No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
This week’s Torah Reading could not have been more timely. And I was compelled to respond in the wake of the news we’ve received over the last couple weeks regarding the legalization of late term abortions on demand. And just this week, the proposal for a bill by one state of our union to actually sanction the murder of babies even after birth.
This week’s Torah Reading is found in Exodus 21:1 through 24:18
But it is here in Exodus 21:12 where Father prohibits the violent taking of another’s life:
“”And if any man smite (also strikes) another and he die, let him be certainly put to death” (LXX).
This in great part is a reiteration of the 10-Commandment instruction that simply stated “Thou shalt not kill” (Exo. 20:13).
Interestingly, both the Hebrew and Greek terms used to denote murder in the 10-Commandments differs from that of Exodus 21:12. The Hebrew term in the 10-Commandments is “ratsach” (rendered in the KJV as kill and in other AV’s murder). The Greek term in the 10-Commandments is “phoneuso” which is of course to murder.
The term used here in the LXX is “patazo” which has essentially 2 meanings:
To strike or hit someone.
To strike down or slay.
It clearly appears, given the stiff penalty that was to be rendered for “patazao,” that the 2nd meaning applies here: that of striking down or slaying someone.
The Hebrew is a bit more precise as the term “naka” means to slay, kill, or strike dead. For it was used also in Josh. 10:26 to denote the murder of another man. The term naka may be of an intentional manner such as described in 2 Sam. 2:23 (premeditated intentional first-degree murder), or unintentional manner as described in Deu. 19:4 (such as voluntary or involuntary manslaughter). We find in this sense that Father sanctioned the execution of both levels of killing or murder as in this verse He makes no distinction.
The difference between Exodus 20:13–“thou shalt not kill”–and Exodus 21:12–“If any man smite another”–is that the 10-Commandment verse is speaking to murder, while in today’s reading Abba is addressing any violent act that leads to the death of another. Regardless, murder in Abba’s Torah is strictly prohibited.
One may think that Father’s prohibition against murder or killing is only here being established for the first time. But truth be told, Abba expressly prohibited murder as far back as the Cain and Abel incident. We saw that Cain was unceremoniously cursed and exiled from his people as punishment for murdering his brother Abel (Gen. 4). And any who sought to kill Cain would be severely punished as well (Gen. 4:15).
Given man’s sinful ways, why did Father care if humans murdered other humans? We find in Genesis 9:6 the answer:
“He that sheds man’s blood, instead of that blood shall his own be shed, for in the image of God I made man” (LXX; cf. Gen. 1:26,27; 5:1).
Interestingly, murder has been a major taboo in virtually every society outside of the Hebraic. Of course it is, given that Father’s instructions regarding proper behavior for mankind extends well before the Sinai Revelation and the gifting of Torah. Yet, as every society delved more and more into paganism, and walked further and further away from God, the horrible stigma of murder diminished. The sanctity of life–the recognition that man was made in the image of His Creator which makes that life precious–in the eyes of the people in these Godless societies the question of murder becomes a relative one. To these nations of people, murder, although inherently evil, may be justified.
Just in the last century, have we not seen the sanctity of life diminished across the board? Even in our so-called enlightened Western countries, murder in so many circumstances is justified in the minds of its people.

New York celebrates the passing of a late term abortion bill. This is open defiance against God and His Law.
Take for instance here in the United States. Just last week, New York passed legislation legalizing the murder of an unborn child up to that baby’s delivery date! And we’re not even talking about the millions of babies who have been murdered under the protection of Roe v. Wade in this country. So far away has this nation walked from God, that the New York governor who signed this bill into law, with smiles and applause, openly and proudly celebrated the bill’s passing.
So we must ask ourselves: how can a nation that was established on so-called Judeo-Christian principles fall so far away from Yehovah’s laws?
I can’t but help but be alarmed by the statement of someone calling in to the Rush Limbaugh Show, who in comment to the disgusting passage of this abortion bill, gave this sobering explanation as to why: Because man has reached a point of openly defying God and His laws!
But if this New York travesty and open defiance of God and His Laws weren’t enough, just this week, Virginia politicians were proposing a bill that would legalize the murder of a child after birth. That’s correct. According to the evil spirit of this proposed legislation, the birthing mother in concurrence with her physician(s) would have the option of killing the new born. According to news reports, the permitted justification for terminating the life of that new born was fuzzy to say the least. It was suggested by at least one state legislator in support of the proposed bill that the justification for clinical execution of newborns would be related to concerns for that child being deformed or having some kind of life-impacting ailment or disease.
When we talk about Torah’s prohibition against violence—that is the violent smiting or slaying of a human being formed in the image of their Creator by another human—this week’s Torah Reading could not be more timely.
Certainly, there will be a heavy price to be paid for this inexpressible violation of Yehovah’s Torah and the teachings of our Master Yahoshua Messiah.
From a Yahoshua-centric standpoint, Master came our way and expanded this prohibition against murder. We find in Matthew 5 the following:
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment (ie., in danger of judgment that leads to one’s execution). But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire” (vss 21,22).
