Commentary on
The Festivals and Sacred Days of Yahweh,
Volume One
By Qadesh La Yahweh Press
First Edition, 1998
Available at
http://www.yahweh.orgBy Isaac Aluochier
All my scriptural quotations, unless otherwise stated, are from the Hebrew Names Version of the World English Bible, available at http://www.ebible.org/bible/hnv/
COMMENTATOR'S SUMMATION AND CONCLUSION
Does Yahweh Except His People From Observing His Feasts At His Designated Location?
"The idea of gathering at a fixed shrine or location to observe the khagi is manifested in different ways. For sacrifices, offerings, prayers, or other religious duties, whether in connection with khagi, or the other moadi, or the eating of meals dedicated to Yahweh, one is required under the Torah to go to a place where Yahweh has placed his name. The only exception to this rule is if the place where Yahweh's name is located is too far away. In that event, one is to carry out his obligations within his own gates (Deut., 12:21)."
Deuteronomy 12: 21 does NOT give a blanket exception. It concerns only the killing of one's herd or of one's flock, and eating of such. All other requirements must still be fulfilled at the place Yahweh has placed his name to dwell in for all time (Deuteronomy 12: 20-28).
Did Yahweh ALWAYS Include High Sabbaths In The Phrase "Sabbaths"?
"Further, the statement that the Israelites were given knowledge of Yahweh's '...(sabbathuth; Sabbaths),' in the plural, demonstrates that the high Sabbaths as well as the weekly Sabbaths were meant." [Footnote 35: When Yahweh referred only to the weekly Sabbath, it was normally spoken of in the singular (e.g., Exod., 20:8-14, 31:14-16; Lev., 23:3; Deut., 5:12-15; etc.). Yet when all the various Sabbath days (weekly or other sabbathon) are being included, they are referred to in the plural (e.g., Lev., 23:37-39, 26:2; Isa., 1:13, 56:4; Lam., 1:7, 2:6; Ezek., 20:12-24, 22:8, 26, 23:38, 44:24, 45:17, 46:3; Hos., 2:11; etc.). Also, when a number of weekly or seventh year Sabbaths were counted as a group to give a total figure, they were spoken of in the plural (e.g., Lev., 23:15, 25:8)."
To me the word "demonstrates" would better be rendered "indicates", unless it is the case that in every case that Sabbaths are used in the plural all Sabbaths are meant, that is both weekly and annual, and not just a plurality of weekly Sabbaths.
Were Curses Instituted Upon The Yisraelites By The Deuteronomic Covenant?
"After the death of almost all of that generation who had left Egypt, Yahweh told the children of the next generation to walk in his statutes and judgments and keep his Sabbaths. Once more they rebelled, this time in the incident at Shittim with Baal-peor. As a result, at the end of a 40-year sojourn in the wilderness, Yahweh 'gave them statutes not good and judgments by which they could not live,' i.e., he made the Deuteronomic Covenant, an augmentation of the Torah which is recorded in the book of Deuteronomy. The Deuteronomic Covenant put in place curses that would come upon the Israelites if they once more failed to listen to the voice of Yahweh and observe his commanded statutes and judgments - the ultimate curse being death."
If death, as penalty for disobedience to Yahweh, be a curse, then curses were not instituted with the "Deuteronomic Covenant", but already existed at the time of the Sinaitic Covenant, and even prior to it! For the following scriptures, well before the time of the Deuteronomic Covenant, attest to this: Exodus 19:12, 21:12, 21:15, 21:16, 21:17, 21:28-29, 22:19, 31:14-15, 35:2.
It therefore appears that it is not strictly accurate to say that curses came about as a result of the disobedience of the Israelites over the 40-year sojourn in the wilderness. For the "ultimate curse" of death was already in operation even prior to Israel entering into the Sinaitic Covenant with Yahweh!
With respect to Ezekiel 20:25, Yahweh giving "them statutes not good and judgements by which they could not live," it appears to me that statutes that are classified as "good" are those that facilitate one living - eternally! In other words, if adherence to a particular statute does not facilitate one living eternally it is not good. But if it facilitates one living eternally it is good. Good statutes, therefore, are those that facilitate one living eternally.
Deuteronomy 30: 19-20 indicates that the law that Moshe put before the Yisraelites was as a double-edged sword. Abiding by it facilitated life, while rejection of it brought about death.
If one focuses on the rejection part, highlighting that so rejecting it brought about the ultimate curse - death, and thereby alluding by this that the statutes (Law) were not good, and the judgements were those by which one could not live, one can also do the opposite. For as one could obtain blessing - life - by adhering to the covenant at Moav, one can also say that this covenant, and its attendant statutes and judgements, were good, for by them one could live! Yet it is the very same law that one is likening as "not good", yet can also be likened as "good"!
It therefore appears that the Deuteronomic Covenant, and the covenant at Moav, should NOT be termed as those that were not good. For if they are indeed not good, then all of the law is tantamount to being termed as not good, seeing that it contains both stipulations facilitating the ultimate curse - death!
On the other hand, if it be the case that no one can live out of doing the Law, even if done perfectly, then the entirety of the law is not good, seeing that such a law fails to facilitate the provision of life - the ultimate (?) blessing.
Earlier on the author stated that Abraham attained to eternal life in the Covenants of Promise by having abided by the conditions of these covenants, including abiding by the Law Yahweh gave him to abide by. Implying that there is indeed a law that facilitates everlasting life.
The author has also argued that this law has been incorporated into the Torah of Moses, such that the Torah of Moses includes both laws facilitating the attainment of everlasting life, and those not so facilitating it. The task facing us is therefore one of distinguishing between the laws leading unto life, and those not so leading unto life.
How does the author make this distinction?
Have Aspects Of The Law Been Annulled Under Grace?
"Under grace, the law of commandments in dogmasin, which include fleshly circumcision, have been annulled. Such things are classified as "works of the Torah (Law)."
How does the author reconcile Yahweh's words to Abraham in Genesis 17, with respect to the covenant of circumcision being an everlasting covenant in the flesh of Abraham's descendants, and its being annulled? For Genesis 17:9-14 reads,
17:9
The Mighty One said to Avraham, "As for you, you will keep my covenant, you and your seed after you throughout their generations. 17:10This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your seed after you. Every male among you shall be circumcised. 17:11You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin. It will be a token of a covenant between me and you. 17:12He who is eight days old will be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he who is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner who is not of your seed. 17:13He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 17:14The uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant.""At the same time, Saul pronounces that Yahushua the messiah is the only true offering and is our Phasekh victim. Where remission of sins exist, 'there is no more an offering for sin.' Therefore, since the death of the messiah, there is no more need to sacrifice flock animals as a typology of the messiah's death. Our true Phasekh has already been sacrificed."
The implication one derives from these comments is that prior to the death of the messiah there was indeed a need to sacrifice flock animals as a typology of the messiah's death.
Frankly speaking, I think this does NOT make sense!
Did sacrificial flock animals have a special quality prior to the death of the messiah that they lost subsequent to his death?
If not, then what is the purpose of the above argument?
For if the purpose of sacrificial flock animals prior to the death of the messiah was to typify it, why should they magically lose that typification role? The sacrificial flock animals were NOT the messiah and could not remit our sins.
It therefore appears that just as they typified the messiah's death prior to the event, they likewise CAN continue to typify the messiah's death AFTER the event! They are only typifications! As they were before the messiah's death, so they are after the messiah's death!
Also, it is not against the messiah's word that his death be typified after its occurrence. For the messiah himself gave his disciples the commands of the eating of bread and the drinking of wine to commemorate his death after the event in typification form. Therefore the argument that there is no more need to sacrifice flock animals as a typology of the messiah's death does not appear to hold water!
Also, the author earlier showed from Scripture that Yahweh did not require sacrifices and offerings of the Yisraelites when he took them out of Mitzrayim, implying that it was not essential that sacrificial flock animals be killed to typify the messiah's death. For the messiah was going to die irrespective of whether or not his death was typified with sacrificial flock animals. Nevertheless he commanded them to do that which was not essential for their doing.
Seeing that the Yisraelites were doing that which wasn't essential for their doing, and remained in harmony with Yahweh's word, anyone engaging in sacrificial flock animals for the purpose of typifying the messiah's death after the event remains in harmony with Yahweh's word! There is nothing wrong in engaging in the non-essential activity of sacrificial offerings for the purpose of typifying the messiah's death.
There is therefore nothing wrong in fulfilling the Phasekh command as contained in the Torah!
"Rather, the evidence indicates that Christians must continue to observe the commandments and a number of the laws and statutes found in the Torah while under grace. At the same time, there are many other statutes and laws which are no longer applicable. The premise is thereby established that, just because one sets aside the authority of the handwritten Torah, it does not mean that the conditions found in the Abrahamic Covenants are also annulled (see Chart A). One must still obey Yahweh, keep his charge, and be subject to the same commandments, statutes, and laws observed by Abraham."
WHO is the author addressing? The entire body of Christians? Or just non-Yisraelite Christians?
Second, was the entirety of the Torah applicable to non-Yisraelites? Was not the Sinaitic Covenant one entered into between Yahweh and Yisraelites, to the exclusion of non-Yisraelites? And the manner non-Yisraelites could participate in the Sinaitic Covenant was by becoming Yisraelites by conversion? Therefore, if the entirety of the Torah was not applicable to non-Yisraelites, it appears that the author is not addressing non-Yisraelites, but is addressing Yisraelites!
How Does The Author Explain The "Annulment" Of Some Of Yahweh's "Everlasting" Commandments?
If the author is addressing Yisraelites, how does he reconcile the "permanence" or "everlasting" nature of some of the commandments Yahweh gave Yisraelites and his statements that some of the "everlasting" commandments have already been annulled? Such as the circumcision covenant?
It does NOT appear that the author is being CONSISTENT!
It therefore needs to be clear to the reader who the author is addressing - whether Yisraelite believers, or non-Yisraelite believers, or all believers, irrespective of their national origin. The author also needs to clarify the matters raised above.
For it can indeed be stated that if non-Yisraelites were not party to the Sinaitic Covenant, as indeed they were not, but need to abide by the commandments Abraham abided by facilitating his receipt of the everlasting promises, in order to likewise share in the receipt of those same promises all they need to do is to find out what commandments Abraham abided by and do likewise! And this was the case both prior to the coming of the messiah, and also after his return to heaven!
In other words, the requirements for non-Yisraelites have not really changed fundamentally. Just as they needed to be blessed in Abraham's seed, Yah'shuah the Messiah, prior to his coming, so also they need to be after his coming and return to heaven!
Also, since there is no partiality with respect to salvation - everlasting life, what is true of non-Yisraelites is also true of Yisraelites!
An issue therefore becomes one of how the author addresses the matter of "everlasting" and "long lasting" commands Yahweh gave the Yisraelites, and the applicability of these to Yisraelites after the coming the Messiah.
The Geographical Location For Serving Yahweh
Deuteronomy 12 reads,
12:1
These are the statutes and the ordinances which you shall observe to do in the land which Yahweh, the Mighty One of your fathers, has given you to possess it, all the days that you live on the earth. 12:2You shall surely destroy all the places in which the nations that you shall dispossess served their mighty ones, on the high mountains, and on the hills, and under every green tree: 12:3and you shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire; and you shall cut down the engraved images of their mighty ones; and you shall destroy their name out of that place. 12:4You shall not do so to Yahweh your Mighty One. 12:5But to the place which Yahweh your Mighty One shall choose out of all your tribes, to put his name there, even to his habitation shall you seek, and there you shall come; 12:6and there you shall bring your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the heave-offering of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill-offerings, and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock: 12:7and there you shall eat before Yahweh your Mighty One, and you shall rejoice in all that you put your hand to, you and your households, in which Yahweh your Mighty One has blessed you. 12:8You shall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatever is right in his own eyes; 12:9for you haven't yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which Yahweh your Mighty One gives you. 12:10But when you go over the Yarden, and dwell in the land which Yahweh your Mighty One causes you to inherit, and he gives you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety; 12:11then it shall happen that to the place which Yahweh your Mighty One shall choose, to cause his name to dwell there, there shall you bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave-offering of your hand, and all your choice vows which you vow to Yahweh. 12:12You shall rejoice before Yahweh your Mighty One, you, and your sons, and your daughters, and your men-servants, and your maid-servants, and the Levite who is within your gates, because he has no portion nor inheritance with you. 12:13Take heed to yourself that you don't offer your burnt offerings in every place that you see; 12:14but in the place which Yahweh shall choose in one of your tribes, there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I command you. 12:15Notwithstanding, you may kill and eat flesh within all your gates, after all the desire of your soul, according to the blessing of Yahweh your Mighty One which he has given you: the unclean and the clean may eat of it, as of the gazelle, and as of the hart. 12:16Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it out on the earth as water. 12:17You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain, or of your new wine, or of your oil, or the firstborn of your herd or of your flock, nor any of your vows which you vow, nor your freewill-offerings, nor the heave-offering of your hand; 12:18but you shall eat them before Yahweh your Mighty One in the place which Yahweh your Mighty One shall choose, you, and your son, and your daughter, and your man-servant, and your maid-servant, and the Levite who is within your gates: and you shall rejoice before Yahweh your Mighty One in all that you put your hand to. 12:19Take heed to yourself that you don't forsake the Levite as long as you live in your land. 12:20When Yahweh your Mighty One shall enlarge your border, as he has promised you, and you shall say, I will eat flesh, because your soul desires to eat flesh; you may eat flesh, after all the desire of your soul. 12:21If the place which Yahweh your Mighty One shall choose, to put his name there, be too far from you, then you shall kill of your herd and of your flock, which Yahweh has given you, as I have commanded you; and you may eat within your gates, after all the desire of your soul. 12:22Even as the gazelle and as the hart is eaten, so you shall eat of it: the unclean and the clean may eat of it alike. 12:23Only be sure that you don't eat the blood: for the blood is the life; and you shall not eat the life with the flesh. 12:24You shall not eat it; you shall pour it out on the earth as water. 12:25You shall not eat it; that it may go well with you, and with your children after you, when you shall do that which is right in the eyes of Yahweh. 12:26Only your holy things which you have, and your vows, you shall take, and go to the place which Yahweh shall choose: 12:27and you shall offer your burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, on the altar of Yahweh your Mighty One; and the blood of your sacrifices shall be poured out on the altar of Yahweh your Mighty One; and you shall eat the flesh. 12:28Observe and hear all these words which I command you, that it may go well with you, and with your children after you forever, when you do that which is good and right in the eyes of Yahweh your Mighty One. 12:29When Yahweh your Mighty One shall cut off the nations from before you, where you go in to dispossess them, and you dispossess them, and dwell in their land; 12:30take heed to yourself that you not be ensnared to follow them, after that they are destroyed from before you; and that you not inquire after their mighty ones, saying, How do these nations serve their mighty ones? Even so will I do likewise. 12:31You shall not do so to Yahweh your Mighty One: for every abomination to Yahweh, which he hates, have they done to their mighty ones; for even their sons and their daughters do they burn in the fire to their mighty ones. 12:32Whatever thing I command you, that shall you observe to do: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it.It appears to me that Deuteronomy 12 is pretty clear in its stipulations.
