Q. There seems to be several groups that contended for the religious attention of the people in the New Testament. Is this right and who were they?

A. Just like today, there was not one group that made up the religious ‘conscience” of the Jewish people in the first century. There was a diverse and very often violent opposition to one group by another. No one group spoke for all Jews, unless they got into some sort of political or highly powerful religious position of authority and could force their beliefs on others. Much like politics in the United States, if you can get enough of “your side” in power you can make things happen. There was no such thing as “Judaism” in the 1st century but “Judaisms” due to many different groups (sects), beliefs and teachings. Here is a basic rundown of just some of the varying groups and beliefs that made up the collective belief system in Israel that Yeshua was confronted with and had to “straighten” out, starting with His select group during His ministry, but what the 1st century believers had to contend with once they were sent out. That is only within the borders of Israel, among the people. This doesn’t even include what was waiting for them once they got outside the borders of Israel into the rest of the world.

· Pharisee’s – they had two main groups, but there were others:

*School of Hillel- Ist born was President (or Nasi) of the religious Sanhedrin , they were mainly based from the north, were more into the spirit of the law, wanted converts, Jewish halakah today is decided on their teachings, very eschatological, Paul was from this group.

*School of Shammai- based mainly in the south, strict, had one of their number as “Av Beit Din” (father of the house of judgment) as a “balance” to the Nasi from Hillel on the religious Sanhedrin, believed in the letter of the law, discouraged converts, very eschatological, would contend with School of Hillel over halakah

· Sadducees’s-opposite of the Pharisee’s,believed very little(no resurrection,angels, Messiah etc), accepted only the books of Moses, non-eschatological’

· Boethucians- rich Sadducees, upper class, many were High Priests, rejected the Oral law, non –eschatological

· Sicari- most radical, “cutthroat”, would assassinate anyone who helped Rome

· Zealots- politically opposed Rome, for the most part torah observant, could belong to other groups

· Chasidim- “pious ones”, in the north mainly but not like the Pharisee’s, very eschatological

· Essenes- confusion still exists as to who they were exactly, had many priests who were fed up with the Temple system and priesthood, the Pharisees and the Sadducees, very eschatological

· Theraputae- “healers”, related to the essences and may have been the same group, eschatological

· Am ha Eretz- “people of the land”, common folk, uneducated in the yeshiva’s, either not interested in Torah study or something else, followed the Pharisee’s mainly.

· Hellenists- goes back to the time of the Maccabee’s (Approx. 165 B.C.), influenced by Greek culture and were looked at with distrust by the more traditional groups.

*Judean- not real eschatological or Torah observant.

*Asia Minor-very eschatological and Torah observant.

* Alexandrian-Torah observant,

· Babylonian- Torah observant, did not have these other sects to contend with

Now, knowing this and knowing what these groups believe will help you understand many of the debates and controversies seen in the New Testament. For instance, in Acts 15.1 it says that certain believers came from Judea and taught other believers that a gentile had to get circumcised to be saved. Well, they were from the School of Shammai and we see that Paul, taught in the School of Hillel, opposed them. We’ll see the same argument in Galatians (Chapter 2) were the same doctrine was trying to be taught, and Paul opposed them again. Another example id in Mark 7 and the discussion over halakah and hand-washing. We know from what was being discussed that these Pharisee’s were from the School of Shammai who believed very strongly in ritual hand-washing, but the Scriptures never commanded it and Yeshua makes that point. Anyway, it helps to know who believes what when you read the Scriptures. When it says “Pharisee” it doesn’t mean all the Pharisee’s believed the same thing. Yeshua’s apostles came from some of these groups and had a diverse range of beliefs to deal with. Even after salvation, they still clung to some of these beliefs and you can see how God had to change them in order to receive the truth so they could effectively teach others. The same thing happens today. Just because someone becomes a believer doesn’t mean he automatically discards the belief system he has known. It takes time and good teaching from God to do that, so, patience is needed with believers without compromising the truth they need to know. So, there is nothing new under the sun. Even though we don’t have the same groups today as the 1st century, we still have many denominational beliefs that have to be discarded and replaced. Being called of God and teaching the Word is not to be done by novices. This comes through the revelation of the Holy Spirit and good teachers placed in the body to help guide these believers to the truth the Lord would have them to know in order to make their life a true testimony and a true light to the world, rightly dividing and handling the Word of Truth.

Continued from last weeks article

This week we will pick up where we left off with whether or not Jesus and the Holy spirit are God, and with the concept of the Trinity. Again, the current Jewish view of this would seem contrary but the concept was believed and discussed anciently and there was much agreement on this matter, although not readily discussed today. Certainly, the writers of the New Testament believed it and taught it without much opposition, so that tells you many of those who heard their teachings weren’t totally unaware of the concept.

All three are divine, unique persons , coeternal, coequal in essence (being). God has chosen to reveal this doctrine carefully and gradually. It is a guarded revelation due to our human limitations to understand it. Wrong ideas have produced many heresies that actually threatened the Faith in the past. God has given us many examples of this concept that we still have trouble understanding, and if we don’t fully understand the picture, we will truly struggle when confronted with the reality. For example, look at the mind. It is made up of conscience, will, emotion, intellect and so on. Psychiatric and psychological schools of thought have confronted the human mind and walk away dumfounded over the complexities, and yet we think we have the Creator of that mind figured out? Look at nature, the tree has the root, trunk and branches, the egg has the whites, yolk and shell. Light is one and yet it can be broken down to many colors, some of its essence we can’t even see with the human eye. Time is one yet distinct (past, present, future), space has length, breadth, height and so on. And the atom, well, we haven’t even explored all of that yet. Look at the cell and you will see the Lord giving us a glimpse of His essence. Even the names of God give us a clue. Elohim is masculine plural, used in a collective sense. YHVH is singular but is used for the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The names Father (Deut 32.6), Son (Rom 8.14) and Holy Spirit (John 3) represent the individual roles each have to make it easy for us to understand the relationship and functions they have. These roles are not meant to be pushed beyond the clear, intended purposes in which they were given to us. For example, the “Son” does not mean subordinate to in essence to the Father. The Spirit is not a force or wind. The Father speaks of a position of authority, the disciplinarian, the teacher, provider and so on. The Son speaks of the mediator and servant, the Holy Spirit as the helper, comforter.

So, in conclusion, the concept of the Trinity, the three divine “persons” of the Godhead is a biblical concept clearly taught within the pages of Scripture. We should not go beyond the boundaries given in God’s description of Himself, but I hope this brief overview gives you a better understanding of this.

Q.Are Jesus and the Holy Spirit God?

A. Yes and the Scriptures are very clear about that but there are many believers who have a different idea on this concept called the “trinity” but I believe the Scriptures are very clear about it. Contrary to current belief, there were ancient Jewish views on this that is very consistent with how the Trinity is viewed today in Christianity and it was not considered as idolatry or a violation of the Shema in Deut 6.4. There was a very interesting teaching on the Hebrew letter “shin” which has three heads, and there are other teachings, As Christianity developed a theology about this concept, the Jewish view would take the opposite view and that was true with many such teachings. Where Judaism taught something, Christian theology would counter with something different and vice versa. But, with all that said, let’s look at this concept. We’ll start in Acts 5.3 where Peter is telling Ananias that he has lied to the Holy Spirit. Now, if the Holy Spirit was just a “force” or a “power” how could Peter say he lied to an “it?”.You can’t lie to a force/power. You also were to be baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28.19) and you can’t be immersed in the name of a force/power. So, the Holy Spirit has to be something other than a force/power and He is. In Eph 5.30 it says that the Spirit can be “grieved, in Acts 13.2 the Holy Spirit “speaks.” In John 2Cor 3.17 and John 4.14 the Lord is called “Spirit” so that isn’t inconsistent. In Rom 8.26 He intercedes for us, and is called God in Acts 5.4,Genesis 1.2, Psalm 139.7 and 1 Cor 12.11. God is spoken of in the plural many times like in Gen 1.26, Isa 6.8. In Jer 30.5 it says that the Lord says “I have heard “ but it should be ”We have heard.” You can see all three together in Isa 48.16 and Matt 3.16-17. In Ecc 12.1 it says “creator” but it should read “creators” and in Job 35.10 “maker” should read “makers” and the list goes on and on. Yeshua is called God in John 20.27 and Phil 2.5. When you read the beginning of many epistles Yeshua is listed as a co-equal with the Father, and if He isn’t that is blasphemy. So, what does all this mean? God is one in essence (His being), distinct in “persons”, not some multi-faceted manifestation of one being, or “person” if you will. In Jewish mystical teachings like Kabbalah, this multi-faceted concept of one Person is taught through the idea of the ten “Sephirot” or “emanations” but this is just man’s feeble attempt to explain the Godhead. The Father is unique (Dan 7.13), the Son is unique (Psa 40.7-8) and the Spirit is unique (Rom 8.26). All possess a full, equal share of the status of Deity (Mt 28.19-20, Gen 1.26, 2 Cor 13.14). All three have been revealed uniquely in Scripture as God, with Father in Deut 4.35, the Son in Titus 2.13 and the Spirit in Acts 5.4. His nature is the composition of His essence, or being, having been revealed as infinite, a spirit, immeasurable, omniscient, all powerful, omnipresent and so on. His character is the “traits” of His essence, or being, having been revealed to us as perfect, holy, good, just, merciful, truth sovereign, love, light to name just a few. Next week we will continue with this concept in further detail and hopefully “pull” all this together to give you a better idea of who God really is according to His own description of Himself as found in the Scriptures. Please study the verses already given so that it can be built upon next week.

Q.Some people say that the Jews are different from the Israelites and try to make a distinction today. What is your opinion?

