Q. What are some signs that we are in the end times?
A. There have been many books written on this question and there are some obvious signs like war, pestilence and a rise in evil. Since Yeshua walked this earth these signs have gotten worse and worse and those that lived in each generation thought that things could not get worse and that they were living in the last days, but they were wrong. Some basic signs can be found in Mat 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, but I am going to give some other signs that are implied and what I am looking for. First, one must have a knowledge of the biblical calendars and festivals. These are signs that the Lord gave and a timetable for events. In biblical eschatology, the world since creation will go on for 6000 years and then we enter into the last thousand years called "the Lord's Day" and the 7 day week we go by today is a picture of that. We know that there will be a Temple built and it will be active during the Tribulation. We know from 2 Thes. 2 and Rev 11 it will be in operation during the tribulation. There are scriptures that indicate that it will begin operating at the beginning of the last 1000 year day called the Lord's Day as mentioned before. That 1000 year period begins on a Rosh Ha Shanah, so the Altar will be in operation before the actual Temple building is done (Ezra 3.1-6) and so it is possible that the day the rapture occurs (Rosh Ha Shanah, year 6001 from creation) will also be the first day the offerings begin on the Temple Mount. So that means that the believers will be here up to that point, which means we could see several things first. In order to have an operating Altar you would have to have the Temple Mount. You also will need a Red Heifer slaughtered in order to cleanse people from ritual uncleanliness from contact with the dead. The Red Heifer would have to be slaughtered at least 7 days before the Temple or Altar could begin to operate, so we could see that. We also would have to see the priests being prepared and the actual Altar being built and cleansed, along with all the utensils that will be used. Much of this will have to begin 7 days prior to the actual beginning. So, here is what I am looking for. I believe that the the rapture of the believers will happen on a Tishri 1 of the biblical calendar. But before that will happen we will see the following things happen. We will see the Temple Mount in Jewish control where they will begin putting up an Altar for the coming Temple. I believe we will also see the priesthood being prepared and cleansed from ritual uncleanliness, which means we will see a Red Heifer slaughtered on the Mount of Olives. This has to be done at least 7 days prior to Tishri 1 so that would put this around the 24th of Elul according to the biblical calendar. These cleansings take 7 days according to the Torah (Num 19). So, along with the general signs Yeshua gave there are more specific signs to look for. When Israel gets the Temple Mount, when a Red Heifer is slaughtered and a priesthood prepared to make offering and an Altar is built on the Mount, the next Rosh Ha Shannah will be the day the rapture occurs. Then 10 days later the 7 year Tribulation will begin on Yom Kippur.
The La Quinta meeting room in Alvarado, 1165 Hwy 67W Alvarado, TX. 76009. (Behind Sonic)
For information Email at wmriley17@yahoo.com
Olive Tree Image
upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
1 Corinthians 10:11 (NASB95)
Monday, February 20, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
What does "unclean" mean in Leviticus 11?
Q. What does "unclean" mean in Leviticus 11?
A. The concept of clean and unclean is a subject that is misunderstood at best by most believers. I am not going to go into massive detail here but I will give some basic definitions and instruction that should answer your question and give you enough information so that you can do your own study on the subject. The term clean and unclean relate to ritual purity and ritual purity applies to whether or not you can enter the Sanctuary and touch Holy things. Basically, if you were unclean you could not enter the Temple or touch anything that was in the Temple. So, in Leviticus 11 God tells us what creatures are acceptable and ritually pure and what aren't. All of that pertains to whether or not you can enter the Temple. Now, there are several concepts to discuss. These creatures in Lev 11 can be divided into three categories and how they affect a person who wants to go to the Tabernacle/Temple. There are creatures that are acceptable for sacrifice, like the bull, goat, sheep and certain birds. These can be offered to God and eating them is ritually acceptable (clean). There is another category of creatures that cannot be offered as a sacrifice, like deer, elk and certain birds but they are acceptable to eat and will not make someone ritually impure so they can enter the Tabernacle/Temple. The third category is made up of creatures that are not only unacceptable for sacrifice but eating them will make the worshiper ritually unclean and ineligible to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. That is why the term clean and unclean are used in this chapter. It tells you what is ritually acceptable or not when wanting to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. Now, the term unclean is not equated with sin. Nowhere in Lev 11 does it say it was sin to be unclean in regards to these creatures. Did Yeshua ever sin? No, but he was unclean on several occasions and could not enter the Temple. He touched the dead, the highest form of uncleanliness. He touched lepers and a woman with a blood issue. To enter the Temple again, he would have had to go through the purification process required for whatever impurity it was, from being sprinkled with the ashes of the Red Heifer, to a simple immersion and remaining unclean till sundown. So, unclean should not be equated with sin but should be understood in the context of ritual purity and the ability to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. There is no Temple today so the laws pertaining to clean and unclean are not applicable today. Everybody, even Orthodox Jews, are unclean today and would not be able to enter the Temple if it stood today unless they went through a purification process. There are people who think they eat kosher but they don't. All meat from restaurants and grocery stores are unclean. Canned foods and other items are unclean ritually. There is not one person who doesn't eat unclean food. But, that doesn't matter because there is no Temple and so it does not apply. People will say "I don't eat pork because it is unclean" but they will eat steak and chicken that is also unclean because it has been in contact with pork. No butcher shop in grocery stores is ritually pure and when you go out to eat, the meat there is unclean, no matter what you eat. We are also unclean many other ways, too. Ever touched the dead or been to a cemetery? Ever touch a woman who was menstrual or a dead insect? Ever touched the carcass of a dead animal that was unclean? Have you ever touched a woman who ever had a baby? All these things make one ritually impure and ineligible to enter the Temple. Now, there are certain health benefits to eating clean animals today but that wasn't the reason the Lord gave these laws. We must not look down on people when they eat unclean food because everyone does. Just because you don't eat pork doesn't mean you don't eat unclean meat, because you do. But, do a study on what clean and unclean mean and how that relates to entering the Temple and you will have a better understanding of these concepts and hopefully it will set you free on some inaccurate concepts you may be holding on to.
