the oath I swore to your father Abraham. I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because Abraham obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws.”

There it is. That’s the key. Abraham obeyed the L-RD and kept His requirements and commands, His decrees and laws. While we need the forgiveness offered by Yeshua’s sacrifice to make up for our failings, the only way to minimize our failings, and therefore minimize the generational curses we pass on to our children, is to pursue not just salvation, but holy living – sanctification – by seeking to embrace the Torah of God, which is the mind and will of the L-RD for our lives, the mind and will of our Living Torah, the Messiah Yeshua.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Toldot, Torah commentary
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

Two commentaries done, one more, plus sermons, remaining

Monday, November 16th, 2009

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have three commentaries and two sermons to write and deliver over the next few weeks. The progress report so far? I have two commentaries done or nearly done, one revving its engine, and then I’ll be free and clear to work on the sermons.

That’s a work load that makes me long for a retreat, at least in my daydreams. But even without that, it’s quite an honor to be entrusted with two sermons and three deliveries of said sermons by around the time of the first of the year.

I’m glad my prayer life is better now than it was a year ago, or I’d be more stressed out by this; as it is, the writing is going pretty smoothly, and feels like a natural outgrowth of the study and prayer involved. Praise the L-RD!

Tags: sermons, Torah commentaries
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

At least a one-month break!

Monday, October 19th, 2009

And with my commentary on B’resheet, I get about a one-month break from writing a Torah commentary every week! While the respite will indeed be a welcomed one, I am already studying for my next turn.

Normally that would come on November 7 with VaYera; this year, however, it will not be until November 28 with VaYetze. That’s because we’re having a combined service on November 7, so I won’t need to write one that week.

That means I have close to five weeks off now; time I can devote to other writing ventures. And then come back to Torah commentaries fresh and eager in about three weeks. The time to really study and pray deeper on one parashah will also be welcome!

The only down side is by the time I give my next Torah commentary, all of Minnesota will be likely covered in Christmas trees. Not a happy prospect for a Hanukkah celebrator such as myself, but oh well!

Tags: B'resheet, VaYetze
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

My 2009 B’resheet Commentary

Monday, October 19th, 2009

Here’s my commentary for this year on the parashah known as B’resheet. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for today is B’resheet, which means “in the beginning,” and covers Genesis chapter 1 through chapter 6, verse 8, and what I’d like to focus on today is the episode related in this Torah portion commonly referred to as “The Fall of Man.” Now you’re probably wondering, what is there that could possibly be found in the fall of man that’s new and interesting, right? I mean, after all, it’s one of the most told and re-told tales in all of Genesis. And the basics of the story are actually pretty simple and almost universally accepted.

As commonly told, the story goes like this: after God created Adam, he realized it wasn’t good for Adam to be alone, so he made Eve from Adam’s rib and, some time after that, the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden Honeycrisp apple, bringing sin into the world, and then Adam appears, sees what Eve has done and, in an act of selfless love for his wife, decided to eat it right along with her so they could be together. Then they all blame each other and God casts them out of the garden. That about the size of it?

Well, let me just say right now, there are a lot of misconceptions out there about this story of life in paradise, and I threw a few of the most common errors into that little summary. Now, let’s back up and see what B’resheet really teaches us about the fall of man, shall we?

One of the most important elements of the story of the fall happens before Eve is even in the Garden. We read this in:

Genesis 2:16-17
And the L-RD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.”

In another translation, that last phrase is rendered, “it will become certain that you will die.” I think that will be a helpful translation as we continue our study, so keep that in mind. Now, in the very next verse, we begin the account of how the L-RD formed Eve from one of Adam’s ribs; so let’s remember that this command about not eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil came before Eve was even formed. Sure, Adam and Eve were of one flesh and were together in the Garden with the L-RD for an unspecified period of time prior to the fall; but for now let’s just keep in mind that she wasn’t created yet when the original command was given.

So now, let’s take a closer look at the temptation and fall.

Genesis 3:1-3
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the L-RD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

Now, most people pay a lot of attention to the serpent’s question, trying to paint the ways in which he manipulated Eve. But that’s not what I want to focus on today. I want to focus on Eve’s response.