So many would-be or supposed disciples of Yahoshua have over the centuries railed against any form of violence that would lead to another human’s death. At least, that’s the temperament that most of them put forth to the seeing public. These individuals no doubt felt they were being true to their so-called Christian or Messianic call. And to a greater or lesser extent, they halahkically were being true to their call.
However, many of those same folks secretly or openly harbored terrible hatred, bigotry, disgust and anger toward others within and without their communities. Needless to say, this same sentiment is ongoing today in virtually so many of our communities. Little do most of these offenders realize that they are just as guilty of murder as the common murdering criminal on the street; this according to our Master Yahoshua.
Father recognized that the Hebrews had been enslaved in Egypt for a number of years and their moral compasses had no doubt been significantly skewed. Thus He, in His infinite wisdom, reiterated to His people the central principle that murder is a capital offense that should be handled accordingly. However, we find in the proceeding verses of this reading specific provisions related to murder and killing that the nation was to follow.
Through Torah Abba sought to tightly regulate the taking of human life by other humans. The Creator is sovereign and has the supreme authority to determine who should and who should not die; either by His own doing (as with the Egyptians at the last plague) or by the hands of another (as with Joshua’s armies cleaning out Canaan of the pagan nations).
Although all killings were death penalty eligible, Father called out those killings that were especially heinous:
So serious was Abba about the sanctity of human life that any who violated this ordinance would themselves be subject to execution.
In fact, Father informed us that unrequited murder polluted the land and could not be tolerated:
“So you shall not pollute the land in which you live. For blood pollutes the land and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it. And you shall not defile the land which you inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell. For I, YHVH, dwell in the midst of the Israelites” (Num. 35:33,34; QBE).
So I ask you: with all the babies that have been aborted in this and other nations of the world over the years and those that will be murdered in the years to come, whose blood will be required in recompense? According to the just cited Numbers passage, one could safely conclude that our nation is horribly defiled because of the unrequited shedding of innocent blood by the hundreds of thousands over the years.
We find also in this same Numbers passage that the shedding of innocent blood that pollutes the land must be avenged if the land is to be made whole again. That responsibility fell to either the nearest kin, or a representative of the elders of a given city. Torah refers to such individuals as “avengers of blood” (Num. 35:12; Deu. 19:6, 12; Jos. 20:3,5,9).
So I have another question to pose to you: if both the next of kin (that of course would be the parents in the case of abortions and terminating a birthed child) and our government officials are responsible for the murder of these aborted and murdered children, how will our land ever be made whole again, assuming that it once was?
Well, the answer to that question is: only through the atoning sacrifice of our Master Yahoshua Messiah. And until our nation, and all her mothers and politicians who advocated and participated in these murders fall to their knees and plead for forgiveness and turn from their wicked ways and obey the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, our lands will remain irreconcilably defiled I’m afraid.
Verse 13 of the 21st chapter of Exodus goes on to address those acts leading to death that are NOT premeditated. Better, it addresses those deaths we routinely refer to today as involuntary and voluntary manslaughter. Killings that were accidental in nature or were unknowing or without the knowledge of the offender fell within the realm of this provision.
In such cases, Torah still holds the offender responsible for the death. And although the offender may not have intended to kill his/her victim, he/she is still subject to execution.

Sanctuary cities were a shadow of the sanctuary that Father offers us from the penalty of sin, through His Son Yeshua Messiah.
We find documented in Numbers 35 and Joshua 20 that six levitical cities were designated as cities of refuge or asylum. Three cities of refuge were selected on either side of the Jordon River. The location of these cities, according to Moody Bible Atlas, made for fairly even access to all of the tribes (cf. Deu. 19:3; Jos. 20:7-9).
We find mentioned in Hebrews that Torah was a shadow of the good things to come (Heb. 10:1). Indeed, the provision Abba made for such offenders by enacting and mandating the establishment of sanctuary cities, foreshadowed in many ways the sanctuary we have in Messiah.
Indeed, as a result of our sins, we are most eligible for death. Nevertheless, Abba has enacted and established sanctuary for us through the atoning sacrifice of His Son, Yahoshua Messiah. Praise Yah for His grace and His provision.
Let us pray for our nation as our lands are defiled because of the shedding of innocent blood. Fortunately, the Almighty has not only provided the opportunity for our individual death penalty pardon, but also for the cleansing of our nation.
Although not likely, if our nation were to simply turn to YHVH and turn away from her evil ways, the blood of Yahoshua could indeed make her whole again. This simple act could stave the pending judgments that stand against this nation.
We are called to be lights to this world (Mat. 5:14; Exo. 19:5; Deu. 14:2; 26:18). For we have the solution to the world’s problems. While it is still day, let us work to deliver the Gospel of the Kingdom to this lost and dying world.
Thank Yah for His Son Yahoshua; the gift of His eternal Torah and Word; and the life of Faith He has blessed us with.
Faithfully,
Shalom.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
The first portion of this week’s Torah Reading deals with the issue of Hebrews owning slaves; particularly Hebrew slaves (Exo. 21:1-11) .
