Shabbat Bible Study for June 3, 2017

Shabbat Bible Study for June 3, 2017

©2017 Mark Pitrone and Fulfilling Torah Ministries

Shemoth 20:21-22:24 – YeshaYahu 56:1-7 – Tehellim 55 – MattitYahu 5:38-42, 7:1-5

Shemoth 20.21-26 – We are not to have any gods of silver or gold WITH Y’hovah, or alongside him. He is the ONE Y’hovah and the ONE Elohim; there is none else. Any altar they built would be of either earth or unhewn stone. I infer from that that the altars of the Amorites were of hewn stone and quite artistic and beautiful to look at. But those can become gods themselves. “Look at the beautiful altar? My son, the artist, built that.” Pride fairly drips off the thing. The blood of the offering is supposed to be poured out on the earth, directly on something made by the hand of Y’hovah, not human hands, is the concept, I think. And the instruction is also given to not use steps to access the altar, but either to not elevate it or use a ramp to access it so that noone will have a chance to see under his clothing. Too much info to comport with any standard of godliness. All this was to set the people, the altars and the priests apart unto Y’hovah’s service.

Shemoth 21.1-9 – Remember that the events of Shemoth 19.1-24.3 all happened on Shavuoth, the Feast of Weeks. There is no break in the action, nor are we told that another day begins until Moshe has come down off Mount Horeb in 24.4, AFTER Israel has vowed to obey Y’hovah 3 different times AND Moshe has written down the Covenant of Y’hovah with Israel (they agreed to shema his voice a 4th time the next day).

The judgments of Y’hovah are the subject of the next 3 chapters of Shemoth. They are ‘set before’ b’nei Yisrael, so they will know how Y’hovah thinks. These are ‘special permission’, not the norm of life for Yisrael. If a Hebrew sold himself into bondage, it was for a fixed time – six years. There was to be no permanent slavery of one Hebrew to another, of one believer to another. The only permanent servitude of a believer is to Y’hovah. What Y’hovah did with this judgment is tell us that he will not impede our freedom of contract. This was codified in our American Constitution in Art.1 §10:

Section. 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

What Y’hovah did was set a limit on the time a man could sell himself into servitude. And this was also a stipulation of the Common Law of England. Y’hovah did provide for an exception for the man who entered his servitude unmarried and married a female servant. If the man wanted to maintain his family in that situation, he could choose to remain in servitude. I think the idea of servitude was and is repugnant to Yisrael. This was permission for a person to pay his debts in this manner and was not intended to be the norm. At the end of his 6 years of work, the Yisraelite was given rest from his servitude. I suppose that a man freed in the Sabbatical year could then sell himself again, but, as I said before, the idea of being another’s indentured servant was repugnant to Yisrael, especially after their sojourn in Egypt. BTW, It used to be that a person entering service to the United States military signed a contract for 6 years of service. When I joined the Navy I signed a 6 year contract. The norm was that a person would enter active service full time for periods of 2, 3 or 4 years and would commit to being recallable for the remaining years of the contract or could enter active reserve service until the end of the full contract. Even draftee’s entered 2 years of active and 4 inactive years of service. Inactive meant no drills or active service time, whi;e active meant he would serve 2 days a month and 2 weeks a year until the contract expired. The United States War/Defense Dept. honored Yhwh’s limitation to servitude for not longer than 6 years at a time, and freedom in the 7th [or Sabbatical] year.

Interestingly, females did not sell themselves into servitude, but a father COULD sell his daughter to another and there was no time limit set, she did not go free in the seventh year, as the male did. If she didn’t please him for whatever reason, he could then sell her back to her father (redeemed) or, if she was purchased as a wife for his son, to another (treat her as a daughter, v.9), but not for profit. Why the 2nd class citizenship or, better said, LACK of citizenship for women in Yisrael? I couldn’t tell you, except that I think it reflected the mores of the time, when women WERE considered as chattel. Not saying that it’s right or wrong – it just was [and IS in other, non-Yhwh worshipping cultures]. I think this was addressed within the faith community in that there is no Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female in Mashiach, and I think this was addressed long before Paul wrote about it.

