Image 01

MessianicMusings.com

Not quite Jewish, not quite Christian … totally commited to Torah and Messiah Yeshua.

Posts Tagged ‘Torah’

Sermon, Part 1: Noach and the flood

Wednesday, November 12th, 2008

Some folks would rather do elliptical exercises than speak in public. Not me. I enjoy teaching and I enjoy Torah and I had a blast recently when I was able to deliver my first-ever full-length sermon. The topic was Noach and the flood. Here’s part 1 of that sermon. Or listen to it!

Shabbat Shalom.

Well, here we are, in the week of Noach. This is probably my second-favorite parashah of the entire Torah year. It’s a favorite because, when it’s properly understood, it explains so much about world history, as well as about God, and yet it is so often either misunderstood, or dismissed as a fictional parable. So I thought rather than trying to fit all my thoughts about Noach and the flood into my commentary tomorrow, that I would be better off teaching about that tonight, when we have more time and space to really dig in and study.

So tonight, we’re going to try and cover three main points. First, who was Noach? Second, what can we take away from the flood narrative? And third, what was the aftermath of this experience on Noach?

The reason I think it’s so important to really understand Noach and the flood is because, perhaps more than any portion of the Torah, aside from B’resheet – Genesis, this is a parashah that has been cited as a reason for unbelief. The origins of man, and the flood of Noach have long been a focal point for the sciences to attack and discredit the Bible, and to foster unbelief. Now, it may require faith to believe these early chapters of Genesis, but I hope, by the end of tonight, you’ll agree that it doesn’t have to be a blind faith.

So, who was Noach?

Well, let’s start with what the Torah says explicitly at the beginning of the parashah.

Genesis 6:9
Here is the history of Noach. In his generation, Noach was a man righteous and wholehearted; Noach walked with God.

That’s not much, is it? In fact, after saying here’s his history, we get all of 14 words. The rest of the passage defines Noach not by his history, but by his actions – specifically, how he responds to Adonai. Is this all we know of the man, Noach? Not at all.

In this picture we see the most popularly-accepted image of Noach. There he is, standing on the deck of the ark, releasing a dove. He’s old and wearing robes and looking a bit like a cross between a first-century high priest and a first-century citizen of Rome. In fact, some might suggest he bears a striking resemblance to Socrates or Plato.

Now, there are many things wrong with this image, and we’ll get to several of them tonight. But is that all we can know about Noach? Not yet. We have this, courtesy of the Jewish Dictionary:

JewishDictionary.org
Noah: Son of Lamech and the ninth in descent from Adam. In the midst of abounding corruption he alone was “righteous and blameless in his generations” and “walked with God” (Gen. 6:9). Hence, when all his contemporaries were doomed to perish by the divine judgment in punishment for their sins, he “found grace in the eyes of the Lord” (Gen. 6:8).

We also know that Noach’s grandfather was Methuselah, from the genealogy given earlier in B’resheet. Methuselah was the son of Enoch (or, Hanokh, according to the Complete Jewish Bible). And this is important to understand.

Here is what the Bible says about Noach’s great-grandfather, Enoch:

Genesis 5:21-25
Enoch lived sixty-five years and fathered Methuselah. After Methuselah was born, Enoch walked with God 300 years and had sons and daughters. In all, Enoch lived 365 years. Enoch walked with God, and then he wasn’t there, because God took him.

Enoch, to whom the book of Enoch is attributed, we are told that he walked with God, and then he wasn’t there because God took him. Can you imagine living so perfectly within God’s will, trusting in him so completely, that he would spare you from tasting death? Only two figures in the Tenakh are given this privilege: one is Enoch, and the other is the prophet Elijah.

So, while Noach was the only one righteous left on the Earth in his generation, we can see that walking with God was something that ran in his family line. A Jewish tradition about Methuselah says that Methuselah prayed for Adonai to bless his father, Enoch, and it was in part because of Methuselah’s selfless and righteous prayer that Enoch escaped death.

Let’s take a closer look at Noach’s family tree. Who among them did Noach know? Well, not Enoch. By the time of Noah’s birth, Enoch had been transmitted to paradise by Adonai for 69 years. So he didn’t know his great-grandfather.

Noach did, however, know his righteous grandfather, Methuselah. In fact, according to Jewish tradition, it was for Methuselah’s sake that the flood was delayed by Adonai until Noach reached his 600th year, and after Methuselah passed, there was a week of mourning allowed for his passing, and then the flood waters began to rise. If you look at the ages given for all of this, it works out. Methuselah did indeed die in the year of the flood.

What about Noach’s father, Lemekh? Well, Lemekh wasn’t around for any of it. He had Noach when he was 182 and lived for only 413 more years. Lemekh had been gone for 87 years when Noach was called by God to build the ark, and gone 187 years by the time the flood waters came upon the earth.