According to this passage, if a Hebrew acquires a Hebrew slave, they would serve that master for 6-years. In the 7th-year that slave would be freed. This is confirmed in Deuteronomy 15:12 which reads,
“And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee” (KJV).
It would seem this ordinance involving the releasing of the Hebrew slave in the 7th month is not directly tied to the Shemitah.
It should be noted that the Hebrews failed to keep this ordinance according to Jeremiah 34:14.
What would justify a Hebrew acquiring a Hebrew slave? The most likely reason is found in Matthew 18:25:
“But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his master commanded him to be sold, and his wife and children and all that he had and payment to be made” (KJV).
In this context, a Hebrew would acquire another Hebrew through unpaid debt.
Ancient Near Eastern custom facilitated that an individual who is in debt to another, be sold into slavery if that debtor is unable to pay off their debt. Torah, although not sanctioning or advocating the practice, established provisions for an individual who is in debt to another to be sold into slavery if the debtor is unable to pay his debt to the master.
Abba, in establishing ordinance regulating the treatment of Hebrew slaves, acknowledged the practice existed. However, Abba established time limits to the servitude. No Hebrew who was enslaved by another Hebrew could be forced into servitude for more than 6-years. That slave was to be released in the 7th year of their enslavement.
Yeshua came to clarify Torah for us. In so doing, it was through parable that He taught that the debt owner always had the wherewithal and right to release or forgive his debtor’s debt (Matthew 18).
What Master’s parable teaches the Torah Observant Disciple of Yahoshua is that debt should ultimately be forgiven. No one who is indebted to us, as disciples, should be made to endure unending servitude or strung out debt to us. And this attitude should run across the board and be recognized by every disciple of Messiah.
Debt in this sense also transcends the material. Forgiveness is always a virtue that Father has shown to His beloved. The biggest and most pervasive debt we all owe is our sin debt. We are indebted to Father as a result of our sins. Yet Abba has provided a means whereby our debt can be forgiven. We in turn serve and obey Him for his forgiveness of our sin debt.
Likewise, we are compelled to forgive our fellow disciples any physical debts they owe us, as well as any trespasses committed against us by fellow believers.
Master instructed that we lend, hoping for nothing in return…(Luk. 6:35; NKJV).
If we harden our hearts towards those who owe us materially and on a relationship basis, then we stand the risk of not being forgiven by our Heavenly Father. In this regard, Yeshua in the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant stated:
“Then his lord (speaking of the master to the servant who refused to forgive his debtor), after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant. I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me. Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you. If ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses” (Mat. 18:32-25; KJV).
Nevertheless, back to our Torah Reading passages: Father placed a provision in Torah whereby the servant who chooses to remain in permanent servitude to their master may willingly do so. Thus, the servant desiring bond servant status would be brought to the judgment-seat of God (according to the LXX) or to the judges (according to the KJV and other Authorized Versions) by that master. The purpose appears to be one of making the permanent servitude a publicly stated matter.

A Hebrew slave desiring to serve their master in perpetuity would undergo an ear piercing by an awl on that master’s doorpost.
Upon the conclusion of the proceeding at the judgment seat of God, the servant would then be brought to the door or door post of the master’s home. That servant’s ear would then be pierced by an awl (ie., a metal pointed tool used to punch holes in material like leather).
Thus, that servant would serve that master till the death of the master or of that of the servant (cf. Deu. 15:17).
This ordinance is clearly illustrated in our claiming perpetual servitude to YHVH our Elohim. Fortunate for us, Yahoshua Messiah was already pierced on our behalf having himself been judged on our behalf for our sins.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
What does it truly mean for a would-be disciple of Jesus Christ (ie., Yahoshua Messiah) to call on the Name of the L-rd? Is it simply an utterance whereby the would-be disciple utters or invokes the actual Name or Title of the Divine One? Or is it a fervent prayer whereby the disciple addresses and or ends their petition to the Divine One? Could it be an act of one who is in the midst of some life-changing event calls out to the Divine One to deliver them from or assist them in whatever situation they find themselves in?
Or maybe calling on the Name of the L-RD is something more than that of how we westerners envision calling on the Name of Someone? If so, what does calling on the Name of the L-RD actually look like.
In my opening I read you two-key passages that speak to calling on the Name of the L-RD. For the sake of discussion let’s revisit them briefly.
The Apostle Paul writes to the Assemblies of Messianic disciples in Rome: “For ‘whoever calls on the name of the L-RD (ie., “kurios,” or Master)’ shall be saved” (Rom. 10:13; NKJV).
Yet Master warned, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘L-rd, L-rd (ie., “kurios,” or Master),’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘L-rd, L-rd, did we not prophesy in your name, drive out demons in your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’” (Mat. 7:21-23)

Christian and Western Concepts of what it means to call on the Name of the L-RD often do not match the Bible’s concept.
Being raised in the Baptist Church and then transitioning on to charismatic and interdenominational churchianity, calling on the Name of Jesus or God or in general The L-RD, meant:
Came upon the Sacred Names movement and they taught that calling on the Name of The L-RD meant uttering the Creator’s and the Son’s Hebrew Names.