There is neither Y’hudim nor goy, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Mashiach Yeshua. (Galatians 3:28)

When Yehudah betrothed his son to Tamar, the contract was with her father AND her – she had a say in whom she would marry. When her husband died, Yehudah transferred the betrothal to his younger son – again, with her approval. When HE also died, Yehudah then promised her his youngest son, which she also approved. Yehudah must have been some kind of rich for her to stay with his ‘star-crossed’ family for this long (Yehudah was actually reaping the fruits of his life, not unlucky or whatever ‘star-crossed’ means). But he could not sell her with impunity, because she had not displeased his sons, who had both consummated their marriages. The original contract MUST have been that she would bear children to Yehudah through his sons – a political treaty or a business deal, I think. When he failed in his end of the covenant and married his last son to another, she was free – which is legally why he couldn’t have her burned for adultery. She was seeing to her end of a legal contract. And, since she is in Mashiach’s lineage, it worked together for good. Q&C

Vv.10-17 vv10-11 – This judgment should have told Yisrael all it needed to know about Y’hovah’s position on multiple wives. Take my word for it; men have only a limited capacity for ‘her duty of marriage’. He may think that he’ll be 19 years old forever, but you may believe me when I say that a man is only 19 years old for about a year. IF a man is going to obey this judgment, he is NOT going to marry a 2nd or 3rd wife. Remember that there was no ‘little blue pill’ in the Wilderness. And BECAUSE this judgment is one of the first listed, it MUST have been one of the most important to the life of Yisrael as Y’hovah’s people. It is not a prohibition of multiple marriages, but even feigned obedience to it makes it a practical prohibition. A man who is after Y’hovah’s heart is NOT taking ‘little blue pills’ to maintain his performance into his 70s and 80s. A man takes it to maintain his self-image, which is idolatry and against at least 4-5 of the 10 Commandments. If he can’t maintain ALL 3 of the stipulations of this judgment, he is to set his 1st wife free. And in THIS litigious age, I do not advise that. She’ll take you for everything the bimbette probably wants you for. Practically speaking, of course.

Vv.12-14 – Here is the 1st judgment that goes into the outline under II. A, as in;

I am Y’hovah Elohecha,

which brought you forth from out of Eretz haMitzrayim:

I. Love Y’hovah                                             II. Love your neighbor

    A. No Idolatry/Adultery                               A. No Murder

        1. No multiple spice (Ex.21.10-11)                     1. No manslaying (Ex.21.12-14)

                                                                                               a. No lying in wait (12)

        2. No insubordination to parents (15)                   b. No subterfuge to murder (14)

                                                                                               c.  provision for accidental death (13)

I wish you could see MY notes, so you could see how the outline looks on paper. From this point, I’ll try to remember to give the outline points as IA1a, and etc. NO PROMISES!

V.12 is saying (IIA1a) that killing a human being in any way is to be scrupulously avoided. But v.13 (IIA1c) says that if a man causes another’s death accidentally or inadvertently, there was to be a provision for him to live, but not go ‘Scott-Free’, which eventually became the Cities of Refuge (CoR) where he could flee the hand of the Avenger of Death (AoD), but remain in exile from his home until the death of the High Priest. Schottenstein’s Chumash notes to v.14 are pretty good here, pp.150-151.

V.15 (IA2) is specific to anyone raising his hand against his parent. It is tantamount to striking Y’hovah and is not tolerated in any way. To strike your parent, abba or ima, is punishable by death as a violation of the 5th commandment, which is arguably a violation of the Greatest Commandment. V.16 (IIA3), on kidnapping and slave-trading, is a violation of the 8th and 10th Commandments and is punishable by death. V.17 (IA3) is also a violation of the 5th Commandment and punishable by death. If you will curse your own parents whom you CAN see, will you not more readily curse Y’hovah whom you can’t? Am I beginning to see a pattern in how these judgments are laid out? Q&C

Vv.18-19 (IIB) are about restitution to be made for any loss we cause another man. If we harm a man that he needs medical attention (IIB2), we are to pay for it. If he loses income due to an injury we caused (IIB1) we are to compensate him for the loss. This COULD be a cause of us entering indentured servitude, to repay him for his losses.