A. The concept of clean and unclean is a subject that is misunderstood at best by most believers. I am not going to go into massive detail here but I will give some basic definitions and instruction that should answer your question and give you enough information so that you can do your own study on the subject. The term clean and unclean relate to ritual purity and ritual purity applies to whether or not you can enter the Sanctuary and touch Holy things. Basically, if you were unclean you could not enter the Temple or touch anything that was in the Temple. So, in Leviticus 11 God tells us what creatures are acceptable and ritually pure and what aren't. All of that pertains to whether or not you can enter the Temple. Now, there are several concepts to discuss. These creatures in Lev 11 can be divided into three categories and how they affect a person who wants to go to the Tabernacle/Temple. There are creatures that are acceptable for sacrifice, like the bull, goat, sheep and certain birds. These can be offered to God and eating them is ritually acceptable (clean). There is another category of creatures that cannot be offered as a sacrifice, like deer, elk and certain birds but they are acceptable to eat and will not make someone ritually impure so they can enter the Tabernacle/Temple. The third category is made up of creatures that are not only unacceptable for sacrifice but eating them will make the worshiper ritually unclean and ineligible to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. That is why the term clean and unclean are used in this chapter. It tells you what is ritually acceptable or not when wanting to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. Now, the term unclean is not equated with sin. Nowhere in Lev 11 does it say it was sin to be unclean in regards to these creatures. Did Yeshua ever sin? No, but he was unclean on several occasions and could not enter the Temple. He touched the dead, the highest form of uncleanliness. He touched lepers and a woman with a blood issue. To enter the Temple again, he would have had to go through the purification process required for whatever impurity it was, from being sprinkled with the ashes of the Red Heifer, to a simple immersion and remaining unclean till sundown. So, unclean should not be equated with sin but should be understood in the context of ritual purity and the ability to enter the Tabernacle/Temple. There is no Temple today so the laws pertaining to clean and unclean are not applicable today. Everybody, even Orthodox Jews, are unclean today and would not be able to enter the Temple if it stood today unless they went through a purification process. There are people who think they eat kosher but they don't. All meat from restaurants and grocery stores are unclean. Canned foods and other items are unclean ritually. There is not one person who doesn't eat unclean food. But, that doesn't matter because there is no Temple and so it does not apply. People will say "I don't eat pork because it is unclean" but they will eat steak and chicken that is also unclean because it has been in contact with pork. No butcher shop in grocery stores is ritually pure and when you go out to eat, the meat there is unclean, no matter what you eat. We are also unclean many other ways, too. Ever touched the dead or been to a cemetery? Ever touch a woman who was menstrual or a dead insect? Ever touched the carcass of a dead animal that was unclean? Have you ever touched a woman who ever had a baby? All these things make one ritually impure and ineligible to enter the Temple. Now, there are certain health benefits to eating clean animals today but that wasn't the reason the Lord gave these laws. We must not look down on people when they eat unclean food because everyone does. Just because you don't eat pork doesn't mean you don't eat unclean meat, because you do. But, do a study on what clean and unclean mean and how that relates to entering the Temple and you will have a better understanding of these concepts and hopefully it will set you free on some inaccurate concepts you may be holding on to.
Monday, January 30, 2012
What does "under the law" really mean?
Q. In Gal 3.24-25 it says that the Law is our tutor and now that faith has come we are no longer under a tutor. Does that mean we are no longer under the Law?
A. This term "under the law" is "upo nomon" in Greek and Paul uses it many times. He says in Gal 5.18 that we are not "upo nomon" (under the law) if we are led by the Spirit. Now, the main theme of Galatians is whether or not the believers there had to be ritually circumcised according to the traditions of the elders to be saved. They taught that a person had to become a Jew through ritual circumcision to be saved. When Paul uses "under the law" he is referring to the oral law of the Rabbi's that said you had to be circumcised to be saved. This came up in Acts 15 and Acts 21 and was a major issue in the first century. Now, a system of works righteousness was developed by the rabbi's from 300 BC to 50 BC (Rom 9.30-33) and what he is basically saying is that a person is not under indictment or under arrest for breaking the oral law of the rabbi's, in this case, ritual circumcision. Now, let's get back to the original question about the "tutor" in Gal 3.24-25. The tutor in Greek is the word "paidagogos" and in the Greek/Roman world they were the guardians and disciplinarians over the master's children until they reached the age of maturity. Now, here is why Paul used it. The Torah has a double nature. The Law acts as a "tutor" in a judicial role, but only until we come to the Lord as a believer. The "tutor" (Law) points us out as sinners and calls for punishment. We are "under arrest" and in custody. Both Jew and Gentile are all under sin (Rom 3.9). But, when we become a believer (maturity) the Law's role as "tutor" is abolished. The Law can no longer demand our death because there is no longer a record of our sins. That's what remission of sin means. By doing this we are no longer under the curse of the law, which is death. This brings us to the second aspect of the Law, and that is instructional. That's what Torah means, instruction. The Torah reveals God's ways to us and guides us in the way that we should go. It reveals the will of God in so many areas that we don't even have to pray about it, we already know. When we don't follow the Torah, then we sin and we know we have forgiveness (1 Jn 1.9). So, what Paul is saying is this. The Law was our tutor when we weren't saved and it points out our sin and penalty, the first aspect. When we become a believer we are no longer "under a tutor" because we are "mature" and that role does not apply to us anymore. Now, the Law becomes our instructor and it tells us to obey, it tells us how to live as a believer. It doesn't save you but it shows us what to do, how the Lord thinks and what is important. When I was in Catholic school the priests used to tell us that we "were children of God, act like it!" So, Paul is merely saying to the Galatians that they have moved from the judicial role of the Torah to its instructive role and the false teaching of ritual circumcision was not in the Torah and they did not have to obey it. It was a rabbinical decree and part of the oral law and it played no role in salvation. They did not need to "do" any works to be saved and that was the whole point of the book of Galatians. Now, ritual circumcision is not to be confused with Abrahamic circumcision. Let me explain. The Torah teaches that a descendant of Abraham should be circumcised (Gen 17.9-14). That is a commandment and Paul observed it and had Timothy circumcised because his mother was Jewish but his father was a Greek and apparently they did not circumcised Timothy. So, when Timothy became a believer Paul had him circumcised in obedience to the Abrahamic Covenant. But, this is not ritual circumcision. Ritual circumcision only applied to Gentiles and they were told that they could not be saved unless they became a Jew and they had to undergo a ritual circumcision as part of the conversion process. This was a man-made law and Paul was against it and so was God (Acts 10). Knowing this will help explain why Paul circumcised Timothy (Abrahamic circumcision based on Gen 17) and why he did not circumcise the Gentile Titus (rabbinical, ritual circumcision). One was of God and the other man-made. So, in conclusion, the bottom line is this. If you are an unbeliever you are still "under the tutor" but once you believe you are no longer "under a tutor because you have reached maturity and now the Torah is instructional.