It’s a little different from the command the L-RD just gave, isn’t it? Remember, the L-RD said, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” But here, Eve states it slightly differently, doesn’t she? She says, “‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” Now, there are two major differences here, at the minimum. First, we get some new information; the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is located in the middle of the garden. But the L-RD’s original command was simply not to eat of the fruit of that tree. Yet when Eve recites the command back to the serpent, what happens? She adds something. “You must not eat of it, or touch it.” Hold on! Where did the “You must not touch it” come from?

To be completely honest, no one is sure. It’s not written about in the Torah. There is no indication in the Word of the L-RD. All we do know for certain is that when Eve recites the command of the L-RD to the serpent, it comes out differently than the way the L-RD actually said it.

Well, who can blame her, right? I mean, Eve wasn’t even there when the L-RD spoke the original command. Of course, Adam and she are echad once she is created as his wife, and they did have that time in the Garden with the L-RD before the fall. So what could have happened that the command of the L-RD became twisted and inaccurate? How could this extra phrase, “you must not touch it,” come into the picture? Well, there is a theory. Granted, a theory is not as reliable as Scripture by any means, but this one may be useful to us. We read this tradition in:

Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, vol. 1, p. 72
[Eve] spoke thus, because in [Adam’s] zeal to guard her against the transgressing of the Divine command, Adam had forbidden Eve to touch the tree, though God had mentioned only the eating the fruit.

So, according to this tradition, Adam had passed on the command of the L-RD to his wife himself; it did not get transmitted to Eve directly from the L-RD. And Adam chose not to trust his wife with the command exactly as it was given to him; instead, he did what? He added to the words the L-RD Himself had spoken.

Now, any parent will understand Adam’s motivation here. He was being protective. We do it to our own children all the time. We have a pot boiling on an open flame on the stove. We don’t want the child to burn their hand on the open flame, so we tell them, “Don’t touch the flame or you’ll burn your hand.” But then we think, wow, even letting them near the stove is dangerous. So them we tell them, “Don’t touch the stove.” But hey, we know how curious little kids are, so even letting them in the kitchen at all is risky. So we say, “Don’t come into the kitchen while I’m cooking.” Before you know it, we have grounded the child to his or her room because we’ve built so many protective fences around the actual threat. The worst part is, they don’t even know why they’re grounded to their room anymore.

But, Eve wasn’t a child, was she? She was supposed to be a suitable helpmate to Adam, and therefore he should have given her the command exactly as the L-RD had given it to him. But hey, Adam’s intentions were good, right? Well, let’s see if it worked! Let’s see if adding to the actual command of God produced a good result. We read this in:

Genesis 3:6
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Now, there’s a lot to deal with here. Let’s start with why Eve ate the fruit. The same tradition I read earlier from Ginzburg suggests that while he was beguiling her, the serpent pushed Eve into the tree and, when she didn’t die, the seed of doubt began to grow in her. I also think there’s a hint in the text of the Torah here that Eve touched the fruit before eating it, because how else could she “see that it was good.” Either way, once she touches the tree and does not die, doubt springs to life and she then has cause to doubt the rest of the L-RD’s command. After all, she had been taught that she could not even touch it and live, right? So when she does touch the fruit and there’s no lightning bolt from above… well, the door to deception is wide open, isn’t it?

But that’s not what God said. If you remember what I said was a preferred translation, the L-RD said that if they eat of it, it would… what? It would become certain that they would die. That doesn’t sound like immediate judgment, instant keeling over or the cliché lightning bolt from above. That’s not in God’s nature! He’s patient with us, wanting all of us to come to repentance.

One more point on the fall. Most people, when asked about the fall of man, will say, “Oh yeah, Eve really messed us up.” But is that what’s really going on here? Not at all. Remember how it was worded in the last part of verse eight. It reads, “She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.” See that? “Who was with her.” Adam didn’t show up after the fact. He was there the whole time. And they are echad. So they fell together, but that’s not how it’s remembered. People remember that Eve bit first and create this whole scenario about Adam showing up after the fact – but it’s not there in Scripture; just the opposite is written.

And Adam’s responsibility is, in some ways, even greater. He has the burden of headship in the marriage and it was his place to speak up in the middle of the serpent’s efforts to deceive, and put a stop to it. He didn’t do that. Adam could have stepped in and pointed out that touching the fruit was not part of the L-RD’s original command; for whatever reason, he also did not do that. And so we know how the story goes from there.