V.20 (IIB3) says that a slave-owner is liable for the life of his servant, and can be punished for killing a servant, though there is no death penalty imposed because a slave is property. But the servant is still human and made in the image of Y’hovah, so there must be some form of punishment. V.21 (IIB3a) says that if the slave isn’t killed immediately, there is no punishment beyond the loss of equity in the slave. Vv.26-27 (IIB3b) sets the punishment for any permanent injury to a slave.

V.22 If there is a fight between 2 men and (IIB4) the one’s pregnant wife is harmed to the loss of her baby, but not her life, the husband will lay the cost of restitution on that man (IIB4a), with the approval of the sitting judges (IIB4a[1]) to ensure equitable compensation.

Vv.23-25 (IIB4b) have to do with equitable judgment in compensation and punishment for the loss to the wife when she is injured. Here is the first application of the ‘eye for eye, tooth for tooth’ provision of Torah. This is likely also a judicial action, not that the husband may just kill the man whose action caused the death of his wife, but it may fall under the ‘avenger’ statute [vv.12-13], as well.

Vv.28-32 (IIC) deals with restitution for our property causing harm to another’s property. In all these things, we are liable for whatever we own and any injury it may cause to another man. V28 (IIC1) establishes punishment as loss of property for loss of property. However, V.29 (IIC2) says if this is a repeat performance by an animal which the owner knew would likely happen, the animal killed a human and he didn’t take precautions against it happening, both his property and his own life were forfeit. V.30 (IIC1a) says that if the repeat performance is against another man’s cattle, the owner of the offending animal SHALL pay what the other man SAYS his cattle was worth. No questions asked. He can pay with his money or with his life, perhaps another reason for selling oneself into indentured servitude. The repeat offending animal is stoned to ensure noone eats the flesh of it (there would be no way to drain all the blood from the animal that was stoned to death). V.31 (IIC2a) says that an ox that gores another man’s child the ox shall be stoned to death and its owner shall pay whatever the judges say, whether it’s with his life or his money, depending on the extent of injury. V.32 (IIC2b) says that an ox goring a slave is stoned and the owner of the ox pays the slave-owner 30 shekels of silver (the slave price – what Yehuda got from the Jews for betraying Yeshua).

Vv.33-36 are about (IIC3) Liability and Compensation for Losses. Vv.33-34 (IIC3a) is about a man digging a pit and not filling it in or cordoning it off so people will know not take their cattle there. Compensation is animal for animal. V35 (IIC3b) is about one ox killing another. Again, compensation is basically ox for ox. V.36 (IIC3c) is about the known goring ox killing another ox. This one’s penalty is a little different. I think the ox for ox trade has nothing to do with the ox that did the goring. It should be stoned and its owner should pay the other man for his loss. V.36 doesn’t say the injured party gets the ox that killed his ox. I don’t think he would take a dangerous animal in trade for a harmless one. The dangerous animal needs to be stoned as in vv.29 and 32. Oxen are not usually considered dangerous. One that is wont to gore for other than defensive purposes can be assumed to be diseased in some way, and eating its flesh may pass on the disease to the person consuming it. Mad Cow?! Possibly. Q&C

Shemoth 22.1-15 V.1 – Punitive damages are added for (IID) willful property crimes. All property crimes are a result of covetousness of one type or another. To steal another man’s property is to either deprive him of the benefit of it or to steal the benefit of it for yourself. If covetousness were not present, the theft would not have occurred. Stealing another man’s stuff to use for ones self or to sell for money or just to keep the rightful owner from having it results from covetousness, which is a form of idolatry.

What did America’s founding fathers think of thieves? John Adams was fairly typical:

“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.” John Adams, A Defense of the American Constitutions, 1787

All thefts that are destroyed or pawned are punishable (IID1) by payment of the value of the property + 400% punitive damages. If a sheep you stole was worth 2 shekels you got to pay your victim 10 shekels. If the ox was worth 10 shekels, you got to pay 50. This would produce 1 of 2 things, honest men who wouldn’t steal to save their souls or very circumspect thieves who would ensure their clean getaway – perhaps to the extent of murder. If he has so little regard for your property as to steal it from you, why would he not as easily steal your life from you? Thieves are of the lowest order of human vermin, IM[not so]HO. In the Navy, there is no more heinous crime short of murder. A thief is despised by his shipmates.