12:1 clearly lays out that what follows are the statutes and ordinances of Yahweh.
12:2-5 clearly lays out that the geographical location for serving a mighty one, and specifically for serving Yahweh the Mighty One, is IMPORTANT!
12:5 clearly shows that Yahweh is to be served at the place that he chooses out of all the tribes of Yisrael, to put his name to dwell there. He is not to be served in any geographic locality, whether mountain, hill or under every green tree. He is to be served at the place that he chooses! Geography is therefore important in service to Yahweh!
12:8 indicates that the Yisraelites, during Moshe's reign over them under Yahweh, were serving Yahweh in whatever manner they deemed right in their own eyes. With each man doing his own different thing!
It should be noted that Moshe was speaking to them in the context of serving Yahweh. It therefore appears that the Yisraelites were indeed serving Yahweh, but not in a consistent manner!
12:9 indicates that this inconsistent service to Yahweh by the Yisraelites was tolerated by Yahweh prior to the Yisraelites reaching the land of Promise. Indicating that Yahweh can tolerate inconsistent worship of or service to him by his children even though what his children are doing is not consistent, provided his children are still in the wilderness and have not yet reached the land of Promise.
12:10-11 clearly shows that with respect to the geographical location of serving Yahweh, it is not a matter of debate or preference. All serving Yahweh, once they have reached the land of Promise, MUST serve Yahweh at the precise geographical location of his choosing. Not under every mountain, hill or under every green tree. But at the precise geographic location of Yahweh's choosing! Once in the land of Promise Yahweh must be worshipped by the Yisraelites in a consistent manner by all of them with respect to the geographical location that they serve Yahweh!
12:13-14 reiterates that with respect to offerings and sacrifices Yisraelites are to serve Yahweh only at the place Yahweh chooses, and nowhere else.
12:15 shows that Yisraelites are allowed to kill animals within their gates. Nevertheless, it should be noted that these animals that they are allowed to kill within their gates are not burnt offerings to Yahweh, but just animals for their sustenance.
12:17-18 clearly shows that Yahweh's offerings MUST be taken to the place Yahweh chooses.
It should therefore not be assumed that just because Yahweh allowed the Yisraelites to kill and eat animals within their gates that he also allowed them to observe his statutes and ordinances within their gates! NO! He only allowed them to kill and eat those animals that were not a part of his offerings. But those provisions that were offerings to Yahweh were to be taken to the place Yahweh would choose, and were to be dealt with there at Yahweh's word. One should therefore NOT STRETCH Yahweh's word here to mean that he allowed Yisraelites to observe his feasts, or offering aspects of his feasts within their gates. Yahweh gave no such allowance. It appears to me that so stretching Yahweh's word is ADDING to Yahweh's word!
12:21 again reiterates that Yahweh allowed Yisraelites to kill and eat of their herds and flocks within their gates.
12:26-27 nevertheless shows that their holy things, vows and offerings to Yahweh were not to remain and be dealt with within their gates. These had to be taken to the place Yahweh chose, and dealt with there. It was therefore IMPERATIVE that Yahweh be served at the place of his choosing according to his stipulations. This command to serve Yahweh at the place of his choosing COULD NOT and CAN NOT be replaced by a practice of similarly serving Yahweh from another location, even if this other location is "within your gates".
12:28 shows that Yahweh again warns the Yisraelites to heed his words, that it may go well with them.
12:30-31 again warns the Yisraelites not to serve Yahweh in the manner the nations they were dispossessing served their mighty ones, such as in every geographical location that seemed right to them. Yahweh their Mighty One was to be served at the place of his choosing according to his stipulations. It is imperative that Yahweh be worshipped in the manner that he commands.
12:32 clearly states that Yahweh's word should not be added to or diminished from! May we all heed his words!
On Whom Are The Author's Words Applicable?
"Except in reference to the four categories of dogmasin not adverse to us, those conditions no longer applicable were not required prior to the composition of the written Torah. They have been nailed to the stake and annulled with the death of the messiah. Therefore, those things which are still applicable, unless otherwise stated, must have existed prior to the written Torah and continued to exist after the messiah's resurrection.
"This formula is based upon the scriptural principle that we must use line upon line, here a little, there a little, to discover any scriptural doctrine, and that every issue is established upon two or three witnesses."
Applicability with respect to what? Applicable to who?
Are All Things Acceptable For Food?
"Then, after the great flood of Noah, mankind was given permission to eat 'all things, even as the green plants.' This statement is all-inclusive and refers both to clean and unclean types."
Just because green plants are acceptable for food, is it the case that all green plants are acceptable for food? Aren't there some green plants that are not acceptable for food?
If so, then it is not necessarily the case that all things are acceptable for food.
Yisraelites Born In The Wilderness Did Not Observe Yahweh's Pesach In The Wilderness
"The Israelites born after the Exodus, though ordered to be circumcised in the flesh under the Levitical codes composed while still at Mount Sinai, were not immediately circumcised. Regardless of the fact that Yahweh was with them, they did not receive this fleshly circumcision until they invaded the land of Kanaan, which followed their 40-year sojourn in the wilderness."
What is the author's view with respect to the statutes of Pesach and matzah? These were given to the Israelites prior to the Sinaitic covenant, and were of everlasting duration.
Exodus 12:14-20 reads,
12:14
This day shall be to you for a memorial, and you shall keep it a feast to Yahweh: throughout your generations you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever.12:15
Seven days shall you eat matzah; even the first day you shall put away yeast out of your houses, for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Yisra'el. 12:16In the first day there shall be to you a holy convocation, and in the seventh day a holy convocation; no manner of work shall be done in them, except that which every man must eat, that only may be done by you. 12:17You shall observe the feast of matzah; for in this same day have I brought your hosts out of the land of Mitzrayim: therefore shall you observe this day throughout your generations by an ordinance forever. 12:18In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat matzah, until the twenty first day of the month at evening. 12:19Seven days shall there be no yeast found in your houses, for whoever eats that which is leavened, that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Yisra'el, whether he be a sojourner, or one who is born in the land. 12:20You shall eat nothing leavened. In all your habitations you shall eat matzah.'"Exodus 12:43-49 reads,
12:43
Yahweh said to Moshe and Aharon, "This is the ordinance of the Pesach. There shall no foreigner eat of it, 12:44but every man's servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then shall he eat of it. 12:45A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it. 12:46In one house shall it be eaten; you shall not carry forth anything of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall you break a bone of it. 12:47All the congregation of Yisra'el shall keep it. 12:48When a stranger shall sojourn with you, and will keep the Pesach to Yahweh, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one who is born in the land: but no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. 12:49One law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who sojourns among you."Seeing that no uncircumcised person is to eat the Pesach, and that Yisraelites born in the wilderness were not circumcised, it is therefore the case that Yisraelites born in the wilderness did not eat Yahweh's Pesach during their sojourn in the wilderness! Showing that Yahweh's Pesach was not observed during their sojourn in the wilderness, despite Yahweh's angel having been with them throughout this entire 40-year period!
Why would Yahweh allow Yisraelites not to observe Pesach over the 40 years that they were sojourning in the wilderness, apart from one other noted occasion?
Some Commands In The Torah Are Not Essential For Salvation Purposes
I think an issue needs to be addressed. Just because particular provisions were included in the Torah of Moses does not necessarily mean they were essential for salvation purposes! Some of these provisions had other purposes. One should therefore not assume that all provisions in the Torah of Moses had the provision of salvation as their underpinning!
Seeing that non-salvation purposes existed for many provisions in the Torah of Moses, provided these non-salvation purposes remain valid, these provisions can continue and need to continue to be upheld. They are not being upheld for salvation purposes, but for non-salvation purposes!
Were Yahweh's Festivals And Sacred Days Established On Creation Week?
"Did the khagi and sacred days of Yahweh exist prior to the covenant at Mount Sinai? Most definitely, and from the very beginning. The festivals and sacred days of Yahweh were established during the very first week of creation. Genesis, 1:14-18, for instance, notes that on the fourth day of the creation week the luminaries (the sun, moon, and stars) were made to appear in the open expanse of the heavens, 'to give light upon the earth.' These lights appeared in order 'to divide between the day and the night' and to be 'for signs and for the ... (moadim; group of appointed times) and for days and years.' In one of the Psalms, for example, we read that Yahweh, 'made the moon for the moadim.'
"Accordingly, one of the stated purposes of the sun, moon, and stars is to clock-in the moadim of Yahweh. This detail makes no sense unless the moadim of Yahweh were brought into existence at that point. The moadim of Yahweh are specifically defined in Leviticus as the weekly Sabbath day, the Khag of Phasekh (Passover) and Unleavened Bread, the Khag of Weeks (Pentecost), the Day of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Khag of Tabernacles, together with its eighth day, also called the Last Great Day."
It appears that the author is CONJECTURING!
Where is the scriptural proof supporting the institution of the festivals and sacred days of Yahweh, excluding the Sabbath, during the first week of creation?
Just because Yahweh created the luminaries for a stated purpose does not automatically mean that he also instituted his festivals and sacred days at the same time that he created the luminaries? Is it the case that when Yahweh creates a thing to fulfil a given purpose he also brings into the existence the purpose for which the thing is created at the same time that the created thing is created?
For example, it was purposed before the foundation of the world that the Messiah would die for the sins of mankind, in order to redeem mankind from the death penalty resultant upon mankind's sin. Did the Messiah die at the time he was purposed to die, before the foundation of the world? Or did he die several millennia after mankind had commenced sinning on the earth? The fact of the matter is that though it was purposed that the Messiah would indeed die, purposed before the foundation of the world and therefore before mankind's creation, he did not die until several millennia after mankind was created and had sinned.
It is therefore evident that just because Yahweh has created something for a particular purpose does not automatically mean that the purpose for which he created the thing is executed or fulfilled at the time of the creation of the thing. Some purposes are fulfilled several periods of time subsequent to the creation or occurrence of the thing.
It therefore appears that the author is conjecturing that the festivals and sacred days of Yahweh, in their entirety, were instituted and revealed to man on creation week. The evidence he has proffered does not support his conjectural assertion.
Does The Author Have A Pre-Existing Notion Regarding Yahweh's Festivals And Sacred Days?
I am getting the impression that the author already has a notion in his head with respect to the festivals and sacred days of Yahweh, and is trying to force or fit the facts to support this pre-existing notion. Rather than allow the facts to speak for themselves, and thereby lead us to the valid conclusion. A conclusion independent of any pre-existing notion anyone may have with respect to these festivals and sacred days.
Was Yahweh's Pesach Intended To Be A One-Time Commanded Offering?
"It was during the event of the Exodus and in association with the seven-day festival of Unleavened Bread that the first Phasekh sacrifice was commanded. It was understood to be a one-time commanded offering, for when Israel left Egypt (the Exodus) there were no commanded sacrifices or burnt offerings, only free-will gifts. Indeed, there was no command shortly after the Exodus to sacrifice a Phasekh victim in the handwritten covenant made at Mount Sinai. Only after the Israelites had sinned against this marriage covenant by building the golden calf was the Phasekh victim reinstated as a commanded work of the handwritten Torah and under that agreement permanently attached to the festival of Unleavened Bread."
Exodus 12:1-11 reads,
12:1
Yahweh spoke to Moshe and Aharon in the land of Mitzrayim, saying, 12:2"This month shall be to you the beginning of months. It shall be the first month of the year to you. 12:3Speak to all the congregation of Yisra'el, saying, 'On the tenth day of this month, they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to their fathers' houses, a lamb for a household; 12:4and if the household be too little for a lamb, then he and his neighbor next to his house shall take one according to the number of the souls; according to what everyone can eat you shall make your count for the lamb. 12:5Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You shall take it from the sheep, or from the goats: 12:6and you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Yisra'el shall kill it at evening. 12:7They shall take some of the blood, and put it on the two side-posts and on the lintel, on the houses in which they shall eat it. 12:8They shall eat the flesh in that night, roasted with fire, and matzah. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. 12:9Don't eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts. 12:10You shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; but that which remains of it until the morning you shall burn with fire. 12:11This is how you shall eat it: with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste: it is Yahweh's Pesach.It is evident from the Exodus 12:11,1-11 that Yahweh's Pesach is the lamb - the lamb that is killed on the fourteenth day of the first month of the year.