So from this, we learn that the line of the Messiah, from Adam to Noah, at this point is in trouble. By the time Noach is called by God the last righteous man on Earth, we can see that his father, Lemekh, is no longer alive and his grandfather, Methuselah, is a man of advanced years and, at the age of 869, is probably well beyond the task of repopulating the Earth.

Noach waited until nearly midlife to have his three sons at the age of 498, just before he was called by Adonai. With Noach being the only person in the line of Messiah of an age to father children, and the only righteous man left upon the Earth except perhaps for the aged Methuselah, who would not live to see the flood itself, Noach was indeed fit for the description the Torah gives him as “a man righteous and wholehearted.” Yet what is the true extent of Noach’s righteousness? Was Noach a man who could compare to Moshe or David? Or was he simply, “the best of a bad crop,” so to speak? This has been a topic of debate for generation upon generation of rabbis and Bible teachers, and opinions do vary.

Let’s take a look at what Louis Ginsberg had to say in his major work, The Legends of the Jews:

Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, vol. 1
It was by the grace of God, not on account of his merits, that Noah found shelter in the ark before the overwhelming force of the waters. Although he was better than his contemporaries, he was yet not worthy of having wonders done for his sake. He had so little faith that he did not enter the ark until the waters had risen to his knees.

Now, this is not a universally-held view of Noach by the rabbis. The Jewish Encyclopedia offers a wider variety of opinions.

JewishEncyclopedia.org
Although Noah is styled “a just man and perfect in his generations,” the degree of his righteousness is, nevertheless, much discussed by the Rabbis. Some of the latter think that Noah was a just man only in comparison with his generation, which was very wicked, but that he could not be compared with any of the other righteous men mentioned in the Bible. These same rabbis go still further and assert that Noah himself was included in the divine decree of destruction, but that he found grace in the eyes of the Lord for the sake of his descendants. Other rabbis, on the contrary, extol Noah’s righteousness, saying that his generation had no influence on him, and that had he lived in another generation, his righteousness would have been still more strongly marked (Sanh. 108a; Gen. R. xxx. 10) … Still, it is generally acknowledged that before the Flood, Noah was, by comparison with his contemporaries, a really upright man and a prophet.

So where do I come down in this debate? Well, my opinion is formed not from the arguments of various Rabbis and other Bible teachers, but from the actual words used in the text of the Torah.
In the case of both Noach and his great-grandfather Enoch, the same words are used. In English, they both are said to have “walked with God.”

This holds true in the Hebrew as well, as this entry from Strong’s will show:

01980 halak haw-lak’
1) to go, walk, come
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to go, walk, come, depart, proceed, move, go away
1a2) to die, to live, the manner of one’s life (fig.)
1c) (Hithpael)
1c1) to traverse
1c2) to walk about

I believe the wording here is intentional by Adonai. The same wording that was used to describe the life of Enoch, who walked so closely with God that he was spared physical death, is also used to describe Noach. Therefore, at least in the way he led his life before the flood, I do not believe that Noach’s righteousness was second-class in any regard. No one short of Yeshua could be said to have walked as closely with Adonai as did Enoch, and that’s who Noach is compared to here. That’s not second-class, only-by-comparison-to-his-generation righteousness. That’s the genuine article!

I also think this is borne out by Noah’s actions that follow in the rest of this parashah. For, as we read in:

Genesis 6:22
This is what Noach did; he did all that God ordered him to do.

And again in:

Genesis 7:5
Noach did all that ADONAI ordered him to do.

In fact, if Noach’s faith were so inferior, I doubt the author of the book of Hebrews would have honored him in the Faith Hall of Fame passage. As it is written:

Hebrews 11:7 (CJB)
By trusting, Noach, after receiving divine warning about things as yet unseen, was filled with holy fear and built an ark to save his household. Through this trusting, he put the world under condemnation and received the righteousness that comes from trusting.

Where the Stern edition uses the word trust, most traditional translations use the word “faith.” So at best, I think the more skeptical Rabbis have it half-right. Noach was indeed saved by faith, though the grace of Adonai; but this does not make his righteousness second-rate or lesser than other Biblical figures. For, as it is written:

Ephesians 2:8-9 (CJB)
For you have been delivered by grace through trusting, and even this is not your accomplishment but God’s gift. You were not delivered by your own actions; therefore no one should boast.

Therefore, Noach’s faith, his trust, are not that different from our own; where he differed is in the level of his obedience to Adonai’s directions. We can trust that these things were as true in Noach’s day as they are today, or in Yeshua’s time, for, as it is written:

Hebrews 13:8 (CJB)
Yeshua the Messiah is the same yesterday, today and forever.

One final thing we ought to know about Noach, before the flood. I mentioned it briefly earlier, and it is that Noach waited until midlife before having his children. Jewish tradition gives us a clue as to why:

Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, vol. 1
Noah had not married until he was four hundred and ninety-eight years old. Then the Lord had bidden him to take a wife unto himself. He had not desired to bring children into the world, seeing that they would all have to perish in the flood, and he had only three sons, born unto him shortly before the deluge came. God had given him so small a number of offspring that he might be spared the necessity of building the ark on an overlarge scale in case they turned out to be pious. And if not, if they, too, were depraved like the rest of their generation, [Noah’s] sorrow over their destruction would but be increased in proportion to their number.