V.2-4V.2(IID1a) There is no punishment for the intended victim of the theft if he caught and killed the thief in the commission of the deed. It was a justifiable homicide. In many states and municipalities, you now have to give your stuff to the thief rather than try to protect your property and possibly kill the criminal. This is bass-ackwards and a witness to our culture’s wickedness. To my mind, a victim who kills the thief in the commission of the crime has saved society the time and energy of trying him and also the possible repeat offence or something even worse. AND it is a real deterrent to crime. V.3 (IID1b) says that if his theft is brought to light and he has nothing with which to make restitution, he shall be sold into slavery and the proceeds of the sale go to the victim. V.4 (IID1c) says if he is found with the stolen property the thief pays double to the victim. I think that’s the property found in his hands + 200% punitive damages. The word translated as ‘restore’ is H7999 ‘shalaym’, and can be translated as both restore and compensate, so I think the restoration of the stolen animal AND the compensation of 200% is proper.

Vv.5-15 (IID2) deal with restitution for damages not involving theft, but that with a modicum of preparation could have been avoided. Some have liability attached while others do not. V.6 says that anyone who starts a fire that gets out of control (IID2a) will make restitution to all who lost property in the fire – no punitive damages. V.7 is about (IID2b) property left in another’s care for safekeeping that is stolen. If the thief is caught, (IID2b[1]) he will return the stolen property + 200% punitive damages. V.8 If the thief is NOT caught (IID2b[2]) the matter is taken to the judges to see if the trusted party was complicit in the crime. V.9 If the thief is caught (IID2b[3]), the inquiry will determine if the trusted party had any connection with the crime. The guilty party then pays 200% damages. V.10-11 (IID3) – If one man puts property in his neighbor’s care and it dies or runs off while in his care and (IID3a) noone saw any untoward evidence of the cause of it’s death or running off, the two will trust each other in Y’hovah that one neighbor didn’t defraud the other and no liability attaches. If it can be shown V.12 that the property was stolen (IID3b), the watchman makes restitution, because he should have taken better care of his neighbor’s property. V13 If a predatory animal got to an animal left in another’s charge, the watchman is not liable. Vv.14-15 (IID4) are about that which is borrowed. V.14 says (IID4a) if a borrowed thing breaks or dies and the owner isn’t there, the borrower needs to make restitution to the owner. V15 (IID4b) says that if the owner is present when the thing breaks or dies, there is no liability, and if the thing is rented, no liability attaches because it’s covered by the rent (IID4c). Q&C

Vv.16-24Vv.16-17 (IID5) deal with fornication/adultery, which is still theft of a different variety. A man who seduces an unbetrothed virgin (IID5a) must provide for her as his wife. This was an accepted practice in Canaanite cultures. It is EXACTLY what Shechem wanted to do with Dinah 400+ years before in Gen 34. If the girl was betrothed, she was legally married and the punishment for adultery was executed, the man would be stoned. If it were a seduction and not a rape, they would both be stoned. That all he had to do was provide a marriage contract was grace – in my neck of the woods, he’d be lucky to escape so easily. I live in red-neckville. Shotguns are prominent at LOTS of weddings. If her father will NOT allow her to marry him, (IID5b) he must pay the father the bride price, anyway, which was 50 shekels of silver, according to the Chumash. V.18 is about witches or sorcerers. The judgment applies equally to male or female sorcerers, but it given in the feminine because it was and possibly is STILL more prevalent in women than men. (IID6) If a witch or sorcerer was discovered, they were to be stoned to death. The theft here is worship from Y’hovah to whom only it is due. V.19 (IID7) is all about bestiality, which is also punishable by death and for the same reason as sorcery – it is a perversion of Y’hovah’s purpose for sex and is a form of idolatry by despising his right to our worship. V.20 (IID8) is a proscription against offerings made to ANY other elohim, and the punishment is UTTER destruction. Chumash has a note that the word cherem means that the idolater is so far beyond the pale as to be unworthy of any existence. This may be where the church of the Middle Ages got the idea of burning witches at the stake. That the church did this to ‘Jews and heretics’ might be worn as a badge of honor. This may yet become a spectator sport again. I put nothing passed the pagans who run the world’s governments and religions.