Exodus 12:21-28 reads,
12:21
Then Moshe called for all the Zakenim of Yisra'el, and said to them, "Draw out, and take you lambs according to your families, and kill the Pesach. 12:22You shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side-posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning. 12:23For Yahweh will pass through to strike the Mitzrim; and when he sees the blood on the lintel, and on the two side-posts, Yahweh will pass over the door, and will not allow the destroyer to come in to your houses to strike you. 12:24You shall observe this thing for an ordinance to you and to your sons forever. 12:25It shall happen when you have come to the land which Yahweh will give you, according as he has promised, that you shall keep this service. 12:26It will happen, when your children ask you, 'What do you mean by this service?' 12:27that you shall say, 'It is the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach, who passed over the houses of the children of Yisra'el in Mitzrayim, when he struck the Mitzrim, and spared our houses.'"The people bowed their heads and worshipped. 12:28The children of Yisra'el went and did so; as Yahweh had commanded Moshe and Aharon, so they did.
Again it is reiterated in verse 21 that Yahweh's Pesach is the lamb that is killed on the fourteenth day of the first month.
Verse 24 records that the ordinance of the Pesach was to be observed by those Yisraelites and their sons FOREVER! In other words, when the command for the Pesach was issued, it was Yahweh's intention that Yisraelites observe it in subsequent generations. Clearly showing that the Pesach - killing or sacrificing the Pesach, was not instituted for regular observance after Sinai, but was intended for regular observance from its institution in Yisrael! The author's understanding that the Phasekh (Pesach) was a one-time commanded offering therefore does NOT appear to be correct. For this verse clearly shows that the ordinance of the Pesach - the lamb killed or sacrificed on the fourteenth of the first month - was intended to be kept forever, and not just on that occasion in the land of Mitzrayim (Egypt)!
Also, verses 26 and 27 clearly show that the Yisraelites were meant to be observing it in subsequent generations, and explaining the meaning of this ordinance to those subsequent generations - the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach!
Exodus 12:43-51 reads,
12:43
Yahweh said to Moshe and Aharon, "This is the ordinance of the Pesach. There shall no foreigner eat of it, 12:44but every man's servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then shall he eat of it. 12:45A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it. 12:46In one house shall it be eaten; you shall not carry forth anything of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall you break a bone of it. 12:47All the congregation of Yisra'el shall keep it. 12:48When a stranger shall sojourn with you, and will keep the Pesach to Yahweh, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one who is born in the land: but no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. 12:49One law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who sojourns among you." 12:50Thus did all the children of Yisra'el. As Yahweh commanded Moshe and Aharon, so they did. 12:51It happened the same day, that Yahweh brought the children of Yisra'el out of the land of Mitzrayim by their hosts.Verse 48 and 49 clearly show that Yahweh intended the Yisraelites to observe his Pesach once he had settled them in their own land. For he issued stipulations regarding strangers sojourning with them in their own land, and how these circumcised strangers were to be accorded equal status with Yisraelite natives born in the land, born at home. Thus it is clear that Yahweh intended the Yisraelites to be observing the ordinance of his Pesach, which included sacrificing the lamb on the fourteenth day of the first month, and subsequently eating it according to its commandment.
The author's understanding is therefore at variance with the scriptural exposition on this matter.
Were Uncircumcised Christians At Corinth Keeping Yahweh's Pesach?
"Not only is Saul commanding the uncircumcised Christians at Corinth to continue to keep this festival, but he is giving us the typology of the lamb and the unleavened bread that goes with this celebration."
For starters, UNCIRCUMCISED people are NOT to observe Yahweh's Pesach, for the ordinance of Yahweh's Pesach requires that only circumcised people eat it. Therefore whatever it was the "uncircumcised Christians at Corinth" were eating was DEFINITELY NOT Yahweh's Pesach!
Secondly, Yahweh's Pesach was to be observed ONLY at the place Yahweh placed his name to dwell in within the land of Yisrael. It was not to be observed in some other geographic locality. In fact, if one was outside Yisrael during the time for observing Yahweh's Pesach, one was to observe it in the second month, still at the place Yahweh placed his name to dwell in for all time - Yerushalayim! Now WHY say that "uncircumcised Christians" were observing the Pesach at Corinth! Whatever it was that these "uncircumcised Christians" were observing at Corinth was DEFINITELY NOT Yahweh's Pesach!
Is The Author Trying To Force Facts To Fit Into A Pre-Conceived Notion?
As I said earlier on - it appears to me that the author already has a conclusion or notion in his head, and is trying to force the facts to fit into his notion or construct. Rather than allowing the facts to speak for themselves, and lead to a conclusion that stands irrespective of anyone's prior notions!
Why Is The Author Conjecturing?
"Another example is found in the book of Acts. Here we read that Saul, while teaching among the Greeks, set sail from Philippi, in Macedonia (northern Greece) to go to Troas in Asia Minor, 'after the days of unleavened bread.' [Acts 20:5-12.] There was no need to mention his waiting until after the days of unleavened bread unless Saul kept the festival while dwelling among the non Israelite peoples living in Philippi."
The author is again CONJECTURING! The scripture does not give the reason for Saul staying until after the days of unleavened bread before commencing his journey, yet the author presumes to know! On what basis? Is he the author of book of Acts? What presumption!
Is The Author Confused About Pesach Observance In The New Testament?
"Saul gives us still other charges to continue the festival until the messiah returns, [1 Cor., 11:20-34.] as does the messiah in the synoptic texts. [Mark, 14:22-25; Matt., 26:26-29; Luke, 22:14-20.] Yet before we can fully utilize these items of evidence, we must first prove that the famous Last Supper of the messiah was the Phasekh meal. Therefore, we shall wait to explore this additional evidence at the appropriate time in our study."
1 Corinthians 11: 20-34 is talking about the meal instituted by the Messiah, including the broken unleavened bread and the wine. This was not part of Yahweh's Pesach ordinance as instituted in Exodus 12! For the Pesach is the sacrificed lamb, not the unleavened bread and the wine that Yah'shuah ate with his disciples AFTER eating Yahweh's Pesach!
I think the author is confusing issues here!
Did Shaul Observe Pentecost Outside Yerushalayim?
"Next, not only was the day of Pentecost (the Khag of Weeks) celebrated by the followers of the messiah shortly after his death and resurrection, but the apostle Saul continued to observe Pentecost many years later. Saul's own records prove that he observed one Pentecost in Ephesus and another at Jerusalem. [Acts, 20:16; 1 Cor., 16:8.]"
It should be noted that just because followers of the Messiah APPEARED to have observed some of the feast days in a locality outside Yerushalayim, a locality outside the land of Yisrael, does not automatically mean that they were required to so observe these feast days in those localities outside the land of Yisrael! An allowance is NOT EQUATED to a requirement.
One should therefore not conclude that all followers of the Messiah are required to observe Yahweh's feasts outside the land of Yisrael!
For, in truth, it is to the place that Yahweh has placed his name to dwell in for all time - Yerushalayim, that people are to go to observe these feasts. Nevertheless, there is scriptural evidence to show that if one was in a land far away from Yerushalayim during feast times, one was not necessarily required to attend that particular feast. One could attend the subsequent feast. This is clearly shown in the case of Yahweh's Pesach.
Author's Conclusion Contains Inherent Weaknesses
The conclusion includes some of the objections already referred to above. While it contains some accurate matters, it does not appear to me to be devoid of weaknesses already referred to above in my comments. It assumes too much without clearly explaining or clarifying the matters that it talks about!
Does "Between The Two Evenings" Refer To Twilight?
"... And all the assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it ... (byn ha-arabim; within the periods of twilight). [For proof that byn ha-arabim is the period of twilight extending from sunset until dark see FSDY, 2.] ..."
Based on my own examination of this matter, though without going into the meaning of the Hebrew phrase byn ha-arabim, I do not agree with the author. My understanding is that the period referred to is between sundown (3 p.m.) and sunset (6 p.m.). For reference see http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/pesach.htm and http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/matzah.htm. Also, where there is more than one possible meaning of a phrase, the acceptable one must be that which does not contradict the context in which it is used. The meaning of the Hebrew phrase byn ha-arabim in the context of Yahweh's Pesach must therefore not contradict Yahweh's instructions pertaining to his Pesach.
"... In the first (moon), on the fourteenth day for the moon, at (arab, twilight) [For proof that arab is the period of twilight just after sunset see FSDY, 2.], you shall eat unleavened bread until the twenty-first day for the moon, at arab (twilight) ..."
A Danger To Be Guarded Against
"The task of Part II of our first volume is to examine and define the different Jewish and Christian schools with regard to their observance of Phasekh, with its seven days of unleavened bread, and Shabuath (Pentecost)."
There is a danger that one needs to guard against, that of studying the practices of various schools and then aligning one's preference to that of a particular school. The reason why I say it is a danger is that all schools may have elements within them of truth, and also of error. By assuming wholesale what one school does, not only does one assume the truth, but also the error. One should therefore maintain sufficient independence and objectivity to study what the various schools did and why, but not necessarily do everything a particular school did. It is truth that one seeks, even if it was not embodied entirely in the practices of a particular school.
Was The Day Of The Wave Offering The Anniversary Of The Messiah's Resurrection?
"It shall be demonstrated that the first day of the 50-day Pentecost count, the day of the ... (omer) wave offering, was also the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection."
It is evident that my current views differ from those of the author. I await the author's proof - if indeed it be proof.
Why Is The Author Doing Away With The Requirement For Observing Yahweh's Pesach?
"As our investigation shall prove, the advocates of the Christian Quartodeciman (Aristocratic) system, which view was held by the early assemblies who followed Yahushua the messiah, contended that the seven-day Festival of Unleavened Bread began with the 14th of Abib and ended at the close of the 20th of Abib. This system recognized that the 14th was not only the date for the ancient Phasekh sacrifice (an event no longer required) but was the correct date for both the Phasekh supper and the first high Sabbath day of that khag. In this construct, Phasekh is the first day of the seven days of unleavened bread."
On what BASIS does the author say that the ancient Phasekh sacrifice is no longer required? A scriptural one?
And how does he marry this view with Yah'shuah's words in Matthew 5:17-19?
Where Is The Author's Proof Affirming The Validity Of The Aristocratic System?
"Practice of the Aristocratic system, which was followed by Yahushua and the early assemblies, or anything like it, has been totally suppressed since the eight century C.E. Except for the most ardent students of history, few are even aware that it existed. The Hasidic or Pharisaic model, on the other hand, which in some way or another serves as the basis for the constructs of almost all the remaining systems (despite its late appearance relative to the Aristocratic system), has become so well-entrenched that few pundits have thought to search beyond its perimeters to solve the several contradictions presented by its format. This study shall expose these problems."
Proof sought for each of the above statements.
Explanation Sought From The Author
"The Phasekh supper and the eating of unleavened bread for seven days are meant to be a celebration and a reaffirmation of the Abrahamic Covenants."
How does the author derive this meaning for both Pesach and matzah? In some of the scriptures dealing with Pesach and matzah?
Do All Meals In Hebrew Culture Bind One To An Oath?
"In Hebrew culture, a meal binds one to an oath, vow, or contract and can be used to ratify a contract."
Just because a meal can be used to bind an oath DOES NOT automatically mean that ALL MEALS are used to bind oaths! It must be determined that a PARTICULAR meal is partaken of for the purpose of binding an oath!
Where Is The Author's Scriptural Proof?
"The Phasekh supper, therefore, is in fact a covenant meal, binding one to the Abrahamic Covenants and to the messiah."
Where is the author's scriptural proof supporting this statement?
Or is the reader simply expected to accept as fact whatever the author has asserted?
Author's Scriptural References Do Not Prove His Assertions
"The continued observance of the Phasekh repast and the seven days of eating unleavened bread during the centuries that followed the Exodus were expressly stated to be a ... (zakar; memorial) khag, the purpose of which was to recall the significance of the Exodus parable signifying the fact that Yahweh would fulfill the words of his covenant to Abraham [Exodus, 12:14; 13:6-10.]."
The scriptural references the author gives make no mention whatsoever to a connection between Pesach and matzah and the Abrahamic Covenant(s). So how does the author tie both Pesach and matzah to the Abrahamic Covenant? And which Abrahamic covenant? The one involved with the messiah?
Author's Words On The Pesach Are Negated By Scripture
"The reinstitution of the Phasekh sacrifice after the revolt at Mount Sinai, when the Israelites built the golden calf, was meant to look back at the parable type that the original sacrifice performed in Egypt represented, which pointed to the coming death of the messiah."
See my comments under Page 125, paragraph 2, showing that the author's comments suggesting that the Pesach sacrifice was reinstituted after the revolt at Mount Sinai are not scriptural. For they are negated by Exodus 12.
Where Yahweh's Feasts Were Intended To Be Observed
"Also, only manna was available for bread during the Israelite 40-year sojourn in the wilderness (Josh., 16:35), yet during that time they continued to keep the Festival of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread (Josh., cf., Exod., 34:18-26; Num., 9:1-5). For example, the Israelites were given and continued to eat manna in the first few days of the Festival of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread during their first year in the land of Kanaan (Josh., 5:10-12)."