As for who he married, the Jewish Encyclopedia sheds this light upon that topic:

JewishEncyclopedia.org
The “Sefer ha-Yashar” (l.c.) and Gen. R. (xxii. 4) both agree that Noah’s wife was called Naamah. According to the latter, she was the sister of Tubal-Cain (Gen. iv. 21); according to the former, she was a daughter of Enoch, and Noah married her when he was 498 years old. In the Book of Jubilees (Hebr. transl. by Rubin, iv. 46-47) Noah’s wife is referred to as “Emzara, daughter of Raki’el.” Emzara was his niece, and two years after their marriage bore him Shem.

Now, although Na’amah is the more widely accepted theory on who Noach’s wife was, I see potential problems with this identification. We must remember that Enoch, Noach’s great-grandfather, had been transmitted to heaven 69 years before Noach’s birth. Assuming the most optimistic circumstance – that Enoch and his wife had Na’amah just prior to his transmission to heaven – at best that means that Na’amah would have been 567 years old at the time Noach married her at the age of 498.
And that’s at best! In all likelihood, Na’amah would have been closer to 100 years older than Noach, and potentially nearing the end of her child-bearing years.

The book of Jubilees’ identification of a niece, Emzara, as his wife, may be a better fit, but in the end, the Torah simply does not identify her by name, so we cannot know who Noah’s wife might have been with any certainty.

Now that we understand who Noah was a bit better, let’s move on to the subject of the flood. Now, even Biblical minimalists are willing to concede that there MAY have been a man named Noach in history, but surely, they assert, the Bible has it wrong about the flood.

Sermon, Part 2: Noach and the flood

Wednesday, November 12th, 2008

Building an ark is a whole lot more complex than, say, building remote control helicopters, but then again, Noach was given 100 years to complete the project. Here’s Part 2 of my first-ever full-length sermon on Noach and the flood. Or listen to it!

Before we can address that, let us take a look at the conditions that surround Adonai’s decision to send a flood on the Earth. The Torah paints the picture this way in:

Genesis 6:11-13 (CJB)
The earth was corrupt before God, the earth was filled with violence. God saw the earth, and, yes, it was corrupt; for all living beings had corrupted their ways on the earth. God said to Noach, “The end of all living beings has come before me, for because of them the earth is filled with violence. I will destroy them along with the earth.

The part that stands out to me there is that violence is the reason cited by Adonai as his motive for sending such destruction on the Earth. Think about that. In our time, we have wars going on throughout the world, terrorist bombings, all sorts of violent crime from muggings to shootings and stabbings to rapes and other atrocities, more than we have time here tonight to name. As much evil as there is in the world today, yet Adonai is showing us mercy, but this generation of Noach’s, He destroyed. Was the level of violence then greater than it is now?

Some would argue, definitely not. That’s because there is a minority theory out there that the real reason behind the flood was not violence, but the presence of the Nephilim, which Simon spoke about last week. While there is some support for that as a contributing factor, I do not believe we can lay all the blame for the violence in the world at the feet of the Nephilim alone; if that were true, then Adonai would have found more righteous in the Earth than Noach alone.

One thing I find very important about the flood narrative, which also underlines Noah’s righteousness, is the parallel with the life if his great-grandfather, Enoch. Enoch walked with God, and as a result, was spared from physical death. Noach also walked with God, and it should be noted that by being selected by Adonai as the sole righteous person of his generation on the Earth, Noach was similarly spared from a type of physical death – in his case, death in the flood, rather than from all death.

Now, nearly all of us are familiar with the account of Adonai’s instructions to Noach on how to build the ark and what kinds of creatures, and how many of them, he was to gather together with him, so I’m going going to spend a lot of time on those details.

Instead, I want to focus on some issues I feel are often overlooked in relation to the flood. First, Adonai begins to establish his covenant with Noach before the first raindrop ever falls.

Genesis 6:18
But I will establish my covenant with you; you will come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife and your sons’ wives with you.

After the flood, Adonai reaffirms this covenant with Noach. As it is written in:

Genesis 9:8-11 (CJB)
God spoke to Noach and his sons with him; he said, “As for me––I am herewith establishing my covenant with you, with your descendants after you, and with every living creature that is with you–– the birds, the livestock and every wild animal with you, all going out of the ark, every animal on earth. I will establish my covenant with you that never again will all living beings be destroyed by the waters of a flood, and there will never again be a flood to destroy the earth.”