Vv.21-24(IID9) Here are the judgment about the widows, orphans and strangers who sojourn with us. V.21 Strangers are to be treated well (IID9a) because we were NOT treated well when we sojourned in Eretz Mitzrayim. Yisrael should be most sensitive of all to oppression and vexation of strangers, having been vexed and oppressed as strangers for so long. It should be assumed that the strangers who lived among them were those who wanted to follow after Y’hovah and learn his Ways. Why else would they be living among them? And what was Yisrael’s calling but to be salt and light to the world? By oppressing and vexing the stranger, they would drive him away, and that was not Y’hovah’s desire. Vv.22-24 are about (IID9b) messing with the helpless among your people, the widows and fatherless. 3 times in as many words, as the last word in v.21 and the first 2 in v.22, Y’hovah uses the root word anah. Here’s an excerpt from Strong’s 6031;

6031 `anah aw-naw’ a primitive root (identical with 6030 through the idea of looking down or browbeating); to depress literally or figuratively, transitive or intransitive (in various applications, as follows):– abase, … afflict(-ion), chasten …, deal hardly with, defile, exercise, force, humble …, hurt, ravish, … weaken, X in any wise.

When Y’hovah repeats himself, it is for emphasis. How important do you think it is to him when he repeatedly repeats himself. 3 times in 3 words. A Mark paraphrase of these 3 words goes like this, “Widows and orphans you will not afflict. Your afflicting and afflicting them will REALLY tick me off!” These are the people we need to protect, not afflict. This was a problem in the Jerusalem community with the diaspora Jews among the ‘other’ Jews in Acts.6.

And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. (Acts 6:1)

The first Gentile convert directly to the Way was Cornelius in ch.10, so these were Jews from Greece, not Gentiles, though they MAY have been proselytes. What did the Way do for the widows? They heard them and provided for their needs, as Torah’s judgments required. The apostles knew Torah well enough to know what this was about – it was about NOT ticking Y’hovah off. If we afflicted the widows and orphans, he would make our wives and children widows and orphans. That was NOT an idle threat, but a lead pipe cinch. We need to provide as we are able for the widows and orphans, and not make life difficult for the strangers who want to live among us, contribute to our faith community and know Y’hovah Elohenu. Q&C

YeshaYahu 56.1-7 – Just in case you DIDN’T think Y’hovah cares about the outcasts in society: in case you thought widows, orphans, eunuchs and strangers who want to sojourn with us are not on his mind, he repeats himself once again. Not only does he regard them as his own when they are after his heart, but he makes it well known to us throughout his Tanakh and Brit Chadashah.

Vv.1&2 has Y’hovah speaking to faithful Yehudah. This prophecy was given while Assyria was at the gates and Yehudah was under siege. I make the observation that vv.1&2 speak of Yehudah because vv.3-6 are full of exile references that aren’t in vv.1&2. 3-6 are definitely speaking to Ephraim, which had been exiled from Y’hovah and his land by the time YeshaYahu made this prophecy. He warned Yehudah to stay faithful to Y’hovah’s Torah and continue in his Sabbaths. Today’s Torah was all about Y’hovah’s judgments and here Yehudah is told to keep those judgments in mind so that they can be just in their rulings and actions, because Y’hovah’s salvation is about to show itself. I think it’s possible that ChizkiYahu was in the Temple and spreading Sennacharib’s letter out before Y’hovah while YeshaYahu got this word from Y’hovah.  Y’hovah LOVES to do that kinda stuff! In v.2, Yehudah is told that Y’hovah’s blessings come to them who guard his judgments and perform justice, which he goes on to explain more fully in vv.3-7. But doing justice begins with guarding the Shabbat and keeping one’s hands from doing what is evil. In the immediate context, evil is to NOT guard the Sabbath or Y’hovah’s judgments and to not exercise justice. If Yehudah will do just this much, they will be blessed with deliverance from their present trouble. In the larger context, keeping Shabbat is the first prerequisite, but also to keep from ‘any evil’ speaks of guarding the entire Covenant, which includes all the judgments we spoke of earlier.