Everyone cites Romans 10:13, embracing the promise that if they follow theirs or the church’s or some preacher’s concept of what it means to call on the Name of the L-RD will without question result in their irrevocable salvation.
Yet Master states quite emphatically in Matthew 7 that a great many folks who have called upon His Name—so to speak—will be sorely disappointed to hear from Him that He never knew them.
There is indeed a disconnect here. Either Paul is correct or Yeshua is correct? Can both be correct?
Well, we would not question Yeshua’s instructions that not everyone who says L-RD L-RD will enter the Kingdom.
However, we will see that Paul is absolutely correct in his emphatic statement that any who calls on the Name will be saved.
We must first determine what it means Biblically to call on the Name.
There was a common practice in ancient times of invoking the name of deities for various reasons and purposes. But the practice of invoking the name in those ancient times went a bit further than our Western, churchianity concepts of invoking the name of a deity.
The first century ancients when invoking the name of an Person/entity submitted themselves to that entity’s authority.
For instance, when invoking Caesar’s name, the Roman national would submit themselves to Caesar’s authority and to the formalities and procedures that Caesar demanded of those who came before him.
We find in Acts 25 where Paul called upon the Name of Caesar when He was arrested over allegations of sedition among the Jews and throughout the world; leading a seditious religious sect (ie., the Nazarenes); desecrating the Temple and violating Jewish Law and crimes against Rome.
“So Paul said, “I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as you very well know. For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I APPEAL TO CAESAR” (vss 10,11; cf. Acts 26:32; NKJV).
It so happens that the same terminology used here related to Paul appealing to Caesar is the same terminology used in “calling upon or calling on the Name of…”
To call or appeal upon in ancient Greek texts is the term “epikaleomai,” which in English means to invoke an entity for aid, worship or testimony.
In Paul’s appealing to or calling on Caesar, what was he essentially doing?
He was submitting himself to the authority of Caesar as a Roman citizen for purposes of adjudicating the legal case against him.
Not just Roman authority, but subject to Caesar’s authority.
The Name of Caesar here is crucial—for the Name carries with it more than just a recognized designation for the person.
The English term name in ancient Greek texts is the term “onoma,” which in a literal sense points to an entity’s name, but in a figurative sense, points to an entity’s authority or character.
This same mindset applies to would-be believers of Yahoshua Messiah calling upon His Name or upon the Name of our Heavenly Father.
The act of calling on the Name of the Savior or the Creator goes well beyond utterances of their names (which in many cases is not their name but their titles).
In fact, it would require a complete submission to the Father or Son’s authority and obedience to their instructions and commands.
According to T. Pierce Brown (a prolific and widely read Christian writer and teacher of the 20th century), “calling on the Lord” involves obedience. According to Mr. Brown, calling on the Lord is not simply a verbal recognition of god or some verbal petition to Him (www.apologeticspress.org).
I would ask you to bear in mind that Mr. Brown was a Fundamental/Traditional Christian teacher and writer. I doubt he advocated a Torah-life style.
We find throughout the New Testament record that first century disciples of Messiah did not simply pray to Yah in an expression of His name (for indeed they did so quite regularly throughout every given day), but more so they served Yah, submitting themselves to His authority through their obedience.
When the writers of the New Testament spoke of calling on the Name of Yeshua Messiah, there was the sense of the would be disciple’s deeds and words being under Messiah’s authority. We see this illustrated in Colossians 3:17:
“And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the Name of the Lord (ie., Master) Yahoshua, giving thanks to Yah and the Father by Him” (KJV).
Sadly, most folks are taught that calling upon the Name of God or calling upon the Name of Jesus Christ is simply uttering their titles in prayer, teachings, songs of praise and worship, or in simple conversations that extol the greatness and provision of our God.
But truth be told, this less than judicial explanation of the phrase has gone a long way towards fostering the living of a “lawless” Faith among Christians.
When Christians (or even Hebrew Rooters and Messianics for that matter) are told they only need to utter or reference the Name or Authority of the Lord to be saved and to be a good Christian, absent any life of obedience and repentance, the disciple is then short-changed and not given the crucial information he or she requires in order to lead a true Messiah focused life.
This erroneous understanding of what it means to call upon the Name of the L-RD is part and parcel of the “grace perversion” made popular in the last couple centuries.
All one needs to do in order to better understand what it truly means to call upon the Name of the Lord is study Acts 2:21-38.
We find in this pivotal passage of New Testament history Peter admonishing the multi-national gathering of Jews attending Shavuot (ie., Pentecost) just after the resurrection of Master Yahoshua.
By this time, the 120 or so disciples who were temporarily residing in Jerusalem as Master had commanded them, had just been immersed in the Ruach HaKodesh (ie., the Holy Spirit) on the Temple Mount and the Shavuot attendees (1,000s) were trying to make sense of what they were witnessing in the behavior of Yahoshua’s disciples (ie., their speaking in tongues).