The author's reference to Joshua 16:35 should be to Exodus 16:35, as Joshua 16 goes only to verse 10.
Exodus 34:18-26 reads,
34:18
"You shall keep the feast of matzah. Seven days you shall eat matzah, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the month Aviv; for in the month Aviv you came out from Mitzrayim. 34:19All that opens the womb is mine; and all your cattle that is male, the firstborn of cow and sheep. 34:20The firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb: and if you will not redeem it, then you shall break its neck. All the firstborn of your sons you shall redeem. No one shall appear before me empty.34:21
Six days you shall work, but on the seventh day you shall rest: in plowing time and in harvest you shall rest. 34:22You shall observe the feast of weeks with the first-fruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of harvest at the year's end. 34:23Three times in the year all your males shall appear before the Sovereign Yahweh, The Mighty One of Yisra'el. 34:24For I will drive out nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither shall any man desire your land when you go up to appear before Yahweh, your Mighty One, three times in the year.34:25
"You shall not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the Pesach be left to the morning. 34:26You shall bring the first of the first-fruits of your ground to the house of Yahweh your Mighty One. You shall not boil a young goat in its mother's milk."Exodus 34:24 shows WHERE Yahweh intended the Yisraelites to be observing his feasts, including matzah, weeks and harvest. He intended them to observe these feasts IN THEIR LAND, where they would have borders, and where men could desire their land when they went up to appear before Yahweh their Mighty One three times in the year!
The wilderness WAS NOT their land, nor did they have borders in the wilderness, borders of land that men could desire when they left it to go to a separate place to appear before Yahweh their Mighty One!
It is therefore evident that the place that Yahweh INTENDED the Yisraelites to be observing his set feasts was the land he was giving them to inherit as a possession!
These scriptures that the author has quoted DO NOT prove that the Yisraelites regularly observed Yahweh's feasts while they were sojourning in the wilderness!
Numbers 9:1-14 reads,
9:1
Yahweh spoke to Moshe in the wilderness of Sinai, in the first month of the second year after they were come out of the land of Mitzrayim, saying, 9:2Moreover let the children of Yisra'el keep the Pesach in its appointed season. 9:3In the fourteenth day of this month, at even, you shall keep it in its appointed season: according to all the statutes of it, and according to all the ordinances of it, shall you keep it. 9:4Moshe spoke to the children of Yisra'el, that they should keep the Pesach. 9:5They kept the Pesach in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at even, in the wilderness of Sinai: according to all that Yahweh commanded Moshe, so did the children of Yisra'el. 9:6There were certain men, who were unclean by reason of the dead body of a man, so that they could not keep the Pesach on that day: and they came before Moshe and before Aharon on that day: 9:7and those men said to him, We are unclean by reason of the dead body of a man: why are we kept back, that we may not offer the offering of Yahweh in its appointed season among the children of Yisra'el? 9:8Moshe said to them, Stay you, that I may hear what Yahweh will command concerning you. 9:9Yahweh spoke to Moshe, saying, 9:10Speak to the children of Yisra'el, saying, If any man of you or of your generations shall be unclean by reason of a dead body, or be on a journey afar off, yet he shall keep the Pesach to Yahweh. 9:11In the second month on the fourteenth day at even they shall keep it; they shall eat it with matzah and bitter herbs: 9:12they shall leave none of it to the morning, nor break a bone of it: according to all the statute of the Pesach they shall keep it. 9:13But the man who is clean, and is not on a journey, and forbears to keep the Pesach, that soul shall be cut off from his people; because he didn't offer the offering of Yahweh in its appointed season, that man shall bear his sin. 9:14If a stranger shall sojourn among you, and will keep the Pesach to Yahweh; according to the statute of the Pesach, and according to the ordinance of it, so shall he do: you shall have one statute, both for the sojourner, and for him who is born in the land.Numbers 9:1 notes that this was an event that took place on the year following the departure from the land of Mitzrayim. It does not say that this was to occur every year that the Yisraelites were in the wilderness.
Numbers 9:10 talks of the possibility of some Yisraelites being on a journey afar off. Where could Yisraelites possibly be on a journey far from? Was it not far from the land that Yahweh was giving them for an inheritance? Therefore showing that Pesach was meant for observance in the land of Promise?
The wilderness was a location that included all the Yisraelites who left the land of Mitzrayim. They were all travelling to the land of Promise, and not going about on other journeys. The implication being that this command was not meant for application in the wilderness, but was rather meant to be applied in the land of Promise, where some Yisraelites could, and would, on occasion, be away from.
Numbers 9:14 also talks about strangers sojourning AMONG the Yisraelites. In the wilderness the strangers amongst them were sojourning together with them, for they were all sojourners together. But once the Yisraelites had inherited the land that Yahweh was giving them, strangers would sojourn among them, while they would dwell in their own land, just as they had sojourned among the Mitzrim dwelling in their own land of Mitzrayim. The clear implication again being that Pesach was to be observed in the land of Promise.
Exodus 12:17-20 reads,
12:17
You shall observe the feast of matzah; for in this same day have I brought your hosts out of the land of Mitzrayim: therefore shall you observe this day throughout your generations by an ordinance forever. 12:18In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat matzah, until the twenty first day of the month at evening. 12:19Seven days shall there be no yeast found in your houses, for whoever eats that which is leavened, that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Yisra'el, whether he be a sojourner, or one who is born in the land. 12:20You shall eat nothing leavened. In all your habitations you shall eat matzah.Exodus 12:19, given to Yisrael at the time of the institution of both Pesach and matzah just before they left the land of Mitzrayim, shows that these feasts were meant to be observed in the land of Promise. For that is where they would next have HOUSES. For as they were just about to leave the land of Mitzrayim they were no longer to have houses in that land. The next time that they were to have houses was in the land of Promise. This indicates clearly that these commands, of Pesach and matzah, were primarily to be observed in the land of Promise.
Also, the references to one being a sojourner versus one being born in the land again clearly show that these observances were meant to be kept in the land of Promise. That was the locality intended for their observance.
Therefore, from all the scriptures the author has given, he has NOT PROVEN that the Yisraelites regularly kept Yahweh's feasts while they were in the wilderness! Neither do we have in them a command from Yahweh that these feasts be kept regularly by them while in their sojourn in the wilderness. Instead we find Yahweh clearly indicating that these feasts were intended for observance by Yisrael once they were in the land of Promise. Nevertheless, Yahweh did not forbid them from observing these feasts prior to their reaching the land of Promise.
Why Yahweh Commanded Yisrael To Observe Pesach In The Wilderness
It should also be noted that there appears to be a reason why Yahweh specifically commanded Yisrael to observe his Pesach in the second year after departing from Mitzrayim, yet we find no such scriptural command for matzah or the other feast days.
What is noted from Numbers 9 is that Yahweh was teaching Yisrael that those who were unclean were not to observe Pesach at its appointed time. They were to wait until the following month in order to so observe Pesach according to its ordinance. In other words, Yahweh was giving additional instructions with respect to the observance of his Pesach, instructions that included the institution of observing Pesach in the second month for those unable, for good reason, to observe it in its appointed time in the first month.
It therefore appears inappropriate for one to conclude on this evidence that Yisraelites regularly observed Yahweh's feasts while they were in the wilderness!
Did Yisrael Regularly Observe Yahweh's Feasts While Sojourning In The Wilderness?
Joshua 5:1-12 reads,
5:1
It happened, when all the kings of the Amori, who were beyond the Yarden westward, and all the kings of the Kana`anim, who were by the sea, heard how that Yahweh had dried up the waters of the Yarden from before the children of Yisra'el, until we were passed over, that their heart melted, neither was there spirit in them any more, because of the children of Yisra'el. 5:2At that time Yahweh said to Yah'shuah, Make you flint knives, and circumcise again the children of Yisra'el the second time. 5:3Yah'shuah made himself flint knives, and circumcised the children of Yisra'el at the hill of `Aralot. 5:4This is the cause why Yah'shuah did circumcise: all the people who came forth out of Mitzrayim, who were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came forth out of Mitzrayim. 5:5For all the people who came out were circumcised; but all the people who were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Mitzrayim, they had not circumcised. 5:6For the children of Yisra'el walked forty years in the wilderness, until all the nation, even the men of war who came forth out of Mitzrayim, were consumed, because they didn't listen to the voice of Yahweh: to whom Yahweh swore that he wouldn't let them see the land which Yahweh swore to their fathers that he would give us, a land flowing with milk and honey. 5:7Their children, whom he raised up in their place, them did Yah'shuah circumcise: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way. 5:8It happened, when they had done circumcising all the nation, that they abode in their places in the camp, until they were whole. 5:9Yahweh said to Yah'shuah, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Mitzrayim from off you. Therefore the name of that place was called Gilgal, to this day. 5:10The children of Yisra'el encamped in Gilgal; and they kept the Pesach on the fourteenth day of the month at even in the plains of Yericho. 5:11They ate of the produce of the land on the next day after the Pesach, unleavened cakes and parched grain, in the same day. 5:12The manna ceased on the next day, after they had eaten of the produce of the land; neither had the children of Yisra'el manna any more; but they ate of the fruit of the land of Kana`an that year.The above verses in Joshua clearly show that only the men of war who left Mitzrayim were circumcised. Their children, who were born to them, were not circumcised, and therefore needed to be circumcised. The verses also show that those men of war who left Mitzrayim did not listen to Yahweh's voice. Yahweh therefore consumed them in the wilderness.
Now, if these men did not listen to Yahweh, and one says that Yahweh commanded them to REGULARLY observe Pesach and matzah while in the wilderness, would not one logically draw the conclusion that these people did not observe Pesach and matzah?
Secondly, Yahweh had commanded all the descendants of Abraham, through the covenant of circumcision that he made with Abraham, that they be circumcised and circumcise their male children on the eighth day of their lives. Nevertheless, these Yisraelites, the men of war, Abraham's descendants, did not abide by this circumcision covenant, nor did they listen to Yahweh in other matters.
In Exodus 12 Yahweh clearly stated that no uncircumcised person was to eat the Pesach. Exodus 12:43-51 reads,
12:43
Yahweh said to Moshe and Aharon, "This is the ordinance of the Pesach. There shall no foreigner eat of it, 12:44but every man's servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then shall he eat of it. 12:45A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it. 12:46In one house shall it be eaten; you shall not carry forth anything of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall you break a bone of it. 12:47All the congregation of Yisra'el shall keep it. 12:48When a stranger shall sojourn with you, and will keep the Pesach to Yahweh, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one who is born in the land: but no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. 12:49One law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who sojourns among you." 12:50Thus did all the children of Yisra'el. As Yahweh commanded Moshe and Aharon, so they did. 12:51It happened the same day, that Yahweh brought the children of Yisra'el out of the land of Mitzrayim by their hosts.It is clear that one law applied to both Yisraelites and strangers sojourning among them. No uncircumcised person was to eat the Pesach!
Now, if the rebellious Yisraelites did not circumcise their male children, and these grew to become adults, yet they were not circumcised, how could they keep Yahweh's Pesach, yet it was Yahweh's command that no uncircumcised person was to eat it?
It is therefore evident that Yisrael DID NOT REGULARLY observe Pesach while they were sojourning in the wilderness. They did not keep the portions of Yahweh's command that would have facilitated their observing the Pesach according to its ordinance. Therefore, even if they thought to undertake a similar ordinance, it would have been their own Pesach, and not Yahweh's Pesach!
It is therefore evident that the author is WRONG in his assertion that Yisrael regularly observed Yahweh's Pesach and other feasts while sojourning over 40 years in the wilderness! The truth of the matter is that they DID NOT!
Commentator Thinks Author Has A Pre-Conceived Notion
I am beginning to firm in the impression that the author already has a construct in his mind that he thinks is the correct construct. He therefore appears to be marshalling a whole collection of data and information to support the construct in his mind that he thinks is the correct one.
Personally I DO NOT think this is the manner one ought to approach any subject matter, especially matters pertaining to worshipping Yahweh. One should have an open mind, and allow the collected facts, data and information to speak for themselves, shedding light where light is needed, thereby leading to the adoption of the "correct" construct in light of all available facts, data and information!
Volumes 2 And 3 Should Be Made Available To The Public
So far the author has made several references to volumes 2 and 3 of which the current volume is volume 1. Yet these have not been made available to the public. To do justice to the serious student of the matters that volume 1 covers, the author should likewise make available volumes 2 and 3. By so doing some of the matters raised above might be shown to have already been dealt with, and hopefully appropriately.
Why Is The Author Inconsistent With Respect To The Place Intended For Observance Of Yahweh's Feasts?
"This wave offering of newly cut grain is a gift to Yahweh of the firstfruits of the land from each year's harvest. The offering occurs in the spring and is directly connected with the Promised Land. This offering is described in detail by the book of Leviticus.
When you come into the land (of Promise) which I am giving to you, and have reaped its harvest, and have brought in this omer, the beginning of your harvest, to the priest, then he shall wave this omer before Yahweh for your acceptance. On the day after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it."
Here the author acknowledges that waving the omer is directly connected with the Promised Land. Why does he not do the same for the other of Yahweh's feasts?
Author Does Not Accept His Own Translation Of Leviticus 23:14
"Under the guidance of this statute, no one could harvest or eat any of the new year's crop until the offering had been made by the high priest at the altar.