A. This term "under the law" is "upo nomon" in Greek and Paul uses it many times. He says in Gal 5.18 that we are not "upo nomon" (under the law) if we are led by the Spirit. Now, the main theme of Galatians is whether or not the believers there had to be ritually circumcised according to the traditions of the elders to be saved. They taught that a person had to become a Jew through ritual circumcision to be saved. When Paul uses "under the law" he is referring to the oral law of the Rabbi's that said you had to be circumcised to be saved. This came up in Acts 15 and Acts 21 and was a major issue in the first century. Now, a system of works righteousness was developed by the rabbi's from 300 BC to 50 BC (Rom 9.30-33) and what he is basically saying is that a person is not under indictment or under arrest for breaking the oral law of the rabbi's, in this case, ritual circumcision. Now, let's get back to the original question about the "tutor" in Gal 3.24-25. The tutor in Greek is the word "paidagogos" and in the Greek/Roman world they were the guardians and disciplinarians over the master's children until they reached the age of maturity. Now, here is why Paul used it. The Torah has a double nature. The Law acts as a "tutor" in a judicial role, but only until we come to the Lord as a believer. The "tutor" (Law) points us out as sinners and calls for punishment. We are "under arrest" and in custody. Both Jew and Gentile are all under sin (Rom 3.9). But, when we become a believer (maturity) the Law's role as "tutor" is abolished. The Law can no longer demand our death because there is no longer a record of our sins. That's what remission of sin means. By doing this we are no longer under the curse of the law, which is death. This brings us to the second aspect of the Law, and that is instructional. That's what Torah means, instruction. The Torah reveals God's ways to us and guides us in the way that we should go. It reveals the will of God in so many areas that we don't even have to pray about it, we already know. When we don't follow the Torah, then we sin and we know we have forgiveness (1 Jn 1.9). So, what Paul is saying is this. The Law was our tutor when we weren't saved and it points out our sin and penalty, the first aspect. When we become a believer we are no longer "under a tutor" because we are "mature" and that role does not apply to us anymore. Now, the Law becomes our instructor and it tells us to obey, it tells us how to live as a believer. It doesn't save you but it shows us what to do, how the Lord thinks and what is important. When I was in Catholic school the priests used to tell us that we "were children of God, act like it!" So, Paul is merely saying to the Galatians that they have moved from the judicial role of the Torah to its instructive role and the false teaching of ritual circumcision was not in the Torah and they did not have to obey it. It was a rabbinical decree and part of the oral law and it played no role in salvation. They did not need to "do" any works to be saved and that was the whole point of the book of Galatians. Now, ritual circumcision is not to be confused with Abrahamic circumcision. Let me explain. The Torah teaches that a descendant of Abraham should be circumcised (Gen 17.9-14). That is a commandment and Paul observed it and had Timothy circumcised because his mother was Jewish but his father was a Greek and apparently they did not circumcised Timothy. So, when Timothy became a believer Paul had him circumcised in obedience to the Abrahamic Covenant. But, this is not ritual circumcision. Ritual circumcision only applied to Gentiles and they were told that they could not be saved unless they became a Jew and they had to undergo a ritual circumcision as part of the conversion process. This was a man-made law and Paul was against it and so was God (Acts 10). Knowing this will help explain why Paul circumcised Timothy (Abrahamic circumcision based on Gen 17) and why he did not circumcise the Gentile Titus (rabbinical, ritual circumcision). One was of God and the other man-made. So, in conclusion, the bottom line is this. If you are an unbeliever you are still "under the tutor" but once you believe you are no longer "under a tutor because you have reached maturity and now the Torah is instructional.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Why so many differences in the Messianic Movement?