Peter, filled with the Ruach addresses the crowd, referencing Joel’s prophecy to explain what the crowd was witnessing.
When members of the crowd were convicted in their hearts as a result of the words passionately spoken to them by Peter, they asked of Peter what was required of them to make things right with Yehovah (Act. 2:37). Peter in response to their query provides clear instructions as to what is involved in calling upon the Name of the Lord and reconciling with their Creator:
“…Repent and be baptized everyone one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (2:38; KJV).
In other words, Peter provides a two-part process for members of that multi-national crowd to follow in their efforts at calling on the Name of Yah:
The issue with repenting, we must keep in mind, is that there’s a lot more involved than simply seeking Father’s forgiveness of one’s sins.
Repentance also involves an abandonment of one’s former life and the taking on of the life of an disciple of Yahoshua Messiah.
Then after repentance is accomplished, the disciple was to be immersed in the Name; that is the authority and obedience of Yahoshua Messiah.
As it turns out, 3,000 souls “called upon the Name of Yahoshua HaMashiyach” in those days.
Then there’s Romans 10:11-15, Paul addresses with the Roman assembly of Messianic Disciples the issue of salvation for both Jew and Greek. In verse 12, Shaul underscores there being no difference between the Jew and the Greek, “for the same Master over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.”
In the next verse he brings out the famous pronouncement that so many Christians hang their lawless, grace-perverted picture of salvation and living the Christian life on: “For whosoever shall call upon the Name of the L-rd (ie., kurios, the Master) shall be saved” (vs. 13; KJV).
It is in the two-succeeding verses (which by the way we never hear those lawless, grace-perverted folks mention rarely mention) that Shaul gives the prescription and requirements for calling on the Name of the L-rd:
“How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?…” (vss. 14,15; KJV).
It is within these two key verses that Paul states the requirements for calling on the Name of the L-rd”:
(1) The would-be disciple must hear the correct teaching of Yah’s Word from a properly called and sent teacher.
(2) The would-be disciple must believe in the resurrected Messiah. Again, belief in the resurrected Messiah is not simply a cognitive understanding or acknowledgment that Yeshua our Messiah was raised from the dead.
Indeed, that is an obvious given. The problem with stopping there is that having a cognitive understanding and acknowledgment of our resurrected Messiah is “the lowest of the lowest hanging fruit.”
Knowing of Yah as opposed to knowing Yah. Having a right relationship with the Creator of the Universe. Living and walking out one’s Faith.
Father’s Torah is written on one’s heart. For the truth of the matter is that demons believe and they utter the Name of the Father and Son. The big difference between the level of belief that demons have versus the belief that so-called Christians have in Yahoshua’s work and sacrifice is that the demons tremble when this fact is brought to their attention. They react (Jam. 2:19).
Thus, belief when it is truly realized in a disciple, must be accompanied by some behavior.
To the Hebraic mindset, belief and faith are action words.
Therefore, to believe in Yahoshua requires works as the Apostle James pointed out in his epistle, 2:20: “…faith without works is dead…”
And then we find in the 22nd chapter of the Book of Acts where Paul, while traveling to Damascus to arrest Messianic Jews of the Way Movement, is knocked off his horse/mule/donkey, whatever, by our glorified Master. And upon coming to a semblance of senses, while still on the ground, he calls on the Name of the Master (vs. 10). We find in the succeeding verses what that calling on the name of the L-rd truly meant to Paul this particular incident:
(1) He was to get up and go to Damascus (vs. 10).
(2) Upon reaching Damascus, he was to await further instructions from someone who the Master would send him (vs. 10).
(3) He would receive his sight back (vs. 13).
(4) He was to repent (vs. 16). And
(5) he was to be baptized (vs. 16).
This concept was not limited to the New Testament saints. We find documented in Genesis 21:33 that Abraham “called on the Name of YHVH, the everlasting God.” What did this call on YHVH entail?
(1) Obedience
(2) Worship
(3) Faithful service. (Bobby Bates, 1979; pg. 5.)
We find in Zephaniah that one’s calling on the Name of the Father was tied to one’s service; specifically tied to one’s obedience:
“For then will I turn to the people a pure language that they may all call upon the Name of the LORD, to serve Him with one consent” (3:9; KJV).
Indeed, calling on the Name of YHVH to the Hebrews of Old required their complete submission to Yah’s will.
In this prophecy, we find the promise of God’s people adopting or returning to their original, pure, clarified or brightened language that they may call (ie., qara, to proclaim or cry out) upon Father’s Name and serve Him with one (ie., echad, that is in unity; oneness) consent (ie., shekem, that is as the place or neck of burdens); more sensibly put, serve Yehovah with singleness of purpose and in one accord.
Bottom line Saints, it’s NOT simply expressing or verbalizing “L-rd, L-rd! (Mat. 7:21) or saying a prayer that includes the names or titles of the Father and or His Son that constitutes true “calling on the Name of the L-rd.” (cf. Act. 9, 22; Rom. 10:13,14). Instead, calling on the Name of the L-RD is doing the will of the Father as Master instructed in Matthew 7.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
I Corinthians 14:34, 35, and 1 Timothy 2:11,12 have long challenged my sensibilities and understanding of how women are to be viewed and treated in the Body of Messiah.