Vv.3-6 speak directly to Ephraim in exile. Look at all the exile references; son of the stranger, eunuch, dry tree (think of the fig tree that Yeshua cursed). But Y’hovah promised even the Eunuchs that if they would turn from their own ways and start after His Way, which is begun by guarding his Shabbats and progresses to doing what pleases him, namely taking hold of His Covenant, that he would bring them home to haAretz and Zion. In Mashiach there are no ‘dry trees’. This is what was typified when he cursed the fig tree and it withered in a day. The Yehudim leaders of their Hebrew religion were a dry tree. ALL ‘religion’ is a dry tree. Torah keeping is not religion, it is righteousness. Humans tend to conflate the one for the other. We ought not. Mashiach was likening Yehudah’s religious leaders to the dry tree they were cultivating and intimating that Ephraim, 10-Yisrael was being revived. But as that Yehudi tree withered in a day, so it will be revived in a day – the day when he returns to rule and reign over Y’hovah’s Millennial Kingdom, the day when they look on him who they pierced and say, “Baruch haba b’Shem Y’hovah – Blessed is he who comes in the Name of Y’hovah”.

V.4 and 6 remind me of 3 verses in Rev.12, 14 and 22;

And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of Elohim, and have the testimony of Yeshua haMashiach. (Rev.12:17)

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of Elohim, and the faith of Yeshua. (Rev.14:12)

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. (Rev.22:14)

We Ephraimite eunuchs, if we remain faithful to him will be given great reward IN Y’hovah’s HOUSE. We will be as sons and daughters, even if we are of the mixt multitude. Keeping his Shabbats and taking hold of his Covenant are the prerequisite for his blessing and acceptance into his Kingdom, NOT physical descent from the patriarchs. All who guard his Shabbats and lay hold of his Covenant are accepted by Y’hovah, whether Yehudim, Ephraimite or goyim/gerim. All are one in Y’hovah and Mashiach. The rejoicing in v.7 puts me in mind of;

12 For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap hands. (Is.55.12)

Q&C

Ps.55.1-8 – this Psalm begins with Y’hovah’s people in exile – seemingly in hiding from their enemies who are out to kill them. I think the psalm may have been written while David was on the run from Absalom (cf.v.9). I think it will be our plight before long, to be on the run or in hiding from the forces of AntiMessiah. I think Rev.12.14 speaks to this:

And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. (Rev.12:14)

Though we are being hunted, if we remain faithful to Y’hovah and his Toroth, He will deliver us and nourish us, as He did Yisrael in the Wilderness and as He did David in the hills of Yehudah.

In v.9, David asks Y’hovah to divide his enemies tongues. When he divided the tongues in Babylon, the people had to just find whomever they could understand, disperse according to language group and then set up individual societies. David is asking Y’hovah to do something as disconcerting as that to his enemies. Language is the ‘yoke’ that holds a society together. If you want to destroy a society, the quickest way to do it is divide the people into factions, and the easiest way to do that is by introducing various languages into those societies with a refusal to learn and become a part of that society. America was built on the backs of immigrants, quite literally, but it became a great melting pot because the immigrants made sure that their children learned English so they could fit in, produce and become viable members of the community. Italians, Germans, French, Africans, Chinese, Russians, etc., all came and learned English and became Americans. And America became the greatest nation that ever was in terms of economic, military and industrial power. Multi-culturalism has nearly destroyed America in only 1 generation. And it was all planned that way by haSatan, who implemented his plan by communicating it to the human agents that would work it, I think spirit to spirit. The humans involved need never have met to be instrumental in the satanic conspiracy and working towards the same end. But, if they could be made unable to communicate with each other, the plan would have to fail. Command and control is the first thing an invading army tries to compromise in its enemy and set up for itself. Of course, this plan of haSatan, which is a counterfeit of the work of Y’hovah on Nimrod’s Babel, could never have worked had the people of America remained the people of Y’hovah.