A. There are some who believe that the two terms mean different things but in actuality they are really the same people. There have been many false, theological concepts that have developed over the years based on this misunderstanding. So, let's do a basic study in definitions and get to the heart of the matter, using Easton's Bible Dictionary as a source. In the Bible, there are actually three terms used to describe the same people, Hebrew, Jew and Israelite. The name "Hebrew" is a name applied to the Israelites in the Bible only used by foreigners (Gen 39.14,17,41.12). It is also used by the Israelites themselves when talking to a foreigner( Gen 40.15, Ex 1.9). In addition it is used when compared to other nations (Gen 43.32, Ex 1.3,7,15, Deut 15.12). In the New Testament the same contrast exists (Acts 6.1, Phil 3.5). The name "Israel" is the given to Jacob after his struggle at Peniel (Gen 32.28) because as a "prince" he had power with God. This is the most common name given to his descendants. All twelve tribes are called "Israelites" or the "children of Israel" (Josh 3.17, 7.25, Judges 8.27, Jer 3.21) and also the "house of Israel" (Ex 16.31, 40.38). This name is sometimes used for the "true Israel" (Psalms 73.1, Isaiah 45.17, 49.3 John 1.47, Rom 9.6,11.26).After the death of Saul the ten tribes took this name forythemselves as if they constituted the whole nation (2 Sam 2.9,10,17,28, 3.10,19.40-43) and the kings of the ten tribes were called "kings of Israel" while the kings of the other two tribes were called "kings of Judah." After the exile the name Israel was used for the all twelve tribes. The name "Jew" comes from Judah, a son of Jacob. It was first used to designate one from that tribe or to the kingdom of Judah ( 2 Kings 16.6,25.25,Jer 32.12,38.19.40.11,41.3. It is used in contrast to those belonging to the kingdom of the the te tribes, who were called Israelites. While in Babylon ,and after, the name was given to all twelve tribes (Esther 3.6,10; Dan 3.8,12; Ezra 4.12,5.1-5). At the beginning the people were called Hebrews until after the exile when the name was not used used much. Paul described himself as a Hebrew in 2 Cor 11.22 and Phil 3.5 however. So, in conclusion, there are three names used in the New Testament to describe those who have descended from the twelve tribes. The name "Jew", in regards to their nationality and to distinguish them from the Gentiles, "Hebrews" in relation to their language, customs and lifestyle to distinguish them from the Hellenists (Greek-speaking Jews). this contrast can be seen in the Book of Acts very clearly. Lastly, the name "Israelite" will be used when they are described as a people chosen by God and the mandate they have to teach the nations about about God, the Messiah and the redemption. All three names are used to describe the descendants of Jacob, those that come from any of the twelve tribes. Confusion over these biblical defintions exist today and it has caused an "identity crisis" with many believers. Several denominations today believe they "Jews" or "Israelites" when in actuality they are not. This type of believe comes from a severe lack of teaching at one end and a severe lack of personal study with the Lord on the other. Somehow, some believe they are lacking in something, have fallen short spiritually and feel "left out" of something unless people consider them Jewish. In actuality, God doesn't care either way and that is quite clear from the New Testament where Paul says in 1 Cor 7.17-20 that we should walk as God has assigned us. If someone is "circumcised" (Jewish), let him not seek "uncircumcision" and if called by God as "uncircumcised" (Gentile) let him not seek "circumcision" . He says circumcision or uncircumcision doesn't mean anything but keeping the commandments do, as they apply. Peter came to the same conclusion in Acts 10.35 were he says that God is not partial to anyone (Jew or Gentile) and he "who fears Him and does what is right (keeps the commandments as they apply) is welcomed by Him".

Q. What does it mean in Mt 24.12 where it says that the “love of many shall wax cold?”

A. Before we look at what it means we need to define a couple of words. The verse reads “ and because lawlessness is increased most people’s love shall grow cold.” (NASB). The first word we need to define is “lawlessness”, which is “anomos” in Greek. The Greek word for Torah is “nomos” and when you put an “a” before it , it means to be against or “none”. So “anomos” means “no Torah” or in other words people are not obeying God, thus becoming “lawless.” The other word that needs to be defined is “love.” The word there is “agape” and that is God’s kind of love, love that is unmerited. It’s charitable love and the idea Paul was conveying in 1 Cor 13. So with that in mind, let’s look at the verse again in its context. Yeshua is giving signs of the end times. We won’t get into all of that, but He says in verse 12 that because people have a disregard for the Laws of God their God-kind of love will grow cold. So, you have to ask “cold in what way?” There are three areas we will look at . First, their love towards God, which is really what Yeshua is saying here. He said “If you love me, keep my commandments.” Deut 6.4 says we should love the Lord with all our heart, mind and strength and Yeshua said this was the greatest commandment. Well, how do you do that. You love Him by obeying His Word. When you don’t obey Him, you are “lawless” in the sense that His word has no affect on you, you won’t do it. That is not loving the Lord, so your love for Him will grow cold. Paul wrote to the Ephesians that their love for God was well known, but then later in Rev 2.4 Yeshua says they have left their first love and they should repent and do the deeds they did at first, by being obedient. Now, for love to “wax cold” you must have had a love in the first place, which was for the Lord. But, through self-centeredness it grew cold.

Secondly, let’s look at family love. Not obeying the Lord will affect this area, too. To wax cold means to lose the warmth of love for the family and become self-absorbed, self-centered and uncaring for your family. All of these are contrary to God’s word, of course. Do you know why any relationship fails and is destroyed? It’s when one person stops being kind to the other. When parents are unkind to their children, the relationship fails. When one spouse commits adultery, is that being kind to the other? When one abuses the other, is that being kind? Again, when one does not follow what the Lord says (lawless) then the love for your family will grow cold. Lastly, let’s look at some of the social ramifications of this. Society is plagued with this. People will stop acting charitably towards one another as a result of their own sin, or lawlessness. 2 Tim 3.1-4 says: “But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.” You see, what it all comes down to is when we love God and our neighbor, our love will not grow cold. Now, that doesn’t mean that others won’t mistreat us, cheat on us, hate us ,curse us, try to destroy us, leave us and do all manner of evil against us because they will. People who love themselves tend to gravitate towards people who are kind and charitable because it’s all about what that person can give them. Many marriages fail because those that are self-absorbed marry one who is not like that because they have no intention of giving to the other, but it’s what the other can do for them and it eventually destroys the relationship. In the same way, it’s like that with the Lord. He is a giver and charitable and the selfish want a relationship with Him for what they can get from Him, but when He wants them to give back, they won’t and their love “grows cold.” So, I hope you have a better understanding of this verse and your love for God, family and your neighbor does not grow cold.

Q. I have a general question on Exodus 34.6-7.

Q. I have a general question on Exodus 34.6-7. Can you expand my understanding on these two important verses. Is it true it is a new covenant with his people at that time? (Paul)

A. This portion of the Torah is called the “Midot” or God’s 13 Attributes of Mercy. It has some major commentary in Jewish literature and what we will do is review the events leading up to why God spoke these words and how it relates to the covenant at Sinai. The whole Exodus story is a picture of the individual salvation we receive as believers. They were delivered out of Egypt (the world) by the blood of a lamb (Yeshua) and they arrived at Mt. Sinai. He enters into a covenant with Israel and gives them commandments, which is what He does with a believer today. These commands weren’t meant to save them, they were already delivered but He was going to show them how to love Him, which is the purpose of the commandments even today. Yeshua said “If you love Me, keep My commandments”. Israel then accepted God’s idea of a “holy nation” of kings and priests (Exodus 19.5-8) and then He gives additional laws found from Exodus 20.19-24.11. Moses then will ascend Mt Sinai to receive the stone tablets which were the symbol of this covenant which were the Ten Commandments and the results of disobeying them. God included certain attributes in this first covenant. Well, we know what happened later. Israel disobeys this covenant with the Golden Calf and God is going to destroy Israel and rebuild through Moses, still fulfilling His earlier covenant made with the “avot” or fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). God’s presence or “shekinah” will not be present and Moses rejects this idea (Exodus 33.12-16). To resolve the problem, God gives a “new covenant” which allows His Shekinah to remain even though Israel may sin in the future. God says that He will grant mercy in certain situations and this will give Israel another chance. As a result, Moses must ascend Mt. Sinai again for another “ceremony” if you will. Now, there is no reason to change the commandments in this new covenant, they will remain as before because it is by obeying them that Israel will be a “holy” (set apart) nation. What changes is how the Lord will relate to Israel and so the 13 attributes of mercy are proclaimed. As a result, God comes down in a cloud and says Exodus 34.6-7. These attributes of mercy will allow God’s Shekinah (presence) to remain with Israel even when they sin. However, these attributes do not guarantee that God will forgive, but they allow for the possibility that He will. To experience His forgiveness, each individual must repent and forsake his sin. Each attribute in 34.6-7 can be researched out for their individual meaning, so that will not be done here, but there is an interesting thing in the Hebrew in verse 7. The word “keep” in v 7 is written with an elongated “nun” in Hebrew and it carries the meaning that God will go “far beyond” or “longer” than what He needs to in being merciful. Now, there is a picture being portrayed here. This “new covenant” is not the New Covenant spoken of by the prophet Jeremiah in 31.31-34 or the gospels and epistles. That covenant can be found in Deut 29.1 through 30.20, but it is a picture of it. The word “new” means to rebuild, or to be renewed. In the New Covenant the commandments don’t change because that is what is being written on our hearts, or desires (Jer 31.33). It also is not symbolized by a physical circumcision but a spiritual circumcision of the heart (Deut 30.6). Now, circumcision of the heart is just another way of saying “live” or to be “born from above” or born again. What changes from the Covenant at Sinai to the Covenant in Moab is how God will relate to it. The Lord told the people to circumcise their own hearts in Deut 10.16 and then says in Deut 29.4 that He did not give them the heart/desire to know Him, or eyes to see or ears to hear. That was the problem with the Covenant at Sinai. They failed and died in the wilderness. The New Covenant was “cut” in Moab with a new generation and not only included those present, but those that will be born later ( Deut 29.14-15). Moab means the “seed of the father”. This covenant will be ratified or “cut” in Yeshua Himself, the seed of the father (virgin birth). So, are you getting the picture. Exodus 34.6-7 is really a prophecy of the New Covenant that will be coming later and God is giving us a picture of how it will work and how He will relate to it. His presence will not leave us even though we sin because it is based on His attributes of mercy for those who believe. Those that don’t believe will not receive the benefits of that mercy and their sin will remain and the wrath of God will have to be carried out. There is much more to this but hopefully this will basically answer your question.