Would you allow to read these passages to you once more? I know that I read them in the introduction. But Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:34,35:
“Let your women keep silence in the churches (ie., ekklesias): for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.”
And then in 1 Timothy 2:11,12 he writes:
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
I grew up in the Southern Baptist Church. During those formative years, I was exposed to the practical manifestation of a plain reading and understanding of these crucial Pauline passages.
Thus women were not permitted to be preachers or ministers, nor were they permitted to hold leadership roles in the church.
Over the last several decades there has been a softening of this tradition and doctrine in the Baptist Church as a whole. However, overall women holding leadership and teaching positions in the Southern Baptist Church are a clear minority. One can only imagine that the number of women holding and exercising leadership positions in the Hebrew Roots/Messianic Communities is as bad, if not worse.
This is all the more interesting to me given what we know of the number of women practicing their Christian and Hebrew Roots Faith today, when compared to their male counterparts.
According to the “Pew Research Center,” in an article they published on March 22, 2016, entitled “The Gender Gap in Religion Around the World:”
Globally, women are more likely to affiliate with a religious faith; women attend more worship services more often than men in predominantly Christian countries (greater than 7% more); more women than men pray daily (greater than 10% more).
I have no data to support the ratio between women to men in our Hebrew Roots/Messianic communities. Nevertheless, according to a March 13, 2014 article entitled “The Rise of the Hebrew Roots Movement,” (a hit piece against our beloved Faith I should note) journalist Menachem Kaiser estimated there were some 200,000 to 300,000 Messianics worldwide at the time he wrote his article. Add to this my personal observations having attended a number of Hebrew Roots and Messianic events, the women in attendance at these events outnumbered the men. Yet I rarely, if ever, saw women leading the proceedings, teaching, or ministering at these events.
But returning to mainstream Christianity for a moment (since there’s a lot more hard data to reference than in Hebrew Roots) in Barna Group’s “The State of pastors 2017: Leading in Complexity,” dated January 26, 2017:
“One of every 11 Protestant pastors is a woman—triple as many as 25-years ago, yet women often lead smaller congregations than men.”
Interestingly, this Barna article suggests the reason for the disparity is due to the unreasonably high expectations western society places on women as a whole to perform in the workplace.
But I would bet you dollars to a doughnut that the real reason (or let’s say the overwhelming reason) for the low numbers of women church leaders in the world today is due to an ancient The misogynistic mindset that has dominated much of the world since the fall, along with a twisted understanding of these two Pauline passages of 1st Corinthians 14 and 1st Timothy 2.
Please bear in mind that I am not laying the blame for the disparity that exists in women to men holding leadership roles in the Body of Messiah/Christ solely on the shoulders of the males that make up the Faiths. The mindset that women should not be in positions of authority in the Body of Christ/Messiah seems to not only rest with a number of men, but with a great many women as well.
Christian researchers have determined that long-held misogynistic views and mistreatment of women can be traced back to ancient Greece.
These, and other, misogynistic views and ill-treatments of women found their way into Rabbinic Judaism, and by the close of the Apostolic age, into what we call today Christianity.
In fact, it was Socrates (c. 470-399 BCE) who coined the phrase for women being “the weaker sex.” Socrates went so far as to contend that being born a women was a divine punishment. He was quoted as saying, “Do you know anything at all practiced among mankind in which in all these respects the male sex is not far better than the female” (Plato, Timaeus, translated by H.D.P. Lee, Baltimore: Penguin, 1965; 24A-C, 90C, 91A).
Socrates perspectives on women were of course handed down to his equally famous pupil Plato (c. 427-347 BCE), and then on to Aristotle (384-322 BCE). Aristotle, for instance, held that it was barbaric for a Greek man NOT to distinguish between a wife and a slave. And ultimately, according to John Temple Bristow in his book entitled, “What Paul really Said About Women,” “Aristotle laid a lasting philosophical foundation for the notion that females are inferior to males.” Thus it could be thought that he helped formalize the practice of sexual discrimination and inequality. And it was this arm of Greek philosophy that Post-Apostolic Christianity infused into their interpretation and understanding of some of Paul’s writings and teachings regarding women and women’s roles/functions in the Body of Messiah/Christ.
So it seems that this Greek derived, anti-woman mindset infiltrated Christianity and became firmly established in the minds and writings of the so-called Church Fathers and church leaders. Is it so hard then to see how Christianity and even Hebrew Roots to a greater or lesser extent, interpret these rather eye-raising Pauline passages in such an anti-woman fashion?
A plain read of these passages doesn’t seem to give us much in the way of interpretative wiggle room. Clearly, as it is interpreted, Paul is emphatically instructing the Corinthian Assembly to not allow the women in their midst to speak. And to add insult to injury, so to speak, Paul asserts that the women’s silence was mandated by law.
