Into the Unknown and Unexpected Part 2

So what happened? I tried to live with my struggles against Christian liberty, assuming I was totally wrong to doubt that the Law had completely been done away with except for what was reiterated in the New Testament. Thankfully, God didn't leave me questioning. I met a woman who claimed that she and her family followed a Messianic faith. Although I wasn't sure what that meant, I had heard of others who followed the Torah even though they worshiped Jesus Christ as Lord. Cautiously, because I thought they were wrong, I listened to her explanations and read the material that she suggested that I read. The light bulb went off in my head. First off, the caliber of the material she referred me to was not easy, puffed, or without logic. It spoke to my heart!!

Secondly, the New Testament had been misunderstood when it came to the abrogation of the Law. Jesus followed and kept the Law Himself and never claimed that it was done away with.

Matthew 5:17-19 (KJV):

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Not until heaven and earth pass away will the Law be done away with! Well, how, then can Christian liberty be explained? How can we explain those Bible verses that seem to contradict Matthew 5? Stay tuned for part 3!!

Into the Unknown and Unexpected!!

I've been going along on this Christian journey for a long time! I am fully committed to Jesus! But, apparently, my journey hit a snag; one that caused others to wonder about my faith. Suddenly, I began to follow the Torah! Had I converted to Judaism? Had I become a Pharisaical legalist? The answer to these questions is a resounding, "No!" But let me explain.

I was totally convinced about Christianity and its truth. However, I had one bugaboo. I couldn't understand "Christian Liberty." I had a feeling that the way Christians taught it and lived it could not be accurate. Christian liberty seemed like a legitimization of sin to me.

Christian liberty, as it is sometimes explained, means that Christians are no longer obligated to follow the Torah, or the so called Law of Moses (Romans 3:20-22). Yet, the Torah has many verses that speak of the eternality of God's laws. For example:

Exodus 29:9 (KJV): And thou shalt gird them with girdles, Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them: and the priest's office shall be theirs for a perpetual statute: and thou shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons.

Exodus 31:16 (KJV): Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

But how could I believe contrary to all the theologians that have taught, throughout most of Church history, that Jesus had done away with the Law? Initially, I felt compelled to "go along," that  my understanding was incorrect. However, it continued to rub me the wrong way. Would God ever make this concept clear in my mind? Would I come to terms with this teaching?

If you've ever had an issue with Christian liberty, please let me know! I would love to hear from you! Stay tuned for part 2 to see where the Lord took me!

Christian Halloween?

Every year at this time I struggle with Halloween. It's not that my immediate family participates in it nor do we think that we are missing out on anything. Rather, I struggle with Christian family and friends who feel that Halloween can be modified into something acceptable. They insist that by choosing costumes that don't glorify death or by going to their churches' Harvest Party that Halloween has somehow become something a Christian family can participate in.

However, this same kind of attitude ended up by creating a mess in Christianity during its early days. When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire there were many, many pagans that were compelled to become Christians. Thinking that the incorporation of some pagan rituals and traditions into Christianity would ease the pagans' transition to their new religion, Christianity became polluted and contained elements that God had not desired. Hence Christmas and Easter came into existence full of pagan rituals and traditions. Even pagan holidays had been co-opted and supposedly sanitized.

But no matter what you do with a pagan holiday it remains a pagan holiday! Another example of this is the new craze of Christian yoga. What? Just ask a Hindu and you will be met with scoffing. The principles behind yoga are not Christian, they are Hindu. Christian yoga is still Hindu!

God's Word says it best.

2 Corinthians 6:15-17 (KJV) 
¹⁵ And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
¹⁶ And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
¹⁷ Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 

If we are to remain separate from paganism and pleasing to God we have no business trying to sanitize Halloween into a Harvest Party or its traditions into Christian traditions. There can be no compromises!!

This Do in Remembrance of Me

1 Corinthians 11:25 (KJV)
²⁵ After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

Christians will recognize that 1 Corinthians is referring to the ordinance of communion. Some churches do this every week during the church worship service, while other churches observe this practice once a month, or twice a year, or even once a year. Needless to say, Christianity has seemed to have gotten the idea down pat.

However, Christianity has forgotten the context of when Yeshua made this statement. Let's go back to Luke to find that context.

Luke 22:13-19 (KJV)
¹³ And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.
¹⁴ And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.
¹⁵ And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
¹⁶ For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
¹⁷ And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
¹⁸ For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
¹⁹ And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 

These verses were uttered at the Passover Seder just before Yeshua's death. When Yeshua commanded His disciples to "remember Him," the disciples would have realized that the next time that they would be in this situation would be a year from then at the next Passover Seder. But why would Yeshua tie communion to Passover? Why can't the churches just decide on their own when and where they want to observe communion?

The annual Passover Seder was instituted by God as a memory device.

Exodus 12:14 (KJV)
¹⁴ And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.

What were the Israelites to remember on subsequent Passovers? They were to remember how God delivered them out of Egypt and how He redeemed them and made them His people. The Passover and the Exodus are types of the salvation that Yeshua provided in His own death and resurrection. Our remembering Yeshua and His provision of salvation by observing communion connects us to the Exodus and the Passover. This is how God works!!! The blood of a lamb kept the Israelites from death and the blood of the Lamb of God (Yeshua) keeps believers from eternal judgment and death.

Can churches do their own thing and observe communion as they want? The story of Cain and Abel, the laws in the Torah, and the history of Israel's faithlessness all point to God's desires for correct worship. At the very least we are missing out on the connections that God has provided.

Freed From The Law?