Q.”Is Matthew 5.32 and 19.3-9 correct? I want to explain it to a divorced friend.” (Pete)

A. The area of divorce can be a difficult issue to understand if one does not have a proper biblical foundation to understand it with, so I will try to give a balanced view based on my understanding of the Scriptures and where Yeshua and Paul were coming from. The basis for their view can be found in Deut 24.1-4. The word for “uncleanliness” in verse one is “ervah” and it means improper behavior and can be translated “indecency” in other versions but it does not mean adultery or any uncleanliness found in Leviticus 18, those were punishable by death, so a divorce wasn’t needed. The word used here means anything that made life together impossible because that would lead to cruelty and abuse. Exodus 21.10-11 gives other reasons for a divorce that clarifies what this word can mean. If a husband marries a woman, he cannot reduce her food, her clothing or conjugal rights. He must support her. If he doesn’t, she can initiate a divorce if she is not supported by the husband. Deut 21.14 says he that cannot mistreat his wife. So, with that back-ground a divorce can be initiated if life together becomes impossible due to various, very serious reasons. Adultery was punishable by death, not a divorce. So, what is going on in the verses you cited? Yeshua is freeing up Deut 24.1-4 from all the false interpretations of the Pharisees from the School of Hillel, who was very liberal on divorce. Yeshua says that if you divorce someone for any other reason than the “ervah” of Deut 24.1 causes her to commit adultery ( “Moichao” in Greek) because that is not a biblical divorce. The word in Greek for fornication is “porneia”, where we get pornography from in English and as you can see they are two different words and it is the Greek equivelant to the Hebrew “ervah” of Deut 24.1 and complements it exactly. What he is saying is if you divorce someone in order to marry someone else, that is adultery. That was a big problem in the 1st Century because people were abusing the meaning of the word “ervah” and stretching it to mean if she burned the toast, or did trivial offenses that displeased the other you could divorce her/him. To divorce someone for that was just adultery covered up by a divorce. Another school of Pharisees called the School of Shammai disagreed with the Pharisees of the school of Hillel and agreed with the interpretation Yeshua gave on it. The common people, for the most part, agreed with what the Pharisees from Hillel taught because it was to their advantage and more expedient and Yeshua was giving what God had originally intended through Moses, which sided with what the school of Shammai was saying. Divorce and remarriage was always permissible if done for scriptural reasons. In Matt 19.3-9 it comes up again. The debate there is not over the right to remarry, all the rabbi’s agreed that you could. The argument was over the legal grounds for the divorce. Divorce, war, slavery was never God’s plan “from the beginning” because it does not reflect His perfect character as stated in 19.4 but it was “allowed” because of the hardness of our hearts (19.8) and so He gives the boundaries for doing it the right way. Again, in 19.8, Yeshua says that you cannot divorce in order to remarry someone else, it had to be for biblical reasons already stated in the Torah, and those have already been cited above. We don’t stone people today for adultery, but that breaks the marriage covenant completely and that would be a biblical reason today. Non-support, any type of abuse(emotional, physical, chemical) that makes life impossible, loss of conjugal rights are other reasons but there are many more. That’s why God uses the word ”ervah” because it can cover so many areas that can make life impossible, and it’s Greek equivalent is “porneia.” Unfortunately, some English translations translate “porneia” as “adultery” and it gives the wrong interpretation to what Yeshua is really saying. He is addressing some of the wrong interpretations of “ervah” done by the Pharisees, especially from the School of Hillel, who clashed with the Pharisees from the school of Shammai over this matter, and He clarifies God’s intention through Moses, which happened to be more consistent with how the school of Shammai interpreted it than the school of Hillel. Now, Paul was trained in the School of Hillel because his teacher Gamaliel, Hillel’s grandson. He had to change his view on divorce and you see it in 1Cor 7 where he is teaching the Corinthians about what to do in their domestic situations. We know he taught the Torah concepts because he tells them in 1 Cor 11.1-2 that he wanted them to “hold fast to the traditions “he taught them. The word for traditions in Greek is “paradosis” which means the Jewish traditions that were biblical, as found in the Scriptures, and the only scriptures that exixted at that time was the Old Testament, or “ Tanak” which is an acrynym fot Torah ( 5 bks of Moses), Nevi’im (prophets) and Ketuvim(writings). Now, these Corinthians were well versed in the pagan culture of Greece and Rome and were getting divorces for many of the same reasons the Jews were, only worse. In 1 Cor 7.10-11 he says that it is not his opinion “but the Lords” ( which means it’s found in the Scriptures-Deut 24.1-4, Exodus 21.10-11 for a start) that the wife should not leave her husband for trivial , unscriptural reasons , and if she has, she can’t remarry or else she needs to be reconciled to her husband. This is not referring to a wife who has biblical, legal grounds for a divorce but to one who just abandoned her husband for her own, selfish reasons not sanctioned by the Scriptures. This verse is taken out of context by those not understanding all of the scriptures. Remember, Paul is a trained rabbi who was an expert in Jewish hermeneutical interpretation and would have all the scriptures relating to divorce in mind when writing this. Remember, he said it wasn’t his opinion, but the Lord’s in v10. In verse 39 he gives another reason to remarry and that is the case of one spouse dies, and he was telling the Corinthians in that case you can also remarry. So, divorce and remarriage is permissible in the Scriptures in all cases where the marriage cannot go on due to some of the reasons already given, but it is not limited to only those mentioned. This should only be entered into with much prayer and sound biblical counsel that is founded on the principles God already has laid down in the Torah because that is what Yeshua and Paul used as the basis for their instruction in the verses you cited. I know this doesn’t even scratch the surface of this difficult subject, but I hope this will help you counsel your friend who may be struggling with a lot of guilt piled on her by people who misunderstand what God has said. She doesn’t need that kind of guilt because a divorce is difficult to deal with emotionally even when it is necessary. If I can help her further, tell her to contact me as soon as possible.

Q. In John 1, Jesus says he saw Nathanael “ under the fig tree.” What is the significance of this?

A. Being “under the fig tree” is a Hebrew idiom for peace, and more specifically the Messianic Kingdom. In John 1, Yeshua is looking for his disciples. They didn’t choose Him, His followers never do, it’s the Lord who finds them. He says to Nathanael that he is an Israelite “in whom there is no guile” which means he had no false estimation of himself, he was an honest man. And Nathanael asks Him “how do you know me?” or why do you say that. Yeshua answers and says in v 46 that “before Phillip called you (v45) when you were under the fig tree, I saw you. Nathanael knows the meaning of the idiom and immediately declares Yeshua a king by saying “you are the Son of God” which is a title for kings found in 1 Chr 28.5-7 where the Lord calls Solomon a “son to Me” and from that time on kings were called the “Son’s of God.” He then comes right out and tells us what he means by saying that by calling Yeshua the King of Israel. The term ”sitting under the fig tree” is an idiom for peace found in several scriptures Micah 4.4 says that in the Messianic Kingdom each person will sit under his fig tree, with nobody making them afraid and it will be a time for study, meditation and peace. If you are sitting under a tree you aren’t building walls to defend yourself so that’s why it carried the idea of peace. In 1Kings 4.25 it says that Judah and Israel lived in safety, every man under his vine and his fig tree during Solomon’s reign. You will also see this concept in Isa 36.16 where an Assyrian envoy tries to convince those in the city of Jerusalem to surrender and says that if they make peace then each person can eat of his vine and of his fig tree and drink from his own water cisterns and so on. Again, eating and sitting under the fig tree symbolized peace. Lastly, in Zech 3.10 it says that “In that day (another idiom for the Messianic Kingdom or when Messiah comes), declares the Lord of Hosts every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree.” So, when Yeshua calls Nathanael a righteous man He also says He sees him the Messianic Kingdom by saying He saw him “under a fig tree.” It is also very probable that Nathanael was actually sitting under a fig tree. When Yeshua told him He saw him, Nathanael knew that there was something different about this Man and it is possible that he declared Yeshua King through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is also possible that Nathanael may have been meditating on Jacob’s Ladder found in Genesis 28 and that’s why Yeshua immediately goes into the imagery found there and ties Jacob’s Ladder to Himself.

Q. There are rumors going around on the Internet that Barack Obama could be the Antichrist. What is your view on this?

A. Right off, Mr. Obama is not the Antichrist, who I will refer to as the False Messiah which is closer to its meaning. Over the years many politicians have been accused of that including Prince Charles, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Henry Kissinger and many others. But, the subject of the False Messiah is very comprehensive in the Scriptures and it is a subject that has been talked about for several thousand years. Some of the Rabbi’s of the first century believed that he would be Jewish from the tribe of Dan. A good source to study this subject can be found in the Jewish encyclopedia under “False Messiah” and it is very well developed and actually has a lot to say on the subject. I will go into some of the Scriptures concerning him but some back-ground in Eschatology will have to be laid first. In Prophecy, some of the countries today will have an ancient counterpart. For instance, Europe will be symbolized by Egypt. Egypt was called the “iron furnace” in Deuteronomy and where Israel was held captive, and Europe was where Israel was held captive and the iron furnaces are well known to those who are familiar with the holocaust. Europe will also be known as
Kittim” in prophecy and we will get to that. Russia will be pictured by Assyria, the United States by the Land of Babylon, the Kings of the East by the army of Babylon. To develop this out takes many hours and in our congregation I take about a month every fall and teach nothing but prophecy, using the festivals, idioms, phrases found in Scripture to develop out Biblical eschatology. The false Messiah of course is an end-time eschatological character that must be understood. So, with that in mind let’s look at a few Scriptures to get an idea of who he is. Leviticus 24.10-16 gives a good picture. The son of an Israelite woman (Jewish) and an Egyptian man(European) struggles with a man of Israel (Messiah-Gen 3.15). He blasphemes the name of the Lord (Dan 7.8-11, 11.32, 2 Thes 2.4). His mother’s name is Shelomith which means “peaceful”, the daughter of Dibri which means “my word” from the tribe of Dan. He is eventually killed because of his blasphemy and so will the False Messiah (2 Thes 2.4-8). Daniel 9.26 describes the False Messiah as “ a prince from the people that will come” who we know will be the Romans, which is referring to Europe. There is a concept found in the prophets about a creature named Leviathan. The Jewish Encyclopedia also has a lot to say about this creature. Isaiah 27.1-2 describes what will happen to this creature in the day of the Lord, and he is described here as a “tannin” or sea monster who is destroyed. If you compare this with Ezekiel 29.3-7 and 32.2-8 you will see how this dragon is referred to as Pharaoh, king of Egypt, or Europe again. In Dan 11.30 there is a prophecy about Antiochus Epiphanes. He is the Greek king in the Chanukah story who made war with the Jewish people and forced them to stop observing the Torah. In v 30 it talks about ships from Kittim coming against him to help the Macabees. We know from history that Rome came to the aid of Israel and so we know Kittim means Rome, or Europe. The False Messiah will attempt to help Israel in the birth-pains but will eventually turn on her, just like Rome did. So again, the False Messiah will come out of Europe. In Ezekiel 21.25-27 there is a prophecy about a wicked prince of Israel whose day of judgment has come and his ruler-ship is ended. In the literal, the prophecy concerns Zedekiah but Zedekiah is also a picture of the False Messiah. But notice he is a “prince” and Dan 9 calls the False Messiah a “prince”. There is a small prophecy in Micah 2.4 where it says that God will give Israel over to the “apostate”. Now to be an apostate means he is away from the biblical faith. The False Messiah is described as the “lawless one” ( 2 Thes 2.1-12) and when you look up the word it means “no Torah” or “Torah-less”. The religion of Europe is apostate Christianity and we know from Revelation 12.17 that the False Messiah will make war on anyone who believes that Yeshua is the Messiah and keeps the commandments of God. So, he will be against Torah observance as most of Israel’s enemies have been. There is so much more that can be said about this but in conclusion the False Messiah will be Jewish, probably from the tribe of Dan and come out of Europe. It is very dangerous to accuse anyone living today of being the False Messiah and the Scriptures say that he won’t be identified until after the catching away of the believers on earth at Rosh ha Shanah anyway (2 Thes 2.1-3). There may be many reasons not to vote for Mr. Obama and that is up to the individual, but being the False Messiah shouldn’t be one of them.