Q. Why are there so many differences in the Messianic Movement?
A. One of the problems with the Messianic movement is that it tries to resemble "Judaism" and its practices that centered around Rabbinic Judaism. Some believers get caught up in all the "Jewish" practices which can get them right back into a religious perversion that is just as bad as some of the practices in Christianity. Most Messianic Jewish organizations are just "fronts" to win Jewish people to Christianity. Their leaders have said it was never the intent of these organizations to direct Jews and Gentiles to follow the Torah. This has been dealt with in many previous articles so I won't get into it here, but that is a problem. If one stood up and said that they should follow the Torah they would be escorted out of that Congregation. That's why pork is served at their conventions and they buy and sell on the Sabbath. They have a Jewish window dressing so that they can reach Jews to Christianity without telling them. So, when one realizes what is going on they reach out to other organizations who follow the Torah but the problem with many of those places is that they incorporate Rabbinic Judaism into their practices, which God never sanctioned either. So discussions over the matter lead to dissension and that tends to lead to some confusion. Any organization that uses the term "Judaism" will eventually drift into that direction and then they start following the Rabbis to some extent. But these Rabbis are the spiritual descendants of the Pharisee's and we know what Yeshua said about their teachings. An article was written several weeks ago about this very thing. There was no "Judaism" in the first century and while the Temple stood. Everybody went to the Temple and worship centered around what the Torah said about that. There were many "sects" and believers were just one of many, called the Way in the Book of Acts. Since the Temple was destroyed, the Rabbi's have come up with "Judaism" that is anti-Yeshua and have given the people the Talmud, Kabbalah and other writings and say those writings are more binding on the people than the Torah. Christianity has done the same thing with the writings of the "Church Fathers" and these writings have perverted the truth of God. People are taught that only the Rabbi or the priest can properly interpret the Bible. The Rabbi's tell their people not to read the New Testament and the priests/ministers tell their people not to read the Torah and understand it. The problem is when a person comes out of Christianity and they begin to study from the Rabbi's. Which one are you going to follow? They don't agree among themselves and they are certainly placing themselves under anti-Yeshua instruction. Yeshua already told us about their teachings (Mt 16.11, Mk 8.15). Truth be known, are the teachings of the Rabbi's today any different than their spiritual fathers in the first century? I think not, but many Messianic organizations are following these teachings. Their leaders have been fed at the troughs of the Church and some say the Torah is only for Jews, but how can that be. All that does is create two different groups. Others go the other way and teach their congregations to follow Rabbinic Judaism. Now, one can glean some truth from all of this but I have heard people say that Yeshua's teachings were similar to the Pharisee's so He must have been one, but that is not the case. Yeshua was very clear about what He thought about their teachings. The bottom line is this. When one becomes a believer they must go out to the desert. They are not going to change the Church into Torah observance and so Yeshua said let them be and to come out. Most Messianic Congregations won't listen either and they missed it long ago. Rabbinical Judaism has rejected Yeshua, the Church has rejected the Torah and the Messianic congregations say Torah observance doesn't matter. The Lord is leading people out of these groups and to a "new land" that He will show them. The Lord will be at the head of that flock in spite of the Rabbi's, the priests and the Messianic leadership. We aren't called to follow organizations but to follow the Lord. This can be lonely and difficult, but it is the way it has to be. These man-made organizations have missed the boat and the Lord has said "my sheep hear my voice" and they do. There so many differences because they have left the Lord behind and developed their own "ways" and that is what has caused the confusion. We don't have to belong to any organization or be put under their authority. We are to follow the Lord and learn a proper understanding of His Word. Yeshua didn't belong to any group and we don't have to either. But this takes trust and it can be lonely, but in the end you will know the way in which you are to go.
A. One of the problems with the Messianic movement is that it tries to resemble "Judaism" and its practices that centered around Rabbinic Judaism. Some believers get caught up in all the "Jewish" practices which can get them right back into a religious perversion that is just as bad as some of the practices in Christianity. Most Messianic Jewish organizations are just "fronts" to win Jewish people to Christianity. Their leaders have said it was never the intent of these organizations to direct Jews and Gentiles to follow the Torah. This has been dealt with in many previous articles so I won't get into it here, but that is a problem. If one stood up and said that they should follow the Torah they would be escorted out of that Congregation. That's why pork is served at their conventions and they buy and sell on the Sabbath. They have a Jewish window dressing so that they can reach Jews to Christianity without telling them. So, when one realizes what is going on they reach out to other organizations who follow the Torah but the problem with many of those places is that they incorporate Rabbinic Judaism into their practices, which God never sanctioned either. So discussions over the matter lead to dissension and that tends to lead to some confusion. Any organization that uses the term "Judaism" will eventually drift into that direction and then they start following the Rabbis to some extent. But these Rabbis are the spiritual descendants of the Pharisee's and we know what Yeshua said about their teachings. An article was written several weeks ago about this very thing. There was no "Judaism" in the first century and while the Temple stood. Everybody went to the Temple and worship centered around what the Torah said about that. There were many "sects" and believers were just one of many, called the Way in the Book of Acts. Since the Temple was destroyed, the Rabbi's have come up with "Judaism" that is anti-Yeshua and have given the people the Talmud, Kabbalah and other writings and say those writings are more binding on the people than the Torah. Christianity has done the same thing with the writings of the "Church Fathers" and these writings have perverted the truth of God. People are taught that only the Rabbi or the priest can properly interpret the Bible. The Rabbi's tell their people not to read the New Testament and the priests/ministers tell their people not to read the Torah and understand it. The problem is when a person comes out of Christianity and they begin to study from the Rabbi's. Which one are you going to follow? They don't agree among themselves and they are certainly placing themselves under anti-Yeshua instruction. Yeshua already told us about their teachings (Mt 16.11, Mk 8.15). Truth be known, are the teachings of the Rabbi's today any different than their spiritual fathers in the first century? I think not, but many Messianic organizations are following these teachings. Their leaders have been fed at the troughs of the Church and some say the Torah is only for Jews, but how can that be. All that does is create two different groups. Others go the other way and teach their congregations to follow Rabbinic Judaism. Now, one can glean some truth from all of this but I have heard people say that Yeshua's teachings were similar to the Pharisee's so He must have been one, but that is not the case. Yeshua was very clear about what He thought about their teachings. The bottom line is this. When one becomes a believer they must go out to the desert. They are not going to change the Church into Torah observance and so Yeshua said let them be and to come out. Most Messianic Congregations won't listen either and they missed it long ago. Rabbinical Judaism has rejected Yeshua, the Church has rejected the Torah and the Messianic congregations say Torah observance doesn't matter. The Lord is leading people out of these groups and to a "new land" that He will show them. The Lord will be at the head of that flock in spite of the Rabbi's, the priests and the Messianic leadership. We aren't called to follow organizations but to follow the Lord. This can be lonely and difficult, but it is the way it has to be. These man-made organizations have missed the boat and the Lord has said "my sheep hear my voice" and they do. There so many differences because they have left the Lord behind and developed their own "ways" and that is what has caused the confusion. We don't have to belong to any organization or be put under their authority. We are to follow the Lord and learn a proper understanding of His Word. Yeshua didn't belong to any group and we don't have to either. But this takes trust and it can be lonely, but in the end you will know the way in which you are to go.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Yeshua High Priest even though He was of the tribe of Judah.
