Apostolic Messianic Truth

Beards: by Lyzette Rod

2011-07-24T12:32:00.000-07:00

This is for the men shalom that love Yahuwah and obey HIM What Scripture teaches about Beards and Baldness

It is a belief among many brethren in the faith that men should wear beards as did most Yisraelites (Israelites) throughout history. However, it is not considered mandatory to do so. The purpose of this study is to inform you of what the scriptures say concerning beards and to show that it is a law of Yahuwah which should be obeyed.

Let's begin by looking at the actual commandment in Lev. 19:26-28; "Ye shall not eat any thing with the blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times. Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard. Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am Yahuah."

Notice that we continue to obey verses 26 and 28 even today. The question is, do we have to obey verse 27? As we read in Lev. 19:1,2, these commandments are for the children of Yisra'el, also by association the strangers who join themselves into the household of Yisra'el, Isa. 56. In verse 27 the KJV uses two words which do not help in clearly understanding this verse, "mar" and "corners." Unless you have a square head and a square beard you cannot have "corners." The Hebrew for "corners" is "peah" which means the "region or extremity" according to Strong's Concordance. A word study of such verses as Ex.36:25; Job 18:14,15; Nu.24:17; Ezek.41:12; and Lev.19:9 will reveal the correct meaning to be "border" or "the outline that forms the image." Referring to the above references; the peah or border of a building is its' walls; of the sea, its' coastline; of a country such as Moab , its' borders; of a field, its' borders; of the beard, the outline which forms the image. In other words, the hair line along the cheeks, lower neck, below the lower lip, etc. Goatees, mutton chops, Hitler mustaches and totally shaven faces are all forbidden by Yahuah. Incidentally, the Jewish practice of not cutting the sideburns is based on an erroneous understanding of this scripture.

The word "mar" in Hebrew is "shachath" which means to decay or ruin. It was also translated "destroy, perish, cast off, corrupt and utterly waste." So what this commandment is really saying is, "Do not utterly destroy the borders of your beard." The only way to utterly destroy the beard is to remove the hair from your face. The most common way is by shaving which totally ruins and mars the beard. It creates baldness upon your skin and, as we will see later, baldness is associated with shame and defilement throughout scripture. Trimming the length of the beard is permitted because it does not create baldness. Instead, it adds to a man's handsomeness.

To "round the corners of your head" would mean to create baldness around one's head, as certain people do, leaving only a circular patch of hair on top.

Lev.19:27 is among a long list of commandments extending to Lev.20:21. Verses 22-26 teach us to be sanctified from the unbelieving people around us. They tattoo their bodies, stretch their necks with metal rings, shave their heads bald or carve words and designs in their hair. This shows a total lack of reverence for their bodies. How much more should we reverence our bodies which are the temple of the Holy Spirit of Yahuah?

A similar commandment is found in Lev.21:1-6. These verses pertain to the priests, Aaron and his sons. Believers today are said to be priests as well, so this commandment could spiritually apply to us. But even if it doesn't we can see Yahuah's feelings concerning creating baldness on ones head. Not only would the priest defile or profane himself but he would also profane the name of Yahuah (vs 6). It was holiness to a priest to remain unshaven.

Only something holy can be profaned or defiled. Ezekiel talks about profaning the sanctuary and the Sabbath day. Both are holy and both can be defiled. Believers are also holy; in fact, we are a holy priesthood and our bodies are holy temples. If we eat pork we defile the temple of the Holy Spirit (Lev 11:44 ). If we create baldness on our head or face we defile the tabernacle of Yahuah.

Lev.21:16-23 tells us about the seed of Aaron that are blemished. Whenever something happens to a priest that alters the image that he was created with, he becomes blemished. That is why Yahuah told them not to create baldness on their head or face. They could not serve as priests until they were healed again.

Most commentators apply the last chapters of Ezekiel to the millennial kingdom. Notice in Ezek.44:20 the priests are not permitted to shave but they are permitted to cut their hair so it doesn't grow too long. Yahuah does not want men's head hair to be too long and He doesn't want it or the beard to appear sloppy or unkempt. II Sam.10:4,5 recounts the time when King David's men had half their beards shaved off by their enemies causing great shame. But notice what David said to do. He didn't tell them to shave off the other half and return to Jerusalem . He told them to wait in Jericho until their beards grew back and then return.

Some people try to use Gen.41:14 to prove that men could shave if they wanted to. The most logical way to understand this verse is that the Egyptians made Joseph shave when he met Pharaoh just as they made him change his clothing. If a man is kept in a dungeon for two years and then is brought quickly out to meet Pharaoh, he is not going to put on his best clothing because he undoubtedly doesn't have a change of good clothing. The Egyptians would have given him new clothes and they would have required him to clean up and shave. Almost all Egyptians had shaven heads and no beards.

Samson was under a Nazarite vow, through which his long hair gave him great strength until it was shaved off by Delilah. There were only three reasons Yahuah allowed for shaving ones head: 1) A Nazarite vow 2) Leprosy or infection on the head 3) death of a relative. Shaving for any other reason, would defile the person and profane Yahuah's name.

Yahuwah spoke two interesting prophesies concerning baldness. In Is.3:16,17,24 baldness is spoken of as something negative and undesirable that Yahuwah will bring upon the daughters of Zion because of their haughty attitude. Amos 8:9,10 shows that in the Day of Yahuwah, He will cause baldness upon every head; in other words, shame and mourning.

Many people have been misled by today's society into believing that a well shaved, smooth face is desirable and permissible when, in reality, it is against the law of Yahuwah and defiles our body. Yahuwah created men to have beards and then commanded men to not destroy their beards. He desires men to maintain the same image that He created them with. He does not want us to look like Egyptians, Romans, Hindus, or the other nations around us.

Even Yahushua the Messiah, who is our ultimate example, had a beard (Is.50:6). In their attempt to disrespect and shame Yahushua, his persecutors tore out the hair from his beard.

Some brethren believe the law against shaving the beard was a cultural requirement for Yisra'el alone. If that be the case, we could say the same for all the feast days and many other laws. The fact that Yahuwah created men with beards, as a natural part of their body, shows that they are desired by Yahuah for all men, not just for Yisra'elites.

Others will say that not all men can grow beards, therefore they don't have to either. Not all believers can mark the beginning of Sabbath by the visual sunset, yet they must keep the Sabbath holy. Yahuwah will not hold such a person accountable if he cannot grow a beard. Nor will He look away from a man who loses his hair naturally. However, the man who willfully shaves his beard or his head, aside from the Scripturally permitted reasons, will be held accountable.

Elisha's Army Club special offer!

2010-09-11T05:46:00.000-07:00

THIS AMAZING OPPORTUNITY IS FOR ONE WEEK ONLY. A $50 value for FREE when you become a YATI Partner!

FOR NEW PARTNERS ONLY PLEASE!

OFFER ENDS ON ROMAN SEPT. 17TH, MOON 6 DAY 9. ONE WEEK ONLY!