This covenant led to the establishment of the Noachide laws … those commands of God which are incumbent upon all mankind to obey, and not just Jews living in the land if Israel. According to the parashah and further explained in the Talmud, here are the seven Noachide laws:

Sanhedrin 58b
1. Do not murder.
2. Do not steal.
3. Do not worship false gods.
4. Do not be sexually immoral.
5. Do not eat a limb removed from a live animal.
6. Do not curse God.
7. Set up courts and bring offenders to justice.

These are the laws generally considered incumbent upon all humanity to obey, since all humanity is descended from Noach.

And now, to get back to the flood.

As I pointed out earlier, the flood has been a major bone of contention between believers and scientists ever since science arose. It is important to remember, however, that science is limited to the realm of the observable, and even in that arena, science can fall short if limited by a preconceived set of notions.

Let’s start with what the Bible teaches as true, as it relates to the flood itself. As it is written in:

Genesis 7:17-24 (CJB)
The flood was forty days on the earth; the water grew higher and floated the ark, so that it was lifted up off the earth. The water overflowed the earth and grew deeper, until the ark floated on the surface of the water. The water overpowered the earth mightily; all the high mountains under the entire sky were covered; the water covered the mountains by more than twenty–two–and–a–half feet. All living beings that moved on the earth perished––birds, livestock, other animals, insects, and every human being, everything in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life; whatever was on dry land died. He wiped out every living thing on the surface of the ground––not only human beings, but livestock, creeping animals and birds in the air. They were wiped out from the earth; only Noach was left, along with those who were with him in the ark. The water held power over the earth for 150 days.

Later, it is started in:

Genesis 8:13-14
By the first day of the first month of the 601st year the water had dried up from off the earth; so Noach removed the covering of the ark and looked; and, yes, the surface of the ground was dry. It was on the twenty–seventh day of the second month that the earth was dry.

This is what science has a problem with: that the entire earth flooded, and that it lasted a year.

Recently, the cable channel History International did a one-hour documentary called “The Real Noah.” In it, they put forward a theory completely in conflict with the Biblical account, but one which, apparently, science is willing to accept.

In the account, Noach is transformed into a Sumarian trader, famous for trading in livestock on a boat that goes up and down a major river in the Middle East. The massive ark of the Biblical account is traded in for an average trader’s vessel, and the flood little more than a localized anomaly that may have flooded several cities in a valley after the bursting of a natural dam. In this documentary, this Noah’s boat wasn’t large enough to carry more than Noah and a few animals – there would have been no room for his wife, sons and their wives at all. And the idea put forth by this so-called scientific and historical Noah is that his legend grew in the retelling and retelling, until this small flood he weathered became the Biblical account we are familiar with.

Of course, it’s all nonsense. And I’m not the only one to say so. In his book, The Bible Has the Answers, Dr. Henry Morris puts it this way:

Dr. Henry Morris, The Bible Has the Answers
In fact, the ark was so commodious that the whole story makes sense only if the Flood were a universal flood. The ark was far too large for only local animals. For that matter, if the Flood were only local, no ark would have been needed at all! The problem of preserving human and animal life could have been solved far more easily by merely moving out of the endangered flood plains.

If one doubts that the flood was deep enough to cause th cessation of all life from the earth, a tradition from the Rabbis has it covered. We read in:

Sanhedrin 108
The generation of the Flood was judged with boiling water.

Now, this is where it gets kind of interesting. Science claims an Earth that is billions of years old and affected by an ice age, right? Yet is this an observable truth? Or simply a way of reinterpreting the facts in a way that cuts God out of the picture?

Let me start with the example of the dinosaur and the dragon. For millennia, people have told tales of dragons – which at their core are large lizards that at one time roamed the earth. Science calls belief in dragons superstitious nonsense. And we all know that the Bible does refer to dragons, as well, if only as an image of haSatan. However, when the fossil record reveals the existence of giant, lizard-like creatures, what do they do? They invent a new word: dinosaur.

Yet according to Merriam-Webster’s Online dictionary, the term dinosaur was coined in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen, a Victorian-era anatomist; he combined two Greek words, “deinos,” meaning “terrible,” and “sauros,” meaning “lizard,” to create the word. Suddenly confronted with evidence of giant, lizard-like creatures, do scientists admit the Bible is correct? No! They create a new word and suddenly belief in dinosaurs is scientific, but belief in dragons is not! But really, it’s just looking at the same information in two different ways.

I would like to offer the idea that it is the same way with the flood. Science finds polar ice caps, these huge blocks of ice; they find woolly mammoths in these icebergs – like the one shown here:

Often, such creatures are found frozen standing completely upright, in poses that do not indicate freezing to death, as the theory of Ice Ages would have us believe, but poses which would seem to indicate… drowning.

Now think about it: a flood covers the entire Earth. The destruction is vast and radically changes the entire face of the Earth, possibly even tearing continents apart. In fact, the theory of one pre-flood supercontinent, Pangaea, which was followed by the breaking up of the lands into the modern continents, was a theory first put forward by scientists who believed the Biblical account.