So let’s consider this idea of adding to the words of the L-RD. Does this remind you of anything else? Does it sound familiar at all? It should. For one thing, it should remind you of rabbinics. That is exactly what rabbinics is, what it does. This is testified to directly in the:

Babylonian Talmud, Avoth 1
Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the great synagogue. The latter used to say three things: be patient in [the administration of] justice, rear many disciples and make a fence round the Torah.

Now, we’ve all heard Stan use this quote and teach on it as the origin of the Oral Torah. If anyone has any doubt that how we interpret this passage is correct, one need look no further than a footnote in the Soncino Edition of the Babylonian Talmud regarding this very passage. It reads this way:

Babylonian Talmud, Avoth 1, footnote
The Torah is conceived as a garden and its precepts as precious plants. Such a garden is fenced round for the purpose of obviating wilful or even unintended damage. Likewise, the precepts of the Torah were to be ‘fenced’ round with additional inhibitions that should have the effect of preserving the original commandments from trespass.

You see, in their tradition about Adam adding to the words of the L-RD, the rabbis attempt to make Adam a hero of rabbinics. Even he, according to their teachings, saw the value in adding additional commands to the L-RD’s, to prevent violation of the actual command. But they overlook Adam’s results; the fall of man, the necessity of shedding blood for the remission of sins, the necessity of a Messiah to mend things between God and man. Why on earth would one want to continue doing something that didn’t work?

Yeshua Himself points this out, calling the Oral Torah a burden no one can bear, and saying that His burden, by comparison, is light. And what is Yeshua’s lighter burden? It is pure and simple obedience to the written Torah of God – the Word of God alone, and nothing more. Which is exactly what the Father had in mind from the beginning.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Adam and Eve, B'resheet, Torah commentary
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

My B’resheet Commentary for Simchat Torah

Friday, October 16th, 2009

Here’s my Torah commentary for Simchat Torah on B’resheet. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for today is B’resheet, which is a Hebrew word that means “in the beginning.” This portion covers Genesis chapter 1 through chapter 6, verse 8. This is perhaps the most well-read and familiar of all the parashahs of the Torah; yet it is also the focus of more questions and mysteries than any other parashah. For those who believe, the foundation of their faith often starts with the words, “In the beginning, God created.” Yet for those who do not believe, their questions and doubts begin with the very same words.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. God created. He created it all. While it may seem like a simple insight, it is also important. It is so important, in fact, that this is why so many Hebrew prayers and blessings begin with the words: baruch atah Adonai, eloheinu melech haOlam, which means, “Blessed are You, O L-RD, our God, creator of the universe.”

That is who God is. Our creator. Not only our creator, but the creator of everything, of all life. The L-RD is the creator, to borrow a book title from the late science fiction author and humorist Douglas Adams, of life, the universe, and everything.

The L-RD spoke, and everything that is came into existence, by the very power of Him speaking them. The L-RD utters ten phrases, and all that is, is. The interesting thing is, He did not need ten sayings to create it all; according to the Sages, as we find in:

Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, p. 49
With ten sayings God created the world, although a single saying would have sufficed God desired to make known how severe is the punishment to be meted out to the wicked, who destroy a world created with as many as ten sayings, and how goodly the reward destined for the righteous, who preserve a world created with as many as ten sayings.

While this insight into the ten sayings is interesting, what I believe is far more helpful is to realize that the first mention of Messiah comes not in the L-RD’s promises to Moses, nor his promises to Abraham, nor to Noah. The first mention of Messiah in the Torah comes as early as verse three, as we read:

Genesis 1:3
And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Where is Messiah in that verse? Why, in the reference to light! But don’t take just my word for it. Let’s take a look at this tradition from:

Weekly Midrash, vol. 1, p. 18
The Torah tells us, “God said, ‘Let there be light,’ to reveal that God will ultimately illuminate Israel with the light of the Mashiach, of whom it is written, “Arise, shine forth, for your light has come.” (Jeremiah 60:1) – the light being, of course, the Mashiach.