One morning, while I was listening to a Christian radio station, I heard that the hymn "Freed From The Law, Oh Happy Condition" was the next piece that would be played. I was not familiar with this hymn, but I thought the title was bizarre. What!! We're freed from the law!! I guess it is perfectly acceptable to commit murder, theft, adultery, and even idolatry now that Yeshua came and freed us from the law!

Obviously, since I am a born again believer, I know that this was not the intent of the song. I know that "the law" the hymn writer was speaking of was the dreaded Mosaic law? Let's examine this issue a little closer.

This song reminded me of the days when some parenting advice was extremely permissive. Children were left to their own devices and allowed to figure out right from wrong on their own. Obviously, these children grew up to be spoiled and damaged. They didn't respect authority, nor did they even have a sense that anyone cared enough to train and discipline them. Human beings need law and order in their lives for proper development. From this alone, I found fault with the title of the hymn. Without law, no one is in a happy condition!

Oh, but the Mosaic law has been replaced by the "law of Christ," some would say (1 Cor. 9:21). But what is the law of Christ?

Galatians 6:2 (KJV)
² Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

According to Galatians, the law of Christ is to carry one another's burdens. While this sentiment is all well and good, it doesn't give us any concrete definable laws that show us how we are to bear one another's burdens. Gotquestions.org states that "most Bible teachers understand the law of Christ to be what Christ stated were the greatest commandments in Mark 12:28-31, 'Which commandment is the most important of all?' Jesus answered, 'The most important is, "'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." The second is this: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." There is no other commandment greater than these.'" If the law of Christ is indeed the two commandments of loving God and loving our neighbor, these commandments existed in the Old Testament. Gotquestions.org is quoting from Deuteronomy. Therefore, it would seem that the law of Christ is not something new, but rather the same law as the Mosaic law (actually it's God's law, not Moses'). Reducing the entire Mosaic law to two commandments was to convey a summary, not a statement that there were only two commandments. Mark 12:31 even states that there are other commandments (see above).

Well, some would say that the "ceremonial law" (as opposed to the moral law that still exists) has been fulfilled by Yeshua and therefore we don't have to obey that anymore. However, searching through the Bible for a definition of "ceremonial law" is fruitless. When the law is spoken of, there is never any differentiation.

1 John 3:4 (KJV)
⁴ Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We have been conditioned into believing that part of the law is no longer applicable to us. Yet, the verse that is used to show that Yeshua fulfilled the law doesn't even mean what Christianity has come to accept.

Matthew 5:17 (KJV)
¹⁷ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

If the Mosaic law was fulfilled by Yeshua and no longer needs to be obeyed, then how about Galatians 6:2 (see above)? It says that if we bear one another's burdens we fulfill the law of Christ. If "fulfill" means it has been finished and no longer needs to be done, I guess that once we carry someone's burden, the law of Christ is fulfilled and we don't have to worry about doing it ever again! Oh, happy condition!

No, Yeshua did fulfill God's law. He obeyed it! That's all! That doesn't mean that we don't have to obey the law ourselves. Because otherwise, we ignore the guidance that God gave His people. We would then be a spoiled and damaged people. We would be left to our own devices to try to figure out what God wanted and what was pleasing to Him. To be in a happy condition we need concrete laws and commandments. He didn't leave us unloved; He gave us His laws (all of them)!

Israel and The Church

There are two main views regarding the relationship between Israel and the Church. They are Replacement Theology and Dispensationalism. Replacement Theology is defined by Matt Slick posting on the CARM (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry) website as "the teaching that the Christian church has replaced national Israel regarding the plan, purpose, and promises of God." In other words, Israel has lost its "chosen people" status and it no longer has any future place in God's redemptive plan. Dispensationalism is defined also by Matt Slick as "an approach to biblical interpretation which states that God uses different means of working with people (Israel and the Church) during different periods of history." In this perspective, God still has a plan for Israel, but Israel and the Church are two separate entities. However, neither of these approaches satisfies the Biblical record completely.

I would like to posit a very different view that I hope will one day pervade the Christian church.

Isaiah 2:1-4 (KJV) 
¹ The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
² And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
³ And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
⁴ And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

This passage is describing earth at the end of the ages, as seen in a vision by the prophet Isaiah. The nations will be judged and there will no longer be any war. God's temple will be established on Mount Zion and many people will suggest going up to the mountain, to the temple of Israel, to be taught God's ways, so that they would walk in His paths. For surely, the Torah of the Lord goes forth from Jerusalem. Any attempt at suggesting this passage should be taken in an allegorical way defies the plain meaning of the text. There is no reason to believe that it means anything except what it flat out says. This passage and so many others in the Bible reflect the same understanding, that Israel will always be God's chosen people. The church has not replaced Israel.

Paul also confirms this in Romans.

Romans 11:1 (KJV)
¹ I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

He also wrote:

Romans 9:6 (KJV)
⁶ Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

Paul was saying that Israel can really mean two separate entities. The first is that Israel exists as a nation or an ethnicity. However, Paul went on to say that not all Israel (the national or ethnic identity) is Israel (another Israel?).

Romans 11:17 (KJV)
¹⁷ And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

Paul spoke here about Gentiles being grafted into Israel. He can't be speaking about national or ethnic Israel because when we are born again, we don't become Jewish first. We stay as Gentiles. Yet, we are grafted into Israel. What Israel? This Israel consists of the believers. Consequently, the Dispensationalists keep Israel and the church as separate groups. Paul's definition of the Israel contradicts this. The believing remnant of Israel and the Gentiles that have been grafted in comprise Paul's second definition of Israel. Basically, if you are a believer in Yeshua, you are a part of Israel.

It is my hope that in time, we will understand that there is only one group of believers and they are called Israel. This is not to say that Israel as a nation or as an ethnicity doesn't have a place in God's plans, but the sharp divide between Israel and the church is equally misguided.   