If you sign up and become a MONTLHY donor of any amount in the next week, NOT ONLY WILL WE ADD YOU FOR FREE TO THE LATEST MP3 TEACHINGS (hot and heavy) MAILED TO YOU WEEKLY BY E MAIL (The Elisha's Army Club), WE WILL SEND YOU A FREE PDF FILE OF THE JUST COMPLETED Restoration Scriptures True Name Edition Study Bible with Scroll of Jasher a $50 value!! This E book includes new and revised study notes, updated weekly Parsha readings in color, with more balance between Tanach and Renewed Covenant in E book format. This is perfect for those students who take the Word of Yahuwah seriously, or those who travel and or prepare sermons.

Unlike past pdf files, this brand new file has all these updated features:

RSTNE 3rd Edition. With Scroll of Jasher-Yahshar

-New Features: One click easy bookmark that takes you straight to the book and/or chapter you require IN A SECOND!!!! Also the weekly Torah Parshas have been marked with blue book mark e.g. Torah Parsha 1 Beresheeth,

-Also Copy and paste verses with advanced word search function included where you can locate a Scripture in a second!!

 The World’s first fully two-house bible for Yahudah and Ephraim with over 7,000 notes in running commentary format. The NEWEST NOTES on biblical marriage, biblical time keeping and prophecy. Not included elsewhere!

 The True Names of Yahuwah and Yahushua restored in Hebrew font.

 A translation that recovers the Father’s heart for Yisrael’s full restoration.

 A strong emphasis on the Dead Sea Scrolls & Aramaic-Semitic texts.

 Weekly Shabbat Torah, Haftarah and Brit Chadasha selected readings.

 An easy to find blue bookmarked weekly Torah Parsha’s.

 A one click chapter feature that takes you straight to the chapter and book you click on.

 A bible that has fully removed all dispensationalist biases of other translations.

 Scrolls/Books arranged in the order of the actual historical events.

 A new 20 + page simplified glossary to identify and understand key Hebrew terms.

 Missing portions of scripture, such as Psalm 151 and parts of Isaiah 53 now fully restored.

 The Scroll of Yahshar restored to scripture, "Is not this written in the Scroll of Yahshar?" Joshua 10: 13."Behold it is written in the Scroll of Yahshar." II Samuel 1:18"Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the emet: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." Second Timothy 3:8.

 A bible that exposes the myth of dispensationalism.

 Yisraelite terms and idioms restored back into the text.

 Study on screen in your home or office.

 Carry your CD with you to your home group or assembly.

 Great for use on power point presentations.

Insightful Prophetic Podcast Teachings For Instant Download in MP3 Format Sent to You Weekly! Sign Up Today! PLEDGE GET THE FREE PDF E BOOK BIBLE!

Sign UP HERE AND RETURN TO: info@yourarmstoisrael.org

Membership Form For Our New Elisha's Army Club! AND FREE PDF RSTNE BIBLE! FOR NEW PARTNERS ONLY PLEASE!

Yes sir, we would love to get the FREE new RSTNE E Book File and the weekly Podcast MP3 teachings e mailed weekly. Please sign me-us up so our Elisha's Army Club Subscription can begin. I will be a regular monthly partner! Fill out and return to: info@yourarmstoisrael.org :

My real name: ____________________ My E Mail Address:______________________

Credit-Debit Card Type_______________________________ Exp. Date ______________

(All information will be held securely and never shared) Deductions will be made monthly.

Amount pledged $ ____

Option 3-Paypal-I will paypal you monthly. (Please send your first gift to robkon@bellsouth.net) to begin your Elisha's Army Club membership and include a note for the free bible. Amount pledged for my membership $ _______

Option 4-Paypal Bill me monthy-Start my Elisha's Army Club membership and send me a free bible and also send me a Paypal bill for $____ monthly.

TODAH RABAH AND PLEASE INVITE OTHERS TO JOIN, SO HIS LIVING WORD CAN BE SENT TO ALL THE LOST SHEEP OF BOTH HOUSES OF SCATTERED ISRAEL!

Elisha's Army Club just launched!

2010-08-08T14:21:00.000-07:00

What if we told you that you can and WILL receive the RAMYK's teachings from B'nai Yahshua Synagogue of Broward County Florida every week, sent right to your email address?

-What if we told you that this will be sent weekly, within days of when the actual message was given?

-What if we told you there was absolutely no shipping charges or handling charges?

-What if we told you that you simply pledge ANY amount monthly, and we will add you to the brand new list of those who get our messages by e mail in MP3 download file? It's free, if you cannot afford it!

-Now you can get the latest live teachings from Torah and the Besorah without waiting, as they will all be current with the fresh manna and anointing that we all praise YHWH for!

To start receiving your first MP3 file download this week entitled BE YE KADOSH and the ground breaking Yahweh or Yahuwah, (3 new teachings) simply fill out the brief form below and follow the instructions carefully:

Enjoy your new weekly subscription to our new Elisha's Army Club. PLEASE NOTE!

IF YOU ARE AND HAVE BEEN A FAITHFUL REGULAR DONOR TO YATI INT'L MINISTRIES, YOU WILL AUTOMATICALLY RECEIVE THE WEEKLY MP3 FILE MAILINGS TO DOWNLOAD! FOR YOU THERE IS NO NEED TO SUBSCRIBE!

Yes sir, we would love to get the weekly teachings e mailed. Please sign us up so our Elisha's Army Club Subscription can begin. Simply fill out and send to

ravmoshe@bellsouth.net

My real name ____________________ My E Mail Address______________________

Amount I can give to underwrite your worldwide ministry monthly. $ ____ I want to stand with you brother so others who cannot afford can get YHWH's Word!

I cannot afford to help right now, but please make me an Elisha's Army Club member ______

Credit Card_______________________________ Exp. Date _________________

Paypal-I will paypal you monthly. (Please send your first gift to robkon@bellsouth.net) to begin your Elisha Club membership. Amount pledged $ _______

Paypal Bill me monthy-Start my membership and send me a Paypal bill for $____ monthly

TODAH RABAH AND PLEASE INVITE OTHERS TO JOIN!

New Blog!

2010-06-19T05:13:00.000-07:00

I just started a new blog to overcome common objections to polygamy. It's called "Polygamy Advocate". My first post is called "Adam the polygamist" and shows the ridiculousness of the "original intent" argument. If you have never studied Torah plural marriage, this may be a great place to start. I invite you to join me soon and become a follower so you won't miss any new posts!

Camp FEMA: American Lockdown - FULL MOVIE

2010-05-30T12:32:00.001-07:00

Click to Play

http://CampFEMA.com | Please support the film makers and purchase a DVD. - Recent legislation attempting to legitimize the use of internment camps to detain U.S. citizens in the event of an uprising or civil unrest has many people asking what nation they live in.

In a country born out of political dissent, we watch our leaders in Washington slowly pass bills that label ordinary Americans as thought criminals and potential domestic terrorists for simply questioning the actions of their government.