So, as we can see, the gospel writer John was not alone when he suggested that the Messiah and the Father were one eternally, present at creation and in the mind of the Father before time even began. In fact, there’s a striking similarity between how Moses begins Genesis, and how John begins his gospel, as we read in:

John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing made had being. In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not suppressed it.

Notice that John starts out with very much the same word as the book of Genesis… In the beginning, or, in Hebrew, b’resheet. So Genesis is indeed a book of beginnings. The beginning of the promise of Messiah; the beginning of time; the beginning of the world.

In this beginning, the L-RD labors for six days and then establishes the seventh day as a day of rest. It is not, as some would suggest, that the L-RD needed to rest. He was setting an example for us, and commanding us to observe the Sabbath day from the very beginning of time. More importantly, he was setting an example of Adam. And it’s important to realize that the Sabbath is here, commanded by the L-RD’s example from the beginning of time as a festival of the L-RD to be held on seventh day.

Now some people might say, “But the Sabbath belongs to the Jewish people!” In fact, I know of a Messianic teacher who promotes that very idea; he teaches that there are ten commands for those who are Jewish, and only nine for non-Jews because the Sabbath is for the Jews alone. Yet here we are in Genesis, nearly 2,000 years before the L-RD called out Abraham, long before Isaac and Jacob, long before there was a “children of Israel,” and even longer before Moses received the Torah on Sinai, and here is the L-RD setting the example of the Sabbath day for an audience of one – Adam.

And this seven day pattern, as it turns out, will repeat over and over again; it has a prophetic component because it is a shadow of the L-RD’s plan for His creation. Did you know that the Bible teaches, and even the rabbis teach, that there are only seven thousand years of time in God’s plan?

Now, of course, like so much of this parashah, that goes against the conventional wisdom of the world, against science, which teaches, as Carl Sagan once said, that the universe is “billions and billions” of years old.

Yet that is not what God teaches. Let’s look at this tradition from the:

Babylonian Talmud 97a
The school of Eliyyahu teaches: The world is to exist six thousand years. In the first two thousand there was desolation; two thousand years the Torah flourished; and the next two thousand years is the Messianic era,

And what of the last thousand years? That is also spoken of in the:

Babylonian Talmud 97a
One thousand years out of seven shall be fallow, as it is written, And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day,’

So you see, just as the work of God was over in six days, followed by a Sabbath day of rest, so too will the work of mankind last six thousand years, followed by one thousand years of Sabbath rest in which Messiah will reign and the L-RD will be exalted. We are given the key to unlocking this mystery in the word of:

II Peter 3:8
Moreover, dear friends, do not ignore this: with the L-RD, one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day

Now, some people get hung up on the details. They will zealously pour over this verse, for example, and try to extract a hidden meaning from the word “like” versus the word “is.” Or perhaps they will look too closely at Genesis 1:1 through 2:3, as well as Genesis 2:4 and what follows, and they will buy into the claim made by some teachers that there are two creation accounts in Genesis. Or maybe they’ll listen to someone on the radio, or read some Web site that claims to be Messianic – until you read what they teach, anyway – and they’ll try to determine between which two verses of Genesis the war in heaven occurred.

And the truth is, a lot of that stuff can be fascinating. But the truth is also this: none of that stuff is actually in Genesis. I’m concerned about teachers who have so much time on their hands that they have to dream up theories about what happened between the verses of the Torah, rather than prayerfully wrestling with the Torah itself. I’m concerned about teachers who study Torah so little that they would assume there are two creation stories in Genesis, rather than recognizing the style of Hebrew literature, which is not always linear and chronological as we think of it, but is often organized in more of a point-by-point way. First the L-RD, through Moses, gives us a broad summary of the creation, then he delves into the detail, repeating part of it.

This sort of carelessness in study and teaching is what leads to bad theology. It’s what leads to people putting more stock in myths than they do into the text of the Torah itself. In fact, it could almost be considered a form of idolatry, an idolatry of ideas rather than images or gods. The Torah is the Word of the L-RD, after all, and if we’d rather spend time debating whether Adam had a wife before Eve, rather than appreciating all the rich Messianic significance, instruction by example, and prophetic symbolism of the account of the creation of all that is, then perhaps our time is being invested in the wrong area.