Thanksgiving and Sukkot

Happy Thanksgiving to all my readers!!!

As we gather with family and friends this year, let's be sure to remember why we celebrate Thanksgiving. It is not for all the fabulous food, the football, the time off work, or Black Friday deals, but rather a time to think about all of God's blessings to us, especially His provision, and the love of family and friends. It is a time to thank Him!

This year I have heard and read a lot about how the Pilgrims' Thanksgiving was inspired by the feast of Sukkot (Tabernacles or Booths), so I explored this in a little more depth. While some researchers claimed a substantial relationship between the two holidays, others seemed to dismiss the idea. What is the truth?

First of all, Thanksgiving, as a national holiday, was instituted with President Lincoln's declaration in 1863. It wasn't until 1941 that Congress established that Thanksgiving was to be held every year on the fourth Thursday of November. So, the Thanksgiving that the Pilgrims celebrated was not meant to be the precursor of an annual holiday, although, the inspiration for the national holiday was indeed the Pilgrim's celebration.  Likely, the Pilgrims did not celebrate on a yearly basis since they rejected the Catholic idea of fixed holidays throughout the year. Celebration stemmed from events that warranted special treatment.

Yet, there is some correlation between the Pilgrims' perspectives of themselves and the Israelites' exodus from Egypt. When the Pilgrims left Holland, they left because of the liberal influence that Holland had on the congregation, especially the young. They wanted to flee from these influences and felt that starting off in a new land would be the ideal way to create a kind of "new world." They were going on an Exodus, heading for the Promised Land.

This view that the Pilgrims had of themselves did not mean that they followed the whole Torah. They observed the "moral" law but felt that the "ceremonial" laws were no longer applicable. Consequently, they did not observe any of the feasts of the Lord, like Sukkot. However, their view did lend itself to understanding that the Jewish observance of Sukkot was an expression of thanksgiving.

Leviticus 23:39-43 (KJV)
³⁹ Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath.
⁴⁰ And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the LORD your God seven days.
⁴¹ And ye shall keep it a feast unto the LORD seven days in the year. It shall be a statute for ever in your generations: ye shall celebrate it in the seventh month.
⁴² Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths:
⁴³ That your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

The Pilgrims realized that the Israelites living in booths for seven days was a reminder of the hardships of the Exodus, but the accompanying joy of the feast represented the hope of the Promised Land.

Was the original Pilgrim Thanksgiving inspired by Sukkot? Although we may not have a definitive answer, there does appear to be enough evidence to think it a possibility.

Please see: toriavey.com/toris-kitchen/sukkot-the-harvest-holiday/
                   www.jns.org/latest-articles/2013/8/19/did-sukkot-help-shape-thanksgiving

The Lost Sheep of Israel

Sometimes in reading the Bible, we are confronted with elements that are confusing, a theology that seems to conflict with another theology, and behavior that defies explanation. One such passage is the following:

Matthew 15:21-28 (KJV)
²¹ Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
²² And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
²³ But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
²⁴ But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
²⁵ Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
²⁶ But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
²⁷ And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
²⁸ Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour. 

Aren't we told that Yeshua had come to be the Savior of the world? Yet, in Matthew 15 we are surprised with Yeshua initially turning His back on the needs of a Canaanite woman. He then told her and the disciples that He had only been sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Finally, after much persistence, Yeshua granted the woman's request and made much ado about her faith.

What are we to think of this account? Let's look a little closer! In verse 21 we see that Yeshua had gone into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, two Gentile cities north of Israel. This very act seems to counter Yeshua's own claim about being sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. What would He be doing in a Gentile area?

Mark 7:24 (KJV)
²⁴ And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and entered into an house, and would have no man know it: but he could not be hid. 

Mark's version of this account placed Yeshua not in the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, but on the borders of this area. Although this may clarify that Yeshua was not necessarily going into a completely Gentile territory, it seems certain that Yeshua was intending to come into contact with at least this one Gentile woman. She cried out to Him, calling Him the Son of David, and pleaded with Him regarding her daughter that was vexed with a devil (verse 22).

Strangely, Yeshua ignored her (verse 23). The disciples then asked Yeshua to send the woman away because of her crying out after them. In response, Yeshua informed both the woman and His disciples that He had been sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (verse 24). The woman persisted, worshipped Him, and made her request again (verse 25). Yeshua then relegated this woman to an inferior position by calling those of Israel, the children, while she and the Gentiles collectively, were referred to as dogs (verse 26). She persisted again, not by disagreeing with Yeshua, but by wisdom noted that the dogs ate the crumbs from the masters' table (verse 27). At that point, Yeshua exclaimed that the woman's faith was great and that He would heal her daughter (verse 28).

Even from this account, we see hints of God's future ministry that would include Gentiles.

Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
¹⁹ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 

But what can we make of Yeshua's behavior towards the woman? He intentionally went into that particular area, treated the woman very harshly, and yet, healed her daughter. The only conclusion possible is that this whole incident was a setup, a test of faith for this Canaanite woman. Obviously, she passed the test, she demonstrated her faith and received what she requested. 

It makes sense that Yeshua needed to ground His ministry in Judaism before the Gentiles completely overran it. Today we have a situation where Christians and Jews are viewed as belonging to separate religions. But, if Yeshua had not primarily been sent to the lost sheep of Israel, would we Gentiles have held to the Old Testament at all? Would we even recognize that Christianity came out of Judaism? Would there be any Judeo-Christian understanding of morals and values? Probably not!

However, this account of the Canaanite woman and Yeshua's dealings with other Gentiles emphasize the faith that these Gentiles had. Why did Yeshua go out of His way to connect with these Gentiles at this point of His ministry?