Mysteries of Messiah in the Name of יהוה

2009-11-22T17:58:00.000-08:00

Satan: Up Close & Personal

2009-10-30T20:32:00.000-07:00

Satan: Up Close & Personal

American consumers spend over five billion dollars on costumes, candy, and decorations for Halloween each year. Is Halloween and scary movies just good clean fun, or is there really a spiritual ream of disembodied spirits? Does the occult have power? The Bible answers these questions and clarifies much about the devil.

In the spiritual realm is the Creator and His angelic messengers. There are also fallen angels or demons. The word devil comes to the English language from the Greek "diabolos," which means "liar, thief, accuser, and enemy." The devil sure is real but he isn't some little red guy with a pointy tale and pitch fork. This idea and, indeed, much Christian doctrine regarding the devil and hell is derived from Mesopotamian folklore and the classic book, "Dante's Inferno." The Bible never says that satan rebelled with a third of the angels or that satan is omnipotent or omnipresent. Satan exists but he's not what most people think.

The word "satan" is an ancient Hebrew word that is now used in the English language. The adversary's name was NOT changed from the Hebrew. Normally in English Bibles, the names for people and places were transliterated and transformed into a new term. For example, the Hebrew "Moshe" is rendered "Moses" and the name "Y'shua" is often changed to "Jesus" in English. Though every other name from the Hebrew scrolls was changed for English Bibles, the translators kept the hideous name of the adversary the same. In Hebrew, he is called "ha satan" which literally means "the accuser" or "the adversary." Ha satan is like a prosecuting attorney that confronts and accuses believers in an effort to belittle them and render them powerless.

The enemy comes against the saints daily to wear them down. He accuses and he lies. He is active in every type of rebellion yet he is NOT responsible for sin. Flip Wilson was wrong when he said, "the devil made me do it." Satan's part is to simply temp, pry, and appeal to man's fleshly desires. He knows that most people are not going to murder, rob banks, and commit heinous sins. So, he comes as an angel of light and then attacks people at their points of weakness.

Though Hollywood portrays the enemy with unlimited power and strength, the Bible shows that deception is ha satan's ONLY power. This is how he attacks. He comes as a harmless idea or action and then misleads the masses. He deceived Adam and Eve in the garden and hasn't stopped since. Deception is tricky because a person doesn't know that he is being deceived. The Scriptures declare that ha satan has deceived the entire world - including ALL Christians. 1 John 5:19 says that the "whole world is under the influence of the evil one." This deception reaches the Baptists, Lutherans, and Pentecostals. Masons and Muslims are deceived as well. The enemy has deceived the entire world regarding his power and faith in general.

It doesn't take holy water or a powerful exorcism to be free from demons and deception. It only takes the words of truth. The adversary's grip is loosened by the truth. The Savior said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." Don't be deceived, Satan is real and his power is in deluding the world. Deception ends as a person seeks to know and live the truth. "Submit yourselves therefore to YHWH. Resist ha satan, and he will flee from you," James 4:7.

Daniel Rendelman

Emet Ministries

www.emetministries.com

Christians SHOULD celebrate Halloween!!!

2009-10-26T15:26:00.000-07:00

Every year around this time many people of faith struggle with the issue of Halloween. The implications of death that surround this holiday make it a curious mixture for those who proclaim the gospel. Many believers decide not to celebrate this festival because of the holiday's glorification of witchcraft. Some churches hold harvest festivals as a type of compromise and other groups simply see no problem with costumes and fun. Does Halloween have its history in druidic worship? Yes. Does the Bible speak against believers acting like pagans? Yes. Is Halloween a high holy day of Satanism and Wicca? Yes again. "Don't participate in the things these people do. For though your hearts were once full of darkness, now you are full of light from YHWH*, and your behavior should show it! For this light within you produces only what is good and right and true," Ephesians 5:7-12. (*YHWH is the ancient Hebrew name of the Almighty given to Moses in Exodus 3 and found throughout English Bibles as the capitalized LORD.)

Through the years, Halloween has evolved from a day of satanic worship into a secular celebration of sugar. Ancient customs that were once used to conjure up spirits have been adopted by the modern world. Dressing up children for trick-or-treating or decorating with witches and ghosts may be fun, but such actions are inherently immoral. "Abstain from all appearance of evil," 1Thessalonians 5:22. Regardless of these facts, perhaps ALL Christians should celebrate Halloween. Maybe every church should encourage their members to have a merry time on All Hallows eve. This is of course, unless Christians are willing to forsake all pagan holidays and practices. With false worship and paganism, it's all or nothing. Churches shouldn't ban Halloween if they to allow the recognition of the god Mithras on December 25 or the dying of eggs on Easter.

The truth is that just as Halloween has its roots in paganism, so does Sunday worship, Christmas, Easter and most holidays on the Christian calendar. If a person doesn't party on October 31st because of the day's pagan history, then is that same person willing to forsake other pagan festivities? The only difference between the dangers of Halloween and Christmas is that Halloween is easily distinguished as evil. Both holidays originated in non-Christian societies and retain unbiblical practices. The Savior never celebrated Halloween or Christmas, and would no doubt abstain from such practices if He walked the earth today.

About Halloween the Bible says, "you shall not learn to follow the abominations of the surrounding nations. There shall not be found among you anyone... who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to YHWH," Deuteronomy 18:9-11.

About Christmas, Jeremiah 10:2 says, "Do not learn the ways of the pagans, for the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut a tree out of the forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel. They adorn it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so it will not totter."

The evils of Halloween are easy to recognize while the pagan past of other customs are hidden in plain sight for those with eyes open to the truth. It's not easy to ignore the trick-or-treators or to abstain from believing in a magical overgrown elf but such an effort is noteworthy if it is done out of respect to the Biblical faith. Christians should celebrate Halloween (and Easter and Christmas) or they should forsake all other pagan rituals.

By Daniel Rendelman

Are you a haunted house?

2009-10-24T16:56:00.000-07:00

By Brother Rabbi Dani’el Rendelman
Emet Ministries
ravemet@comcast.net

MEMBER OF B'NAI YAHSHUA SYNAGOGUES WORLDWIDE

Stories of haunted houses have fascinated people for years. The idea of ghosts and goblins running wild in their former home seems to enthrall the curious in everyone.

Hollywood has capitalized on this idea with numerous movies including Poltergeist and Rose Red. And there are even some historical homes promoted as supposedly having ghosts living in them. The spook house in your hometown may be scary, but that is not our subject.

Nor does this teaching talk of the real demons rebuked by the Savior during His earthly ministry. The Newer Testament records the Messiah casting out demons on many occasions, so we know that the dark side does exist. Yet, there are also demon-like forces that perhaps are more dangerous than real disembodied spirits. These are ghouls of emotions that haunt the human soul.

Inside believers and unbelievers alike are the ghosts of anger and fear. These twin evil powers manifest when bad choices are made or when emotions are allowed to run free. Many people today live in a haunted house full of demons that they, themselves, have created. The relationship problems people face can usually be traced back to the ghost of fear or the goblin of anger.