Q. In Heb 7.12 Yeshua is High Priest even though he is from the tribe of Judah. Does that mean the Torah has been done away with?
A. No, in fact it substantiates the Torah. The Scriptures teach that there is a heavenly priesthood (of the order of Melchizedek) and that predates the earthly Levitical priesthood. So, this verse is not a change to the Torah but a renewal that was already built into the Torah. Another example would be the New Covenant. It's a renewal of the Torah but the Law will be written on the heart. The Book of Hebrews has many concepts that are foreign to the average Christian. The Book was written to encourage Jewish believers in their faith and that the confidence in Yeshua is grounded in the Torah. Without an understanding of the Torah the book will be hard to understand in its proper context and that is why so many people misunderstand it. Hebrews presents Yeshua as the permanent Yom Kippur sacrifice. That is why the Talmud records that the Yom Kippur sacrifice was never accepted for the last 40 years before the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. His priesthood is part of a heavenly order that began with Adam and was passed down through the first born. It is this aspect that has changed and gone back to the way it was before, to the first born. As the Torah teaches, God's intent was to have the first born dedicated to Him for the priesthood but this changed at the Golden calf. After that, the priesthood was given to the Levites. Yeshua's sacrifice is in the context of Yom Kippur. Hebrews does not teach that the sacrifices have been done away with, only that there was a change to the Yom Kippur sacrifice and the priesthood. Yeshua is after the order of the Melchizedek priesthood and that supersedes the Levitical priesthood. In fact, the Levitical was patterned after the Melchizedek. Yom Kippur comes only once a year and it was separate from the daily sacrifices. One thing people have difficulty with is if the sacrificial system was done away with, why are they conducted in Ezekiel's Temple. Ezekiel shows that the daily sacrifices will return in the Messianic Kingdom. So, many teach that these sacrifices were only done "in remembrance" or for some other reason. One thing interesting, the Book of Ezekiel teaches that there will be no Yom Kippur sacrifice. Hebrews helps us understand what Yeshua did on the cross in relation to the daily sacrifices. Yeshua was the final Yom Kippur sacrifice unto salvation and it is related to the Passover sacrifice. The themes of these two festivals overlap in the final hours of Yeshua. Yeshua and Barabbas before Pilate was a picture of the 2 goats on Yom Kippur. Yeshua was lead away "unto the Lord" and Barabbas was released into the wilderness (world) and never heard from again. The reason there is no Yom Kippur sacrifice in the Messianic Kingdom and Ezekiel's Temple is because Yeshua's death was the final Yom Kippur sacrifice unto salvation. The daily sacrifices will return because they were not the same as Yom Kippur, but were for regular reconciliation with God for daily sins. Because there is no Temple today, Yeshua is our High Priest in the heavenly Temple and is providing the daily reconciliation we need because of our sin. In other words, God accepts the words of our lips in confession (Hos 14.2) rather than the regular animal sacrifices as required by the Torah. This is illustrated in the Torah where sacrifices were done for the nations at the Feast of Sukkot. Yeshua's death was the Yom Kippur sacrifice God accepted. There will be no need for Yom Kippur in the Messianic Kingdom and that is why it is not mentioned in Ezekiel, but the daily sacrifices are recorded there for reconciliation with God for daily sins. Why did Yeshua as a Yom Kippur sacrifice die on Passover? Because it deals with salvation and the establishment of the New Covenant. Hebrews deals with Yeshua's heavenly priesthood and how it is better than the earthly priesthood in that it provided for salvation and that he lives on and does not see death, which wasn't the case with the earthly, Levitical priesthood and that alone makes it better. But just because the Yom Kippur sacrifice was not accepted or needed anymore, as history attests to. As long as there was a Temple on Earth, the daily sacrifices were required for daily sins as reconciliation with God. Once that was destroyed, Yeshua intercedes on our behalf in Heaven (1 Jn 1.9;2.2). When Ezekiel's Temple returns in the Messianic Kingdom the daily sacrificial system will be reestablished for reconciliation with God for the daily sins of the people.