Vv.9-11 shows us why a city is the LAST place we ought to strive to live, especially in a time of trouble. They are breeding grounds for violence and strife, mischief and sorrow, wickedness and deceitful guile. Witness Steve Stevens, who murdered a man he’d never known on Facebook live-stream a few weeks ago, during the week of ULB. Cities are where MOST of the trouble is going to be, because that’s where most of the people are, and unbelieving people are nothing BUT trouble for the believer, especially in a time of trouble. Today, the cities are practically ruled by the street gangs who are anything BUT righteous and truthful. Q&C

Vv.12-14 talk about so-called believers who will point you out to the Beast Patrol, the “Goon Squads” that go out looking for those who will not bow down to the image of the Beast. David’s lament in v.12 is that it wasn’t an enemy who was after his life, but his own son, Absalom. This is prophetic of the troubles we are about to enter. If your brothers, sons, fathers, mothers, etc, are not believers it is a safe bet that they will turn you in to the Beast Patrols, and if you’re in a city, you’ll have nowhere to hide. And some of your so-called brethren in Mashiach, tares among the wheat, will also turn you in to the Beast Patrol. Don’t be disappointed or surprised if some of those who you thought would be least likely to betray you let you down. Yeshua knew full well that his own close associate was going to betray him and sell him into bonds, like David’s own son betrayed him. Do you see David’s imprecation in v.15? Remember that ‘death’ doesn’t necessarily mean physical death. Adam died the moment he partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge; his body didn’t assume room temperature until 930 years later. The apostates sealed their fate by rebelling against Y’hovah’s anointed. David asks Elohim to bring swift judgment on them and kill them quickly. He does not wish them a slow, painful death, but a quick and merciful one. The reason is that David knows it is haSatan who is behind the rebellion in his house. He knows that the wickedness is not natural to his house, but borne of the Satanic conspiracy against Y’hovah and his Mashiach (al-m’shiycho – against his M’shiach), of whom David is typical. The core of the rebellion is revealed in Ps.2:

1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against Y’hovah, and against his anointed, 3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. (Psalm 2.1-3)

The kings and rulers in v.2 are NOT human, but spirit. They work in the unseen, what we call ‘supernatural’, realm. Anything that man can’t experience with his 5 senses he calls ‘supernatural’. They are actually every bit as natural as we are. They are just of a nature that we cannot perceive in our own nature. But because we are physical beings who also have a spirit attached, we are able to communicate on an unconscious level with beings of a spirit nature. There are 2 ways for us to communicate on a conscious level with spirits; 1) witchcraft/spiritism or 2) being born of the Spirit of Y’hovah, who ‘quickens’, or gives life to, our human spirits. That quickening bridges the gap between soul and spirit. The former, witchcraft/spiritism, is a natural human attempt to see into what we cannot really endure, and it’s usually done to achieve power over others. The latter is a supernatural awakening to the fact that we are finite beings with whom the Creator of the Universe desperately wants to live – so desperately that he provided a Way through the sacrifice of his own physical being.

Vv.16-18 reveals David’s heart toward Y’hovah and his sure knowledge that Y’hovah delivers him from trouble. David knew that if he cried out to Y’hovah, his deliverance would come, “He shall save me”; yoshiayni. Just as a side note on the definition of the calendar day, it is revealed in v.17 by the order of the times of prayer, evening, morning and noon. This agrees with the definition Y’hovah showed us in Shemoth 16: with the quail coming at evening of the day, or as the sun was setting; the manna was given at morning, or as the sun was rising; and the manna melted away at noon, the heat of the day when the sun was at it’s zenith. Some Messianics say that the sun doesn’t mark any important time of day or week or month or year. But that isn’t true – it marks off the times of day that are appointed times of prayer; sunset (beginning of the calendar day), sunrise (beginning of the light part of the day), and sun at zenith (noon, or the end of the ascendancy of the light and the beginning of the coming darkness).

Vv.19-21 describe the betrayer’s spirit. ‘He that abideth of old’ may be referring to haSatan, because we are told to stop and think (Selah), and then that ‘they have no changes’. ‘Changes’ = chaliphot, which sounds to my ear like Caliphate; I’m just saying. Chaliphot is changes, like ‘changes of raiment’. In fact, every other use of the word is in that phrase. They cannot change because they have no other garments to change into – they HAVE no changes of raiment. THIS is why I believe ‘they’ refers directly to haSatan and his demonic cohorts. “He” in vv.19-21 CANNOT mean Y’hovah, because the characterizations do not fit Y’hovah at all, but they are perfect characterizations of haSatan. He always betrays those who serve him. He is the ultimate narcissist, even more so than Bill Clinton, Geo. W. Bush and Barack Obummer and his wife, Michelle Jezebel. That ‘he’ doesn’t mean Y’hovah is proven without doubt in v.20 where it says, ‘he hath broken his covenant.’ Y’hovah keeps covenant;