Don't think that this is someone else's issue. Don't visit another haunted house and point the finger at your spouse, your boss, your enemy, or your friend. Fear and anger haunt everyone. Search your mind and ask yourself if your soul is a haunted house OR a holy house.

The Bible declares that the believer is the temple of the Holy Spirit, or “Ruach HaKadosh” in Hebrew. "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you? You are not your own; you were bought at a price," 1 Corinthians 6:19. The believer’s life should be full of peace, love, joy, and victory. Our house - our life - should not be a spook house run amuck by fear and anger. Yet it often times is. When choices are made to satisfy the lusts of the flesh, the Holy Spirit is kicked to the side and evil spirits are invited to oppress. Anger and fear manifest as yelling at children, being angered easily, worrying about future, or walking around offended at something.

Anger and fear are not forced upon us. These emotional attitudes are chosen. Scary movies suggest that a vampire can’t enter someone’s home unless the vampire has been invited inside. Each time the door is opened to fear or anger; these vampire-like problems are invited in. For example, fear is welcomed whenever you question “What if?”

This is what fear does. It questions and quivers against the believer’s faith. Fear is an emotion that the adversary will use against you. It grips the heart and stops the saint from walking in joy. What exactly is fear? If you can spell fear then you can define it. Fear is: False – Evidence – Appearing – Real. Fear makes you think that life will only get worse, you are all alone, and that nothing can help your situation. Fear feeds the feelings of anxiety and apprehension. This type of fear is NOT of YHWH. “For YHWH has not given us the Ruach (spirit) of fear; but of power, and of ahava (love), and of a sound mind,” Timtheous Bet -- 2 Timothy 1: 7. (YHWH is the ancient Hebrew name of the Almighty given to Moses at the burning bush in Exodus 3. This is his “name forever unto all generations.” This four lettered Hebrew name is often hidden behind the capitalized terms LORD and GOD in English Bibles.)

If you are fearful, anxious, worrisome, or afraid then understand that these feeling do not originate with the Holy One. These are false fears that come from the fleshly mind and the adversary. This type of fear is not from YHWH. You should not fear what life throws at you. You should fear YHWH. “You shall fear YHWH, and serve Him, and shall swear by His Name,” -- Devarim / Deuteronomy 6: 13. It is a commandment and a directive to fear YHWH. Fear belongs to Him only. The place for fear is before YHWH only. Horror comes as this fear of YHWH is traded for a fear of whatever.

Fear paralyzes its victim like the venomous snake bite of a cobra. It is dangerous and deadly. And like the anti-venom to a snake bite, it takes fear to conquer fear. To break the power of fear, one must turn the fear from things and place it unto YHWH. Consider Adam and learn.

After Adam originally sinned in the Garden of Eden, Adam does something really strange. He does something very childish. Out of fear, He hides. “And YHWH called to Adam, and said to him, where are you? And he said, I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. And He said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the eytz (tree) that I commanded you that you should not eat?” Beresheeth / Genesis 3: 10, 11.

Just think about what happened to Adam for a minute. Here is a man, now hiding in the bushes that had “walked with YHWH in the cool of the day”. Why would he be hiding? Adam recognized that he did something wrong and that this, most-certainly-known disobedience brought about the emotion of fear. As a child who had been caught red-handed, Adam hides from His Father.

Now get this, Adam wasn’t afraid of snakes. He wasn’t even scared of a talking snake that had tempted him to sin. But, Adam was terrified of the consequences of his actions. This type of fear is good. Adam hid because he recognized his fall from his exalted state and knew that a holy and awesome Mighty One would most-certainly know about the situation. He wasn’t hiding because he got caught sinning BUT because of what sin did to his relationship with YHWH. Additionally, he recognized that YHWH would be displeased, for he and the woman had done precisely what they'd been forbidden! To Adam, fear was more than just reverence and awe; Adam was hiding because he had a reason to be scared to death! He was terrified! Adam, who had a perfect, unhindered, relationship with YHWH, was now hiding because of his sin! Like Adam, we, as children of Abba YHWH, know when we are caught. We ought to fear our heavenly Father more!

To fear YHWH is to possess an emotional trait equal to a leash on a dog. The fear of YHWH allows us to go and do as our Master allows. Then, our leash will be tugged if we go a little too far on our own. Our leash is pulled back when we don’t see the impending danger of our actions or if we cross a dangerous line. This is the type of fear we need! The problem is that most people trade the fear of YHWH for the fear of life. Instead of putting fear where it goes, before YHWH, we place it before our problems. We fear failure. We fear success. We fear just getting by. We change His word and many times choose fear over faith.

In the beginning when YHWH created the world he said, “It is good.” YHWH declared all of creation good, or “tov” in Hebrew. According to YHWH everything in the entire universe is tov. Fear, on the other hand, says “it is not good.” Fear says, “You can’t do it.” Fear questions “what if?” Fear argues with YHWH and stands in opposition to His word.

So, how does a person combat fear? It doesn’t take an exorcism to kick fear out. Instead simply watch yourself. When you feel it, identify it, and then reject it. YHWH has not given you a spirit of fear. If you are afraid or jittery, those emotions are not from YHWH. Take that fear and give it to Him. Pray about your situation and ask Him to intervene. Perfect love casts out all false fear. Understand that fear belongs to YHWH only. You should be cautious when you become afraid of anything other than YHWH. When the stomach tightens or goose bumps run up the back, just ask yourself, “where is this emotion from?” When you feel afraid, identify this emotion as false fear, and then reject it. Choose faith over fear and don’t allow this ghost to haunt your house.

Fear has a spooky twin that is just as dangerous. This evil emotion is anger. Nothing ruins more relationships than anger. To put it bluntly, anger uncontrolled is like a werewolf unleashed. Anger is as ugly as a half man half wolf. It has a dangerous bite. And the werewolf of anger causes pain, pain, and more pain.

We are told that a werewolf passes its curse to others through the bite. When a werewolf bites someone that person also becomes a monster. Anger is no different. It usually starts with one person and then bites another. Anger is usually passed until it explodes

When a person acts out in anger and bites their spouse or a friend, one is sure to be bitten back. This is the essence of anger. It is fueled by resentment, bitterness, rudeness, jealousy, and misunderstandings. It turns our nice glances into glares and our friends into enemies. The struggle is that anger is a natural human emotion. Anger is part of the human experience. Everyone must deal with this demon. Anger can be expressed in a righteous way. Yet more times than not, anger is a monster that must be bound with chains and not allowed to break loose. Anger must be controlled or it manifests itself worse than a werewolf during a full moon. (Does this resemble someone you know?)

Our Messiah told us to “be angry and sin not.” There is way to control this emotion! Anger does not have to run wild and hurt others. The silver bullet that kills evil anger is honesty. When you begin to boil over, be honest about the situation. Be honest with yourself about how you feel. Be honest with the person that offended you. Be honest with YHWH about your struggle to walk in peace.