A. No, in fact it substantiates the Torah. The Scriptures teach that there is a heavenly priesthood (of the order of Melchizedek) and that predates the earthly Levitical priesthood. So, this verse is not a change to the Torah but a renewal that was already built into the Torah. Another example would be the New Covenant. It's a renewal of the Torah but the Law will be written on the heart. The Book of Hebrews has many concepts that are foreign to the average Christian. The Book was written to encourage Jewish believers in their faith and that the confidence in Yeshua is grounded in the Torah. Without an understanding of the Torah the book will be hard to understand in its proper context and that is why so many people misunderstand it. Hebrews presents Yeshua as the permanent Yom Kippur sacrifice. That is why the Talmud records that the Yom Kippur sacrifice was never accepted for the last 40 years before the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. His priesthood is part of a heavenly order that began with Adam and was passed down through the first born. It is this aspect that has changed and gone back to the way it was before, to the first born. As the Torah teaches, God's intent was to have the first born dedicated to Him for the priesthood but this changed at the Golden calf. After that, the priesthood was given to the Levites. Yeshua's sacrifice is in the context of Yom Kippur. Hebrews does not teach that the sacrifices have been done away with, only that there was a change to the Yom Kippur sacrifice and the priesthood. Yeshua is after the order of the Melchizedek priesthood and that supersedes the Levitical priesthood. In fact, the Levitical was patterned after the Melchizedek. Yom Kippur comes only once a year and it was separate from the daily sacrifices. One thing people have difficulty with is if the sacrificial system was done away with, why are they conducted in Ezekiel's Temple. Ezekiel shows that the daily sacrifices will return in the Messianic Kingdom. So, many teach that these sacrifices were only done "in remembrance" or for some other reason. One thing interesting, the Book of Ezekiel teaches that there will be no Yom Kippur sacrifice. Hebrews helps us understand what Yeshua did on the cross in relation to the daily sacrifices. Yeshua was the final Yom Kippur sacrifice unto salvation and it is related to the Passover sacrifice. The themes of these two festivals overlap in the final hours of Yeshua. Yeshua and Barabbas before Pilate was a picture of the 2 goats on Yom Kippur. Yeshua was lead away "unto the Lord" and Barabbas was released into the wilderness (world) and never heard from again. The reason there is no Yom Kippur sacrifice in the Messianic Kingdom and Ezekiel's Temple is because Yeshua's death was the final Yom Kippur sacrifice unto salvation. The daily sacrifices will return because they were not the same as Yom Kippur, but were for regular reconciliation with God for daily sins. Because there is no Temple today, Yeshua is our High Priest in the heavenly Temple and is providing the daily reconciliation we need because of our sin. In other words, God accepts the words of our lips in confession (Hos 14.2) rather than the regular animal sacrifices as required by the Torah. This is illustrated in the Torah where sacrifices were done for the nations at the Feast of Sukkot. Yeshua's death was the Yom Kippur sacrifice God accepted. There will be no need for Yom Kippur in the Messianic Kingdom and that is why it is not mentioned in Ezekiel, but the daily sacrifices are recorded there for reconciliation with God for daily sins. Why did Yeshua as a Yom Kippur sacrifice die on Passover? Because it deals with salvation and the establishment of the New Covenant. Hebrews deals with Yeshua's heavenly priesthood and how it is better than the earthly priesthood in that it provided for salvation and that he lives on and does not see death, which wasn't the case with the earthly, Levitical priesthood and that alone makes it better. But just because the Yom Kippur sacrifice was not accepted or needed anymore, as history attests to. As long as there was a Temple on Earth, the daily sacrifices were required for daily sins as reconciliation with God. Once that was destroyed, Yeshua intercedes on our behalf in Heaven (1 Jn 1.9;2.2). When Ezekiel's Temple returns in the Messianic Kingdom the daily sacrificial system will be reestablished for reconciliation with God for the daily sins of the people.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Spittle on the Eyes
Q. Why did Yeshua use spittle on the eyes of a blind man in Mark 8.23?
A. Yeshua could have healed the man by any means that He wanted to, so there is a lesson that He is trying to illustrate here. You will notice that He took the man by the hand which speaks of election, in that, God chooses those who will "see" and He leads him away from the village, which symbolizes the world. You will see a similar story in Mark 7.33 where there is a deaf man and He also took the man aside, away from the others. This is necessary because we are chosen by God and then He separates us from the world by this election. We are all "deaf" and "blind" before the Lord separates us from the world.We are chosen in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph 1.4). Now, in both stories He uses spittle, which comes from his mouth which speaks of His Word. We are cleansed by the washing of His Word. Yeshua touches the tongue of the man in 7.33 and this alludes to the application of His testimony. Spittle also refers to "strength" as seen in Psalm 22.15. In Mark 8.23-26 we see that Yeshua applied the spittle to the mans eyes and the healing was not immediate. Yeshua again lays His hands on the man and in v 25 the man began to see clearly. This alludes to the fact that the Gospel and salvation comes in power and it dispels the darkness of the mind and introduces spiritual "light" into a new believer. This light is small at first but gradually the person will gain full insight. So, in both stories Yeshua is using spittle which comes from His mouth, which speaks of the power of His word to deliver the chosen and set apart person to receive the ability to hear and see spiritually. God speaks in many ways to accomplish this. Some have heard the actual voice of God, like Paul on the road to Damascus. He may send messengers or speak to us through the Scriptures. He also will use circumstances to lead and guide us like He did with the brothers of Joseph. He also can use dark speech which is seen in the parables. Another way He will speak to us is through dreams, like Joseph. There are visions which we may see while awake, with pictures flashing in our mind or a prolonged vision, as if we are watching a movie for instance. Then there is the still, small voice of the Lord that can lead us. These stories in Mark 7.33 and 8.23 are real life applications of how the Lord calls us, separates us and leads us to salvation through His word as illustrated by the use of spittle.
A. Yeshua could have healed the man by any means that He wanted to, so there is a lesson that He is trying to illustrate here. You will notice that He took the man by the hand which speaks of election, in that, God chooses those who will "see" and He leads him away from the village, which symbolizes the world. You will see a similar story in Mark 7.33 where there is a deaf man and He also took the man aside, away from the others. This is necessary because we are chosen by God and then He separates us from the world by this election. We are all "deaf" and "blind" before the Lord separates us from the world.We are chosen in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph 1.4). Now, in both stories He uses spittle, which comes from his mouth which speaks of His Word. We are cleansed by the washing of His Word. Yeshua touches the tongue of the man in 7.33 and this alludes to the application of His testimony. Spittle also refers to "strength" as seen in Psalm 22.15. In Mark 8.23-26 we see that Yeshua applied the spittle to the mans eyes and the healing was not immediate. Yeshua again lays His hands on the man and in v 25 the man began to see clearly. This alludes to the fact that the Gospel and salvation comes in power and it dispels the darkness of the mind and introduces spiritual "light" into a new believer. This light is small at first but gradually the person will gain full insight. So, in both stories Yeshua is using spittle which comes from His mouth, which speaks of the power of His word to deliver the chosen and set apart person to receive the ability to hear and see spiritually. God speaks in many ways to accomplish this. Some have heard the actual voice of God, like Paul on the road to Damascus. He may send messengers or speak to us through the Scriptures. He also will use circumstances to lead and guide us like He did with the brothers of Joseph. He also can use dark speech which is seen in the parables. Another way He will speak to us is through dreams, like Joseph. There are visions which we may see while awake, with pictures flashing in our mind or a prolonged vision, as if we are watching a movie for instance. Then there is the still, small voice of the Lord that can lead us. These stories in Mark 7.33 and 8.23 are real life applications of how the Lord calls us, separates us and leads us to salvation through His word as illustrated by the use of spittle.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Luke 10:18 and Barack Obama