And you shall not eat bread, and roasted grain, and new grain until the self-same day; this until you have brought the offering of your eloahi. It is an olam statute for your generations in all your dwellings."
Leviticus 23:14, which the author quotes, states clearly that NO BREAD, or ROASTED GRAIN, or NEW GRAIN is to be eaten until the offering of the Mighty One has been brought. It does not just forbid the eating of the "new year's crop" prior to the bringing of the offering. It forbids the eating of bread, or roasted grain, or new grain! In other words, it does not just forbid the eating of new grain, or the new year's crop, but ALSO the old one, that prior to the new year!
For if the bar was only to new grain, then there would have been no reason to classify new grain in its own separate category from bread and roasted grain. That new grain has been listed separately indicates that both bread and roasted grain are not from the new grain, are not from the new year's crop!
It is therefore my impression that not only was the bar on the new year's crop, but also on that of previous years!
Author Following Human Tradition Inconsistent With Scripture
"The date for the Festival of Weeks is totally dependent upon the date for the omer wave offering. At the same time, the omer wave offering is totally dependent upon the timing of Phasekh and the seven days of unleavened bread."
How is the omer wave offering totally dependent upon the timing of Phasekh and the seven days of unleavened bread?
The author has given NO SCRIPTURAL PROOF to support this assertion. INSTEAD, he has given us accounts from the Pharisaical priests Philo and Josephus confirming that it was their practice to wave the omer offering during the days of unleavened bread.
But, as the author has already argued in his thesis, Jewish practice at a particular period of time does not automatically equate with scriptural practice! Also, there are different conflicting Jewish schools of thought on the matter of Phasekh, Unleavened Bread and Pentecost.
Therefore, on what basis does he select the Pharisaical accounts of Philo and Josephus as being definitive on this matter, yet he rejects their approach in determining both Phasekh and Unleavened Bread, for he is of the Aristocratic (Sadduccean and Quartodeciman) persuasion? If the author is using scripture as his basis, let him show the reader the scriptures he is relying on. But if not, he is likewise following human tradition, a practice he has himself condemned in his thesis, especially when that human tradition is not in harmony with Yahweh's word!
The Author Conjectures Regarding The Omer Wave Offering
"Third, definition is added to our problem from the story found in the book of Joshua, which tells of the Israelite invasion of the land of Kanaan by Joshua the son of Nun. The omer wave offering was not commanded to begin until the Israelites entered the land of Kanaan (the Promised Land). Up until that time they had for 40 years been dwelling in the wilderness and consuming manna, a "bread from heaven" provided to them by Yahweh. The passage in question from Joshua reports the conversion from manna to grain breads just after the Israelites crossed the Jordan river and invaded the land of Kanaan. These events occurred over the first three days of the Festival of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread. Joshua reports:
Abib 14. "And the sons of Israel camped at Gilgal and they prepared the Phasekh on the 14th day of the moon at arab (twilight), on the plains of Jericho." [Josh., 5:10.]
Abib 15. "And they ate from the ... (abur; stored grain) of the land ... (ma-mokhorath; from the day after) the Phasekh, unleavened bread and roasted grain on this same day." [Josh., 5:11.]
Abib 16. "And the manna ceased ... (ma-mokhorath; from the day after) they had eaten from ... (abur; stored grain) of the land; and there was no more manna to the sons of Israel, but they ate from the ... (tebuath; produce) of the land of Kanaan in that year." [Josh., 5:12.]
The above evidence proves that the "stored grain," that is, grain stored over from the previous year's crop, was consumed by the Israelites on Abib 14 and 15. On the other hand, since the sons of Israel began to eat "from the ... (tebuath; produce) of the land" grown "in that year" on the 16th of Abib, it demonstrates that the omer wave offering had been made on that same date. The very fact that the manna, symbolic of the old bread, ceased on the 16th verifies that it was on this day in that particular year that the omer wave offering took place and the new grain from the field began to be harvested and eaten.
Yet even if one were to translate ... (abur) as "produce" in general, as has been popular, thereby placing the omer wave offering on the 15th, one important piece of evidence is created: the omer wave offering was made after the Phasekh of the 14th and within the seven days of the unleavened bread. The Sabbath after which the omer of the firstfruits of the beginning harvest was to be waved, therefore, cannot be the first Sabbath day of a new year, for by the 14th of Abib there had already been at least two or more weekly Sabbaths since the new year began.
Whether one uses the Aristocratic method, which counts the 14th as the Phasekh high Sabbath, or the Hasidic method, which makes the 15th the Phasekh high Sabbath, we can be sure of one more thing: the 50-day count to Pentecost must begin sometime after the Phasekh of the 14th and after a Sabbath ending within the seven days of unleavened bread. As a result, as J. Van Goudoever notes, "in Israelite tradition there is a close relation between the keeping of the Sabbath and the counting of the 50 days.""
In saying, "On the other hand, since the sons of Israel began to eat "from the ... (tebuath; produce) of the land" grown "in that year" on the 16th of Abib, it demonstrates that the omer wave offering had been made on that same date. The very fact that the manna, symbolic of the old bread, ceased on the 16th verifies that it was on this day in that particular year that the omer wave offering took place and the new grain from the field began to be harvested and eaten," - it is EVIDENT that the author is CONJECTURING!
Just because the Israelites began to eat of the produce of the land, meaning new grain, accepting the author's translations, on the 16th of Abib, DOES NOT prove or demonstrate that the omer offering was made on that day!
Did Yahweh command the Yisraelites to eat new grain of the produce of the land on the very day of the omer wave offering? Did he not, rather, prohibit them from eating of the produce of the land prior to the waving of the omer offering? Are not these two different?
A prohibition from doing something prior to the occurrence of a particular event is NOT the same as a command to do that thing immediately upon the occurrence of that particular event.
That the author so interprets this command of Yahweh SHOWS that he his indeed conjecturing in this matter - adding issues to Yahweh's command, issues that do not exist in the command in the very first place!
Leviticus 23:9-16 reads,
23:9
Yahweh spoke to Moshe, saying, 23:10Speak to the children of Yisra'el, and tell them, When you are come into the land which I give to you, and shall reap the harvest of it, then you shall bring the sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest to the Kohen: 23:11and he shall wave the sheaf before Yahweh, to be accepted for you: on the next day after the Shabbat the Kohen shall wave it. 23:12In the day when you wave the sheaf, you shall offer a he-lamb without blemish a year old for a burnt offering to Yahweh. 23:13The meal-offering of it shall be two tenth parts of an efah of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire to Yahweh for a sweet savor; and the drink-offering of it shall be of wine, the fourth part of a hin. 23:14You shall eat neither bread, nor parched grain, nor fresh ears, until this same day, until you have brought the offering of your Mighty One: it is a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings. 23:15You shall count to you from the next day after the Shabbat, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave-offering; seven Shabbatot shall there be complete: 23:16even to the next day after the seventh Shabbat shall you number fifty days; and you shall offer a new meal-offering to Yahweh.It is evident from this quotation that Yahweh gave no command to the Yisraelites to eat of the produce of the land on the day the omer wave offering was waved to him. One should therefore NOT conclude that because the Yisraelites in their first feast of matzah in the Promised Land ate of the produce of the land on Abib 16 that they waved the omer wave offering to Yahweh on that day. The CORRECT CONCLUSION is that by the time they commenced eating of the produce of the land on Abib 16 they had already waved the omer wave offering to Yahweh. A waving that could have taken place any period of time prior to the time they commenced eating of the produce of the land, counting from the day they entered the Promised Land, EVEN DAYS BEFORE they ate of the produce of the land!
Where Is The Author's Evidence That The Omer Wave Offering Was Made After The 14th Day?
The author also says, "Yet even if one were to translate ... (abur) as "produce" in general, as has been popular, thereby placing the omer wave offering on the 15th, one important piece of evidence is created: the omer wave offering was made after the Phasekh of the 14th and within the seven days of the unleavened bread."
WHERE does the author derive this "evidence"? Where is the evidence that the omer wave offering was made after the Phasekh of the 14th and within the seven days of the unleavened bread? It CERTAINLY does not come from Joshua 5:10-12, for these verses DO NOT tell us when the omer wave offering was waved to Yahweh! So where does the author derive his evidence? Jewish tradition?
Author Wrong On Computation Of Sabbaths Between The New Year And Pesach
The author then concludes, without having shown the SOURCE of his "evidence", "The Sabbath after which the omer of the firstfruits of the beginning harvest was to be waved, therefore, cannot be the first Sabbath day of a new year, for by the 14th of Abib there had already been at least two or more weekly Sabbaths since the new year began."
It is CORRECT to say that the Sabbath after which the omer wave offering was waved could not have been the first Sabbath day of the new year. For the evidence from the book of Joshua is very clear on this matter. Joshua 4:19 reads,
4:19
The people came up out of the Yarden on the tenth day of the first month, and encamped in Gilgal, on the east border of Yericho.It is therefore evident that at least one weekly Sabbath had passed by the time the Yisraelites reached and entered the Promised Land. At most two weekly Sabbaths could have occurred by the 10th of Abib. In fact, the maximum number of weekly Sabbaths that could have occurred by the 14th of Abib would have been two. For if the 1st of Abib was a Sabbath, the next one would have been on the 8th, and the subsequent weekly Sabbath would have been on the 15th. Therefore the maximum number of Sabbaths that can occur by the 14th of Abib is two. The author is therefore not being entirely accurate in stating that "by the 14th of Abib there had already been at least two or more weekly Sabbaths since the new year began." For there CANNOT be more than two weekly Sabbaths from the beginning of the new year by the 14th of Abib.
Since the first weekly Sabbath had elapsed prior to the Yisraelites entering the Promised Land, this Sabbath should be eliminated from the reckoning of possible Sabbaths with respect to the day after which the omer wave offering was waved to Yahweh.
Author's Invalidly Derived Conclusion
The author concludes, "Whether one uses the Aristocratic method, which counts the 14th as the Phasekh high Sabbath, or the Hasidic method, which makes the 15th the Phasekh high Sabbath, we can be sure of one more thing: the 50-day count to Pentecost must begin sometime after the Phasekh of the 14th and after a Sabbath ending within the seven days of unleavened bread."
I contend that this conclusion is not VALIDLY DERIVED! For the author ignores some very clear scriptural statements with a direct bearing on this matter.
Leviticus 23:14 reads, as translated by the author,
And you shall not eat bread, and roasted grain, and new grain until the self-same day; this until you have brought the offering of your eloahi. It is an olam statute for your generations in all your dwellings.
It is therefore clear that NO bread, or roasted grain, or new grain, was to be eaten prior to the waving of the omer wave offering.
Nevertheless, the author argues correctly, showing from Joshua 5, that the Yisraelites did indeed eat roasted grain on the 15th of Abib, "And they ate from the ... (abur; stored grain) of the land ... (ma-mokhorath; from the day after) the Phasekh, unleavened bread and roasted grain on this same day."
Seeing that Yahweh forbade the Yisraelites, in Leviticus 23:14, which the author ignores in his conclusion, from eating any bread or roasted grain or new grain, from the produce of the land, prior to waving to him the omer wave offering, it ought to be clear that no unleavened bread or roasted grain could have been eaten by the Yisraelites on Abib 15 without the omer wave offering having been waved prior to this!
Exodus 12:8 reads,
12:8
They shall eat the flesh in that night, roasted with fire, and matzah. They shall eat it with bitter herbs.It is therefore clear that Yahweh's Pesach MUST be eaten with matzah - unleavened bread.
It is also clear from Leviticus 23:14 that no bread was to be eaten prior to the waving of the omer wave offering. It should therefore be clear that the omer wave offering must be waved to Yahweh BEFORE Yahweh's Pesach is eaten!
It should therefore also be clear that the omer wave offering is NEVER to be waved during the days of unleavened bread. It is to be waved PRIOR to eating Yahweh's Pesach, and therefore prior to the days of unleavened bread!
The author's conclusion, and the traditional Aristocratic and Hasidic constructs that he has presented are therefore seen to be UNSCRIPTURAL!
Also, it should therefore be clear that the weekly Sabbath after which the omer wave offering was waved on the morrow, took place on the year the Yisraelites entered the Promised Land ON OR AFTER the 10th of Abib and before the 14th of Abib! This firmly and clearly shows that the relevant weekly Sabbath with respect to the waving of the omer wave offering to Yahweh is the weekly Sabbath immediately PRIOR to the day for sacrificing Yahweh's Pesach, prior to the 14th of Abib!
Author's Exposition Manifests A Historical Gap
The author appears to commence detailed discussion of the various schools from the period of about the second century B.C.E. What about the practice in the periods prior to this? What about the scriptural evidence in the period preceding this? For example, the practice during the Pesach of Yahweh in Yoshiyahu's time?
Author's Subsequent Arguments On Pesach, Matzah And Pentecost Likely To Be Wrong
It appears that the author is likely to develop his subsequent discussion on assessing the merits and demerits of the four schools that he has just listed, and attempt to show that the Aristocratic school is the correct one. Yet NONE of these four schools is correct. For they all MISS the detail of the correct timing of the omer wave offering, thinking that it takes place subsequent to the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach! The truth of the matter, as already shown in my comments above, is that the omer wave offering was waved to Yahweh BEFORE the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach!
It is therefore my view that the author's subsequent arguments, if centred on the wrong day for the omer wave offering, are unlikely to arrive at the correct rendition of both Pesach and Unleavened Bread on one hand, and Pentecost on the other.
