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.