This slide shows how the sons of Noach may have spread out after the flood, before the continents separated completely, to populate the entire Earth. Consider the jutting mountains and deep valleys we now enjoy. What is the better explanation for them: a slow, centuries-long ice age process? Or a sudden and terrible worldwide deluge?

This may sound strange to many of you, but that’s because we live in a society trained from the earliest ages to look as the data in one way: the way of science. What I submit to you about the flood of Noach is not an insistence that you must believe it occurred contrary to all the evidence, but that it is possible to believe not only that it occurred, but that the evidence is there, but has been misinterpreted by a scientific culture bent on disproving the truth of Adonai’s Torah.

It’s food for thought and my only hope is that if you happen to be someone who believes in evolution, that this will at least pique your curiosity about whether there’s another way to interpret observable data.

Now we move into our third point: the effect of the flood on Noach. One thing we can be sure of is that, however wicked was the generation from which Noach emerged, it could not have been an easy thing to witness their total destruction. We get this insight from:

Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible
The narrative is vivid and forcible, though entirely wanting in that sort of description which in a modern historian or poet would have occupied the largest space. We see nothing of the death-struggle; we hear not the cry of despair; we are not called upon to witness the frantic agony of husband and wife, and parent and child, as they fled in terror before the rising waters. Nor is a word said of the sadness of the one righteous man who, safe himself, looked upon the destruction which he could not avert. But an impression is left upon the mind with peculiar vividness from the very simplicity of the narrative, and it is that of utter desolation.

Certainly being witness to such a tremendous loss of life – like none the world has known before or since, must have had a great impact on Noach – an impact that could not be explained by a mere local flood. Louis Ginsberg offers this insight from the Sages:

Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, vol. 1
When he stepped out from the ark into the open, he began to weep bitterly at sight of the enormous ravages wrought by the flood, and he said to God: “O Lord of the world! Thou art called the Merciful, and Thou shouldst have had mercy upon Thy creatures.” God answered, and said: “O thou foolish shepherd, now thou speakest to Me. Thou didst not so when I addressed kind words to thee, saying: ‘I saw thee as a righteous man and perfect in thy generation, and I will bring the flood upon the earth to destroy all flesh. Make an ark for thyself of gopher wood.’ Thus spake I to thee, telling thee all these circumstances, that thou might entreat mercy for the earth. But thou, as soon as thou didst hear that thou wouldst be rescued in the ark, thou didst not concern thyself about the ruin that would strike the earth. Thou didst but build an ark for thyself, in which thou was saved. Now that the earth is wasted, thou openest thy mouth to supplicate and pray.”

This guilt-trip by God is most likely a Rabbinic tradition meant to teach a point about showing mercy to others, rather than acting selflessly, for it does not portray Adonai in a way that would fit with the Torah. I would suspect these are the same Rabbis who view Noach’s righteousness as relative only to his generation, and being inferior of that to later Biblical figures.

Yet we do know something of how the flood affected Noach. As it is written in:

Genesis 9:20-21 (CJB)
Noach, a farmer, was the first to plant a vineyard. He drank so much of the wine that he got drunk and lay uncovered in his tent.

Now, in a way, although it is sinful, doesn’t that make sense? If anyone has ever had cause to suffer from the condition we today call “post-traumatic stress disorder,” it was Noach. Turning to drink is an example of that type of reaction.

There is also a measure of irony in Noach’s fate, if the traditions of the Rabbis are valid. Just as Noach became the second father of all humanity, after Adam, so too did he fall from grace in the same way. According to:

Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, vol. 1
This deterred Noah no more than did the example of Adam, whose fall had also been due to wine, for the forbidden fruit had been the grape, with which he had made himself drunk.

Most of us think of an apple when we think of the forbidden fruit, but here the possibility of the grape as the forbidden fruit offers an ironic counter-point to the story of Adam, and it underlines the need for the promised Messiah. For it shows that, however much he walked with God prior to the Flood, after Adonai wiped the slate clean, Noach proved no better an example than Adam. Even the most righteous of men were still subject to sin, unable to break those bonds on their own. We needed Adonai’s help. We needed Messiah Yeshua.

Now, what became of the Ark of Noach? It’s hard to say, although there are historical witnesses to it. Josephus confirms its existence in his day, though he pointed out that so many people were carrying off bits of the ark as souvenirs and amulets, they he was now nothing more than “remains,” and he was a late contemporary of the generation of Messiah Yeshua. The 13th-century explorer, Marco Polo, also claims to have seen it during his travels, although he said it is covered in snows that never completely melt. Either way, we know that the Torah says the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

What became of Noach?

Well, many legends, most of them probably false, surround his latter days. They include tales of him writing a series of testaments that did not survive ancient antiquity and, according to some, were destroyed with countless other ancient works when the ancient Library at Alexandria was destroyed.

Others insist he became the father of ancient medicine, writing a tome on the use of herbs and medicinal plants which, being passed down many generations formed the core of medical knowledge for doctors from India and Greece.