Q. Did Yeshua say the name of Barack Obama in Luke 10.18 and reveal to us the name of the false messiah?
A. No, but many use theological tricks to make it sound that way, but let's look at the verse. Yeshua says that "I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven." Now, he is talking about Satan's fall due to his transgression but some today think it refers to the President, They say that Barack means "lightning" and the O is a vav and said like a "o" or "u" and that "bama" means heaven. So, they say that Yeshua said "I saw Satan as Barack O'Bama." Now, that is what I referred to as theological trickery and here's why. First, the President's name is Barack, it is Swahili and Arabic in origin meaning "blessed" not lightning. In Hebrew/Aramaic lightning is said like "b'rak" (one syllable) and probably the language Yeshua used and does sound somewhat like Barack but not exactly. The vav in Hebrew/Aramaic does not sound like a "u" or "o" unless it is a vowel sound as a part of a word. Also, Yeshua said he saw Satan fall "from Heaven" which is "shamayim" not bama (heights). Why do people say that Yeshua said "heights" and not "heaven?" The answer is because "B'rak Mi Shamayim" does not sound like the name of the President and people attempt to twist the words of Yeshua to make it so. This kind of thing is being passed around as something prophetic and true but it it is nothing but another twist of the truth to fit a religious agenda and people should investigate things like this before it is passed on as something that has any merit.
A. No, but many use theological tricks to make it sound that way, but let's look at the verse. Yeshua says that "I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven." Now, he is talking about Satan's fall due to his transgression but some today think it refers to the President, They say that Barack means "lightning" and the O is a vav and said like a "o" or "u" and that "bama" means heaven. So, they say that Yeshua said "I saw Satan as Barack O'Bama." Now, that is what I referred to as theological trickery and here's why. First, the President's name is Barack, it is Swahili and Arabic in origin meaning "blessed" not lightning. In Hebrew/Aramaic lightning is said like "b'rak" (one syllable) and probably the language Yeshua used and does sound somewhat like Barack but not exactly. The vav in Hebrew/Aramaic does not sound like a "u" or "o" unless it is a vowel sound as a part of a word. Also, Yeshua said he saw Satan fall "from Heaven" which is "shamayim" not bama (heights). Why do people say that Yeshua said "heights" and not "heaven?" The answer is because "B'rak Mi Shamayim" does not sound like the name of the President and people attempt to twist the words of Yeshua to make it so. This kind of thing is being passed around as something prophetic and true but it it is nothing but another twist of the truth to fit a religious agenda and people should investigate things like this before it is passed on as something that has any merit.
Jews and Khazars
Q. I heard that the Jews today are not really Jews but Khazars. Is this true and if not, how did this get started?
A. The Khazars were a people located in southern Russia and they had a very powerful kingdom during the Middle Ages and some of the ruling class embraced Judaism around the ninth century. However, most of the population accepted Christianity and Islam. This kingdom fell to other factions and the Khazars intermixed with other populations and lost their distinctiveness. The Jewish population that remained were assimilated into the Slavic-speaking Jewish communities and later by the Yiddish-speaking immigrants of Central Europe. There may be a Khazar connection found among Eastern European Jews, especially those of Hungarian and Bulgarian descent although it is very insignificant due to intermarriage with Ashkenazic Jews. There is no way to get into all the history here but let's get to the heart of the matter. Supporters of the lie that the Jews today are really Khazars believe that claim because they adopted Judaism. However, even if that were true, that can only be said of the Askenazy Jews which is only a small part of all the ethnic branches of the Jewish people. In reality, nobody can detail Khazar origins to the Sephardic, Temani, Mizrachi, Bukharan, Indian, Falasha and the many other branches that make up the Jewish population . So, whoever tries to to destroy the Jewish right to the Land of Israel based on the Khazar connection has already failed because even if every Askenazic failed to be a true Jew, all the non-Askenazim Jews are enough to claim the Land of Israel. In other words, the claim by these people that the Jews today are not really Jews based on the Khazar theory is devoid of any merit because most Jews are not of Eastern European ancestry and did not have any association with the Khazars anyway. Israel is made up of Jews from all over the world and their claim of being Jewish and therefore having a right to the Land is legitimate and those that oppose that have another agenda, which is to claim the rights of the Jews for themselves.
A. The Khazars were a people located in southern Russia and they had a very powerful kingdom during the Middle Ages and some of the ruling class embraced Judaism around the ninth century. However, most of the population accepted Christianity and Islam. This kingdom fell to other factions and the Khazars intermixed with other populations and lost their distinctiveness. The Jewish population that remained were assimilated into the Slavic-speaking Jewish communities and later by the Yiddish-speaking immigrants of Central Europe. There may be a Khazar connection found among Eastern European Jews, especially those of Hungarian and Bulgarian descent although it is very insignificant due to intermarriage with Ashkenazic Jews. There is no way to get into all the history here but let's get to the heart of the matter. Supporters of the lie that the Jews today are really Khazars believe that claim because they adopted Judaism. However, even if that were true, that can only be said of the Askenazy Jews which is only a small part of all the ethnic branches of the Jewish people. In reality, nobody can detail Khazar origins to the Sephardic, Temani, Mizrachi, Bukharan, Indian, Falasha and the many other branches that make up the Jewish population . So, whoever tries to to destroy the Jewish right to the Land of Israel based on the Khazar connection has already failed because even if every Askenazic failed to be a true Jew, all the non-Askenazim Jews are enough to claim the Land of Israel. In other words, the claim by these people that the Jews today are not really Jews based on the Khazar theory is devoid of any merit because most Jews are not of Eastern European ancestry and did not have any association with the Khazars anyway. Israel is made up of Jews from all over the world and their claim of being Jewish and therefore having a right to the Land is legitimate and those that oppose that have another agenda, which is to claim the rights of the Jews for themselves.