Romans 11:17 (KJV)
¹⁷ And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 

Paul tells us in Romans that Gentiles are grafted into Israel by grace through faith. Yeshua knew this Canaanite woman "hidden" in the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, was one of His. He went to find her. She was one of the lost sheep of Israel.

This passage of Matthew emphasizes that sometimes our confusions are due to our not completely understanding all sides of an issue. Definitely, the Bible is complex, but Yeshua's only being sent to the lost sheep of Israel was by no means an exclusion of Gentiles. Not only would the ministry expand to Gentiles, but any and all Gentiles that wanted to follow Yeshua were allowed!

What's the Big Deal About Eating Bread with Unwashed Hands Part 2

Please see part 1

The second part of Yeshua's confrontation with the scribes and Pharisees over the disciples eating bread with unwashed hands begins with Mark 7:14.

Mark 7:14-23 (KJV)
¹⁴ And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:
¹⁵ There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.
¹⁶ If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
¹⁷ And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
¹⁸ And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
¹⁹ Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
²⁰ And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
²¹ For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
²² Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
²³ All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

At this point, Yeshua gathered the multitude to hear and understand what He was about to teach regarding the eating of bread with unwashed hands (verse 14). He plainly explained that what is taken into the body cannot defile a man, or in other words, make him spiritually unclean. It is what comes from the man that causes defilement (verse 15).

The disciples then requested that Yeshua explain His statement (verse 17). Although Yeshua reprimanded the disciples for lacking in understanding (After all, He only had a limited amount of time before His disciples needed to be ready to take over His ministry), He complied and began His explanation (verse 18). Verse 19, without the embellishment of later translators, states that what is taken in by mouth goes not into the heart, but into the belly and whatever is unusable by the body is eliminated. This is clearly a description of the digestive process. Through it, all food is purged. Then, verses 20 to 23 demonstrate and list all of the many things that defile a man like evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, and murders.

Reason tells us that the physical process of digestion which eliminates impurities from food, could not possibly cause an unclean food to suddenly become clean in a spiritual sense. Digestion has been a bodily process from the time of Creation. God instituted His Torah Laws while digestion was already occurring. He commanded His people not to eat certain things that were unclean. Digestion continued, but still, certain foods were unclean. Yeshua came to earth as a man. Digestion continued. Nothing changed. It is impossible to believe that Yeshua now claimed that digestion caused all foods to become clean! As discussed in the prior posts, Yeshua could not speak against the Torah or to change it, or mankind would still be lost in sin and condemned without hope.

Just as was seen in part 1 of this post, the topic has nothing to do with unclean foods becoming clean. The primary point of the passage (Mark 7:1-23) is how the Pharisees were misusing tradition, often raising tradition to the level of the written commandments of God, or of even raising it above the Torah. This second part is a further explanation of how food that may have been contaminated by something cannot make someone unclean. It is the actions and thoughts of man that defile.

Mark 7:19's addition has added to the confusion about the continuing applicability of the Torah. Let's open our hearts and minds to the truths that are written there and seek to find the seamless and enduring Torah that exists in both the Old and New Testaments!

What's the Big Deal About Eating Bread with Unwashed Hands?

Now that it has been established that the parenthetical phrase of Mark 7:19 is an addition to our English Bibles and it cannot serve as the conclusion of the passage, it is important to uncover the true meaning of Mark 7:1-23. See Previous:

Let's begin with the first section of that passage.

Mark 7:1-13 (KJV)
¹ Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
² And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.
³ For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
⁴ And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
⁵ Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
⁶ He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
⁷ Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
⁸ For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
⁹ And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
¹⁰ For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
¹¹ But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
¹² And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
¹³ Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem apparently had come to check out the stories and accounts that they had received regarding Yeshua. As they watched Yeshua and His disciples they were horrified to see that some of the disciples ate bread with unwashed hands (verse 2). In verses 3 and 4 Mark explained the traditions of the elders that these scribes and Pharisees held to.

These traditions had been passed down from generation to generation supposedly starting from the days of Moses. They were not written down but were orally transmitted. The point of these traditions was to fill in the details of the written Torah. The sages did not want the people to accidentally transgress the laws of God, so they made hedges to protect the people that would help keep them from actual disobedience of the Torah. Although the idea and intent were good, the Oral Law had often been treated as if it were as important as the written Torah. This is the attitude of the scribes and Pharisees who came to see Yeshua.

Why did some of the disciples not wash their hands? This seems to indicate that the Oral Law was not always observed the same by all the people. An example of Yeshua following the traditions of the Oral Law can be found in Matthew 14:19 where He said a blessing before feeding the 5,000. That is a tradition. The commandment is to say a blessing after eating (Deuteronomy 8:10).

Since the washing of hands before eating bread (which is a clean food) was a tradition, the Pharisees and scribes were out of line by raising that tradition up to the level of the Torah. Instead of directly stating this to the scribes and Pharisees, Yeshua called the men hypocrites and quoted Isaiah 29:13 (verses 6 and 7).

Isaiah 29:13 (KJV)
¹³ Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Yeshua told the scribes and Pharisees via Isaiah that they gave God lip service, but that their hearts were far from God. They taught the traditions as if they were the commandments of God. He went on then to ask the men why they rejected the Laws of God (Torah) by their traditions (verse 9).

In verses 10 through 13 Yeshua explained a tradition where the scribes and Pharisees found a way to avoid having to honor their parents by not supplying an animal for their parents' use but claimed that the animal was going to be used for sacrifice, thereby freeing them from the obligation of providing for their parents. By doing this these men made the Word of God (Law of God) of none effect. In other words, they were using tradition to circumvent observance of God's Law. They were raising tradition to a level above the Law of God.