First, it’s important to be honest with yourself about the situation. Don’t blow up in rage. Stop and think about what really happened before jumping into a fight. Don’t let the sun go down on your anger AND don’t rush to work out your anger. When made mad, take time to think before you speak. Why are you really mad? What was done or said that offended you? Are you just being too sensitive? Is this really an issue to be angry about? Perhaps write down how you feel so that you can express your position without yelling. Would the Savior be upset about this same issue?

Be honest with the person you are angry with. Go to that person after you have calmed your emotions. Let some time pass from the second you are offended so that you won’t react in angrily. Don’t yell and raise your voice. Think about what made you mad and ask the other person about it. Listen to what is said. Don’t automatically think of how to combat the person’s point of view. “Everyone should be quick to listen. Slow to speak and should not become angry easily,” James / Ya’acov. The best way to beat anger is to talk about it.

Be honest with YHWH and ask Him for help. Anger isn’t easy to control. Just ask anyone that has been bitten with its terrible bite. Pray about this problem and confess this sin to YHWH. Memorize verses on peace and love. Step back and pray when confronted with another sticky situation. Take your focus off what angers you and put that focus on the positive aspects in your life.

Left unbridled fear and anger can turn a person’s soul from a holy place into a haunted house. Saints are the temple of the Holy Spirit, the Ruach HaKadosh. Fear and anger try to destroy the spiritual temple of the soul. Fear can be combated by being sensitive to its symptoms, identifying it, and then rejecting it. Replace false fear for devotion to YHWH. Another monster that rages is anger. Anger too can be controlled. Answer anger with honesty and reconcile differences without fighting. The issue at hand is simple. Will you allow your emotions to control you or will you control your emotions? These ghouls are real. Anger and fear haunt more people than trick-or-treaters. Don’t let your soul be haunted by these demons. Strive to make your body be a holy house, not a haunted house.

The Legal Female Concubine Experience-Where Have You Gone?

2008-11-13T15:06:00.000-08:00

When we hear the word “concubine” we really get anxious and confused, as there is so little scriptural understanding and teaching on this taboo subject.
What exactly was and is a concubine? Do they still exist? Is it scriptural? Dictionary.com defines a concubine as follows:
Concubine-A woman who cohabits with a man without being his wife; a paramour. 2. A secondary wife of inferior rank; a lawful wife, but not united to the man by the usual ceremonies [in Israel, by ketuvah or covenant] and of inferior condition. Such was Hagar, the concubine of Abraham; and such concubines were allowed by the Roman laws. Their children were not heirs of their father.
So a female concubine is either a wife with less than legal status, or a simple handmaiden, or mistress without any rights, whose children have no rights of survivorship. She can come and go for a season, as she and her husband desire and need not make any long term commitments. She can live in a different home and can come to the husband to render sexual favors in return for certain favors that she needs. As long as money does not change hands, it is kosher according to Torah. If money ever should change hands, it becomes zanuth, or prostitution, a pagan practice strictly forbidden in Torah. The specific term for a pilegesh/concubine must be worked out between the husband his wife and the pilegesh.

What about female concubines-pilegeshim today? Is concubinage still practiced, or is it an option for Bible believers today? Before we answer that, I submit to you that modern forms of prostitution, or other variants of it, are akin to the ancient practice and usage of concubines. Today prostitution and escort services (legal, or quasi legal almost everywhere, yet illegal in Torah) have greatly and sadly replaced this practice. In my view, these modern behaviors are in fact synonymous with the practice of using concubines, except according to Torah money cannot change hands.

The main difference was that concubines stayed at your home for an agreed upon time frame, becoming in theory, part of the domestic scene, with no money being exchanged, whereas prostitution applied to any person who lived out on the streets, or elsewhere and was merely a sex for money business transaction.
So from a biblical perspective, there is in fact a difference. A prostitute is rented for a night outside the home, or in the home; a female concubine, is part of the family unit, in the sense that they are part of the family structure used for sex, or other duties and no money changes hands. She renders sexual favors; he renders her other favors that she desires, in a sort of barter exchange. She can be seen as a second tier wife, with no legal authority and rights. Concubinage was and is an acceptable alternative, as concubines do not carry any of the responsibilities of a full wife, to oversee the proper functions of the Israelite home. In many eastern cultures it is still very much alive and the fact remains that all of Torah is in effect until Yahshua returns.
The Torah is very clear that concubines were sex servants, second tier wives for men only, without the same legal rights normally attributed to full marriage partners. True, some concubines were favored and later became wives (Genesis 30:4 and 9). That can also happen today.

As Nazarene Yisraelites, we simply cannot go around quoting Matthew 5: 17-19 ad-nauseum, ad-infinitum and live contra wise to what we declare. What do I mean? We all know and believe that all of Torah is eternal and that until the olam haba/age to come, or eternity arrives, NOT ONE JOT/YUD AND NOT ONE TITTLE, OR NEKUDAH/VOWEL POINT, shall pass away.
If we are going to be intellectually honest and theologically consistent, we must admit that the institution of female concubinage, is an option even today. But they are an option only for a society of Israelites that allows this option. It’s as the apostle Paul said. ‘All things that are in Torah are lawful for me, but not all things in Torah are profitable for me personally, so that I will not be brought under the power of anything other than Yahshua.‘
So while it may be kosher for you as a married man to employ the use of a female concubine, it may destroy your testimony, or walk in Yahshua in this modern world, that frowns upon such a practice. If one were to choose this option it would in my view be best suited for a closed community, or for a situation that promotes communal living, so as to remove the stigma associated with it in modernity. Or you can simply introduce her as your live in girlfriend, which the world will quickly understand and applaud.
Each believer must make his, or her own choices, with the options carefully considered, along with any fall out and subsequent consequences, knowing that every action has a corresponding reaction.
It is NOT SINFUL according to Torah for married men to practice female concubine taking, but you must be led by the Ruach HaKodesh in all such decisions, along with your wife, if you are married. A woman must consider her options as either a full wife in a monogamous, or patriarchal plural marriage, or being a concubine with diminished marital rights and responsibilities, where she barters sexual favors and can live separately if desired. She can come and go as she and her husband pleases, and in some cases, can even be financially fully self supportive and self sufficient. A pilegesh does not have to be a believer, or a Nazarene Yisraelite, although it is better if she is, as that will provide a longer term and more stable relationship. A pilegesh CANNOT be married to any other man! She has committed to being single and has made herself available to meet the sexual needs of Israelite men, all the while enjoying freedom not found in traditional relationships. She can provide a need, without the traditional commitment in a lifelong marriage covenant. For some insecure first wives, a pilegesh may be far preferable to another equal wife, with whom she is forced to share everything with all the time and who may live in her home on a full time basis. A pilegesh who comes and goes may be less of a threat to a wife who struggles with jealousy issues regarding the trials and struggles of plural marriage. Every family has to decide on their own what is best for them.