Q. What is the purpose of fasting?

A. Fasting is a means of cleaning out the mind of earthly thoughts and desires in order to connect to God at a higher , spiritual level and to hear from the Lord. It is a time where we can get alone and ask the Lord “where am I with you” and to separate from the flesh. There are many examples of it in the Scriptures but I am going to limit it to several examples and then draw on the principles found there. The first one is found in Ezra 8.15-30. Ezra is going to lead some of the people back to the land after the Babylonian Captivity and he assembles some of the people to “humble” themselves before God and to pray for a safe journey for themselves, their children and their possessions. The term “humble” is a Hebraism for fasting and you will see it in Leviticus 23.29 in relation to Yom Kippur or the Day of Atonement and Paul also refers to Yom Kippur as “the Fast” in Acts 27.9. Ezra had been saying to their captors how God’s hand was upon the Jewish people and how He was going to protect them in their journey back to the land so he was embarrassed to ask the king for troops and horseman for additional protection because it would have made the Lord look insufficient, and so Ezra had a problem (Ezra 8.22). You see, they were bringing back gold and silver and the utensils that had been captured from the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians and they were going to use it again once the Temple was rebuilt, so they were sitting ducks for thieves and robbers, who would immediately see they were traveling unescorted with a virtual treasure. So, in Ezra 8.23 he calls a fast so that God will give them some ideas on how they were to transport all this wealth back to the land. After 3 days Ezra gets a word from the Lord to divide up the treasure in 12 parts and entrusted it into the hand of some priests and Levites and they wouldn’t have all their eggs “in one basket” in case of an attack. He instructs them to watch and keep the Temple treasure until they arrive in Jerusalem and can give an accounting before the leading priests, Levites and family heads (v 29). So in this case they fasted in order to hear from God on what to do.
In Isaiah 58.1-12 the Lord admonishes the people about their fasting because it had become a mundane performance void of any deeper concerns concerning love, mercy, justice and kindness to others. The Lord was not taking notice of what they were doing because they were oppressing the poor, not supporting their families and pointing the finger at others and supporting false doctrines. He was telling them to stop neglecting the weightier commandments concerning the above things and to start correcting their attitudes. Then they would have the understanding they needed and then He would answer their prayers. In Zechariah 8.19 Israel had added 4 fasts during the year that God never ordained. The Jewish people still observe these today. These self-appointed days of fasting was not going to fix why Babylon came and destroyed the Temple in the first place. They needed stop mourning the destruction of a building ( the Temple)and find out why God allowed it in the first place, which was due to their callousness, sin, idolatry. They were trying to ingratiate themselves to God by their ritualistic fasting but had missed the point as to why the Babylonians were allowed to defeat them in the first place. This exact point is brought out in Ezekiel 20.1-49. They had been fasting on one of the self-appointed days mentioned in Zechariah 8 and inquired of the Lord and He tells them that they needed to understand why the Temple and the exile happened. In Ezekiel 24. 16-24 the people are told why the Temple was destroyed, and he tells them not to mourn over it but to examine themselves and to correct what happened, starting with their own hearts. Another aspect to fasting is seen in the sacrifices performed in the Temple. We read in Leviticus 3. 4,9 that the fat was not to be consumed but burned on the Altar. Now fat has several meanings. First, the fat symbolizes that which is too rich to consume and it is for God alone. We cannot fully understand God’s ways and we need to trust Him. We can “digest” the rich things of God (the fat) in small amounts but most of it is beyond our human comprehension. Secondly, fat is symbolic of pride, prosperity and folly (Psa 17.10; Psa 119.70, Psa 37.20)and it can block our “spiritual arteries” rendering the mind dull, insensitive and oblivious to spiritual truth. The life is in the blood and eating too much fat can cause heart disease, and the same thing happens spiritually. Earthly prosperity can often be the prelude to destruction in much the same way a calf or sheep is fattened before it is slaughtered. By fasting, we burn not only the natural fat in our bodies but it can also be seen as offering the fat on the Altar and to getting rid of the “spiritual fat” that may have been accumulating around our hearts causing is to be dull and insensitive to the things of God. There is so much more that can be said about fasting and how it should be done but I hope this gives you some idea of how it should be done and the correct attitude we should have while doing it. It is certainly ordained of God ( Matt 6.16-19) and should never be done unless we are prompted by the Holy Spirit to do it (Matt 4.1-2) and it should be done in order to hear from God about something or when we don’t know what to do. It can be a blessing to us and others when it is done with the proper understanding and attitude and not turned into some mundane, ritualistic act void of any real spiritual reality.

Q. What is the verse that indicates that God has always known us, even before we were born. Where is it located in the Bible?

A. There are many verses that indicate that the Lord has known us before we were born and I’ll deal with a few right now. God is outside of time, and He is not limited in what He does or knows like we are. That is the whole concept behind the prophecies in the Bible. He knows the players and the situations that He will use to ultimately bring about His desired purposes. For instance, Pharaoh was raised up for the very purposes he played out in the Exodus. Paul even refers to this in Romans 9.17. In Isaiah 45.1 he actually names a Persian King named Cyrus many years before he was even born and tells what he will do and that the Lord was the one who was going to raise him up and bring it about. Daniel 8.5-8 is a prophecy about Alexander the Great and what would happen to him and it continues to describe world history and specific kings that would come and what they would do in relation the people of Israel. In Jeremiah 1. 5 it says that God knew Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb. In Psalms 139 the doctrines on omniscience and omnipresence of God are described. In v 16 it says that God’s eyes saw the writer’s “unformed substance” wrote down in a scroll all the days ordained to him when “yet there were none.” In Ephesians 1.4 it says that God chose us in Him (those who would believe) before the foundation of the world, and compare this with Roman 8.29-30 and you will see that everything was “set” before we ever drew our first breath. There are many verses that teach us that God knew us and planned out our lives before we were ever born and there is no doubt about that. I could mention Judas, who was specifically raised up to do what he did, Isaac who was predicted to be born a year ahead of time and even given the name he was to be called, Jacob and Esau, John the Baptist was also named and prophesied about before he was born, and the greatest example of this is Yeshua Himself. So, God knew us before the world was even created and no human being is an accident but has a specific role in God’s plan.

Q. What does it mean when it says to “know the Lord?"

A. This is one of the most important concepts in the Scriptures to understand. In Jeremiah 9.23 it says that if we are to boast we are to boast in the fact that we know Him. So, I am going to develop this out some to give you a better understanding of what is to “know” the Lord. In Genesis 4.1 it says that Adam “had relations” with Eve and she conceived. The Hebrew word for “had relations” is “yada” and it is an intimate knowledge. It doesn’t get any closer than that physically speaking. Now,  in a spiritual sense how can this be applied? In Hosea 2.20 it says that the Lord is going to betroth Himself to His people and then they will “know” the Lord. But, the Hebrew word for know is “yada’at.” It combines “yada” with the another Hebrew word for knowledge “da’at”. So, this knowledge is intimate and deep. But what exactly is it and how do we know if we know the Lord. Now turn to Hosea 4.6 and you will recognize this verse because it is quoted by people all the time but they do not recite the whole verse. It says “My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge” and most people stop there. They say it in the context that you need to buy their book on health or prosperity because you don’t have this knowledge and need it, or some other contrived reason. But, is that what the Lord is saying? When you read it in Hebrew it says my people are destroyed for the lack of “the knowledge” or “ha da’at, so what is “the” knowledge. The rest of the verse tells you the answer. It goes on to say that because they rejected “the” knowledge the Lord was going to reject them as “priests” (Exo 19.6; 1 Pet 2.9), since they have forgotten the Torah commandments of God. Do you see what He is saying? The Torah commandments are “the” knowledge that the people rejected. When the New Covenant is in full force, which it isn’t right now, it says that God is going to write the Torah commands on our hearts and then we will “all know the Lord.”. So, in other words, the Torah commands are the knowledge we need to acquire and to obey if we are to know the Lord. It is the evidence that we really do know the Lord. In 1 John 2.3-4 it says that “by this (the keeping of the commandments) we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one that says “I have come to know Him” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar and the truth is not in Him.” In other words, if someone says they know the Lord and does not keep the commandments contradicts himself, his walk is inconsistent with his talk. You see, all this is the work of God, not just a rote, mundane ritual of observance void of any real intentions of the heart. When one becomes born again, the Spirit of God puts the desire to keep the commandments in that persons heart, also called the circumcision of the heart (Deut 30.6, Jer 31.31-34). Then you will have the desire to keep the Sabbath, to get away from paganism and idolatry, to observe biblical festivals and to love your neighbor and to follow the Torah because it is God who writes these on our hearts, and that is how we know we have truly come to know Him.

Q. Why do some people say Rosh Ha Shanah is the head of the year, and some say the head of the year is really in the spring.