The point of this first section of Mark 7 has nothing to do with making all foods clean. It is a discussion on the proper place of tradition, nothing more and nothing less. Next time the second part of Mark 7:1-23 will be discussed.

Did Jesus Declare All Foods Clean?

From three different Bible verses, God has instructed mankind not to add to His prophecy or to His commandments. Please see the previous post. Yet, in the Gospel of Mark, there is an egregious example of how translation teams and commentators have ignored these warnings.

Mark 7:1-23 relates an account of a confrontation that Yeshua had with some scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem. The problem stemmed from the fact that some of the disciples ate bread with unwashed hands. The passage is rather long and complicated, but in verse 19, the New International Version states this:

Mark 7:19 (NIV) 
¹⁹ For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")

Similarly, the New American Standard Bible says:

Mark 7:19 (NASB)
¹⁹ because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)

The phrase in parentheses looks and sounds an awful lot like a conclusion and even many Bible commentators have used this verse in exactly that same manner. However, the parentheses are an indication that the phrase is not in the Greek. The Greek simply ends with the phrase "purging all the food." 

So what is up with this extra phrase? Obviously, it is an interpretation of what Mark 7:19 supposedly means. So rather than allowing the verse to be translated as it was written, someone, somewhere along the line, decided that Yeshua meant more than what He stated, that the verse by itself wasn't plain enough. The problem with this is two-fold. In the first place, the Bible was violated by having an interpretation forced on it. It also became a kind of conclusion, which makes no sense when the passage is analyzed. The second problem is that the conclusion has resulted in affirming a lie. God has warned Biblical writers, translators, teachers, and pastors not to add to or subtract from His commandments. This extra phrase subtracts from the commandments of God. Therefore, the extra phrase is incorrect. This wrong conclusion has allowed sincere believers to accept that the food laws are no longer applicable, that the law can be changed, and that other passages, particularly in Paul's writings that on the surface appear to negate the law, prove that the law has been abrogated.

Some common sense demonstrates that this line of thought is impossible!

Matthew 5:17-19 (KJV)
¹⁷ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
¹⁸ For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
¹⁹ Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For an understanding of the word "fulfill," please see:

Yeshua had to obey the Torah perfectly in order for Him to be qualified to be man's substitutionary sacrifice. According to Matthew 5, He also could not speak against the Torah. Therefore, it is impossible that Yeshua could have concluded that "all foods were now clean." He couldn't have even hinted at it or said that all foods would be clean after His death. 

Praise God, as Yeshua was obedient to God's commandments and became the Savior, how can we even think that our disobedience is now acceptable!

Next: Mark 7:19 explained.

Adding and Subtracting

Generally, the terms "adding" and "subtracting" refer to mathematics, but can be used in other contexts as well. These terms can even be found in the Bible as commands from God.

Revelation 22:19 (KJV)
¹⁹ And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

This verse includes a warning that no one should add or subtract from the book of prophecy called Revelation, or there would be some serious consequences to the person doing the adding or subtracting.

Jeremiah 26:2 (KJV)
² Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD'S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD'S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word:

In the book of Jeremiah, God counsels His prophet to speak all the words that God had given him to speak. He was not to subtract a single word.

Ecclesiastes 3:14 (KJV)
¹⁴ I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.

This verse speaks about God's work and how nothing can be added to or subtracted from it.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (KJV)
³² What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV)
² Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy, in these two different places, charges that no one is to add to or subtract from the commands that God has issued His people.

So, what can be concluded from these verses? God's work, whether His plan of salvation by grace through faith, His record of prophecy specifically in Revelation, or His commandments, is complete. There is nothing necessary to add or subtract!

Then why has Christianity found it necessary to add to or subtract from God's work? Some believe that good works must be added for salvation. Wrong! Some believe that we have prophets today speaking further prophecy of God. Wrong! Some believe that the Torah is no longer applicable. Wrong!

More on this next time!

God's Blueprint for His Success!

The parables of Matthew 13 are usually studied one by one, but this method, if not supplemented by an overview of all the parables together, leaves us with a hodge-podge of seemingly independent parables. However, there is definitely an overall scheme behind these parables, especially in how they are placed. A summary of the parables is as follows:

The Parable of the Sower - Yeshua begins spreading the Gospel, but only a small number respond. Satan comes in and snatches away the Word from some. Tribulation and persecution arise because of the Word. The cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke out the Word.

The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares - God created a good world, including His children. Satan ruined the world by sowing his own children. Because the two groups are indistinguishable they must all remain until the end of the age. Then the angels will remove the wicked and cast them into the fire.

The Parable of the Mustard Seed - The Kingdom of Heaven started off small, but will grow very large. Evil will find shelter there. (Don't forget that Yeshua seemed to be referring to the physical world of today, even though Satan has been allowed to have a certain control of the earth that won't end until Yeshua's return.)

The Parable of the Leaven - The Kingdom of Heaven will be infiltrated with false teaching that will go throughout the Kingdom.

Each of the previous parables seems to demonstrate how Satan tries to destroy the Kingdom!

The Parable of the Hidden Treasure - God had given Satan a certain amount of control over the world. Yeshua, by dying on the cross and rising from the dead buys the world and thereby now owns the hidden treasure (His people).

The Parable of the Pearl of Great Price - Yeshua buys each of His people by His death and resurrection.

The Parable of the Net - At the end of the age the angels will gather both the wicked and the just. In judgment, they will cast the wicked into the furnace of fire.

Each of the parables in this group seems to demonstrate God's work on behalf of the Kingdom!

The Parable of the Householder - Since the disciples have been instructed in the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, it is their turn to carry on the work of the Kingdom.