That’s idolatry. We should be investing our time, our study and our prayer in the words of the L-RD, and not some fringe teacher’s flights of fancy. Anything else leads people astray from not only the Word of God, the Torah, but also the Living Word of God, Messiah Yeshua.

That’s what it’s all about, right? I know that’s what the study of Torah is all about for me.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: B'resheet, simchat torah
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

My 2009 commentary for Sukkot Day 1

Monday, October 5th, 2009

Here’s my commentary for Sukkot Day 1. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Our parashah for Sukkot Day One, covers Leviticus 22, verse 26, through chapter 23, verse 44, as well as Numbers 29, verses 12 through 16. This week’s portion focuses on the L-RD’s commanded feasts; His appointed times that we are to set aside as special, as times to spend with our Creator in worship, study and sacred assemblies. And of course, there is a special focus on the festival that begins today, Sukkot.

Now, the celebration of the L-RD’s appointed feasts is one of the elements that helps define us as a Messianic congregation. And most of us who come here from Christian church backgrounds know that not all believers are convinced that observing the feasts of the L-RD is something that applies to them. But what you may not know, unless you come here from a Jewish background, is that not all rabbis believe the feasts of the L-RD, God’s appointed times, are for everyone either.

As a matter of fact, I know of one Messianic teacher at least who teaches if you are Jewish, there are 10 Commands, but if you are a non-Jew, there are only nine commands you are to observe because observance of the L-RD’s Shabbat is only for the Jewish people. Yet is that what the Torah teaches? Let’s take a closer look at this week’s reading, from:

Leviticus 23:3
There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work; wherever you live, it is a Sabbath to the L-RD.

Pay attention to that last part and how it’s worded. Wherever you live it is a Sabbath to the L-RD. Wherever you live. Not just in Israel, not just in the Promised Land, but wherever you live, you are to do no work and observe the Sabbath. Does that sound like a command that is intended only for the Jewish people? No, of course not.

And in the feasts the L-RD commands to be observed, that is how he phrases it throughout the rest of this chapter. Wherever you live, do this. He often goes on to add, “this is a lasting ordinance for you, throughout all of your generations.”

So the case that is made that the festivals are not for non-Jews isn’t looking very good already. But especially with this week’s festival, with Sukkot, the case against non-Jewish believers not observing these feasts appointed by the L-RD breaks down entirely.

You see, to open up the meaning of this festival is to see clearly that the L-RD had more than just the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in mind. Let’s take a closer look at what the L-RD commands concerning Sukkot, starting in:

Leviticus 23:33-36
The L-RD said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘On the fifteenth day of the seventh month the L-RD’s Feast of Tabernacles begins, and it lasts for seven days. The first day is a sacred assembly; do no regular work. For seven days present offerings made to the L-RD by fire, and on the eighth day hold a sacred assembly and present an offering made to the L-RD by fire. It is the closing assembly; do no regular work.

So here the parameters of the festival are made clear, but let’s look as the details of the sacrifices required during the festival, which we read about in:

Numbers 29:13
Present an offering made by fire as an aroma pleasing to the L-RD, a burnt offering of thirteen young bulls, two rams and fourteen male lambs a year old, all without defect.

Now, each day of Sukkot, this offering is to be the same, with one exception: the number of young bulls required reduces by one every day of the festival. So on the second day, twelve bulls are to be offered, eleven on the third day, and so forth. By the time Sukkot is over, a total of 70 young bulls have been offered.

Why is this significant? Well, first we must understand who these bulls represent. When Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt, the sons of Israel are listed in Genesis and if you count them up, there are 70 in all. The L-RD also numbered the nations after the sons of Israel, and so at that time, there were 70 nations on the Earth. Obviously, there are many more than that today, but the numbering was done at the time of the migration of Israel into Egypt, so there are 70 nations.

We find this in Jewish tradition:

These seventy oxen corresponded to the seventy original nations of the world who descended from the sons of Noah, and who were the ancestors of all the nations till this day. Israel brought these sacrifices as an atonement for the nations of the world and in prayer for their well-being as well as for universal peace and harmony between them.