Are any of these legends true? Who knows? We do know Yeshua referred to him, so he must be an historical figure.

What we can know, what we can trust about our knowledge of Noach, is what the Torah clearly teaches. Whatever our traditions are, whatever we believe about Noach beyond the Torah, we know that he was in the line of Messiah Yeshua, and without Noach, none of us would be here today.
Shabbat Shalom.

B’resheet goes by so quickly

Sunday, October 19th, 2008

One of the exciting things about the book of B’resheet is that it contains some of the most vibrant history in all of the Torah. I mean, once we get past B’resheet (Genesis) and begin with the story of Moshe, that where we stay for the last four books of the Torah.

Of course, that’s understandable. They are the books of Moshe, collectively, and the giving of the Torah is central to any understanding of haShem. It’s completely appropriate, so don’t misunderstand.

But I do really enjoy this first book of the Torah quite a bit, because it’s so rich with the history of other key figures. The only down side is how quickly it all goes by, like the way an ephedra-free fat burner disposes of unwanted weight. I mean, in the parashah of B’resheet alone, the topic covered include creation, the fall of man and the first murder. Each could merit at least one sermon all by themselves, if not an entire teaching series.

It’s a rich book and goes by all too quickly, so I’m pleased we’re back around to it again, and pleased I have a chance to do a 30-minute or so sermon, as well as a 10-15-minute commentary to explore this rich section of the Torah in at least a little depth.

Messiah in the first few words

Sunday, October 19th, 2008

In the first few words of B’resheet, we are given our first glimpse of Messiah; even the Jewish sages agree upon this. When haShem spoke the universe into being, his first recorded words were, “Let there be light.”

Even Talmudic sources agree that this is a reference to the Messiah. While Adonai was indeed speaking creation into existence, he was also speaking prophetically about Messiah, who is often referred to as the Light of the world.

While messianic Judaism and mainstream Judaism differs on the point of who the Messiah was or is, there is unity in interpreting this passage as a messianic promise on behalf of haShem. One can be completely sober-minded (as opposed to a member of the wine of the month club) and find Messianic significance even here in the earliest passages of Scripture.

My 30-minute challenge

Sunday, October 19th, 2008

This week, I’m facing my newest challenge: composing my first-ever 30-minute sermon, to be delivered on Erev Shabbat Service this coming Friday. To keep things simple for me, Rabbi Stan has told me to simply expand on my Torah commentary for this coming Sabbath.

I’m blessed that it’s coming this particular week, as I’ll have a chance to cover one of the meatiest parashahs in the entire Torah cycle: B’resheet. This will give me a chance to talk about creation, the fall of man, and the first murder – the story of Cain and Abel.

What I would like to do, I think, is concentrate all 30 minutes on Friday on creation and the fall of man, and make the Torah commentary all about Cain and Abel. I’m not intimidated by the challenge of filling up all this time, but about keeping it all within the time limit, since these five-plus chapters of B’resheet are so full of meaning and significance, I could easily envision – someday – doing several weeks on just these passages alone.

I have plenty of textbooks and source material to draw from, ranging from intelligent design writings to the musings of the sages. I’m really looking forward to this one!

The father of Kayin?

Sunday, March 9th, 2008

While I have deep respect for the writings of the Sages, some of their ideas are more than a little “out there.” Take for example this teaching on the parentage of Kayin, (better known in English Bibles as Cain).

At least some of the Sages teach that Kayin was born by a post-fall of man encounter between Ishah (Eve) and the serpent. After being driven from the Garden, the serpent allegedly bedded Eve, with Kayin the result of their coupling, while Adam’s first child with Eve was Hevel (Abel). While that makes a fine alibi for the first murder (I can’t help it, the devil was my father!), my real problem with the tale is that nowhere in the B’reshit text is there any room or hint for such a thing to be even suggested.

Quite to the contrary, the text of B’reshit says that Adam and his wife had sexual relations and Kayin was their firstborn. Doesn’t get much more straight-forward than that. The rabbinic traditions surrounding the Torah is a rich tapestry of traditions, but not all traditions are created equal. Some are very nice insights into possibilities, while others – like this one – are flights of fancy that flat-out ignore the Torah text itself. Perhaps these ancient sages would have been helped by nice, modern dash kits to improve the lighting by which they read the Torah?

Relevancy of the Torah

Sunday, February 24th, 2008

Discerning the value of traditional teachings that are not part of scripture is not an easy task. As I write my 47 lessons of Torah, it would be easy to get lost in the traditional teachings of the Sages. However, only a small fraction of what is written has direct relevance to our purpose as a messianic congregation; even that aside, only a small fraction has relevance to issues that would shed light on these Torah lessons for my bar and bat mitzvah kids.

Of course, if anyone thinks it’s easy to teach 10-13-year-olds, I have some North Carolina land for sale. While I greatly enjoy it, it is a challenge to get kids at that age to pay attention enough to learn something, though it can be done.