Nicodemus Born Again
Q. If Nicodemus was "the" teacher of Israel, why didn't he understand Yeshua when He said "you must be born again?"
A. You are referring to the story in Jn 3.1-10 so let's look at this portion to get some vital information. I believe Nicodemus understood the concept of being "born again" but did not understand the context Yeshua used that night. The concept of "born again" is better understood as "born from above" or from heaven. There was a concept called the "nephesh ha shamayim" or the "soul from heaven" and Nicodemus believed that a person had to be born from heaven. But, he thought that Gentile proselytes needed a new birth, but the Jews didn't need one and what Yeshua said confused him. Yeshua goes on to say that unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of God. Another way of saying it is "water which is the Spirit" or born from heaven. The word Heaven in Hebrew is "shamayim" which means "there is water" so you can see where the life comes from. Col 2.16 says that the New Moon festival is a shadow of things to come and this feast is related to being born again. It is called the "Feast of the Born Again" referring to the moon becoming visible again, or "born" again. In Jewish thought, conversion of converts is related to the concept of the womb and grave. Both are the word "kever" in Hebrew and they are related in this way. There is a relation between water and the heavens (shamayim).
Now in the Garden of Eden there were rivers and all water today has its roots in Eden because of the water cycle. So, when one goes into the waters for an immersion he is getting back in touch with the waters in Eden. Immersion connects us to Eden. Yeshua's immersion was a recreation of Gen 1 and it also was connected to His resurrection. Gen 1 was the Creation, Yeshua is connected to the New Creation (born from above). Now, Yeshua was conceived in a virgin (new) womb (kever). At His resurrection he came out of a virgin (new) tomb (kever). So, you can see that an immersion has many concepts to it so that we can understand the spiritual. When one goes into the water he enters into a hostile world. He must come out of the "grave" because he can't live in that water. When he emerges he takes a breath (spirit) and he becomes like one "reborn." The grave is the same word and carries the same meaning and that is why the resurrection is a related concept. When one goes through an immersion there is a "change of status" from the life before. The waters have cut you off from that life and when you get immersed you are actually rehearsing your own resurrection. Being born again spiritually is exactly like that. Yeshua associated the Spirit with being like the wind, in that, the Spirit works when, where and how He wants. He works "unseen" but you know the results. This concept is related to the circumcision of the heart taught in Deut 30.6 and Jn 1.13. All of these concepts Nicodemus understood but he may not have thought it applied to him, after all he was a descendant of Abraham (Mt 3.9). Many Jews believed a Gentile had to be born again but they were "in" because of there ancestry. Yeshua pointed out to Nicodemus that these concepts applied to him as well and this is what confused him.
A. You are referring to the story in Jn 3.1-10 so let's look at this portion to get some vital information. I believe Nicodemus understood the concept of being "born again" but did not understand the context Yeshua used that night. The concept of "born again" is better understood as "born from above" or from heaven. There was a concept called the "nephesh ha shamayim" or the "soul from heaven" and Nicodemus believed that a person had to be born from heaven. But, he thought that Gentile proselytes needed a new birth, but the Jews didn't need one and what Yeshua said confused him. Yeshua goes on to say that unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of God. Another way of saying it is "water which is the Spirit" or born from heaven. The word Heaven in Hebrew is "shamayim" which means "there is water" so you can see where the life comes from. Col 2.16 says that the New Moon festival is a shadow of things to come and this feast is related to being born again. It is called the "Feast of the Born Again" referring to the moon becoming visible again, or "born" again. In Jewish thought, conversion of converts is related to the concept of the womb and grave. Both are the word "kever" in Hebrew and they are related in this way. There is a relation between water and the heavens (shamayim).
Now in the Garden of Eden there were rivers and all water today has its roots in Eden because of the water cycle. So, when one goes into the waters for an immersion he is getting back in touch with the waters in Eden. Immersion connects us to Eden. Yeshua's immersion was a recreation of Gen 1 and it also was connected to His resurrection. Gen 1 was the Creation, Yeshua is connected to the New Creation (born from above). Now, Yeshua was conceived in a virgin (new) womb (kever). At His resurrection he came out of a virgin (new) tomb (kever). So, you can see that an immersion has many concepts to it so that we can understand the spiritual. When one goes into the water he enters into a hostile world. He must come out of the "grave" because he can't live in that water. When he emerges he takes a breath (spirit) and he becomes like one "reborn." The grave is the same word and carries the same meaning and that is why the resurrection is a related concept. When one goes through an immersion there is a "change of status" from the life before. The waters have cut you off from that life and when you get immersed you are actually rehearsing your own resurrection. Being born again spiritually is exactly like that. Yeshua associated the Spirit with being like the wind, in that, the Spirit works when, where and how He wants. He works "unseen" but you know the results. This concept is related to the circumcision of the heart taught in Deut 30.6 and Jn 1.13. All of these concepts Nicodemus understood but he may not have thought it applied to him, after all he was a descendant of Abraham (Mt 3.9). Many Jews believed a Gentile had to be born again but they were "in" because of there ancestry. Yeshua pointed out to Nicodemus that these concepts applied to him as well and this is what confused him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)