So here, we get our first confirmation about what the offering of these seventy bulls were about; it was an atonement for the nations of the world, and a prayer for peace and harmony between them. You know, another name for Sukkot is The Festival of Nations. Sukkot, in part, is about Israel making atonement to God on behalf of all the other nations on Earth! Now, granted, there are many levels of meaning to the festival of Sukkot and this is only one of them; however, I believe this makes clear the idea that the festivals were not declared by God to be only “by, about and for” the Jewish people alone.

Of course, it’s not as if involving the nations in this festival was repaid to the Jewish people by extra kindness or deference to them as a whole. As we read in:

B’midbar Rabbah 21
The Sages have said: ‘In place of my love they hate me, and I pray (for them), (Tehilim 109): You find that during the Festival, Israel offers You seventy oxen for the seventy nations. Israel says: Master of the Universe! Behold, we offer You seventy oxen in their behalf, and they should have loved us…instead–’in the place of my love they hate me.’

And that’s as true today as it was in the time of Jacob, isn’t it? How many of the nations today do you see lining up to bless Israel? How many of the nations today do you see lining up to curse Israel, or at least, to turn a deaf ear when others utter curses against her? Even our own country is now falling in line with this unfortunate tendency.

At a recent UN summit, Iranian President Mahmoud Achmadinijad spoke of Israel’s time “being short” and predicting Israel would “soon disappear off the map.” Yet did our government speak out against this rhetoric? Sadly, no. As the old saying goes, “No good deed goes unpunished.” Or, there’s Rabbi Stan’s version: “You have to pay for your good deeds.” This truth was also acknowledged by the sages, such as when:

Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Levi said
‘If the nations of the world would have known the value of the Temple for them, they would have surrounded it with fortresses in order to protect it. For it was of greater value for them than for Israel.
I believe that what this shows is that even some rabbinic traditions line up with what the Torah clearly states; that the feasts of the L-RD are to be observed as “eternal celebrations for you, through all your generations, no matter where you live.”

It also shows that Yeshua was not alone when he taught that we should love our enemies; after all, that’s what the feast of Sukkot essentially is – praying blessings and peace over the nations of the world, even when those nations are hostile toward Israel. It underlines the consistency of the message of the written Torah, and the Living Torah, Messiah Yeshua.

So we who are believers today, whether we come to Messiah from a Jewish or non-Jewish background, can have confidence that we are allowed, and even commanded by the L-RD, to observe His appointed times. The feast of Sukkot makes that clearer than perhaps any other festival, since a large part of the ceremony – the sacrifice of young bulls – is clearly dedicated to blessing the nations outside of Israel.

If the nations of the world had any sense, they would bless Israel in return, and seek for her the same sort of peace and blessing they are receiving as a result of the feast of Sukkot.

So as we begin this week of Sukkot, let us make this a part of our dedication to observing the L-RD’s festival. Let us pray not only for the peace of Jerusalem, but for a change of heart among the nations of the earth, that they would repent and seek to bless Israel as Israel blesses them, that they would pray for the peace of Israel as Israel prays for their peace. While that day has not yet come in fullness, may it come soon. If not in this world, then in the World to Come.

Shabbat Shalom.

Tags: Sukkot Day 1
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

A rotation is coming

Monday, September 28th, 2009

I’ve enjoyed the past several months doing the Torah commentaries every week at my congregation, but the most recent good news is that there is a rotation coming! That’s right, soon I’ll be sharing the Torah commentary duties with a couple other folks.

Some people might be disappointed, but not me; I’m in a Torah study with both of the people joining the rotation and I couldn’t be happier to see them taking on this challenge. It is nice to not have to write a commentary quite so often.

So, let’s see… less work for me, and joining forces with two good friends to share the duties with? I don’t see any negatives!

Tags: Torah commentaries
Posted in Torah | No Comments »

MessianicMusings.com

Archive for the ‘Torah’ Category

My 2010 Sh’mot Commentary

My 2009 VaYeshev Commentary

Parables parables parables

Final commentary before I write my sermons nearly done

My 2009 VaYetze Commentary

My 2009 Toldot Commentary

Two commentaries done, one more, plus sermons, remaining

At least a one-month break!

My 2009 B’resheet Commentary

My B’resheet Commentary for Simchat Torah

My 2009 commentary for Sukkot Day 1

A rotation is coming

Archives

Meta

MessianicMusings.com