A. The term Rosh Ha Shanah means “head of the year” but it is not the Biblical name for the festival. The name for the festival on Tishri 1 should be called “Yom Teruah” which means the “day of the awakening blast (teruah) of the shofar. It can be found in Num. 29.1. You will see it in Hebrew and it is translated in English as a “day of the blowing of trumpets.” The confusion you speak of comes from a basic misunderstanding of the Scriptures, which I will try to explain briefly but much more can be said. In Genesis 1 God creates the heavens and the earth. The first day of creation is seen by many to be Tishri 1, day 2 Tishri 2 and so on. Others see Tishri 1 beginning on day 4 when He created the moon, but no matter which way you look at it, time began that first week of creation. This is referred to as the civil year and the dates given up to Exodus 12 are according to the civil calendar. That’s how you figure the years. So, each Tishri 1 is called a rosh (head) shanah (year) or “new year”. In Exodus 12.2 God says this (new moon) shall be the beginning of months for you and He is referring to a religious calendar He is going to institute. The religious year begins on Aviv (Nisan) 1 with the new moon for that month. Every date given in the Bible after that will be according to the religious calendar. So, there are two calendars operating at the same time in the Bible, one civil and one religious. The civil year begins in Tishri in the fall and the religious year begins in Aviv (Nisan)in the spring. In Exodus 23.14-17 we see that the Lord commanded Israel to appear before Him three times a year. In V 16 He says that the Feast of Ingathering (Sukkot) will happen at the “turning of the year” and He is talking about the civil year in the fall. We know He said Aviv (Nisan) is the beginning of the religious calendar, but here he says there is another new year in the fall, which is the civil year beginning on Tishri 1. He says the same thing in Exo. 34.22 and Deut 14.28 so there is no mistake about it. We will see the two calendars in action again in Joel 2.23 where the Lord says He will send the early and Latter rain “as in the first month.”. Now, you can’t have the rains in the spring and the fall happen “in the first month” unless there are two calendars. These two calendars will directly relate to the coming of the Messiah. When you look up the Hebrew terms for early and latter rains you will find that is says “moray Tzedekah” which means “teacher of righteousness”. So, He says the teacher of righteousness (Yeshua) will come upon Israel in the spring and fall., during the religious and civil new years. When you check the dates given from Genesis 1.1 to Exodus 11.10 they will be according to the civil calendar. Every date given after Exodus 12.1 will be according to a religious calendar. So, those are some examples of two calendars operating together in the Bible. How does this concept relate to prophecy.Yeshua appears during the spring festivals, is crucified, buried and resurrected all on the first three festivals in the religious first month of Aviv (Nisan). He sends the Holy Spirit at Shavuot (Pentecost), but that is not in Aviv but it is the concluding festival of the spring season. He will also come the second time during the fall festivals that happen during Yom Teruah (rosh ha shanah), Yom Kippur and Sukkot, at the “turning of the year” according to the civil calendar. So, to understand eschatology and prophecy one has to know that there are two calendars in operation in the Scriptures. The confusion comes in when people don’t understand that and take Exodus 12 to mean the civil year when it is only referring to a religious calendar that the Lord is instituting, not meaning to replace the civil one, but to operate along side of it.

Q. When reading the commandments, how do you know which apply today and which ones don’t?

A. When reading and studying anything in the Scriptures, there are certain rules to go by. A simple set of rules that will help are called the “7 Rules of Hillel” and they are quite common and have been used for several thousand years. These rules existed long before Hillel. He lived in the 1st century along with another man called Shammai. They were leading figures in 1st century Judaism and both were heads of “schools’ named after them. Hillel’s grandson was Gamaliel, who taught Paul. These rules of interpretation can be found in Paul’s writings and was possibly what he was referring to in 2 Tim 2.15. I’m going to list them briefly here but further research can be done on your own.
1) Light to heavy: If A is true B, then how much more is C
2) equivalence of expressions: An analogy is made between two separate verses on the basis of similar words being used
3) Building a father (truth) from one verse: One very clear verse is the foundation for a rule for all other similar cases
4) Building a father from two or more texts: two verses or truths serve as a foundation for a conclusion
5) general and the particular: a general statement is made and is followed by a single statement which itemizes a particular rule. For instance Genesis one generalizes, Genesis 2 particularizes.
6) An analogy made from other verses: Two verses may conflict, so a third is brought in that solves the conflict
7) explanation obtained from the context. The total context in which the verse or passage is found has to be considered in order to get the proper meaning.
Now, how do you apply these to what commandments apply today. Let’s take sacrifices for instance. Do they apply today? The answer would be no because there is no Temple or priesthood. They can only be offered in the place where God chooses to put His name. At this point it is Mt. Moriah in Jerusalem and only when there is a functioning priesthood and Temple, in particular the Altar. However, just because a commandment cannot be done doesn’t mean we shouldn’t study them and find out what the meanings are. The biblical festivals cannot be kept exactly either because they involved Temple worship and sacrifices. You see, Yeshua’s death has nothing to do with whether or not sacrifices are offered, it has to do with the Temple, Altar and priesthood. Paul and the 1st century believers offered animal sacrifices 30 years after Yeshua’s death (Acts 21). Tithing is another commandment that is not valid today for many of the same reasons. Tithing was done only if you lived in the land, made a living in agriculture and the tithe was given to the Levites and they distributed it to the priests, and the needy. I think it’s funny how false teachers will tell you that the Law is done away with then tell you to tithe, and people fall for it because they don’t understand how to interpret the Scriptures. On the contrary, eating a biblically kosher diet does apply everywhere and you don’t have to have a functioning priesthood or Temple to avoid pork. The commandment to not murder, lie, commit adultery, not cheating your neighbor applies everywhere. You just have to ask yourself “how can I keep this commandment” and implement it into my life and go as far as you can. So, here is what I would do in order to understand what to do. Find yourself a good, balanced Torah teacher who you can interact with. You’ll learn more and a lot faster than doing it by yourself. Remember you can only rise to level of whoever is teaching you. If you find a teacher who knows much, you will learn much. Secondly use the 7 laws of Hillel, in particular number 7 which deals with context. Study the verses over and over again, it takes a lifetime. Read commentaries about the verse or commandment being studied. Ask yourself if it’s possible to keep this today in light of living outside the land, no Temple, priesthood and other applications. You need to find some group of like-minded believers who can help you study and understand the scriptures. Start there and see where the Lord leads you.

Q.Is there going to be a new Temple with sacrifices and why the need for sacrifices if "Jesus was the final sacrifice?"

Q. I've been debating with fellow messianic believers and gentile Christians alike over the new Temple and the sacrificial system in the coming Kingdom. Could you settle the debate once and for all and explain two things. Is there going to be a new Temple with sacrifices and why the need for sacrifices if "Jesus was the final sacrifice?"
A. This question is very multifaceted and rather than go back and lay a foundation with your friends, I'm going to let the Scriptures answer the question and let your friends do the homework. First of all the Scriptures are full of verses that talk about the coming Temple in the Messianic Kingdom. In Ezekiel Chapters 40 through 48 this Temple is described. We know it's the Messianic Temple because it has never been built yet. So, by logic, it has to be after Yeshua came. Tell your friends to read those chapters. It gives the exact measurements of the Temple, it talks about the animal sacrifices that will be offered there and the festivals being celebrated, none of which include any of the festivals Christians keep like Christmas and Easter. The festivals talked about are found in Leviticus 23. That alone shatters their false notions. But, for fun let's go to Zechariah 14.16-21. This describes what happens after Yeshua returns and it says that all the nations will come up to Jerusalem to worship at Jerusalem during the Feast of Sukkot. If you want to see what the worship is, I refer you back to Ezekiel and the chapters given above and find out what biblical worship is. Then it says in Zechariah that a plague will be sent on any nation that does not go up to Jerusalem to worship. Isaiah 2.1-4 talks about the Temple being established and the nations coming to worship. Isaiah 66.23-24 says that all mankind, Jew and Gentile will come to bow down before the Lord on the New Moons and the Sabbaths and the context is after Messiah comes. I could go on and on with verses but if they don't see it after 11 chapters they don't want to see it. Now, why the sacrifices? The sacrifices only cleansed the flesh from ritual impurity but never the conscience, only God can do that by being born from above. They were only pictures of what Yeshua accomplished and went through on the cross, the bread offerings spoke of the Word and provision, the wine offered spoke of blood, marriage, covenant, teaching, joy and many other things. To say that we don't need those things now is like saying we don't ever need to go back and look at a picture we took of a vacation, or of a relative. We don't need to look at videos of our children when they were younger, playing soccer or whatever. The sacrifices looked forward to what Messiah was going to do, now they are reminders at what He did. Didn't He say "Do this (Lord's Supper) in remembrance of Me?" The sacrifices never did take away sin and were never meant to. Scripture is very clear about that. They were educational because they taught that One was coming who was innocent and would substitute Himself in our place and offer His innocence to God because we couldn't (Ezekiel 43.10-12) and practical because the priests and the worshipper could eat and drink many of them. The skins were given to the priests and he could use or sell them and so on. If someone believes that Yeshua's death did away with the sacrifices, they must believe they took away sin and both concepts aren't even biblical. Paul and 4 other messianic believers did animal sacrifices 30 years after Yeshua's death (Acts 21.15-27 Acts 24.14-21) coming out of a Nazarite vow ( Acts 18.18, Num 6.1-21). The messianic believers in the first century went to the Temple daily (Acts 2.46). Peter and John were going to the afternoon Tamid service (Num 28) when a lame man was made to walk. Don't you think that the next Passover after Yeshua died had a little more meaning as they sacrificed an innocent lamb and basically reenacted everything they saw and were a part of the year before? So, this should answer their objections and if it doesn't, refer them to our congregation and we can help them further.