If a man is caught sleeping with another man’s pilegesh, it is the same as a man sleeping with another man’s wife and the pilegesh is committing adultery, while the man is also sinning and fornicating against YHWH (we see that in the biblical account of Reuben, who defiled his father’s bed). A husband’s pilegesh cannot be violated by another single, or married man. Also, a pilegesh cannot service more than one man, or husband at a time, as that would be viewed as polyandry at best, or perhaps outright prostitution. A pilegesh is committed to meeting the needs of only one man at a time, just like any wife, albeit without a lifelong marital covenant.
So clearly you can have a female concubine as a blood washed Israelite. But are you willing to possibly lose your children and husband, or wife over it? Are you willing to see your wife walk out never to return, because she doesn’t understand these things, or doesn’t desire to follow all of what Torah allows you as the husband? Only you and your wife can weigh the “risk-reward” factors inherent in such a decision. Proceed in this area of Torah freedom with great and calculated caution.
We must be consistent in applying Scripture. There are those who say that plural marriage is not a commandment like Shabbat, so why should it even be discussed? True; plural marriage and female concubine taking are not commandments. But then again, neither is monogamous marriage, or any kind of marriage a command. It is merely an option. And mandated celibacy is not a command. It is merely an option for those who have received that gifting.
So like all scriptural options, each option open to us as Israelites, must be treated fairly, openly and ONLY in the Light of Scripture, fully divorced from personal sentiment and individual personal likes and dislikes.

By Apostle to Yisrael Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky

On Polygyny vs. Polyandry

2008-10-11T09:41:00.000-07:00

The REAL Barack Obama Test!

2008-10-06T18:15:00.000-07:00

http://barackobamatest.com

Don't confuse the candidate with the issues!

I'm running for President!!!

2008-09-05T15:21:00.001-07:00

My fellow Americans (and friends from other countries),

I'm so fed up with the drama in the political arena!!! So, I've launched a grass-roots campaign for the presidency!!! I'm someone who will make a real CHANGE in this country! I hope to count on your support and your votes!

My campaign website is HERE!

Future President of the United States of America,

-Paul

Pride, Polygamy, and Personal Convictions

2008-07-23T16:48:00.000-07:00

Below is an e-mail that I recieved from Rabbi Rendelman's mailing list. It is well worth reading and he is someone to whom I listen daily. However, I do disagree with one or two of his points. My replies are in (italics).

Pride, Polygamy, and Personal Convictions

~ An Editorial ~

By Rabbi Dani'el Rendelman ravemet@comcast.net

of Emet Ministries www.emetministries.com

BNAI YAHSHUA SYNAGOGUE OF PROSPERITY, SC

Imagine you are drifting alone in the sea. Your boat has crashed and you are stranded with nothing but the view of ocean water for miles and miles. The waves pound your body. Sharks and other creatures surround you. You have been alone and adrift for days. Finally, out of nowhere a helicopter descends and offers you a rope to climb to safety. This helicopter is part of a worldwide rescue mission seeking people just like you. Your heart jumps at the possibility of being saved! But as the rope falls from the sky you notice the rope is tied with knots. The colors are mixed in the twine. The knots look safe but the tying isn't perfect. This is not good. It's not your choice of tying. You don't care for the colors. The helicopter isn't as large as you would like. Something looks "fishy" so instead of climbing to safety, you swing the rope away and wave off the rescue mission. You'd rather be lost at sea than rescued by an imperfect vessel. Sound ridiculous? Well, this is exactly one huge problem that plagues the Messianic movement today.

Instead of joining the worldwide rescue mission to seek and save the lost sheep of Israel many individuals choose to focus on differences of opinion. These folks choose division over unity and shame the entire faith. The issue of the day doesn't matter. Just pick any topic and the problem will arise. People have their tight-nit ideas on calendars, diets, home schooling, music, moons, and marriage. Sway from a certain belief and be labeled a "heretic" or "cult." If you don't measure up to a certain standard or hold a different doctrine then you may be considered worse than a heathen. Can't you hear the voices now?

Throughout the world, there are many agents working against the truth which we teach. Sadly, the largest battle we seem to face comes from similar 'believers' who choose to push their personal convictions onto others. A personal conviction is just that - an unique and individual area in which a person is convinced to do or not do something. These are the "grey" areas of the scriptures that the Bible leaves open for believers to make their own decision. These are not commandments or areas of sin. These issues can become sin if they are pushed on to others as binding and necessary. Woe unto the man that pridefully exalts personal convictions as truth.

If YHWH leads you to not drink water on Tuesday then you should not do so. Nor should you push that belief on to other people. Envy and strife occur when you are so convinced that yours is the best way, that you condemn others who do not agree. The longer you have had this personal belief the harder it is to allow others freedom in that area. Have you ever done this?

Today, many individuals would rather choose the path of division by exalting their personal choices upon other saints. Many Messianics become judge and jury because others do not measure up to personal standard. Have you taken one point of disagreement to offense, and forgotten about the other areas in which to agree? If so then you may be guilty of exalting your pride above the body of Messiah. The truth is that there should be very few "fellowship breakers" or issues that separate us from other like minded believers. If and when there is separation it should be over the weightier matters of Torah and not personal choices.

In view of how we seem to devour each other with emails, blogs, chat rooms, and personal networks one MUST ask, "where is the love?" It is through our "ahava" or "love" that the world should tell that we are disciples of our Master. Ahava should offer acceptance and compassion to those with different doctrines, ideas, and convictions. If we can't love and accept our brother with whom we disagree then how can we love a kadosh and holy YHWH? 1 Corinthians 13 says that "if you speak with the tongues of angels but have not love then you are a clanging cymbal." The "tongue of angels" is the Hebrew language. What this verse teaches us is that even if our faith is so perfect that we speak angelic or flawless Hebrew, if we don't have love then our religious actions are in vain.

Friend, you will never find a ministry that is 100% doctrinally correct. Nor will you ever find a person that you agree with on every issue of Torah. It takes a mature believer to accept differences and strive for unity in the body. Immature believers find one issue of disagreement to focus, discuss, debate, and divide. Sadly, the Nazarene faith is full of clanging cymbals who make a lot of noise but show little acceptance or love. Selah.

Perhaps we should call these "personal condemnations" instead of "personal convictions." Take head coverings, wearing a tallit, drinking alcohol, the correct pronunciation of the name of YHWH, or even marriage for example. There is Biblical freedom in these issues. Let's discuss marriage. According to the Bible, each person has the choice to marry or remain celibate. This is your personal choice. There are unique blessings and challenges for either decision. While the Torah specifically addresses homosexuality, sex before marriage, bestiality, and promiscuous relationships, the Torah also allows for much freedom IN marriage. We should not judge or criticize those who make their own decisions on this or any other "grey area" of Torah. My wife and I have a monogamous marriage for almost 11 years and have no plans of changing our relationship. However, we must love and accept those who may choose to have a different marriage relationship.