So I ask you: What imagery and feelings do these passages of I Corinthians and I Timothy stir in you? How do you view Paul in light of what he has written here? Was he a brilliant misogynist? Was he channeling his former Pharisee days when he no doubt managed various local synagogues with a firm hand, ensuring that men and women were separated and women were not allowed to speak or be heard in those supposed hallowed halls?
Or maybe these passages are examples of what Paul’s apostolic colleague Peter described as “hard to be understood” which unfortunately many folks within and without the Body of Messiah—both men and women—”wrest—twist—as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction?”
A few questions about these passages should naturally haunt the astute student of Scripture:
1. What women is Paul referring to here? The Corinthian Assembly women? Or any women of the assemblies he oversaw?
2. What authority was Paul giving his instructions from? He states quite emphatically that “it is NOT permitted unto them to speak.” Is Paul speaking from his authority as an Apostle or from some other established authority within or without the Body of Messiah?
3. Was it not this same Paul who elsewhere in his writings penned: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Does this passage not present a conflict to these two passages?
4. Did not Paul claim to have been taught the Gospel of the Kingdom directly from Yahoshua Messiah? Would it seem reasonable then to conclude that Paul received these instructions from Y’shua, who Himself had many female disciples who went on to become leaders in the Body of Messiah. Oh yes.
And 5. Did not Luke throughout portions of his writing, the Book of Acts,as well as Paul in his various epistles, document examples of the mighty works and exploits of a number of Messianic women teachers, preachers, deacons, prayer warriors, assembly leaders, financiers and at least one apostle?
So what do we make of any of this—this dichotomy of attitudes towards women in the Body of Messiah by Paul?
In one vane, the Great Apostle to the Gentles asserts that women are to be seen and not heard in the churches—the ekklesias—the assemblies that he established and oversaw—some would go so far as to say the Churches of God as a whole.
And then in another vane he asserts that men and women are equal in Messiah—such that there are no restrictive roles for men and women in assemblies or Churches of God.
Clearly, the dichotomy that exists between these two sentiments is so extreme, unless Paul is indeed schizophrenic or moody in his oversight of the assemblies he established. For one day he’s extolling the greatness of the women leaders of the Body of Messiah who could not have been silent or dependent upon their husband to teach them the Gospel of the Kingdom. Then on another day telling those same women to go sit in a corner and be quiet for a minute.
I recently came across a popular teaching on these passages that was put out by a Sabbath and Feast keeping congregation (ie., I wouldn’t necessarily classify them as Hebrew Roots or Messianic per se). The pastor of the congregation put forth that these Pauline passages requiring women be silent in the assemblies is really about women being restricted to certain roles in the “church.” Those roles, according to the pastor, are basically limited to teaching other women and children, and maybe rare discussions with men who are ignorant of certain aspects of the Faith, just as long as the interaction/discussion is supervised and done in private…or whatever. Furthermore, if the women have any questions about anything that comes out of the church proceedings, the answers to those questions must be given by the women’s’ husbands.
If one is willing to treat these texts accordingly and in context, one cannot but help see that Paul was in no way addressing roles of women in the Body of Messiah. He didn’t need to. Those roles had already been in operation for years by the time Paul wrote these letters.
In fact, both he and Luke covered those roles in their respective writings: women were knowingly and publicly filling leadership roles in every known area of the Work of the Gospel and in the Body of Messiah.
Contextually speaking, Paul was trying to establish order out of chaos in the Corinthian Messianic assembly.
Certain individuals in the assembly were causing disruptions during assembly gatherings and Paul as the assembly’s overseer was trying to establish order in the assembly. Thus Paul, in these passages, was explaining to his readers what Godly behavior in the assembly and during the assembly proceedings looked like.
When dealing with these and other difficult and seeming contradictory passages of Paul, it is imperative that we seek after Godly wisdom. And I fear that maybe this is what’s lacking in our Faith Community these days.
We have no end of men in line anxious to tell us what to believe and follow. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter one bit what these men say about a matter: it’s what Abba has to say about it. For when we possess Godly wisdom, when a matter is put forth to us, we will ultimately through the leading of the Holy Spirit (ie., Father’s Ruach HaKodesh) be able to discern Truth from error, misinformation and even lies.
Regarding True Wisdom that comes only from YHVH, Paul wrote:
“After all, is there anyone who knows the qualities of anyone except his own spirit, within him; and in the same way, nobody knows the qualities of God except the Spirit of God. Now, the Spirit we have received is not the spirit of the world but God’s own Spirit, so that we may understand the lavish gifts God has given us. And these are what we speak of, not in the terms learnt from human philosophy, but in terms learnt from the Spirit, fitting spiritual language to spiritual things. The natural person has no room for the gifts of God’s Spirit; to him they are folly; he cannot recognize them, because their value can be assessed only in the Spirit. The spiritual person, on the other hand, can assess the value of everything, and that person’s value cannot be assessed by anybody else. For who has ever known the mind of the Lord? Who has ever been His adviser? But we are those who have the mind of Christ”—that is the mind of Messiah (1 Cor. 2:11-16; NJB).