Relevancy is the trick. So many lessons talk about adult concerns in their examples, rather than kids’ concerns. An illustration of how a certain passage of scripture relates to marriage or paying off a mortgage, for example, isn’t as relevant has an illustration that compares a certain passage to dealing with bullying or peer pressure, or making a choice between Bible study time and videogame time.

Yet even kid-appeal doesn’t guarantee relevancy. In writing my lesson on Genesis, I came across a writing of the sages that expands on the day of creation when all underwater life was brought forth by the words of Adonai our G-d. The passage was filled with stories of G-d creating monsters that could destroy the earth if he’d made more than one of them. Such a story from the sages would have held great youth appeal.

But the truth is, it’s complete legend, never mentioned directly in the passage we were studying and, therefore, problematic at best, if not downright confusing the mythology of Torah from the historical Torah passage itself. Better to leave such a story aside for an older, more discerning age. That was my feeling, anyway.

47 lessons of Torah

Sunday, February 24th, 2008

Picking out Nike golf clubs has to be a lot easier than writing a 47-lesson Torah cycle curriculum for my bar and bat mitzvah kids, and yet that is exactly the task I’ve taken on for the coming year. It will be quite a challenge. Not only must I study up on my Torah well enough to teach it, but I must study up on connections to the Brit haDasha as well as the writings of the Jewish sages, gathering the good from each source and discarding the not-so-good.

So far, I’m producing these lessons quite close to deadline. Uncomfortably close. I’m hoping to find a creative burst that will launch me 2-3 lessons ahead of deadline so I have more time to look at, pray over and consider the writing I am doing before having to finalize it.

Already, the rush has produced a possible oversight on my part. In my enthusiasm over the first two chapters of Genesis, I may have misinterpreted the order of events. My traditional understanding of Genesis is that on the sixth day of creation, Adonai’s work was devoted exclusively to the creation of humankind.

However, it appears the L-rd also created some other mammel life on the sixth day as well, a fact I didn’t catch until the lessons were already printed up. I was disappointed in myself, not because I expect to always be right, so much as I expect better results of myself than that.

Sure, I suppose the point might be open to some debate; but I think a clear reading of the text points out that it was simply an oversight on my part. Fortuantely, it’s a small one, easily corrected. If that’s the worst error I make over the next 46 lessons I must write, I’ll be doing well, I think.

Divinely inspired committee?

Thursday, February 7th, 2008

Rather than believing that Moshe wrote the five books of the Torah, the popular trend among so-called “serious” Bible scholars is to believe in fractional ownership of the Torah, with certain parts being attributed to between three to five authors – none of them Moshe himself. Of course, far be it from Bible scholars to posit any belief in the truthfulness of the document they claim to be experts in.

I’ve read their theories and ramblings, and I’m sorry, but I’m just not convinced. While they may be brilliant and creative minds, they’re just a bit too brilliant and creative for their own good. Considering all the evidence in light of the unique unity of Adonai’s written Word, the Torah, it is far easier for me to believe in an historic Moshe who wrote all, or at least 99 percent, of the books attributed to his authorship.

While scholars can imagine fanciful alternative scenarios, the bottom line is that there’s no solid proof for their theories any more than there is for the traditional line of thought that leads to Mosaic authorship. I think I’ll stick with the theory that’s stood the test of millenia, and not some Bible brainiac’s trendy theory, thanks.

The relevence of Torah to messianics

Monday, January 21st, 2008

In a recent column in the Jerusalem Post, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote the following:

The news, therefore, that a leading rabbinical court in Israel refused to allow into Judaism a Chabad-educated conversion candidate because he believed the Rebbe is the Messiah is deeply troubling and constitutes an act of serious contempt for a non-Jew who has made sacrifices to ally himself with the Jewish people. Comparing this with a Jew-for-Jesus wishing to convert is preposterous, given that Jews-for-Jesus believe in the divinity of Christ (which no one in Chabad would ever assert about the Rebbe) as well as the irrelevance of the Torah to modern times.

As a member of the Yeshua messianic movement, I would respectfully submit that Rabbi Boteach is not completely correct in his assessment that those who look to Yeshua as the promised messiah subscribe to the idea that the Torah is irrelevant to modern times. In fact, among the Yeshua messianic movement, it is our insistence in the very relevance of Torah, even today, that sets us apart from mainstream Christianity.

Prior to becoming messianic, the last two Christian churches I attended were almost exclusively “grace-based,” which in practice means that, when push came to shove, attendees of those churches tended to believe that as long as they were “covered by the blood of Jesus,” anything goes because it’s all forgiven anyway. “Grace covers all” was the watchword, and I increasingly found myself ill at ease with such a viewpoint.