Author Makes A Massive Historical Leap
It appears that the author has made a historical leap from the days of Joshua to the 5th/6th century B.C.E. He intends to begin his examination of the matter from EXTRA-BIBLICAL sources from around the 5th/6th century B.C.E. Why does he omit examining the period between the time of Joshua and Ezra? Isn't there scriptural support, during this period, for the correct method of observing Pesach, matzah and Shavuot?
I think there is, especially the Pesach's and Matzah's kept by both Chizkiyahu and Yoshiyahu, kings of Yahudah in Yerushalayim.
Author Prepares Ground To Proclaim Sadduccees Correct
One gets the impression that the author is preparing the ground, and setting the stage, for stating that the Aristocratic system of reckoning the Phasekh and Unleavened Bread and Pentecost is the one that should be adopted. For the Saduccees, the adherents of the Aristocratic system, are the ones reputed by a few ancient writers as the ones who stuck more faithfully to the Torah, while the Pharisees, the adherents of the Hasidic system, had their religious practices polluted by Hellenism and numerous human traditions.
Nevertheless, the author appears to miss the point. Both the Aristocratic and Hasidic systems are wrong! For they ignore the clear scriptural account already examined by my comments above.
I again refer to my earlier impressions: that the author appears to have a particular favoured construct in his mind, and is therefore presenting a whole series of facts and information to support and attempt to prove the correctness of his preconceived construct. He should rather allow the facts to speak for themselves, and adopt whatever construct shown by the facts, data and information. And by facts, data and information, I mean SCRIPTURAL ones! The latter approach, one not adopted by the author, is more intellectually honest.
Author's Historical Citation Negates Likelihood Of Twilight Pesach
"Josephus reports that, during the first century C.E. (up until the destruction of the city of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 C.E.), at which time the Hasidic practice was the state religion, the hour for the Phasekh sacrifice was as follows:
Accordingly, on the occasion of the festival called Phasekh, at which they sacrifice FROM THE NINTH TO THE ELEVENTH HOUR, and a little fraternity, as it were, gathers round each sacrifice, of not fewer than ten persons - feasting alone not being permitted - while the companies often included as many as twenty, the victims were counted and amounted to two hundred and fifty-five thousand six hundred; allowing an average of ten diners to each victim, we obtain a total of two million seven hundred thousand, all pure and sacred. For those afflicted with leprosy or gonorrhoea, or menstruous women, or persons otherwise defiled were not permitted to partake of this sacrifice, nor yet any foreigners present for worship, and a large number of these assemble from abroad. [Jos., Wars, 6:9:3f; 423ff.]"
This quotation from Josephus gives an idea of how long it took to both sacrifice the Pesach and fully roast it, fully preparing it for eating later the immediately following night. About two hours!
If one is to accept the Aristocratic persuasion of sacrificing the Pesach between sunset and dark, that is during twilight, isn't one also saying that twilight consists of a period of about two hours? Yet the evidence shows that twilight consists of a period of about no more than about 30 to 45 minutes, half an hour to three-quarters of an hour. On the basis of time taken to kill and roast the Pesach according to commandment, fully preparing it prior to eating, it does not appear feasible that the Aristocratic persuasion is correct.
Author's Reasoning Scripturally Fallacious
"The evidence shows that the Phasekh, as a commanded sacrifice, was not originally part of the seven-day festival. It was originally only intended as a one-time event in Egypt meant for the Exodus. To demonstrate, there were no commanded sacrifices when the Israelites left Egypt (Jer., 7:21-26). As a result, in the covenant at Mount Sinai, only the statute to keep "the Khag of Unleavened Bread" was affirmed, with no reference to any Phasekh sacrifice (Exod., 23:14-17). The Phasekh sacrifice was introduced only after the Israelites rebelled by building the golden calf at Mount Sinai. With this act of idolatry, the Israelites had broken their marriage covenant with Yahweh. To reinstate them into this covenant, Yahweh commanded that a Phasekh victim be sacrificed each year with the unleavened bread (Exod., 34:25)."
As I have already shown above, this view of the author's is UNSCRIPTURAL. For it ignores Yahweh's clear words in Exodus 12, showing that Yisrael was intended to observe and eat Yahweh's Pesach in subsequent generations forever!
The author's reasoning is also found to be scripturally fallacious on another count. He argues that Phasekh was not intended to be kept by the Israelites apart from its observance in the land of Mitzrayim because, among others, it was not mentioned in the covenant at Mount Sinai. Implying that the ONLY things the Israelites were initially intended to observe were those that were mentioned in the covenant at Mount Sinai.
But this is scripturally fallacious reasoning! For by the same reasoning the author should say that circumcision was also intended to be a one-time event for Abraham and his household existing at the time he received the circumcision command/covenant from Yahweh. For circumcision is not mentioned in the covenant at Mount Sinai. The author would therefore conclude, using his rationale for Phasekh, that circumcision was likewise intended as a one-time event in the days of Abraham. That it was not to be undertaken by subsequent generations of Abraham's children!
For just as Phasekh, when the command was originally given in Exodus 12, was commanded to be kept by subsequent Yisraelite generations forever, so also was circumcision commanded to be kept by subsequent Abrahamic generations forever, the command recorded in Genesis 17! Yet both circumcision and Phasekh are not mentioned by name in the covenant at Mount Sinai!
Implying that it is the author's view that when Yahweh says his commands are valid forever for subsequent generations, Yahweh does not mean what he says, but means that the command is valid for only the person he gives that command. Yahweh's words that his command should be valid forever for subsequent generations of that person notwithstanding!
This is ABSURD!
Does Yahweh mean what he says when he issues a command to be valid forever for subsequent generations? Or does the author TWIST Yahweh's words clearly stating forever for subsequent generations to mean a single one-time event? MADNESS!
The author should clearly understand that not everything that Yahweh intended Yisrael to do in future, and in subsequent generations, was mentioned in the covenant at Mount Sinai. Some things that Yahweh expected them to observe in future, and in subsequent generations, had already been issued prior to the covenant at Mount Sinai! The covenant at Mount Sinai DID NOT negate Yahweh's previously issued commands to Yisrael, or to their forebears with an applicability on them!
To repeatedly suggest that when Yahweh issues a command for a perpetual observance throughout the generations of the children of Abraham and the children of Yisrael he means a one-time event is to RIDICULE Yahweh! MADNESS!
Is the author allowing his great historical and linguistic learning to get into his head, manifesting itself as an arrogance whereby he dismisses, ignores and twists Yahweh's words? MADNESS! I SHAKE MY HEAD - REPEATEDLY!
In light of such SHAMEFUL conduct, what is the author doing to the credibility of his entire thesis? Is he not making it INCREDULOUS?
Author Following Human Tradition
Seeing that the author is relying heavily on extra-biblical references, and also showing, from these references, that early Aristocrats likewise relied on earlier Aristocrats, what is to distinguish the author's and other Aristocratic practices of following HUMAN tradition, even as he accuses the Hasidic school of doing? Are not the practitioners of both schools of thought the same on this score?
Author's Ground For Dismissing Hasidic System For Reckoning Phasekh And Matzah Unscriptural
It appears to me that the author's fundamental argument in dismissing the Hasidic reckoning of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread lies in scriptures commanding that unleavened bread be eaten for seven days, NOT eight days. In other words, the feast of matzah is a seven-day feast and not a seven and a quarter day feast, as would appear to be the case from the Hasidic system.
Exodus 23:18 reads,
23:18
"You shall not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread, neither shall the fat of my feast remain all night until the morning.Exodus 34:25 reads,
34:25
"You shall not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the Pesach be left to the morning.As these scriptures make clear that the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach is not to be offered with leavened bread, it must mean that if any bread is offered with the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach it must be unleavened bread.
To the author this means that the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach was sacrificed on the first of the seven days of unleavened bread, seeing that no leavened bread is to be offered with the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pesach. Therefore, to the author, the Hasidic system, in which Yahweh's Pesach is sacrificed in the afternoon of the 14th of Abib, and eaten on the night of the 15th of Abib, equates to a seven and a quarter day feast of unleavened bread, rather than a seven day feast as commanded in the scriptures. On this basis he dismisses the Hasidic system of reckoning Pesach and matzah.
What the author's argument implies is that unleavened bread IS NOT to be offered outside the seven-day feast of unleavened bread! Is this the case?
Exodus 12:15-20 reads,
12:15
Seven days shall you eat matzah; even the first day you shall put away yeast out of your houses, for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Yisra'el. 12:16In the first day there shall be to you a holy convocation, and in the seventh day a holy convocation; no manner of work shall be done in them, except that which every man must eat, that only may be done by you. 12:17You shall observe the feast of matzah; for in this same day have I brought your hosts out of the land of Mitzrayim: therefore shall you observe this day throughout your generations by an ordinance forever. 12:18In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat matzah, until the twenty first day of the month at evening. 12:19Seven days shall there be no yeast found in your houses, for whoever eats that which is leavened, that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Yisra'el, whether he be a sojourner, or one who is born in the land. 12:20You shall eat nothing leavened. In all your habitations you shall eat matzah.It is clear from verses 15 and 19 that the REASON why the congregation of Yisrael was commanded to remove all leaven from their houses was to ensure that leavened food was not in close proximity to them. For whoever ate what was leavened during the seven days of unleavened bread would be cut off from the congregation of Yisrael. The greater command was therefore the avoidance of eating whatever was leavened during the seven days, and not their removal from their houses.
Exodus 12:5-10 reads,
12:5
Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You shall take it from the sheep, or from the goats: 12:6and you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Yisra'el shall kill it at evening. 12:7They shall take same of the blood, and put it on the two side-posts and on the lintel, on the houses in which they shall eat it. 12:8They shall eat the flesh in that night, roasted with fire, and matzah. They shall eat it with bitter herbs. 12:9Don't eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted with fire; with its head, its legs and its inner parts. 12:10You shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; but that which remains of it until the morning you shall burn with fire.As Yahweh's Pesach was to be eaten at night, when it was definitely into the feast of matzah, it could only be eaten with matzah or unleavened bread, not with leavened bread. Nevertheless, what about the timing of its offering, as distinct from its eating?
Exodus 29:1-25 reads,
29:1
"This is the thing that you shall do to them to make them holy, to minister to me in the Kohen's office: take one young bull and two rams without blemish, 29:2matzah, unleavened cakes mixed with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil: you shall make them of fine wheat flour. 29:3You shall put them into one basket, and bring them in the basket, with the bull and the two rams. 29:4You shall bring Aharon and his sons to the door of the tent of meeting, and shall wash them with water. 29:5You shall take the garments, and put on Aharon the coat, the robe of the efod, the efod, and the breastplate, and dress him with the skillfully woven band of the efod; 29:6and you shall set the turban on his head, and put the holy crown on the turban. 29:7Then you shall take the anointing oil, and pour it on his head, and anoint him. 29:8You shall bring his sons, and put coats on them. 29:9You shall dress them with belts, Aharon and his sons, and bind headbands on them: and they shall have the priesthood by a perpetual statute: and you shall consecrate Aharon and his sons.29:10
"You shall bring the bull before the tent of meeting: and Aharon and his sons shall lay their hands on the head of the bull. 29:11You shall kill the bull before Yahweh, at the door of the tent of meeting. 29:12You shall take of the blood of the bull, and put it on the horns of the altar with your finger; and you shall pour out all the blood at the base of the altar. 29:13You shall take all the fat that covers the innards, the cover of the liver, the two kidneys, and the fat that is on them, and burn them on the altar. 29:14But the flesh of the bull, and its skin, and its dung, you shall burn with fire outside of the camp: it is a sin-offering.29:15
"You shall also take the one ram; and Aharon and his sons shall lay their hands on the head of the ram. 29:16You shall kill the ram, and you shall take its blood, and sprinkle it around on the altar. 29:17You shall cut the ram into its pieces, and wash its innards, and its legs, and put them with its pieces, and with its head. 29:18You shall burn the whole ram on the altar: it is a burnt offering to Yahweh; it is a sweet savor, an offering made by fire to Yahweh.29:19
"You shall take the other ram; and Aharon and his sons shall lay their hands on the head of the ram. 29:20Then you shall kill the ram, and take some of its blood, and put it on the tip of the right ear of Aharon, and on the tip of the right ear of his sons, and on the thumb of their right hand, and on the big toe of their right foot, and sprinkle the blood on the altar round about. 29:21You shall take of the blood that is on the altar, and of the anointing oil, and sprinkle it on Aharon, and on his garments, and on his sons, and on the garments of his sons with him: and he shall be made holy, and his garments, and his sons, and his sons' garments with him. 29:22Also you shall take some of the ram's fat, the fat tail, the fat that covers the innards, the cover of the liver, the two kidneys, the fat that is on them, and the right thigh (for it is a ram of consecration), 29:23and one loaf of bread, one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer out of the basket of matzah that is before Yahweh. 29:24You shall put all of this in Aharon's hands, and in his sons' hands, and shall wave them for a wave-offering before Yahweh. 29:25You shall take them from their hands, and burn them on the altar on the burnt offering, for a sweet savor before Yahweh: it is an offering made by fire to Yahweh.It is evident from verses 1 to 3 that the bread mentioned in verse 23 was unleavened bread. These unleavened breads were waved for a wave-offering before Yahweh and then burned on the altar on the burnt offering.
Would the author say that the consecration of Aharon and his sons took place during the days of unleavened bread, seeing that unleavened bread was offered to Yahweh together with other sacrifices during their consecration? Did not this consecration of Aharon and his sons take place AFTER the days of unleavened bread? Does it not show that unleavened bread can indeed be offered with other sacrifices to Yahweh outside the days of unleavened bread?
