Wednesday, February 7, 2018

“Are you washed in the blood?”

antimis_lies6

Well, well, well - more attempts at proving that Yeshua is a myth. William Hall (who is a former Christian, former Hebrew Roots, now hanging with and promoting the teachings of Jewish counter-missionary Rabbis) seems to be knocking himself out to come up with just any excuse to bash "Jesus." Well, here's a word for him – and we pray that something will “sink in”….

William Hall – the only thing insane here is your question – a question that reveals you never knew the Bible from cover to cover, nor read a single scripture through the lens of the Ruach! Let’s check the context of this issue, shall we? (And, after that, just for fun, William, try reading the entire Book of Hebrews IN CONTEXT! If you can't find the context, don't hesitate to send me a PM or an email to BiblicalTruth613@TheRefinersFire.org. I'm sure I can help you clear up some of the confusion you're experiencing!) Here's the passage that seems to be troubling you:

Hebrews 9:11. But the Mashiyach who came was a High Priest of the good things which he created: and he entered into the great and perfect tabernacle which was not made with hands and was not of these created things. 12. And he did not enter with the blood of goats and calves; but with the blood of himself he entered once and for all into the sanctuary and obtained eternal redemption.

13. For if the blood of goats and calves, with the ashes of a heifer, was sprinkled upon them that were defiled and sanctified them as to the purification of their flesh; 14. then how much more will the blood of the Mashiyach, who by the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to Elohim, purge our conscience from dead works so that we may serve the living Elohim?

15. And for this reason he became the Mediator of the renewed covenant,[1] that he might by his death be redemption to them who had transgressed the first covenant; so that they who are called to the eternal inheritance might receive the promise. 16. For where there is a testament, it indicates the death of him who made it. 17. For it is valid only of a deceased (person) because it has no use so long as the maker of it lives. 18. Therefore also the first (covenant) was not confirmed without blood.

19. For when the whole ordinance had been propounded by Moshe to all the people, according to Torah; Moshe took the blood of a heifer and water, with scarlet wool and hyssop,[2] and sprinkled upon the books and upon all the people;[3] 20. and said to them, This is the blood of the covenant which is enjoined by Elohim. 21. With that blood he also sprinkled upon the tabernacle and upon all the vessels of ministration: 22. because everything, according to Torah, is purified with blood: and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin.

23 For it was necessary that these, the representations [4] of heavenly things, should be purified[5] with those things; but the heavenly things themselves, with a sacrifice[6] superior to them. 24. For the Mashiyach entered not into the sanctuary made with hands which is the emblem of the true (sanctuary): but he entered into heaven itself to appear in the presence of Elohim for us.

25. Neither (was it necessary) that he should offer himself many times as the high priest entered every year into the sanctuary with blood not his own: 26. otherwise, he must have suffered many times since the commencement of the world; but now in the end of the world, he has once offered himself in a self-sacrifice to abolish sin.

27. And, as it is appointed to men that they must once die, and after their death is the judgment; 28. so also the Mashiyach was once offered; and, by himself, he burned away the sins of many: and a second time, without sins, will he appear for the life of them who expect him. (AENT)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Matthew 26:28

[2] Critics of Hebrews sometimes claim this statement is inaccurate because the sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in Exodus 24, nor the mixture stated therein. However, take a closer look: Leviticus 14:6 mentions scarlet yarn, referencing the color, not the material. Most experts assume “thread” is implied (Genesis 38:28), just like the Hebrew does not say “hand” directly when Benyamin is interpreted literally as “son of my right” but everyone knows it is “right hand.”

Wool is, of course, white in its natural state, but Torah commands it to be dyed scarlet, which is why Isaiah uses the metaphor in the first place. And where did Rav Shaul get the idea that the scarlet material was wool? Probably from Exodus 26:31, 36 which indicates the tentway is made of (a) “scarlet (insert material of choice here)” and (b) “fine twisted linen.” In other words, the linen is not dyed and material (a) is clearly not linen.

What’s left if not wool? Scarlet goat hair? No! The fact is, specific material is not mentioned in Torah unless required, as is in Leviticus 13:47-48 and Deuteronomy 22:11 which forbids the making of garments from more than one material; but there are two issues. Ex. 28:15 - “You shall make a breastpiece of judgment, the work of a skillful workman; like the work of the ephod you shall make it: of gold, of blue and purple and scarlet (material) and fine twisted linen you shall make it.”

If it were all linen it would say so, and though it is possible to weave linen and wool into one yarn, this is clearly not being done here, either. Garment (A) 100% wool yarn, and garment (B) 100% fine twisted linen. The linen certainly does not have wool in its thread, or vice versa.

[3] There are two separate issues here. First, there is a clear telescoping of two events we know to be separated by the monthly timetable established by the Tanakh. Two events are being taught together at one time to establish a spiritual point; the seams are quite evident. Event #1 in Hebrews 9:19-20 teaches that the blood is for atonement. Event #2, the blood being sprinkled on the tabernacle later.

This appears to suggest the blood from that day lasted eight to nine months and then was sprinkled on the tabernacle, but again, this is how events are combined to make a spiritual point. Clearly Paul knew, as did his audience, that additional blood prepared in the same manner was required in Exodus 40. Although the reading may appear as “this same blood” the meaning is more like “blood derived from this same manner.”

This becomes clear when we realize that Exodus 24:5 refers to burnt offerings and sacrificed bulls, whereas Exodus 40:29 refers to burnt offerings and meal offerings. We could be much more demanding and ask where is the specific reference to the sacrificed bull in Exodus 40, but that is hardly the smoking gun against Hebrews.

Again, telescoping does not mean this is one flowing event; the details from both events are being used in a spiritual discussion, something sages and rabbis have done from the beginning.

On the other hand, blood is still involved with the burnt offering: Leviticus 4:7 “The priest shall also put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of fragrant incense which is before YHWH in the tent of meeting; and all the blood of the bull he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt offering which is at the doorway of the tent of meeting.”

The second issue is that there are multiple references to the altar being sprinkled with blood, and the people having themselves sprinkled with blood from the same sacrifice. Therefore, it would not be inaccurate to conclude, given the book’s placement by the altar, that it also received an amount of blood.

[4] The word damota indicates a representation, not an exact reflection, of an object. Sometimes critics of Hebrews say that the comparison of the earthly Temple objects to the heavenly puts the epistle into error. However, if exact reflection/image was intended, another word, tzelma, would have been used. This word is used, for example, in Hebrews 1:3, where Y’shua is called the exact identical reflection/image of YHWH’s nature.

[5] The Aramaic word daka (purification) refers only to earthly representations of Temple objects, not the heavenly. The items in the Heavenly Temple need no such purification.

[6] The word here, debkha, appears the same way in the singular and plural form. In this context, there is only one sacrifice superior to the earthly Temple, and that is Y’shua himself.

No comments:

Post a Comment