So then, what am I saying here? Simply this: as we delve into the eternal riches of Scripture, it is incumbent upon us to first assess the state of our hearts. Again, we keep coming around to aggadah being that central thing that governs our entire walk of Faith. Consequently, it will be the state and location of our hearts that will determine our ability to receive and then walk out Truth.
Secondly, let us lean on the Ruach HaKodesh such that Truth is revealed to us in a meaningful and powerful way. Let us not lean to our own understanding (Pro. 3:5).
Therefore, if our hearts are where they’re supposed to be and we are relying upon the leading and guidance of the Ruach HaKodesh (ie., Yah’s Holy Spirit), then we will find and live out the Truth of the matter, and that includes the Truth about Paul’s views of women in the Faith and in the assemblies.
Some of you may be wondering why this subject is so important to Torah Observant Disciples of Yahoshua Messiah? If you’re a man, why should you even care? If you’re a woman and you’re not a member of organized religion or of a church or fellowship or assembly, why should you care?
Well, here’s my thoughts on this.
Understanding what Paul really meant in his more controversial and challenging passages will better help us understand the Gospel message that was given to him by Master Y’shua.
There are women within and without our Faith Community who are being told their role in the Body of Messiah is to only raise and teach their children and mentor younger women. It stands to reason that these precious women of Faith are possibly being duped. Was this seeming silencing of women part of the all inclusive Gospel of the Kingdom message that our Master brought us? Maybe, just maybe, you may be used of YHVH to deliver Truth to someone who is in need of receiving it; someone who needs to be freed from the shackles of religion.
In the dark days ahead, leading to the End of Days and the Tribulation, we’re going to need every person on deck, so to speak. That means, we’re going to need men, women and children out there in the trenches teaching and preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom to a lost and dying world. There won’t be any time for misinformation and doctrinal foolishness. Master expects all of us to be working and exercising the gifts that He has lavishly bestowed upon His Body. We do not have the luxury of allowing modern day Pharisees who are knowingly (or for that matter unknowingly) stuck in the Greek, Stoic, Rabbinic Judaism mindsets of yesteryear to influence our Work in the Gospel of the Kingdom and our individual places in the Body of Messiah. We all have jobs to do and regardless if you’re a man or woman, Father has bestowed upon you gifts and expectations that you will use those gift for the furthering of the Kingdom and the edification of the Body of Messiah.
I know some of you out there have been in the Faith for some time, especially those of you who are women. What I have to say to you is: don’t let anyone tell you that you don’t have a ministry in the Body of Messiah because you’re a woman; or you’ve not been in the Faith long enough; or for whatever reason. Your gender in no way affects your call.
My friend, I’m here to tell you today: Get up off your behind and get to stepping. I don’t care if you’re a woman or a man: if you have a call on your life to teach, preach, prophesy, minister, establish or lead a fellowship, start a podcast or YouTube channel, write a book, start or lead a prayer group, what have you—you best gitter done.
Master gave us the parable of the talents where He described a man who traveled into a far country. And before departing out on His trip, He called in His servants and gave each a certain number of talents (Mat. 25:14-46). And while this man was away conducting His business, His servants went about putting those talents to work, with the exception of one servant who for whatever reason chose to do nothing with the talents given him by his Master.
Upon the servants’ Master’s return, He calls His servants in unto Himself and demands they each give an account of what they did with the talents He gave them. Each servant gave a good report of what they did with the talents that were given to them and how they made those talents increase their Master’s bottom line. However, the one servant who chose to do nothing with the talent given him revealed that he, out of fear and ignorance, hid the talent—adding nothing to his Master’s bottom line.
You know the rest of the story: the servants who put the talents given them to work and produced increases for their Master’s kingdom were rewarded, while the servant who hid the talent given him was sorely punished.
What shall you do with the talents the Master has given you?
What we will find in the next installments of this series is that people in the First Century Body of Messiah did not allow grass to grow underneath them—ESPECIALLY THE WOMEN. The gifts and callings that these great women of Yah received were aggressively put to use and worked during the first century and we are the beneficiaries of their work.
No, Paul was NOT telling the women of the Corinthian Assembly of Messianic Disciples of Yahoshua to prettily sit off to the side in the Body of Messiah while the men evangelized the world. He wasn’t establishing roles for women, for women had already been filling leadership roles in the Body of Messiah for a few years by the time first-Corinthians was written. Shaul vehemently taught that gender was irrelevant in the Body of Messiah.
So what are you gonna do with this essential information? This admonishment?
I’ve said this countless times before and I don’t mind saying it again: It’s all about Him and not one bit about us. None of this is about our comfort zones; our gender; our level of education; our circle of friends; our positions in church hierarchies; our station in life; or our past. For Yahoshua and then Paul employed women from every sector of society to be ministers, preachers, teachers, prophets, administrators, patrons and even apostles. And neither meant for women to be silent or idle.
Indeed, Paul was an emancipator of women in the work of the Gospel and in the Body of Messiah.
May you walk in the power and might of Yah’s Holy Spirit (ie., His Ruach HaKodesh) and may you and your families be well and blessed. I bid you a warm and blessed Shalom.