Matthew's parables of chapter 13 could definitely be called a blueprint for God's success in His world. Although the multitudes heard the parables, it was only the disciples who were given the full information about Yeshua's teachings. Although they may not have completely understood at the time, they had His blueprint to refer to later when the Holy Spirit brought Yeshua's teachings to mind. God's plan meant success in the future, something that the twelve and all Yeshua's disciples, even today, need to understand and trust in!

The Parable of the Householder

Today's parable is slightly different from our previous examples. This one does not start with the phrase, "the Kingdom of Heaven is like unto...."

Matthew 13:51-52 (KJV)
⁵¹ Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.
⁵² Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

Yeshua asked His disciples if they understood the parables that He had been teaching (verse 51). They answered by saying that they did. Is this correct? It seems that they answered very quickly without a lot of thought. The parables were complex teachings. Were they just answering what they thought Yeshua wanted them to? Also, since Yeshua was teaching about future events in a very abstract way, including His death, it seems unlikely that they could have fully understood. Yet, Yeshua said nothing further. Perhaps this question and their answer would serve as a future reminder about how little they really did understand.

Yeshua then began His parable (verse 52). Every scribe who is instructed in the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man that is an householder. Who are these scribes? Who had just been instructed in the Kingdom of Heaven? Obviously, Yeshua is referring to the disciples. Therefore, the disciples must also be the scribes. However, He went on to say that they were like an householder. The last time that a parable included an householder was in the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares.

Matthew 13:27 (KJV)
²⁷ So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

In the Wheat and the Tares, the householder represents Yeshua/God, but in this parable the householder represents the disciples. Hmm. This concluding parable changed the symbolism that has been consistent throughout the parables. How are Yeshua and the disciples alike? The Parable of the Householder is an application for the disciples. After Yeshua's death the disciples must carry on in the manner of Yeshua. It will be their job to do the work that Yeshua had been doing here on earth.

What would be their work? The parable continues by saying that the householder/scribes/disciples would bring forth out of his treasure new and old things. What are these things? There are really two explanations that seem to fit. Many commentators believe that the reference to new and old refers to the Old and New Testament or more accurately, the Torah and Yeshua's teachings. However, if we are consistent, the treasure must stand for God's people Israel. Is this another way of pointing to the disciples ministering to both Jew and Gentile believers? It seems likely.

The last thing to consider is that the twelve disciples were not the only ones being instructed in the Kingdom of Heaven. Every believer becomes a disciple of Yeshua and therefore is instructed and set in place of the householder. It is now our duty to continue Yeshua's work!

The Parable of the Net

This week's parable is a twin to the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. However, it is odd that the two are not located together. They are also not completely similar.

Matthew 13:47-50 (KJV)
⁴⁷ Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
⁴⁸ Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
⁴⁹ So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
⁵⁰ And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Again, we're going to assume that the symbolism must remain consistent between the parables. Since this parable is so similar to the Wheat and the Tares, we can assume that there is a similarity between the symbolism. Ignore the net for the moment (verse 47). What does the sea represent? What do the fish represent? The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares concerns wheat and tares that are sown in the field. The field is the world and the wheat and the tares represent good and bad people respectively. It seems pretty obvious then, that the sea also represents the world and the fish represent both good and bad people. Who are "they" that draw the net to shore, sit down, gather the good fish into vessels, and cast the bad fish away (verse 48)? Verse 49 tells us that "they" are the angels. This activity will occur at the end of the world when the angels will sever the wicked from among the just. The wicked will be cast into the furnace of fire, which in the Wheat and the Tares represented Hell and remains consistent in this parable (verse 50). In Hell there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

So what does the net represent? Although we aren't specifically told, the net functions as the means by which the angels gather everyone. We are left to our own imagination on this one, but it is understandable!

It must also be mentioned again, that good and bad fish, just like the wheat and the tares, are not considered "good" or "bad" due to works. If that were the case, we all would be considered bad fish. Rather, righteousness in this parable has to do with whether or not someone has surrendered to Yeshua as Lord by grace through faith. God sees the good as "good" because of the righteousness of Yeshua that has been imputed to them.

Also note again, that in verse 49 the wicked are severed from the just. We usually think the opposite.

If the Parable of the Net and the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares are twins and their meanings are identical why would Matthew record two such similar parables. It would be wasteful to write something twice (paper was not the cheap, easy obtainable product we have today), so there must be a reason. If we look at the differences we see that the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares had a lot to do with explaining how the bad seed came to be planted in the world. The Parable of the Net doesn't even mention how the bad fish came to be in the sea. Instead the emphasis is only on the end, the judgment of the good and bad fish. Hold onto this thought. We will return to this question when we come to the end of this study of the parables. There is much to learn from looking at these parables as a whole. Stay tuned!

The Parable of the Pearl of Great Price

Our parable today is a "twin" to the parable of the Treasure Hidden in a Field. Be sure to read about that one first.

Previous:

Matthew 13:45-46 (KJV)
⁴⁵ Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
⁴⁶ Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

Just like the Hidden Treasure parable, most commentators have thought that the point of the parable of the Pearl of Great Price is that we should be willing to give up everything in order to gain the Kingdom of Heaven, Yeshua, or salvation. While this is a true statement and may be the application of the parable, there is so much more to it!

Again, let's let the symbols of the parable be consistent with the other parables. Therefore we know that the "merchant man" must be none other than Yeshua/God. Rather than seeking a hidden treasure, He is this time searching for goodly pearls. What do the pearls represent?

Malachi 3:16-17 (KJV)
¹⁶ Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
¹⁷ And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.