Why would Adonai offer up the Ten Commandments, and indeed the whole of the Torah, if it were only “culturally relevant to the time and culture of Moshe, but ready to be cast aside upon the appearance of Yeshua in human history.” Even the teachings of Rabbi Shaul (Paul) indicated a deeper struggle against violating the standards of Torah than is found in modern, grace-based churches. Faith in Yeshua as messiah without a conviction in the relevance of Torah to modern times is like a faith on diet pills; it will always be found wanting.

The revelation I found in the Yeshua messianic movement is not relabeled, warmed-over Christianity with a dash of Judaism for flavor. On the contrary, it is an equal balance. Yes, we have a messiah whose grace covers our human failings and inability to live up to Adonai’s perfect standard for human behavior and, far too often, our failure to even live up to His minimum standard, set forth in Torah.

While such forgiveness is precious, it did not come cheaply and it must be remembered above all that Yeshua was not a revolutionary starting a new religion. Yeshua the messiah was a faithful Jew who lived blamelessly the standards set by Torah; if anyone wishes to emulate Yeshua, the Torah is the only place to go to discover how he lived righteously before Adonai, and therefore the Torah – the written Torah, at least – is more relevant in the life of a Yeshua messianic than any other document they could possibly read.

While rabbinic Jews and Yeshua messianic believers do part ways on some areas of interpretation and conviction, the relevance of Torah to modern times is not one of them. That said, I certainly look forward to a new season of Shalom In the Home and Rabbi Boteach’s new book, The Broken American Male and How to Fix Him.

How the Torah is a minimum standard

Sunday, January 13th, 2008

The teaching I’ve been sharing here recently, originating with my rabbi, Stan Farr, that Torah is G-d’s minimum standard – the point at which we fall short – should not be considered new or revolutionary to careful students of Torah and the teachings of messiah Yeshua. Whether young or old, healthy or in need of Medicare insurance, this is a teaching anyone can understand if they simply read what G-d’s Word has to say.

Let’s look at a relevant passage:

For I tell you that unless your righteousness is far greater than that of the Torah-teachers and P’rushim, you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven! You have heard that our fathers were told, ‘Do not murder,’ and that anyone who commits murder will be subject to judgment. But I tell you that anyone who nurses anger against his brother will be subject to judgment; that whoever calls his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing!’ will be brought before the Sanhedrin; that whoever says, ‘Fool!’ incurs the penalty of burning in the fire of Gei-Hinnom!
Matthew 5:20-22 (CJB / Stern)

Does this not make it clear that the Torah is but a minimum standard compared to G-d’s perfect standard of righteousness? Here, Yeshua references a simple commandment: You shall not murder. Does this mean that as long as we do not murder, we are living to G-d’s perfect standard of righteousness?

There are all manner of things, short of murder, that one can indulge in and steer clear of the letter of this commandment. One can sneer, despise, hate, plot against, assault, batter, disrespect and more – all without crossing the line into murder. Murder is the point at which we fail even G-d’s minimum standard, but a person who does not murder but indulges all that I have just named here is certainly not a master over their anger, are they?

That is Yeshua’s point. It is not merely rhetorical, to make a point, that Yeshua says that even saying, “Fool!” will put one in danger of the fires of hell. It is a real and serious communication by our messiah, from Adonai’s mouth to our ears. Yeshua is our perfect mediator between Adonai and us; we must listen to him and not write off such a serious message as hyperbole to make a point.

Our call is to love one another. Anything short of that is short of Adonai’s perfect standard for righteousness. The Torah, through valuable beyond words, is merely where the compromise between Adonai and us as to what the least we could do and still be within his favor is defined.

Bar and bat mitzvah, defined

Sunday, January 13th, 2008

First communion invitations are not a concern for messianics, as we do not celebrate such a thing; however, we do celebrate bar and bat mitzvah as our young boys and girls enter their teen years, so there is a parallel invitation need.

Bar mitzvah happens for boys around the time they turn 13; bat mitzvah happens for girls around the time they turn 12. What does this mean? Let’s break it down. Mitzvah is a word that traditionally means “commandment” in both Hebrew and Aramaic, although it can alternatively also be translated as “good deed” or “righteous act,” which are simply shadings of the same root meaning. “Bar” means “son of” in Aramaic and “bat” means “daughter of” in Aramaic. So, in essence, the celebration could be translated either, “son of the commandment,” or, more loosely, “son of righteousness.” Similarly with girls, it would be “daughter of the commandment” or “daughter of righteousness.”

Basically, it is a coming of age celebration, but with a spiritual connotation. From a messianic perspective, it celebrates the age of maturity, when young men and women have studied Torah enough to have their own basic understanding of sin and righteousness, so that they are without excuse. It celebrates the time at which young people must become responsible for their own behavior, choosing what is righteous and pleasing to Adonai over what us unrighteous and sinful.

It is not, as many messianics believe, a full license into adulthood. Children in their teen years are still in need of some direction and assistance in making their way through the challenges of life and becoming prepared for full adult responsibilities; all a bar or bat mitzvah signifies is that no longer can they claim they did not know right from wrong.