Having a wife or more than one wife is not a command of Torah. Nor is it sin. This is a personal choice. Sure, Scripture can be twisted to prove any point and any person wrong, but plural marriage is not forbidden in Torah. You might not agree with this or like it, BUT such personal convictions are individual choices that should be respected and accepted. Instead of being judgmental, we should love and celebrate the differences in each other. When we join to worship we should lay aside our personal convictions or opinions and support the leadership totally. There is no place for disunity in the body of Messiah. There is no place for personal attacks in the kingdom of YHWH. 1 Corinthians 13 also says that "When I was a child I acted as a child and spoke as a child. When I became a man, I put away childish things." It's time this movement grows up in the faith and puts away childish pushy personal convictions. We must mature towards love and acceptance. Please don't be like a man who was lost at sea. He drown all alone because he focused on the details of the rope rather than the rescue mission. We have a mission to rescue the lost sheep of Israel. It's time to stop focusing on personal convictions and work towards what is most important - the love of YHWH.

(

Polygamy and "underage" marriage in Texas

2008-07-19T16:33:00.000-07:00

Sometimes an issue is so important that we cannot ignore it. The following article which you may have already read on my ministry website addresses the recent illegal taking of children by the state of Texas. Since my original composition of the article, the children have finally been released, after two months of being illegally held but everyone who values the teachings of the Torah which are clearly against mob action must read this article.

Marriage & Texas Teens

"We Will Violate Their Civil Rights"

"We are not going to violate their civil rights until we have an outcry, a complaint, and I've said that from day one." Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran

Another way to read Doran's statement is this:

"After we have an outcry, a complaint: WE WILL VIOLATE THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS."

The likelihood that a child will be abused while in [Texas] foster care is greater than if they were left where they are. (Bolton, Laner, and Gai, 1981; Pryor, 1991; Spencer and Knudsen, 1992.)1
For the government to remove five hundred and thirty four American (534) citizens in Texas from their homes and put them into the care of homosexuals, fornicators, adulteresses, and worse -- teens with STDs is; well, you tell me what it is. When historians look back at the draconian measures taken against non-Muslims practicing polygamy versus the absolutely blind eye that is turned to Muslims practicing polygamy, and practicing it in nearly every neighborhood in the nation, they will wonder how ours could have ever been called a "Christian" nation.
Our streets are littered with the broken lives of teen prostitutes who may be abused one thousand times with impunity while teens who gave themselves to their one and only husband in purity are locked up. Their crime? Their husband failed to get a government consent form signed and notarized and then presented to a judge, despite the fact that their parents gave their full and complete approval for the marriage. Of course the parents gave their approval, they're part of that same community!
Before proceeding, we must address one issue which has inflamed the discussion of polygamy, so-called "underage girls" marrying fifty (50) year old men. The first cue that such phrases are spoken by stupid people is the redundancy of "underage girls." The second is that underage is a government definition and has nothing to do with biology. According to the most simple logic, a girl is a girl until her first menstruation. After her first menstruation she is biologically a woman. Furthermore, it has been a long standing legal precedent that by the age of thirteen an individual has reached the age of reason where they will be held responsible for their deliberate actions. Pull out your homeowners insurance policy and you will find a statement very similar to this. "We will not pay for injuries or damages that are caused intentionally, UNLESS, the injury or damage is caused by a child 12 years of age or younger." So we have two definitions, one of them biological and the other psychological which put the age of thirteen as the age at which a female is capable both biologically and psychologically of giving consent. The Apostle Paul says, "I will, therefore, that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully." 1Timothy 5:14 And again Paul says, "She shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. 1Timothy 2:15 Saved from what? -- saved from a life of fornication so that the adversary (Satan or anyone else who opposes righteousness) may not have any reason to attack the virtue of the young women. The Greek word translated as "younger women" is "neos" which means recently come into being, young, youthful, new and in the context of marriage Paul is speaking of women who have recently become women. Ah, so Paul himself says that women should marry shortly after their first menstrual cycle which was also in accord with the Roman requirement that upon reaching puberty every citizen must marry.2 Need I remind you that it's America's current five year gap between biologically becoming a woman and legally becoming a woman that sets in motion the pattern of fornication from which few American women ever escape? Even then, they escape only by doing what Paul instructed them to do in the first place, by marrying.

Click Below to see a PDF of a typical insurance policy.
Search for "Voluntary Payments" after you have the Insurance Policy in your browser.

http://www.ibc.ca/en/home_insurance/documents/brochures/home_insurance_explained.pdf

Another aspect of the current mob mentality concerning young women marrying fifty (50) year old men is that the public just cannot believe that a thirteen year old woman would be interested in a fifty year old man. Have they never heard of Mick Jagger, he's sixty five years old and man is he UUUGLY! Yet he still has teens swooning over him. The fact is, in the enclosed society of the FLDS, the fifty (50) year old men are the MOST attractive men to their young women. They strut their little industrial complex with a charisma that politicians would envy. Their families are large and happy. They're famous teachers in their community. They are fearless in the face of mainstream society, willing to risk prison for their beliefs. These men are not just desirable to the young women in their society, they're what our mainstream whores would call HOT! (A whore is a woman who has lost her virginity willingly without wedlock.) But here is the issue that EVERY person who claims they are a believer MUST deal with. The Scriptures define marriage. If these women were given to their husbands by their fathers as wives then they indeed are wives and anyone who encourages them to be with another man is guilty of causing them to become adulteresses for they can only be released to marry another man by their husband with his giving them a Bill of Divorcement. If you are one of the mob running to encourage them to forsake their first husband and take another man then you are an accomplice to adultery. Yahshua was very strict concerning marriage and He lived in an age where the average woman married at thirteen. At the time of Yahshua, the Roman law, referred to as the Lex Papia Poppaea,2 decreed punishments such as the loss of inheritance rights for women who remained single after having attained puberty. Yahshua never criticized that law which commanded that a woman old enough to bear children get married. Why would he? That law prevented pre-marital sex! So when Yahshua made his pronouncements on marriage those words applied to all marriages, including those with thirteen year old women. Here is what Yahshua said, "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is so divorced commits adultery." Mattithyahu 5:32 The same goes for you; if you cause a woman to be put away from her husband then you also are causing her to commit adultery. This is not a social issue. This is a theological issue and this is an issue of the right of religious groups to separate themselves from fornicators such as nearly every American reading this is!

Still another hysteria inducing fact is that the Eldorado polygamists had a room in their temple for consummating marriages. For those of you who are so brainwashed by the Roman Catholic marriage ceremonies that today's Protestants gleefully imitate, every typical marriage in the Bible involves the guardian giving the bride and the groom taking her to his tent. What in the world do you think the implication is of what happens in the tent! Duh, what in the world is marriage? Are you dense or something? Marriage involves a willing giving of the bride and a consummation of that marriage. Without the consummation it is not a marriage even according to government law. The Bridal Canopy3 is a remnant of the Bridal Tent3 which was used by Yisra'elites in times past. This Bridal Canopy3 is used in Jewish marriage ceremonies till this day. If you're going to attack the Eldorado group for having what amounts to a Bridal Tent3 then just remember that your attack is anti-Semitic in its roots!