Q. God brings us into struggles and battles. Why does He do this and how do we handle them?

A. The Lord brings us into struggles and battles to teach us something. It is an unpleasant business for sure, but that’s the way He does things. In Judges 3.1-2 it says “Now these are the nations which the Lord left, to test Israel by them (that is all who had not experienced any of the wars of Canaan: only in order that the generations of the sons of Israel might be taught war, those that had not experienced it formerly)”. You see, the Lord left some of the nations intact in Canaan because He wanted the inexperienced to learn about Him through warfare. He does the same thing today. He will purposely bring us into struggles and battles so that we learn how to fight and what it takes to win a battle. The problem is too many resist it and turn from the battle and run. If we don’t face the enemy and resist the Lord will continue to place you in situations and battles until you finally stand up and get strong in the Lord. That’s why some people keep going through the same struggles again and again. He wants to work out something in your life and you are going to have to stand and fight sometime, so you might as well get it over with. Israel today is making that mistake. Sooner or later they will have to realize who they are and who the Lord is, and fight His battles in His name. But they are trying to be political and they are afraid of the world’s opinions and certainly listen too much to the United States. Someday they are going to have all that stripped away, all their defenses will be of no use and they will be forced to turn to the God of their fathers for help and He will respond in a way they will understand. It’s the same with us. He will strip away our defenses until we acknowledge Him and turn to Him, so it’s better to enter the battle right away and learn what the Lord is trying to do. But, there is way to go to battle and way not to. First, we are to be obedient to Him before the battle begins. In Num 4.1-3 it says that they were to take a census from the sons of Kohath “from 30 years and upward, even to 50 years old, all who enter the service to do the work in the tent of meeting.” The word for “service” there is the word for warfare in Hebrew. In other words, as we are serving the Lord as He commanded, it is a type of spiritual warfare. The best spiritual warfare you can do is to obey the Lord and keep His commandments. Then He will be a shield and a buckler to you and drive out your enemies. What is taught today in many circles as “spiritual warfare” is not the biblical example. So, you will need to believe in the Lord and keep His commandments. When you have done that and a battle comes, there are several Scriptures I use. The first is found in 1 Sam 24.12. David had a conflict with Saul and he says “ May the Lord judge between you and me, and may the Lord avenge me on you, but my hand shall not be against you.” David left it all in God’s hand and did not seek his own revenge or justice, he left it up to the Lord. The second one is dealing with a battle between Israel and the sons of Ammon found in 1Chr 19.10-15. Ammon had hired the Syrians to fight with them against Israel and they surrounded Israel. Joab takes his elite forces and positions them against the hireling Syrian forces. Abshai is Joabs brother, and he takes his forces and positions them against the sons of Ammon. Joab says if you need help, I’ll come to you, and if I need help you come to me. After he has done all he can in the natural he says this: “Be strong and let us show ourselves courageous for the sake of our people and for the cities of our God; and may the Lord do what is good in His own sight.” In other words, they have done all they can do in the natural to take on the enemies of the Lord, but what happens is up to the Lord. Well, the hireling Syrians took one look at the elite Israeli forces and they had no heart for the battle and they ran. When Ammon saw that the Syrians fled, they lost courage and ran also. The battle was never fought and Israel won the victory without a fight. That’s how we should approach our battles. Be obedient to the Lord, do what needs to be done in the natural and leave the rest up to the Lord. Having done all you can do, stand and be ready to fight and no matter what happens, leave it up to the Lord. There is so much more to the concept of biblical spiritual warfare but I hope this answers your question for the most part.

Q. In Zechariah 8.19 there are four fasts listed. What is their significance today?

A. These fasts are still done in many Jewish circles but they were never commanded by the Lord. In fact He has a very interesting take on them. These fast days commemorated the taking of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians. They were self-appointed times of mourning, which in and of themselves doesn’t make them bad, but they had become mundane rituals and a way to get God to do something for them. God sees them suffering without food, God feels sorry for them and owes it to the participants to grant their requests. But that is not how the Lord works. The key, from God’s point of view, on the fasts can be found in Zechariah 7.1-14. I won’t get into detail but the idea is that the Lord was not concerned over whether they continued the practice of fasting, He never commanded them to begin with, but over the reality of why the destruction happened . It was an empty ritual void of any real repentance over the things that caused the Temple and the city to be destroyed in the first place. If repentance was there, then the Lord would have found value in their fasting. The people needed to remember why the Temple was destroyed and repent, not weep and fast over the loss of a building with an empty ritual. In 7.9 He tells them what they should have done to avoid the destruction of the city by the Babylonians, but they didn’t do it. They hardened their hearts so that they would not hear the Torah or listen to the prophets (7.12). In Chapter 8.16 He told them what they should do instead of an empty, ritualistic fast. He then says in 8.19 that when genuine repentance is done, He is going to turn those fast days into days of feasting. This can be applied to us today in many ways. We tend to replace genuine repentance with traditions and rituals that make us feel like we are doing something or makes us feel good. Many fast for the same reason today, they feel that God must respond to their suffering, or what they have given up when He doesn’t have to respond to anything if he chooses not to.. These fasts would not even have been necessary had the people obeyed the Lord in the first place. That should have been the conclusion the people reached. When we find ourselves in similar situations, go before the Lord and find out what went wrong so you can correct it. Sometimes fasting is necessary because it helps us focus on the Lord so He can speak to us about what the real problem is, but it should never be the main focus in and of itself.

Q. What is Romans 14.4-6 speaking about?

A. This chapter is dealing with several groups of people. In the 1st century, Gentiles who believed in Yeshua went to the local synagogue to learn the Scriptures (Acts 15.21). There were also Jews who believed in Yeshua in these synagogues who went back to Rome after Acts 2.10. Another group consisted of Jews who did not believe that Yeshua was the Messiah. These three group co-existed in these synagogues and with that came contention. Paul is dealing with some of these contentions in those synagogues and Romans 14 is continuing with that thought. In Romans 14.1 he uses the term “weak” to describe those synagogue Jews who did not believe that Yeshua was the Messiah (Rom 4.19-20, 10.2, 15.1)). The believing Jews and Gentiles there were not to pass judgment on their opinions. So right there he is talking about their oral traditions, not written Scripture which were not the opinions of men but the commands of God. In verse 2 he discusses the fact that some of the Jews would not eat meat or drink wine sold by Gentiles. There is Jewish law today that says the same thing. That was a part of their “halakah” or how to walk their faith before the Lord and this was an oral law. So, they would just eat vegetables because vegetables could not be considered ritually unclean (Dan 1.8-16). This offended the believing Gentiles and Paul was telling them not to be offended. He is telling those who are “strong” (have faith in Yeshua –Rom 4.19-20, 15.1)) not to look with contempt on those who do not eat meat from Gentiles because God accepts the actions of the weak and the strong. They are serving God the best they know how and it is their opinion that their actions were correct, so leave them alone. God will make their actions stand or fall, in other words reveal truth to them eventually. In v5 he talks about certain days they regarded over other days. This has nothing to do with Sabbath days or biblical festivals, everyone in the synagogue agreed about those because they were not the opinions of men but written by God Himself. These days were certain days regarded by the synagogue Jews there as being important, like certain fast days (Lk 18.11-12). Others there didn’t regard them as that important. What Paul is saying is when it comes to certain traditions, let each man do what he considers right, and not to judge the other about it. After all, each person does it to the Lord so let the Lord deal with it. A modern example would be candle-lighting in Friday nights. There is no commandment to light candles and some do it and others do not. Those that do should not force others to do it or look down on them for not doing it, and those that don’t should not try to convince the others that they shouldn’t do it. When a tradition does not violate the Torah, it’s permissible to do it but it should not be imposed on others one way or the other. There are many traditions like that, and many different variations on how to do them, even today. On the other hand, if a man-made tradition violates or goes against written Scripture, then that is a different story and that is not what Paul is talking about. Modern examples of this is Sunday “Sabbath” over Saturday. The Scriptures are clear that Saturday is the Sabbath. Another issue is eating pork or not. Some will take these verses to justify eating pork and one should not judge the other. But again, the Scriptures are clear about eating pork and it is sin. If we are not to judge one another when it comes to sin you could never raise a child. If your child tells a lie, are we to judge it and deal with it, correct it or just let it go. Of course not, and it’s the same with any other clear commandment God gave. I’ve seen preachers get on homosexuals and quote Leviticus, then turn around and eat pork and tell someone they weren’t to judge them about it. I guess it depends on whose ox is getting gored! So, in conclusion, this portion in Romans is dealing with how to get along in a congregation where unbelieving Jews, believing Jews and believing Gentiles co-existed and that we were not to pass judgment on another’s opinions on how to walk before the Lord as long as the opinion was not in direct conflict with the Scriptures. I hope this answers your question. Keep this in mind as you read the book of Romans and the different groups he is addressing.

Q.In Revelation 16.13 three frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet

Q. In Revelation 16.13 it says that three frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. What does this mean and how does that relate to us today?

A. To fully understand this we will start in 16.13 and go to verse 16. The Scriptures teach that good and evil will exist together in the Kingdom of God. God uses the demonic realm to achieve His purposes and one of the purposes is to test the earth, to test His people and so on. He will use lying spirits to do it ( 2 Chr 18.19-21) if He wants, God is sovereign. I am going to give my opinion on these verses and why. In the verse you mentioned, a similar thing is going on and it is completely under the control of the Lord. Satan, the False Messiah and the False Prophet are not running out of control in the Birth-pains, it is all according to the Lord’s purpose. In V 13 it describes the power behind these beings in apocalyptic language and symbolism. Frogs are used because a frog captures it’s victim by the tongue and so do false prophets. These three will deceive many by their “tongues” also. The next verse tells you it is the power of demons and their job is to gather the world together for a war. This war has been going on since Eden, and notice it does not say “battle.” It is an ongoing war and during the Tribulation it is going to be even worse. I don’t really see a literal “Battle of Armageddon” here, as taught in many prophecy scenarios. These lying spirits will try to convince the world to go against God’s commandments and to embrace replacement theology Christianity, or whatever religion is in their country. The key verse in understanding their purpose is verse 16. John says they will try to gather them to a place called in the Hebrew Har-magedon. Now, why did he say “in the Hebrew” and not just say it in Greek. It’s because there is something to be understood about this and it can only be understood if you have been taught from the Torah and the Prophets and the concepts found there. The Greeks didn’t have these concepts (Jn 4.22). The term “har-magedon” has been used before in Scripture. You will find it in Isaiah 14.13. It talks about Satan’s desire to sit on the “mount of assembly” (har-moe-ghed) and be worshipped. It refers to the people coming up to Jerusalem, to the Temple on Mt. Moriah at the appointed times (Sabbath/Festivals) to meet with God. So this term is used again in Revelation 16.16 to describe why these lying spirits go out to deceive the world. This term does not mean “Mount Megiddo” because there is no Mount Megiddo in Israel. This is a war over whose holy days are the people going to keep. Dan 7.25 says the False Messiah and the False Prophet will replace the biblical festivals with other ones because he wants to be worshipped on the “Mount of Assembly (har-moeghed).” The war being described here is over obedience to the Torah. These lying spirits, described as frogs (because of their tongues) go out and tell people that the Law has been done away with, Sunday is the Lord’s Day, Christmas is godly, go ahead and eat unclean meats like pork, lobster, catfish, and that is just in this country. He has deceived the whole world with many different religions. Satan doesn’t care what you follow as long as it isn’t biblical. And if it isn’t what God said, then by implication you are really following Satan, and he is now on the “Mount of Assembly” (har-moeghed) and that is what he has wanted (Isa 14.13) and that is what the verse is saying. Notice God uses an unclean creature like a frog to signify a demon, and there are people reading this article right now who eat frogs and say God says it’s alright! The war has always been over whether you will obey the Lord or not. So, in short, these frogs signify demonic spirits/teachings, who go forth and try to capture victims with their tongues. The place for this war is the “the mount of assembly” or true worship as described in the Torah (Jn 4.19-24). Do you follow the Lord’s festivals or do you follow replacement festivals? I don’t really see a physical last “Battle of Armageddon” here. That is part of the deception. People are looking for a physical battle when the real war is spiritual and it is over obedience to the Word of God. That is not to say there won’t be physical battles in the Tribulation because there will be, but there is something greater going on in these verses. The world is being prepared right now to embrace these three frogs, the theology is in place and growing and there are plenty of “frogs” capturing their victims with their tongues right now in any religion that does not follow the written word of God as found in the Torah.