Leviticus 2:1-16 reads,
2:1
"'When anyone offers an offering of a meal-offering to Yahweh, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil on it, and put frankincense on it. 2:2He shall bring it to Aharon's sons the Kohanim; and he shall take his handful of its fine flour, and of its oil, with all its frankincense; and the Kohen shall burn the memorial of it on the altar, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savor to Yahweh. 2:3That which is left of the meal-offering shall be Aharon's and his sons'. It is a most holy thing of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire. 2:4When you offer an offering of a meal-offering baked in the oven, it shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, or unleavened wafers anointed with oil. 2:5If your offering is a meal-offering of the baking-pan, it shall be of unleavened fine flour, mingled with oil. 2:6You shall cut it in pieces, and pour oil on it. It is a meal-offering. 2:7If your offering be a meal-offering of the frying-pan, it shall be made of fine flour with oil. 2:8You shall bring the meal-offering that is made of these things to Yahweh: and it shall be presented to the Kohen, and he shall bring it to the altar. 2:9The Kohen shall take up from the meal-offering the memorial of it, and shall burn it on the altar, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savor to Yahweh. 2:10That which is left of the meal-offering shall be Aharon's and his sons': it is a thing most holy of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire. 2:11No meal-offering, which you shall offer to Yahweh, shall be made with yeast; for you shall burn no yeast, nor any honey, as an offering made by fire to Yahweh. 2:12As an offering of first -fruits you shall offer them to Yahweh: but they shall not come up for a sweet savor on the altar. 2:13Every offering of your meal-offering shall you season with salt; neither shall you allow the salt of the covenant of your Mighty One to be lacking from your meal-offering: with all your offerings you shall offer salt. 2:14If you offer a meal-offering of first-fruits to Yahweh, you shall offer for the meal-offering of your first-fruits grain in the ear parched with fire, bruised grain of the fresh ear. 2:15You shall put oil on it, and lay frankincense thereon: it is a meal-offering. 2:16The Kohen shall burn the memorial of it, part of the bruised grain of it, and part of the oil of it, with all the frankincense of it: it is an offering made by fire to Yahweh.Will the author say that all meal-offerings of a baking variety were offered during the seven days of unleavened bread? Was that the only time that Kohanim were to obtain meal-offering food from the people? Was it not rather the case that these were offered at times outside the seven days of unleavened bread, thereby enabling the Kohanim to eat meal-offerings at various times of the year, and not only during the seven days of unleavened bread? And did not this show that unleavened bread could indeed be eaten outside the seven days of unleavened bread?
It appears that the author's rationale for dismissing the Hasidic system of reckoning Phasekh and Unleavened Bread, on the ground that the time the adherents of the Hasidic system dealt with unleavened bread was seven and a quarter days, and not seven days, does not hold water. For the people could and did indeed involve themselves with unleavened bread offerings even outside the festival of Unleavened Bread! The author's argument that Yahweh's Phasekh sacrifice had to have been killed during the seven days of unleavened bread, on the ground that it was not to be offered with leavened bread, does not hold water!
Leviticus 2:11-12 clearly shows that Yahweh forbade leaven being offered to him accompanying meal-offerings made by fire. The Phasekh sacrifice was indeed an offering roasted with fire. In harmony with Yahweh's sacrificial and offering laws it WAS NOT to be offered with leaven.
It should therefore be clear that the reason why Yahweh forbade Yisrael from offering his Pesach sacrifice with leaven was not because it was to be offered within the seven days of unleavened bread. But because Yahweh's sacrificial and offering laws require that no leaven be offered to him accompanying offerings made by fire! It is also evident that unleavened bread offerings were made to Yahweh outside the days of unleavened bread, thereby showing that they can indeed be made outside this period.
The author's rationale for dismissing the Hasidic reckoning of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread on the basis that no leaven was to be offered with Yahweh's Phasekh is therefore found to be unscriptural and dubious!
Author's Contradictory Views Exposed
"Yet, as we shall demonstrate, the first day of the Pentecost count, which was also the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection, came to serve as a guide for the western Christian reconstruction of Phasekh."
It is IMPOSSIBLE that the messiah rose on the first day of the Pentecost count. For the first day of the Pentecost count occurred BEFORE he ate his last Phasekh prior to his death. How could he rise from the dead before he had died?
These are the contradictory views exposed by the erroneous Phasekh, Unleavened Bread and Pentecost system that the author has adopted and is promoting!
It appears to be the author's understanding that there was harmony by all the various differing Jewish and Christian groups in the manner of reckoning the commencement of months, especially the moon of Abib. But was this so?
If the different groups disagreed on so many matters with respect to Phasekh, Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, the omer wave offering, etc., is it not plausible that they might have disagreed also on the commencement of the moon of Abib? With one group commencing the month on a given day, and another group commencing the same month on a different day? Such that even if two different groups appear to adopt the same philosophy of assessing Phasekh, Unleavened Bread and Pentecost, they would still honour different days occasioned by their disagreement on the commencement of the moon (month)?
Where Is The Author's Proof That The Apostles Commanded Observance Of The Sovereign's Day?
"Subsequently, there developed a vital distinction between the early Quartodeciman observance of an annual Sovereign's day and the later practice of the western Christians. Though the early conservative Quartodecimans observed the first day of the week after the 14th as the Sovereign's day, they nowhere ascribe to it the significance of a high festival or make it a day on which one should celebrate the Eucharist mystery of the Phasekh. However, they did celebrate that day by gathering for a meal and Eucharist. It was the first day in the 50-day count to the Festival of Pentecost and marked the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection. For these reasons, the apostles, guided by Scriptures, had instructed the assemblies to continue its observance."
With respect to the validity of the first day in the 50-day count to the Festival of Pentecost marking the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection, refer to my comments under "Page 274, paragraph 1."
Where is the author's PROOF that the apostles instructed the assemblies to continue the observance of the Sovereign's day for the reasons of it marking the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection and being the first day in the 50-day count to the Festival of Pentecost?
Which Scriptures GUIDED the apostles in making such an instruction, if they did indeed make such an instruction?
I do not accept this rationale! For the scriptures clearly show that the omer wave offering was waved BEFORE the sacrifice of the Phasekh. How then can the omer wave offering be the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection? How can the Scriptures guide the apostles in making such an instruction - an instruction to continue observing the Sovereign's day on account of it being both the omer wave offering day and the anniversary of the messiah's resurrection? Scripture DOES NOT contradict itself! Therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE for Scripture to show clearly that the omer wave offering took place prior to the sacrifice of Yahweh's Phasekh, and then to show that it did take place subsequent to the that sacrifice!
"According to the Synoptic texts, the messiah was raised on the first day of the week on the days of unleavened bread. [Matt., 26:17, 27:57-28:7; Mark, 14:12, 15:42-16:9; Luke, 22:7, 23:50-24:7; John, 19:14f, 31, 38-42, 20:1, 19-22.]"
NONE of these scriptural references show that the messiah was raised on the first day of the week. They show that by the time those who went to the tomb on the first day of week arrived at the tomb, the messiah was already risen! They show us that he was already risen by the morning of the first day of the week. But they do not show us WHEN EXACTLY he arose from the dead!
When Will Volume 1 Readers Have Access To Volume 3?
The author introduces us to the different flavours attempting to explain the length of time the messiah was in the heart of the earth. Yet for his own views he refers the reader to volume 3 that has not been released to the public. How frustrating for the reader who wants to study the author's examination of this matter, seeing that the author has already made his own statements on the matter that do not appear to be entirely scriptural! When is the reader to have access to volume 3 of this work?
Author Accuses Others Of The Same Accusation Made Against Him
"Most modern scholars have only noticed System A as a footnote in history. For the most part, they have failed to investigate its true structure and doctrine. Accepting the long-standing victories of the Hasidic Systems B and E as a fait accompli, they have passed over any in-depth study of System A. At the time it seemed unnecessary. This neglect is largely based upon the pre-inclination of interested Jewish and Christian scholars to accept the long-standing practices of their own respective groups as original, despite the evidence to the contrary. Yet, it cannot be ignored that System A has all along been the real focal point of opposition for the ancient populist Hasidic systems, such as Systems B and E. This historical detail alone should have raised a red flag."
It is interesting to note that the accusation the author levels against others is the very same one I level against him!
Is The Fleshly Circumcision Command Still Valid For Non-Salvation Purposes?
"One of the most confusing issues with regard to what statutes one must keep from the Torah is the matter of fleshly circumcision. Some maintain that men must still have the foreskin of their flesh circumcised in order to be saved."
It is my view that not all the commandments given by Yahweh contained in the Torah were given for purposes of salvation! Some were, and some were not!
The issue, in my opinion, is therefore not whether the command for fleshly circumcision remains valid for salvation purposes, which I contend it is not, and never was, but whether it remains valid for some other purpose or purposes. This, I feel, is the issue that needs to be addressed, but is overlooked by several commentators. For my views on the matter of circumcision please refer to the article "Circumcision and the True Gospel" available at http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/circumcision.htm.
Author's Summation Of The Purpose Of Circumcision In The Flesh
"Circumcision of the flesh is nothing more than a fleshly work of the Torah meant to teach a higher point. [Eph., 2:11-15. Circumcision in the flesh points to circumcision of the innermost self.]"
Is The Author Destroying The Law?
"Therefore, we are still required to keep the Ten Commandments, [Matt., 5:17-19, 19:16-19; 1 John, 5:2f.] but we no longer need to concern ourselves with sleeping in tents during the Festival of Tabernacles (a work of the Torah) or with being circumcised of flesh."
Matthew 5:17-19 reads,
5:17
Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. 5:18For most assuredly, I tell you, until Heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. 5:19Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.It appears to me that the author needs to reiterate that his comments are valid only in the context of salvation - attaining eternal life.
By stating "we no longer need to concern ourselves with...", and quoting Matthew 5:17-19 in his footnote, one gets the impression that he is indeed DESTROYING the law, and causing to PASS AWAY FROM THE LAW more than "one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke"! One also gets the impression that he is teaching others to break "one of these least commandments"!
My view, relying on Matthew 5:17-19, is that absolutely NOTHING has passed away from the law or the prophets. Nevertheless, this should not be MISCONSTRUED to mean that all in the law and the prophets is essential for eternal life. Some things in the law, those not part of Yahweh's "righteousness", even as the author mentions, are not essential for eternal life.
Nevertheless, just because something is not essential for eternal life does not automatically mean that it is not applicable to a particular individual. For even as physical circumcision was not essential for eternal life, yet Abraham observed it, because Yahweh commanded him to observe it, so also should all humans observe whatever commands Yahweh has given them to observe, irrespective of whether these commands Yahweh gives them are essential for eternal life!
I will further opine that should one NOT HEED a command applicable to one, BECAUSE it is not essential for eternal life, such a one risks missing out on eternal life!
Did not the Yisraelite king Shaul lose out on having the Holy Spirit dwelling in him when he did not obey a command from Yahweh, a command not essential for eternal life? For killing other human beings and animals is certainly NOT essential for eternal life. Nevertheless, so was king Shaul commanded. And by rebelling from such a command, a command not essential for eternal life, he lost out on having the Holy Spirit dwelling in him!
It should therefore be clear that all human beings are REQUIRED, for whatever purpose, to do all commands that Yahweh specifically requires of them, irrespective of whether or not such commands are essential for eternal life!
Therefore, with respect to circumcision, as this is the topic the author is addressing in this section, I say, repeating Yahweh's words in Genesis 17, it is essential that all male descendants of Abraham be circumcised according to Yahweh's instructions. It is also essential that they circumcise all male slaves in their households as per Yahweh's instructions.
Commentator In Agreement With Author Regarding Abraham's Circumcision Command
"Next, as we have already said, when Abraham was circumcised in the flesh it was not done to abide by a statute or torath; rather it was followed under the guidance to "obey the voice of Yahweh." [Gen., 26:5.] For example, just because the messiah obeyed Yahweh and went out into the wilderness and fasted for 40 days does not mean that it is a requirement that we must all do likewise. Yet, if Yahweh personally commands us to go into the wilderness and fast, we must obey his voice. Therefore, Abraham's fleshly circumcision was not a condition of the eternal covenant (i.e., a matter of statute or commandment) but rather a matter of Abraham obeying Yahweh's voice."
I am in agreement with the author. He has properly addressed some concerns I raised earlier.
Author Appears To Be Addressing Primarily Non-Yisraelites
Earlier on, under Page 69, paragraph 3, I had said that it would be better if the author clearly DISTINGUISHED who his audience is, whether he was addressing Yisraelites, or non-Yisraelites, or both. It appears that he is primarily addressing non-Yisraelites.
With respect to non-Yisraelites, those who were not party to the Sinaitic Covenant, can it be said that the entirety of the Sinaitic Covenant was binding on them, even though they were not party to it?
If the Sinaitic Covenant was NOT applicable to them, why should one say that the "works of the Torah" were annulled, and therefore they do not need to observe them? Were non-Yisraelites required to observe the "works of the Torah" for salvation purposes prior to the death and resurrection of the messiah?
If even Yisraelites WERE NOT required to observe the "works of the Torah" for salvation purposes, seeing that salvation always came by faith in the messiah and not by the "works of the Torah", it is CERTAINLY the case that non-Yisraelites were not required to observe the "works of the Torah" for salvation purposes!