Know therefore that Y’hovah Elohecha, he is Elohim, the faithful Elohim, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations; (Deut. 7:9)  

And said, I beseech thee, Y’hovah Elohim of heaven, the great and terrible Elohim, that keepeth covenant and mercy for them that love him and observe his commandments: (Neh. 1:5)

V.22 shows Y’hovah’s character – he will NEVER allow the righteous to be moved. Do you understand that? If you trust him to carry your burden for you, he will do it;

6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of Elohim, that he may exalt you in due time: 7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. (I Peter 5:6, 7)

If you trust Him to the end, He will give you the strength to do what you need to do. If you need strength to endure persecution, He will provide it by His Spirit in you and you will be like an unmovable mountain. Elohim will bring the wicked to destruction – annihilation. But if we trust Him and not ourselves, He will exalt us in due time. Q&C

MattitYahu 5.38-42 – It was as prevalent in that day as it is in this to misapply this scripture. There are 4 references to ‘eye for eye’ in scripture, here (5.38) and in today’s Torah portion, and in 2 other Toroth

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, (Exodus 21:24)

Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. (Leviticus 24:20)

And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Deuteronomy 19:21)

The reference in today’s portion is about restitution for accidental injury to a man’s wife during an altercation. In Leviticus, it is about compensatory damages. In Deuteronomy it is the judgment against the false witness. Nowhere does it mean that if a guy knocks out your tooth, you can punch him in the face until you knock out one of his. It is all about restitution, not revenge. Only in Deuteronomy does the meaning even come close to revenge, but even there it isn’t that I can do this to you, but the court will exact the punishment you meant for me to have, and THAT measure for measure. The whole passage says;

15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. 16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him wrong; 17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy, shall stand before Y’hovah, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; 18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, the witness, a false witness, hath testified falsely against his brother; 19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. 20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. 21 And thine eye shall not pity;  life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Deuteronomy 19.15-21)

This is to define and deter the false witness – to “put the evil away from among you.”

Torah is NOT what Yeshua is addressing, here. He is addressing the false application of Torah in the oral traditions. EVERY time he says, ‘You have heard that it hath been said’, he is referring to oral ‘law’, not Torah. Had he said, ‘It is written’ THAT would have been addressing the Word of Y’hovah. This whole chapter hinges on Mat.5.20;

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

He then makes 5 examples of ‘You have heard that it hath been said’, which thoroughly eviscerates the traditions of the scribes and Pharisees. His point here is not to take revenge, because revenge is not ours to take.

17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance mine; I will repay, saith Y’hovah. (Romans 12:17-19)

Paul is applying YeshaYahu 63.3-7 and eviscerating the same traditions Yeshua speaks of in Matthew.

3 I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. 4 For the day of vengeance in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come. 5 And I looked, and none to help; and I wondered that none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me. 6 And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth. (Is.63.3-7)

It says, THE people, not MY people. This will happen when Mashiach comes to rule and reign.

7 And shall not Elohim avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? 8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? (Luke 18.7-8)

In view of YeshaYahu 63.3-7, he apparently shall not. Q&C

7.1-5V.2 sets the context of v.1 – judge righteously, using a righteous standard. If you judge subjectively, according to your feelings or personal convictions, rather that Torah, you will be judged using exactly the same standard. It isn’t about fairness, as we judge it. It’s about what is right, as Y’hovah sets the standard in his Torah judgments. If you come to judge someone using an improper standard, justice will not be served. Before you judge another, judge yourself. Are you clear in regard to the judgment you are being asked to judge. If not, recuse yourself from judgment on the issue, because you will not be impartial. This is one of the reasons for the voir dire in jury selection – to determine objectivity and impartiality.

If it comes down to judging another believer’s walk, make sure your walk is right before Y’hovah, that it stands up to the Torah test. THEN you’ll be able to judge by the righteous, objective standard of the Word of Y’hovah. Q&C

End of Shabbat Bible Study

Advertisements