This week will be the conclusion of the series on the New Covenant and the Kingdom offer.

The whole matter will come back to Moab. In 2 Macc 2.1-8 it says that Jeremiah hid the Mishkan (tabernacle) at Mt. Nebo. Many have heard about this when they study about where the Ark of the Covenant may be. But, nobody talks about why he picked Mt. Nebo in Moab! Because according to Jeremiah God was going to place that same law in our hearts someday, just like Jeremiah was placing the Covenant in the “heart” of the mountain in Moab where the New Covenant was described in Deut 29.1-30.20. Again, there is a connection between Moab and the Covenant with Moses. According to this book, the Mishkan (tabernacle) and all its items will be revealed to the world at the re-gathering of Israel, another element of the New Covenant. So, let’s review a few things. There are 2 covenants in the Torah. The New Covenant at Moab is distinguished from the “curse” of the Mosaic covenant. This new Covenant is tied to the work of the Messiah, or Yeshua. This New Covenant involves a change in the heart, or desires, and involves the Holy Spirit to guide us in these desires to observe the Torah. This covenant has been offered to Israel collectively on at least three occasions. The first was in Deut 29.1, upon entering the land. The second when returning to the land in Jer. 29.10, 31.30 and the third in the first century with the coming of Yeshua (Mt 26.27-29). While Israel may not collectively enter this covenant until Yeshua returns, individual people may enter early by becoming citizens of a Kingdom not yet established on earth. The New Covenant is God writing His Torah on our hearts. He did this by the work of Yeshua and the blood He shed on the cross as the pure “seed of the father” (Moab). This fulfills the promise to Abraham about how his “seed” (singular in Hebrew- Gal 3.16) would “bless the nations” (Gen 12.1-3). The Holy Spirit was poured out in Acts 2 on Israel and Acts 10 on the Gentiles. This covenant was cut and ratified like the covenant with Abraham and the covenant at Sinai, not with the blood of bulls, sheep, goats or birds, but with the pure blood of Yeshua. This covenant is repeated in Ezek. 36.22-38. The ultimate outcome of the covenant does not depend on Israel or their obedience like the covenant at Sinai (Heb 8.7-8), but on God and his faithfulness. As you can see, these concepts are very foreign to most reading this because it is not taught. What is usually taught is a remanufactured “New Covenant” made in man’s image and according to the bias of whatever religious institution that does not want to comply with what God has already said about it and gave to Israel. I hope this helps.

This week we will continue with last week's question about the New Covenant

We dealt briefly with what the New Covenant is and this week we will discuss Yeshua, Paul and the New Covenant. When Yeshua began His ministry He reads from Isaiah which is the Haftarah reading for the Torah reading which dealt with the Covenant of Moab. He said that it was fulfilled "today" in their ears (Lk 4.21). The Lord was going to "hasten" this restoration but if the people did not repent it would come in its due time (Isa 60.22). The offer of the Kingdom began with John the Baptist (Mt 3.2, 4.17). One of the elements of the New Covenant is the restored kingdom of Israel (Acts 1.6-7, Jer 23.5-6, Isa 9.6-7, 2 Chr 28.5, 13.8). But the kingdom was being rejected and Yeshua compared this rejection with "those who would not dance" (Mt 11.12-19). But the New Covenant still needed to be ratified in blood, which He did when he was crucified (Mt 26.27-29). The Kingdom offer was later extended and that is what is spoken about in the book of Acts. There was a national call for repentance in Acts 3.12-26 but the people did not respond and by Acts 28.17-28 the final curtain was being drawn on it ever happening in the first century. This brings us to Paul and the New Covenant and this was the basis for his ministry. He contrasts the circumcision of the heart by the Holy Spirit (an element of the Covenant of Moab) with those who were circumcised in the flesh (an element of the Covenant at Sinai) in Rom. 2.27-29. He spoke of the renewal of the Spirit (Moab) with the oldness of the writing of the Sinai covenant alone (Rom 7.6). In chapters 7 and 8 of Romans he contrasts the two Mosaic covenants when he said that walking by the Sinai covenant alone was a work of the flesh but walking by it in the Spirit was what the New Covenant was all about. You see, the Torah or Law of God was never done away with. It was how you walked in it that made all the difference. In Rom 10.4-8 he contrasts the "righteousness that is by the Torah" by quoting Lev 18.5 with the righteousness that is by faith by quoting from the covenant at Moab (Dt 30.11-14). He says that this covenant is the word of faith that "we proclaim" and said that the Covenant at Moab is the covenant of Messiah by which we are saved (Rom 10.9-13). In 2 Cor 3.3-6 he refers to the New Covenant when he contrasts the "letter" written on stone with the "spirit" of Torah written on our hearts. He says following the letter kills, but following the spirit of it gives life. In Galatians 3 he alludes to these 2 covenants. He says Messiah redeemed us from the curse (3.10-13). Jewish commentators tell us the word "besides" in Dt 29.1 distinguishes the covenant at Moab from the curse of the Law. In Galatians 4.16-31 he plainly compares the two covenants. The main thing to remember in all of this is that the Torah is what is being followed in both covenants. One is by the flesh (Sinai) and the other is being led by the Holy Spirit to keep the commandments (Moab). It all comes down to being "born from above" or not. The book of Hebrews is full of references to these covenants. Heb 8.1 begins with the "main point" then it quotes all of Jer 31.31-34 regarding the New Covenant. In Hebrews 8.8-11 and beyond he compares the first covenant at Sinai with the second at Moab (8.6, 7, 13, 9.1, 15, and 10.9). This second covenant differed from the first. The first (Sinai) was ratified with the blood of animals but the second (Moab) was ratified by the blood of Yeshua. Again, the Torah itself didn't change or was done away with (9.12-24) with the covenant at Moab, it was repeated or "renewed" with better promises and that is why it is called the New (renewed) covenant. In Heb 3.7-4.10 he says the "rest" we enter is like the entry of Israel into Canaan which took place at the death of Moses and after making the covenant at Moab. If you study out the names and places when Moses died you will see the whole picture of the covenant at Sinai and the covenant of Moab played out. Remember, the common element in both covenants is the commandments of the Lord. That hasn't changed. But instead of the Lord writing them on stone, He writes them on our hearts. This is made possible through the ratification of this covenant by the death, burial and resurrection of Yeshua. Next week we will review all of this and try to wrap it up nicely so it can be understood better and we will see the New Covenant all comes back to the Covenant at Moab in Dt 29.1 through 30.20. Click here for part 3

Q. You have mentioned in past articles that the kingdom was being offered in the 1st century. What exactly do you mean?

A. To understand this I will have to go back and give some background. This will take several weeks so don't miss the next few articles. This will not be in massive detail but it will give you a better idea of what is going on, This week we will go over what the New Covenant is, next week we'll talk about Yeshua, Paul and the kingdom offer in relation to the new covenant and then the next week try to wrap everything up with a historical overview and show you it all comes back to the Covenant at Moab in Dt 29.1 through Dt 3.20. The "new" covenant is called the "Covenant at Moab." The Mosaic Covenant was made at Mt. Sinai and mediated by Moses, ratified with blood and given to those present at that time ( "in your ears" Dt 5.1-5). The Covenant at Moab ( Moab="seed of the Father") was made at Mt. Nebo (Nebo="prophet") shortly before entry into the promised land. This covenant is "besides" the Mosaic Covenant and includes Torah observance (Dt 30.10). Are you starting to see the connection? The people said they would keep the Mosaic covenant (Ex 24.7) but didn't. This brought on the need for the 2nd covenant at Moab. Both covenants are a work of God's grace (Jn 1.17). It's not like the Mosaic covenant because it had better promises, it was made with everyone, even those unborn (Dt 29 10-15). The Messiah (Yeshua) was the "surety" (Heb 7.22, 8.6, 12.24) and it would be ratified in His blood, not animals like in the Mosaic Covenant. The Moabite covenant had blessings, not just curses. Israel would be honored in the earth, the land would prosper, enemies defeated and they would be the head not the tail. It would be centered around repentance (Dt 30.2,8) and a circumcised heart ("desires"-Dt 30.26). The prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah talked about this new covenant (Ezek 36.22-38, Jer 11.1-4). This is the new covenant Yeshua spoke about and it is based in the Torah (Dt 30.10, everlasting (Jer 32.40) and gives life (Dt 30.6,15,19). The difference between the "old" covenant and the "new" covenant is not what is written but where it is written. It won't be on stone this time but on the heart, through the Holy Spirit. Daniel was studying about the prophecies in Jeremiah (Dan 9.2) and knew that the curses had come upon Israel due to their disobedience (Dan 9.13, Lev 26.14, Dt 28.15). He also knew that it would be seven times worse if they didn't repent (Lev 26.18,21,24,28). In Dan 9 he prays for mercy because he knows Israel failed to repent and 7 x 70 equals 490 years. Gabriel comes with God's reply and Israel will fall into a 490 year cycle. But Messiah will come after 483 years and be "cut off." Israel would need to repent when he came and accept the Torah and then at the end of 490 years enter the new covenant, already promised in Dt 29.1-30.20). But the new covenant could not take place until it was ratified in blood and that brings us up to the coming of Yeshua. He came to offer the kingdom and to ratify this new covenant for the forgiveness of sins, to open the way up for the coming of the Holy Spirit who would circumcise the heart and write the Torah on the hearts of those "born from above" (Jn 3.1-21). This circumcision of the heart is the desire to keep the commandments and that could only happen after the resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit ( Jn 7.37-39). Next week we will pick up right here with the coming of Yeshua and His mission to offer the kingdom and to ratify the Moabite or new covenant and repentance.You see, the failure of the Mosaic covenant wasn't because the commandments were bad, it was the people who were at fault in Heb 8.8-13 and repentance was needed. That's why Jeremiah 31.31-34 is quoted by the writer of Hebrews describing the new covenant. Their desires needed to change and that could only be done through the work of God. So, hopefully, you have a better understanding of what the new covenant really is. It has nothing to do with the Law being done away with as is taught by many today but a new, circumcised heart to obey God and not make the same mistakes the people did under the Mosaic covenant. We'll pick up there next week with Yeshua and Paul in relation to the new covenant. Click here for Part 2