Pearls are a type of "jewel" aren't they? And they are a type of "treasure." These verses in Malachi say that God's jewels are those that fear the Lord. As we found in the previous parable, the treasure refers to both Jews and Gentiles that have believed on Him. Similarly, the pearls also represent believers. Malachi also says that God is "making up His jewels." In other words, God is making a crown that will be made up of His people, the jewels (the pearls). But rather than buying a field in order to buy a collective treasure, Yeshua this time is searching for individual pearls. When He found one, He went and sold all that He had, and bought the one pearl.

Just like in the previous parable, Yeshua sold everything He had by coming down to earth to be born as a baby, leaving much of the splendor and benefits of Heaven behind. He then bought the pearl by dying on the cross and taking the punishment for our sin. He was willing to make this sacrifice, not just for the whole group of mankind that would come to Him, but for each individual who would come to Him. Isn't it hard to believe that each one of us could be considered SO valuable?!

Again, this parable gives us a picture of the gospel message, but it is different from its "twin" in that God wanted to assure His people that He wanted each one of us!! That is an amazing and incredible thought! We are priceless pearls! Wow!

The Parable of the Treasure Hidden in a Field

Our next parable is this:

Matthew 13:44 (KJV)
⁴⁴ Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.

Most of the commentators see this parable as an exhortation for Christians to give everything in order to obtain the Kingdom of Heaven, or Yeshua, or salvation, depending upon what they believe the treasure symbolizes.

However, if we continue to keep elements (symbols) consistent throughout the parables, the meaning of the Parable of the Treasure Hidden in a Field becomes very different.

Yeshua already defined two of the symbols in this parable. He said that the "man" or the main male character in the parables refers to Himself/God. He also defined the "field" as the world. So the only missing element is the treasure itself. Since Yeshua did not give us any information about what the treasure symbolized, we need to look elsewhere for the answer. It would seem that the Bible has all kinds of references to treasure.

Exodus 19:5 (KJV)
⁵ Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

Psalm 135:4 (KJV)
⁴ For the LORD hath chosen Jacob unto himself, and Israel for his peculiar treasure.

Plainly, God has viewed Israel as His very special treasure. But do we see the same thing in the New Testament?

1 Peter 2:9 (KJV)
⁹ But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Most would say that 1 Peter is talking about Christians. However, this Bible verse is a quote from the Old Testament.

Exodus 19:6 (KJV)
⁶ And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

How is it possible that Christians and Israel are described using the same terminology? Theologians of all stripes have weighed in on this matter. Without going into the differences between Replacement Theology and Dispensationalism, let me suggest that there is a better answer. Since the same terminology is used, both entities, in some form, are identical. From Paul we see that being ethnic Israel does not guarantee that you are really "Israel."

Romans 9:6 (KJV)
⁶ Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

At the same time, there are many Gentiles who have been grafted into Israel when they became believers.

Romans 11:17 (KJV)
¹⁷ And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

Therefore, the treasure that Yeshua was teaching about is His people, the believers, either Jew or Gentile.

Now let's examine the parable more closely. God's people are hidden in the world. Isn't this exactly what we see regarding both the Jews and Gentile believers, who have been scattered throughout our world. When God "finds" His people, He hides them again, and then, with joy, sells everything that He has, and then buys the world with His people in it.

So how did Yeshua give up all that He had?

Philippians 2:5-7 (KJV)
⁵ Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
⁶ Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
⁷ But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

But why did Yeshua have to buy the world? Doesn't the world already belong to Him?

It does, but when Adam and Eve sinned our world was marred and Satan was given a certain amount of control and influence over it.

2 Corinthians 4:4 (KJV)
⁴ In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Yeshua then bought the world by doing what?

Philippians 2:8 (KJV)
⁸ And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

This one verse parable basically gives us the entire Gospel message! Yeshua was willing to leave Heaven, come to earth as a man, and then die, in order to buy mankind the opportunity to be saved. This should fill our hearts with gratitude! Amazing!  

The Parable of the Leaven

The next parable that we come to is the Parable of the Leaven.

Matthew 13:33 (KJV)
³³ Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

This parable is the twin to the Parable of the Mustard Seed. The meaning is generally viewed as similar to its twin, that the Kingdom of Heaven starts off small, but grows very big. But just like its twin, the meaning is not explained by Yeshua. Therefore, this particular meaning is not based on anything besides the commentators' own ideas. As we've seen in the previous parables it makes more sense to understand that the symbols or elements of all the parables must all remain consistent.

Let's examine this parable with that in mind. Let's start with the leaven. Although there are no clues given to us within the parable itself, the Bible has some interesting things to say about the connotation of "leaven."

Exodus 12:15 (KJV)
¹⁵ Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.
 
Exodus 13:7 (KJV) 
⁷ Unleavened bread shall be eaten seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters.

These two passages in Exodus speak about the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, where for seven days not only did they not eat bread with leaven, but leaven couldn't even be found in their homes or they would be cut off from Israel.

1 Corinthians 5:6 (KJV)
⁶ Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

As we enter into the first century, we see that Paul's writings exhibit the idea of leaven being something bad that goes throughout the whole lump. In this particular case, it referred to the Corinthians patting themselves on the back for their tolerance of sin in their midst.

Galatians 5:8-10 (KJV)
⁸ This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
⁹ A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
¹⁰ I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

In this passage of Galatians Paul warns about allowing someone's meddling to influence their thinking. Paul says that this someone's ideas are not from God. In these New Testament verses we easily see that leaven had become a symbol for sin, or, as in the case of Galatians, false teaching.

What does the meal represent?

Leviticus 14:10 (KJV)
¹⁰ And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil.

In this verse we see that this particular meal offering was made up of three lumps of flour.

Leviticus 6:14,17 (KJV)
¹⁴ And this is the law of the meat offering: the sons of Aaron shall offer it before the LORD, before the altar.
¹⁷ It shall not be baken with leaven. I have given it unto them for their portion of my offerings made by fire; it is most holy, as is the sin offering, and as the trespass offering.