If non-Yisraelites were not required to observe the "works of the Torah" for salvation purposes, why should anyone then say that these "works of the Torah" were annulled for them, and therefore they do not need to observe them? They never needed to observe them for salvation purposes in the very first place! Therefore the issue of these "works of the Torah" being annulled for them, with respect to their salvation, DOES NOT arise!
Likewise, seeing that eternal life could not, and cannot, come by doing the "works of the Torah", it appears inappropriate to say that the "works of the Torah" were annulled for salvation purposes, speaking with respect to Yisraelites!
If it is inappropriate to say that the "works of the Torah" were annulled for salvation purposes with respect to ANY human being, is it the case that these "works of the Torah" were annulled for purposes EXCLUDING salvation?
If so, and one is addressing non-Yisraelites, the implication one draws is that the "works of the Torah" had been applicable upon non-Yisraelites for non-salvation purposes! But how could these "works of the Torah" be applicable to non-Yisraelites yet they were not party to the Sinaitic Covenant?
If non-Yisraelites were NOT party to the Sinaitic Covenant, or to any other covenant enjoining upon them the "works of the Torah", then it is inappropriate to say that these "works of the Torah" were annulled with respect to non-Yisraelites!
Therefore, if the "works of the Torah" were annulled for non-salvation purposes, then they could only have been annulled for Yisraelites!
But if one says that "the works of the Torah" were annulled for Yisraelites, there no longer being a requirement, for any purpose, for them to observe these "works of the Torah", would not one be CONTRADICTING the messiah's words in Matthew 5:17-19, wherein he said that nothing would pass away from the law and the prophets prior to the passing away of heaven and earth?
Relying on the messiah's words I say that NOTHING passed away from the law upon his death and resurrection. Whatever law was binding on a particular person prior to his death and resurrection REMAINED BINDING on that particular person after his death and resurrection! The issue of ANYTHING in the law or the prophets being annulled therefore DOES NOT and SHOULD NOT arise!
Why then should anyone say that the "works of the Torah" were annulled? Does not so saying imply that they were annulled for Yisraelites? Or they were annulled for non-Yisraelites? Does not so saying imply that there is a CONTRADICTION in the Scriptures? Or that the one so saying is attempting to contradict the messiah's words, and therefore not fully abiding by the messiah's words?
Or can one show me that non-Yisraelites, who were not party to the Sinaitic Covenant, were otherwise required to abide by the provisions of the Sinaitic Covenant, a separate covenant having been made for non-Yisraelites so showing that these provisions were binding upon them in their entirety?
TOUGH THINGS! TOUGH THINGS!
I speak in reference to Ephesians 2:11-17!
Ephesians 2:11-22 reads,
2:11
Therefore remember that once you, the Goyim in the flesh, who are called "uncircumcision" by that which is called "circumcision," (in the flesh, made by hands); 2:12that you were at that time separate from Messiah, alienated from the commonwealth of Yisra'el, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without the Mighty One in the world. 2:13But now in Messiah Yah'shuah you who once were far off are made near in the blood of Messiah. 2:14For he is our shalom, who made both one, and broke down the middle wall of partition, 2:15having abolished in the flesh the hostility, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man of the two, making shalom; 2:16and might reconcile them both in one body to the Mighty One through the cross, having killed the hostility thereby. 2:17He came and preached shalom to you who were far off, and shalom to those who were near. 2:18For through him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 2:19So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones, and of the household of the Mighty One, 2:20being built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Messiah Yah'shuah himself being the chief cornerstone; 2:21in whom the whole building, fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Master; 2:22in whom you also are built together for a habitation of the Mighty One in the Spirit.In essence, prior to the coming and death of the Messiah, there were two distinct peoples - Yisraelites and non-Yisraelites, who were separated from one another. Non-Yisraelites were separate from the Messiah, which made them separate from the Mighty One. Implying that it is through the Messiah that one is enjoined to the Mighty One.
The blood of the Messiah has brought near to the Mighty One those who were far from him, including both Yisraelites and non-Yisraelites. By uniting both Yisraelites and non-Yisraelites, by bringing both near to the Mighty One, the blood of the Messiah has rendered IRRELEVANT whatever was separating Yisraelites and non-Yisraelites.
By virtue of having the law - the law of commandments contained in ordinances, Yisraelites were NEARER to the Mighty One than non-Yisraelites who did not have the law. For the law did indeed show how one could draw near to the Mighty One. Nevertheless, without the Messiah, who was embodied within the law, even Yisraelites could not draw very near to the Mighty One. For without the Messiah it is IMPOSSIBLE to draw very near to the Mighty One! Therefore, even though Yisraelites had the law, they still needed the Messiah in order to draw very near to the Mighty One! The law only brought them so near to the Mighty One, but NOT NEAR ENOUGH!
With the coming of the Messiah and his shedding his blood, thereby facilitating ALL nations coming very near to the Mighty One, irrespective of whether or not they previously had the law, the law was SUPERSEDED! NOT in the sense of being abolished or abrogated, but in the sense of its effectiveness in bringing one near to the Mighty One!
In other words, the law can indeed bring one near to the Mighty One. But it CANNOT bring one VERY NEAR to the Mighty One. To come very near to the Mighty One a person needs MORE than the law. This ADDITIONAL NEED is the Messiah - faith in his shed blood as sacrifice for one's sins, thereby facilitating forgiveness of one's sins and reconciliation with the Mighty One!
Therefore, when it is said that the law is abolished, it is NOT to mean that it no longer applies to those it was given to apply to. NO!
It means that its effectiveness in bringing one VERY NEAR to Yahweh the Mighty One has been SUPERSEDED by a BETTER THING, a BETTER AGENT. This better thing or agent being the Messiah - by virtue of having shed his blood as sacrifice for the sins of humans.
Therefore the law of commandments contained in ordinances CONTINUES to exist. For it indeed contains Yahweh's righteousness, the doing of which is essential in bringing one near to Yahweh the Mighty One. Nevertheless, possessing the law BUT NOT possessing the Messiah DOES NOT bring one very near Yahweh the Mighty One. For the law alone can only bring one so near, but not sufficiently near for purposes of eternal life. To attain to eternal life, to come very near Yahweh the Mighty One, one must also possess the Messiah, in addition to Yahweh's righteousness embodied in the law, which is part of possessing the Messiah!
In this sense and manner it is seen that there is NO CONTRADICTION in the Messiah's words in Matthew 5:17-19, showing the continued applicability of the law until the passing away of heaven and earth, and the "abolishment" of the law of commandments contained in ordinances!
What do the SCRIPTURES, NOT HUMAN TRADITION, say?
I need to undertake my own scriptural study to arrive at my own understanding of the scriptural view!
My study can be found at http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/year.htm.
COMMENTATOR'S SUMMATION AND CONCLUSION
The author has concluded that it is necessary, for salvation purposes, to observe the festivals and sacred days of Yahweh. These days were observed by Abraham and were part of the covenant by which he is to receive eternal life. Seeing that they preceded the Torah of Moshe they could not be abolished with the abolition of the Torah of Moshe, the Torah of Moshe purportedly being abolished with the death of the messiah. As those to attain to everlasting life under grace must come under the Abrahamic covenants of promise, and these covenants included observance of Yahweh's festivals and sacred days, all to attain to everlasting life must indeed observe Yahweh's festivals and sacred days.
The author has concluded that the correct manner of observing Pesach and Unleavened Bread is after the manner of the Aristocratic System, the system followed by Sadduccean Jews and Quartodeciman Christians. This system holds that Yahweh's Pesach is sacrificed at twilight on the 14th day of the first month, relying on a translation of the Hebrew phrase byn ha-arabim. And that the Days of Unleavened Bread run from the beginning of the 14th day to the end of the 20th day of the first month. The omer wave offering takes place on the morrow after the Sabbath occurring within these days of Unleavened Bread, marking the commencement of the count to Pentecost, which always occurs on the first day of the week, seven weeks later.
The author holds that it is currently not necessary to observe Yahweh's Pesach by sacrificing the Pesach lambs. He says that sacrifices were instituted after the Sinaitic Covenant and were not initially intended upon the Yisraelites, the requirement brought upon them after their transgressions against Yahweh's word. Therefore, to the author, the Pesach observed by Yisraelites while they were still in the land of Mitzrayim was a one-time event, not observed before and not intended for observance subsequently. Also, since the messiah is our Pesach sacrifice, it is no longer necessary to kill the sacrificial Pesach lamb in observing the Pesach. For sacrifices were part of the works of the Torah, and these were purportedly abolished with the death of the messiah.
Scriptural analysis of the author's views, and the Pesach/Matzah/Pentecost construct he presents as the correct one, shows them to be riddled with several errors, including some fundamental ones! It appears that the author already had in his mind the notion that the Aristocratic system for Pesach and Unleavened Bread observance was the correct one, and therefore sought to try to fit the facts and data he marshalled from several historical and scriptural sources to attest to this notion. But this approach to providing truth is not intellectually honest. For it tries to fit the facts into a preconceived construct, rather than allowing the facts to speak for themselves and bear out the correct construct! This is a fundamental flaw in the author's thesis!
Also, the author ignores and dismisses several portions of Yahweh's scriptural word in arriving at his views. These ignored and dismissed portions negate the author's erroneous views, showing the scriptural invalidity of the Aristocratic system that is beholden to the author.
In several instances the author has been found to be engaging in conjecture, not being able to prove his assertions. Yet he continues his thesis presumably expecting his reader to accept his unproven assertions as truth, and builds on these unproven assertions. This is another fundamental flaw in the author's thesis!
In a number of instances the author has been found to be adding to Yahweh's scriptural words, and in other instances he has been found to be omitting therefrom. This goes against the scriptural injunction in Deuteronomy 12:32 warning against such practices, a warning the author is indeed aware of. Why then does he not subject his views and thesis to Yahweh's scriptural word?
The correct manner of observing the Pesach is to kill it on the 14th day of the first month, at even, at the going down of the sun, which is before sunset on the end of the 14th day. The Pesach is then eaten on the night of the 15th day, upon the commencement of the feast of matzah (unleavened bread). The days of Unleavened Bread run from the beginning of the 15th day to the end of the 21st day of the first month.
Prior to sacrificing and eating the Pesach the omer wave offering must be waved to Yahweh according to commandment. For Yahweh forbade the Yisraelites from eating bread, parched grain or fresh ears before the omer wave offering. Implying that unleavened bread could not be eaten with Yahweh's Pesach on the night of the 15th day if the omer wave offering had not been waved by then! The omer wave offering must therefore be waved on the morrow after the Sabbath immediately before the days of Unleavened Bread, making the morning of the 14th day of the first month the last possible day for so waving it.
With the omer wave offering begins the count to Pentecost, which must fall on the first day of the week seven weeks later.
The correct manner of observing Pesach and Unleavened Bread, with respect to days of the month, is the same as the Hasidic System. Yet in the Hasidic System the omer wave offering is waved during the days of Unleavened Bread, and not before it. The Hasidic System is therefore also not correct.
It is my view that from the time they were given, Yahweh's Pesach and the feast of Unleavened Bread were meant to be observed forever by the generations of Yisrael. Therefore, just as they were valid at the time Yisrael received the commands to observe them, so they remain valid upon Yisrael, and within Yisrael's land, to this day, and on into the future, until the passing away of heaven and earth as spoken of by Yah'shuah in Matthew 5:17-19. They should therefore be observed in Yisrael, and specifically at Yerushalayim, the place Yahweh has placed his name to dwell in for all time.
It is also my view that Yahweh's Pesach, the sacrificial lamb, still needs to be killed at Yerushalayim at the appointed time. These commands were not abrogated upon the messiah's death, popular Christian opinion, including that of the author, notwithstanding.
Nevertheless, it is also my view that not all of Yahweh's commands contained in the Torah are essential for salvation purposes. Observing Yahweh's sets feasts at Yerushalayim is not essential for salvation purposes, for those outside the land of Yisrael are not denied salvation by not observing these set feasts of Yahweh according to their commandment. Nevertheless, to those in the land of Yisrael, it is essential that they do indeed observe Yahweh's command, for he commanded observance of these sets feasts of his upon all dwelling in the land of Yisrael, even though observing these set feasts is not essential for salvation purposes.
1. Yahweh's Pesach and Yah'shuah's Commands - http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/pesach.htm
2. Feast of Matzah - 14th or 15th Commencement? - http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/matzah.htm
3. When Does the Year Start? - http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/year.htm
4. Circumcision and the True Gospel - http://www.ServeYahweh.org/Articles/circumcision.htm
Return to Servants of Yahweh Site Contents page.
© 1998, Isaac Aluochier, All rights reserved. Published by Servants of Yahweh, P O Box 22855, London, NW9 8ZF, United Kingdom. E-mail: servantsofyahweh@serveyahweh.org. Permission is hereby GRANTED to reproduce this and other publications in the Servants of Yahweh web site, http://www.serveyahweh.org, unless otherwise stated.
Financial contributions, payable to Servants of Yahweh, and sent to P O Box 22855, London, NW9 8ZF, United Kingdom, are welcome and gratefully received. These facilitate the effective distribution of the word Yahweh has given us, both in electronic and hard copy formats. Not all have easy access to the Internet and therefore cannot easily access our web site, http://www.serveyahweh.org, for this information where it is freely available. These need hard copies of the information published on our web site. Production and distribution of books and booklets is significantly more costly than publishing and distributing material over the Internet. In this regard your financial contributions, whether by way of tithes and/or freewill offerings, go a great way in disseminating the word Yahweh has given us to the people he wills it to reach. May Yahweh richly bless you for your financial contributions to Servants of Yahweh.