Q. Why does your interpretation of Paul’s writings seem to differ from mainstream Christianity?

A. I want to make this clear that it is not my interpretation only and that I had many teachers and scholars who passed on their knowledge to me over the years. To know the Lord is a commandment and that comes through knowing His word primarily and that takes a lot of work. Many people have told me what God said, but few could tell me what He meant and there is a difference. So, let me pass on to you some ways to help you understand Paul (and the rest of Scripture). There are several things to understand when you are reading Paul that just aren’t taught in seminaries or churches, so I’ll go over some of those things to give you some idea on how to understand the difficult words of Paul. Paul was a second Temple period Pharisee and was also an expert in the Torah. His teacher was the grandson of Rabbi Hillel. His writings contain many deep and mystical Hebraic concepts about the Lord. Most people who read the New Testament know very little about the Pharisaical understanding of the Scriptures. Most people know little or nothing about PARDES ( the 4 levels of interpretation called Peshat, Remez, Drash and Sowd) and the 7 Rules of Hillel in interpreting Scripture. Paul uses both of these in his writings. Anyone trained in these levels and rules will recognize them immediately when they read Paul. And if they don’t know the 4 levels (PARDES) they will not understand the deeper, mystical aspects of Paul’s writings and the writings of the other New Testament writers for that matter.. Another problem is the that the Hebrew concepts do not carry over well into the Greek. There are several good books on this subject like “ Understanding the Difficult words of Jesus” by Roy Blizzard and David Bivin. For instance, how does Paul convey the meaning of legalistically following the commandments without faith? Well, a phrase had to be invented called “erga nomos” in Greek which means “works of the Law” because there was no equivalent concept in Greek. Now if some of Paul’s meanings were lost from Hebrew to Greek, it got worse from Greek to English. Another problem is people read Paul’s letters with an instilled bias from their own theology and backround. They already think Paul was teaching “we are not under the Law” before they even start reading. Peter taught that Paul was hard to understand and that was before some of the above problems (2 Pet 3.16). Peter said that there would be “lawless” people who would twist what Paul said into error. He did not mean people who are were without Roman or American law, but “lawless” is to be understood as “without Torah (anomos in Greek).” He is saying that those who twist Paul’s writings do not follow God’s Law, the Torah ( the teaching, the instruction, the bull’s eye, the commandmants). They may do it ignorantly or on purpose, it really doesn’t matter. The fact is they will have incorrect interpretations because their “plumb line” is crooked. So, how should Paul be understood? You must understand the overall biblical and historical context. Be aware of Peter’s warning in 2 Pet.3.16. Remember what Yeshua said in Mt 5.17-19 when He said “Do not think that I have come to destroy (misinterpret) the Law, but to fulfill (interpret it correctly).” Today there are people who not only think it but teach it! Paul had positive statements about the Torah (Rom 7.12;22,25;1 Tim 1.8;Rom 3.31; 1 Cor. 7.19; Acts 25.8;28.17). Even Paul’s negative statements was not about the Torah but about the people and man’s misuse. Lastly, Paul himself was Torah observant (Acts 21. 15-26) and he taught others (1 Cor. 11.1-2; 2 The 2.16, 3.6). Eventually his writing’s would be used not only against the Jews by Gentile Christianity but used to deter anyone from following the Torah. They “redefined” his writings into what has developed into Replacement Theology (exactly what Peter warned us about) and that is where we find ourselves today. But, God wrote the Scriptures and inspired Paul and it is God who will teach us the same truth He conveyed to Paul so it is not hopeless. Many are being taught of the Lord through teachers He has raised up and they are rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem like Nehemiah and finding out that Paul is not difficult to understand at all. Try to keep these things in mind when you read his writings the next time. One of the questions I always ask myself is “How would this have been understood in the first century?” When Paul said what he said, how would his listeners have understood him. Don’t look at the Scriptures through the Church Fathers or the Rabbis, look at Scripture as if you were a first century Jew or Gentile and you will see what the writers were trying to say. It takes work and going back in history but God has not asked us to do something that is impossible. He wrote the book and He will show you what He meant.

Q. .What is the Lord's Supper?

A.This is a very important concept in the Scriptures and it started in the Torah. The information on what a Lord's Supper is will conflict with the concepts, ideologies and doctrines of many but hopefully you will look deeper into this. Again, there is no way to get into detail about all of
the concepts related to it but you will get a good idea of what it is and what it isn't.
Let's start with what it is. A Lord's Supper is a meal, a full meal, dedicated to God and concentrated on Him. Every Sabbath, festival (except Yom Kippur), life-cycle event had a theme and a meal was centered around it. Harvests and sacrifices also had meals around them. The emphasis of the meal always came back to the Wedding Supper. A Lord's Supper pointed to Sukkot and Sukkot pointed to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. The idea was to rehearse being in the Messianic Kingdom ( Mt 8.11; Mt 22.1-14; 25.10;Dt 16.1-16;Gen 18.1-8;31.54;Ex 24.1-11;Lk 12.35-38;Job 1.4). Each festival had a meal with songs, prayers, blessings, a theme, teaching, ceremonies, symbolic foods and scriptures.You could have a meal to celebrate victories, give comfort to mourners and it had a celebatory nature to them. Joy was an essential element and a right attitude. Paul admonished the Corinthians about how their meals had degenerated. Portions were given to the poor and guests were invited accompanied by a spirit of hospitality. The essence of a Lord's Supper was a banquet, an eschatological meal that taught something about the redemption. To eat with someone showed you had accepted them. In The Book of Galatians, the Gentile believers were being told that they had to be ritually circumcised( become Jewish) to be saved by some well-meaning believers but that wasn't true. When these teachers came to Galatia, Peter stopped eating with them to show he had not accepted them and Paul took him to task about it. It was Peter who had the revelation from God in Acts 10 that Gentiles did not have to be circumcised to be saved and yet he entered into hypocrisy for fear of them. This didn't look very good and Paul had to correct Peter to his face. A communal meal is one of the concepts around a meal concecrated to God and Peter didn't want to be seen "communing" with them. As you can see, there a many elements to a Lord's Supper that is very unfamiliar to most reading this and that is because what is being practiced today is not what the biblical model is. The current practice in many congregations is based on pagan concepts related to Mithraism. If you did some research on the Lord's Supper as it was done in Mithraism you would be very surprised to find out that
that it has more to do with pagan rituals than what the biblical model is. It has some mystical, sacramental element that has nothing to do with what the Lord had in mind. And
how did a full meal degenerate down to a thimble full of grape juice and a piece of bread?
It's because Replacement Theology has turned it into something it never was supposed to be. How many of us would invite someone over for a Thanksgiving dinner and then serve grape juice and a piece of bread? Now, if we wouldn't do that for a man-made festival why do people do it with a meal consecrated to God Himself? I hope this gives you some idea of this concept and also causes you to rethink what you may be practicing. There is so much more to this than what people have experienced and I hope this motivates some to find the true essence of what a meal consecrated to God is all about. For more information on this you can go to the Jewish Encyclopedia on the Internet and to Tyndale's commentary and look up "Banquets" and also look up"mithraism" on the Internet and find out what was practiced. You will be very surprised.

Q. Are the “sons of God” in Genesis 6.2 fallen angels?

A. This issue comes up every so often and we’ll deal with it again here. The “sons of God” are not fallen angels and they did not produce some sort of half-man, half-angel type of being . Let’s start in Genesis 6.1 and work through verse 4. Chapter 6 is telling us of Satan’s further attempt to corrupt mankind. There are other attempts in Scripture like when Balaam and Barak caused Israel to sin and 24,000 died. As mankind procreated, daughters were born. As time went on some followed after God and others didn’t and the truth was being corrupted. The “sons of God” is merely an expression for the believing line, also called the “sons of Seth” based on Genesis 4.26. In Genesis 6.2 these sons of Seth began to choose wives from the daughters of men from “whomever they chose” out of the unbelievers, and they were unequally yoked. Remember Abraham had a fear of this when he wanted to choose a wife for Isaac, and the wives of Jacob and Esau is another example. The Lord saw this wasn’t good. Living long lives was not producing repentance (2 Pet 3.9) and He sets a certain time limit (2 Cor6.2) in Genesis 6.3. The Nephilim in verse 4 were the children produced by these parents. Nephilim in Hebrew simply means “fallen ones” which implies that they had fallen from the truth with ferocity and impiety. This word is used again in Num 13.33 with allusions to the “giants in Deut 1.18, 2 Sam 21.18-22, 1 Chr 20.4-8 and these certainly were not children born from fallen angels but simply people with a “giant” reputation of ferociousness and impiety who had fallen away from the truth . These people became famous for their valor, power and rule and certainly the battle between David and Goliath would be an example of this struggle between the truth and those who had fallen away (nephilim) that has been going on since Genesis 6. There “nephilim” in the world today ,too. Now there are several other reasons why these were not fallen angels. First, angels cannot marry or are they given in marriage (Mt 22.29-32). Secondly, angels can’t produce children with humans because they don’t have the DNA to do it. Mankind can only produce “after their own kind” and that is through the DNA so that should settle this whole issue right there. So, in conclusion, Genesis 6 begins to tell the story of how the truth of God begins to get corrupted, and believers began to intermarry with unbelievers producing a mixture of truth and error. In time mankind was so corrupted that God brought the flood and preserved the truth through the righteous line of Noah. Later through the line of Shem (“semites”) the Messiah would be born who would destroy Satan as promised in Genesis 3.15. Genesis 6 tells us the story of how God preserved the truth of His Word to save mankind and judged those who had fallen from the truth and corrupted themselves through unbelief.