The meal offering was to be made without leaven since it was most holy. This indicates again the status of our world (the hidden Kingdom of Heaven). What God meant for good has had some evil, sin, or false teaching hidden into it. This teaching will grow until it fills the whole lump.

So who does the woman represent? The main actor in the previous parables was a man who represented Yeshua/God. This woman is acting an an agent for Satan, planting evil, sin, or false teaching, that will corrupt the Kingdom of Heaven.

Taken all together, we find that the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, the Parable of the Mustard Seed, and the Parable of the Leaven are all very similar parables, differing only in aspects that Yeshua meant to highlight. The Kingdom of Heaven started off small, but as it grows Satan is working hard against the Kingdom. Satan planted his evil children into the Kingdom, he has infiltrated it by evil (demons?), and he has sown sin, evil, and false teaching. It would seem that the Kingdom of Heaven is in desperate need of help. What will the next parables tell us?

The Parable of the Mustard Seed

We have been discussing Yeshua's parables in Matthew 13. So far we have covered the Parable of the Sower and the Seeds and the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. Between Yeshua's giving the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares and His explanation there are two more parables that we have yet to analyze. Today we will be looking at the Parable of the Mustard Seed.

Matthew 13:31-32 (KJV)
³¹ Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
³² Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

This time Yeshua said that the Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field (verse 31). Then in verse 32 He remarked that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds, but becomes a tree when it is grown. It is so large that the birds come and lodge in its branches.

This is all that we are given. So, if Yeshua did not give us any explanation, how are we to determine what Yeshua was trying to tell us? Most commentators believe that the message is pretty clear, that the Kingdom of Heaven starts out small, but grows to be so big that all kinds of people come to dwell within it. Specifically, the birds must represent Gentiles who come into the small Kingdom that Yeshua started. Although there seems to be a consensus on this parable's meaning, the reasoning involved is nothing more than guess work.

Instead, if we look closely, the four symbols used in the parable have already been defined by Yeshua. The man that sows the mustard seed must represent Yeshua, just as the man (sower) does in the Parable of the Sower and the Seeds and in the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. The field has already been shown to be the world and the mustard seed represents those who hear the Word of God. The birds represent Satan. When we put this together we now find that the Kingdom of Heaven, yes, starts off small after being sown by Yeshua into the world. It then grows to be very large, so large that evil (or Satan) finds shelter there.

But how is this possible that evil could be hiding in the Kingdom of Heaven? Actually, what the parable says is that evil infiltrates the world where God's people also exist. Isn't this the situation of our world? Isn't this what was being described in the Wheat and the Tares?

Perhaps our definition of the Kingdom of Heaven needs a little tweaking. These parables seem to indicate the condition of what is actually going on in the world today and not really what is happening in the spiritual Kingdom of Heaven. It is as if Yeshua was already looking to His physical Kingdom of Heaven that will be in place during the Millennial Kingdom here on Earth. Is it possible that in some sense Yeshua is viewing His Kingdom as our world, even though it is marred because of sin? This change in thought serves to explain how we are to view these parables. And there seems to be some patterns developing. We'll talk more about this as we progress.

Note: While the mustard seed is not actually the smallest seed, nor does it grow into a tree, the Jews traditionally used the mustard seed as an example of the smallest. Yeshua's use of hyperbole (exaggeration) was a common method of making a strong point.

The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares Part 2

See Part 1

Matthew 13:36-43 (KJV)
³⁶ Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
³⁷ He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
³⁸ The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
³⁹ The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
⁴⁰ As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
⁴¹ The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
⁴² And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
⁴³ Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

After Yeshua told the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares to the crowd, He sent them away, and went into the house (verse 36). His disciples came to Him and asked Him to explain the meaning of the parable. Yeshua then revealed that the man who sowed the good seed is Yeshua himself (The "Son of man" is a Messianic term referring to the Messiah.) (verse 37). The field stands for the world and the good seed are the children of the Kingdom of Heaven (verse 38). He further explained that the tares represent the children of the wicked one (Satan according to verse 39). The harvest represents the end of the world and the reapers are the angels. According to verse 40 the tares would be gathered and burned in the fire. This part of the parable mirrors what will happen at the end of the world. The Son of man will send forth his angels and they will gather out of his kingdom all things that offend and them that sin (verse 41). These will be cast into the furnace of fire where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth (verse 42). Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the Kingdom of Heaven (verse 43). Yeshua ended His explanation by saying, "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

Since Yeshua revealed the meaning of this parable to His disciples, it is pretty impossible to misunderstand. He was explaining that He had originally placed His own good children in the world, but that Satan disturbed that perfection by introducing his own evil children. Since it was difficult to remove the wicked without possibly uprooting the good, Yeshua determined to leave both in the world until its end. At that time the angels would remove the wicked and cast them into hell, but the righteous would remain in the world, where they would shine forth as the sun. Yeshua then encouraged His disciples to really listen and understand the parable.

But who are the wicked and who are the righteous? Although all mankind is guilty of sin and is deserving of hell, Yeshua, by His death and resurrection, made it possible for sinful mankind to trust and believe in Yeshua's work on the cross, and to be viewed by God in light of Yeshua's own righteousness. Those who trust are considered the righteous. They will remain on earth in the Kingdom of Heaven, but the wicked, those who are not believers and then are viewed by God in all their sin, will be cast into hell.

How can we apply this parable to our lives? This short parable explains what our world is like now. We are living with a mix of evil and good. However, one day, there will be judgment and only those who are trusting in Messiah for their salvation will survive. The destination of everyone else is hell. We've been warned! Let's make sure our eternal home will be with Yeshua!