For those of you who think that the anti-polygamy hysteria is some new thing, please note that anti-polygamy laws have their roots in anti-Semitism and the two Semite groups that have been the brunt of this bigotry are the descendants of Avraham -- Ya'akov (the Jews), and Ishmael (today's Muslims). Both have a long record of regulated polygamy and both have been the butt of bigoted jokes and worse. It is hate, and hate alone that fuels this group think against polygamy. One thousand years ago Rabbenu Gershom declared that polygamy would be forbidden to Jews in Christian nations. Why did he do this? Well you guess. We see among us five hundred and thirty four American citizens ripped from their homes because of anti-polygamy hatred. If it were not hate that drives this anti-polygamy hysteria then the subject could be discussed openly and without bigoted jokes, accusations, and outright lies.
To understand the hatred, let me give you an example. Let's say that you and your family chose to live in a neighborhood of five hundred plus like minded believers and you were all practicing monogamists. Let's say that there was one sixteen year old teenager among you who called the police and said that one of the people in the neighborhood had sex with her after a private marriage ceremony when she was fifteen years old and that her parents knew about it and had approved of it but that they had not obtained a judge's waiver for their daughter to get married at that age. Do you think it would be fair for the government to come into your neighborhood and arrest (that's what it is no matter what else you claim) to arrest, more than five hundred of your neighbors, fellow Americans, yes, AMERICAN citizens, in the largest group arrest in the country in years? Do you think it would be right to take the children of your neighbors who had nothing to do with the fifteen year old's marriage and place those children, all virgins, among some of the most notorious teens of the country? It is a fact that many of the teens in foster care have been placed there because of their own delinquency. Is it right for virgins who have never left their household to be placed among such teens? I have cried over this. If you haven't, may YHVH have mercy on your soul. If you say, "but they were taken out of the homes of polygamists," that's exactly my point. Your hatred for polygamists is so great that you think it's perfectly O.K. to rip people out of their homes, for what? For being polygamists just like so many Tanakh saints as well as many in the New Testament? Don't you realize that many of Paul's contemporaries were polygamist Jews? If that was not the case then why would Paul have exempted men who were not the "husband of one wife" from the thankless job of Elder, Bishop, and Deacon? He exempted the polygamists because they were being fruitful and multiplying in compliance with YHVH's command and fulfilling that duty was enough to exempt them from unwanted tasks that were to be assigned by Timothy and the other apostles. If the selection was to be only those who were "husbands of one wife" then surely there were enough men with more than one wife that Paul thought it necessary to make such an exemption from troublesome lower offices within the church. Yes, Elder, Bishop, and Deacon were not high offices or they would have been called of Elohim, not appointed by man.

Click below to read my article entitled: "The Key to Understanding The Husband of One Wife."

http://www.christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=50

Now, back to Texas. Isn't it Texas where the governor assumes that teen girls are so promiscuous that he wants to force them to take anti-std immunizations? So the government bans teen marriage, a Kadosh outlet for young women who choose marriage, yet the government not only permits but encourages them to fornicate? Not only does the government encourage their fornicating but they make it legal for them to fornicate with boys who have no ability to support them but make it illegal for stable bread winners to court them and marry them, even when the parents and the girls have given their consent as part of their system of stated community values. What? This has got to be the craziest system man has ever invented; to reward women who have sex with the boys who are least able to support them and penalize those who choose to marry men! The quite probably non-existent girl who started the Eldorado hysteria is quoted as saying, "Church members told her that if she leaves the ranch, outsiders will ... force her to cut her hair, (TRUE) to wear make up (TRUE) and [different] clothes (TRUE) and to have sex with lots of men. (TRUE)" What is it that is not true about the alleged victim's statement concerning American culture and the environment of foster care today? Everything that this probably non-existent victim was told about the outside world was true. Who is the abuser in this situation? The fact is that American women think it is better to have sex with lots of men before settling on one. Don't you tell me anything different, you fake! Were you a virgin on your wedding night? Look at the actual behavior of people if you want to understand a culture, don't look at what the people in a culture say. We call that baloney. They're full of baloney, spelled BS. Any anthropologist with training knows this. You can go into a country where they say cannibalism is evil but if they're eating their neighbor's liver, don't believe them! When Americans say they believe in waiting till marriage for their first sex, don't believe them. Over ninety percent of Americans have pre-marital sex.4 Face it, we live in a country that says one thing about sex and does another. Forty-five percent of the country says fornication is evil but they fornicate anyway and forty-five percent of the country says fornication is good and they practice what they preach, at least concerning fornication. Now we find America in a situation where its filthy fornicators find a culture within theirs that says and does what it preaches and the fornicators send in armed government officials to arrest and detain five hundred and thirty four fellow American citizens in the most blatant violation of civil rights this country has seen in over fifty years. The pundits are afraid to discuss the issue in a clear and rational way because of the irrational hysteria generated in America by the mere mention of polygamy. Cowards! America's taboo against polygamy has few rivals in the modern world. Americans are willing to suspend the constitution when it comes to polygamists but wait, it's white polygamists who are really the focus of their hatred. "They got our white women in there! They better let lose of 'em or we'll string em up? What white man would do such a thing as have more than one wife! It's plain uncivilized." I can hear them now, their mouths frothing as they hold up their pitch forks... oh yes, it's 9mm weapons they use today. As for the five hundred and thirty- four innocent American citizen detainees in Texas, they remain jailed. What else do you call it when you are held against your own will?
To quote a man who I was personally introduced to as a paid staffer on his campaign in 1980; "Government isn't the solution to our problem, government is the problem." Nearly every blessed mother in the Scriptures was a teen bride, usually married within a year or two of her first menstruation. Throughout history the average age of a princess has been between thirteen and eighteen and the same has been true for the common man. Men who break the law when they could have simply gotten a government license to marry their young bride are foolish but they are not brutes. Teen marriage license infractions, for that is all the Texas case concerns, are now being used to prosecute polygamists since prosecutors know that the next polygamy prosecution will be struck down by the Supreme Court. According to Texas law the only thing that stands between a woman under the age of sixteen (16) and her man receiving a marriage license is a court order. Take a look at the statute for yourselves.

Click below to review Texas Marriage License Requirements

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FA/content/htm/fa.001.00.000002.00.htm#2.001.00

It is of note that only after the FLDS moved to Eldorado, were Texas marriage laws changed to discriminate against them, raising the age without a court order to marry from fourteen to sixteen. Prior to the 2005 law being passed a woman age fourteen or older could marry simply by producing a properly executed parental consent form. No court order was required. The requirement of a court order was passed by the Texas legislature for the specific purpose of discriminating against the FLDS so that such court orders could be issued for marriage license requests made by any citizens of Texas EXCEPT unless that citizen were a member of the FLDS.
If men who marry teen brides are brutes then so was President James Monroe who married his seventeen year old bride, Elizabeth Kortright as well as President Andrew Johnson who married his then sixteen or seventeen year old bride, Elizabeth McCardle. Neither did Monroe nor Johnson lift so much as one finger to get a license for their marriages. In fact, the marriage dates of the Presidents before the mid-eighteen hundreds are hard to determine since marriage licenses were not required in most localities. The declaration of the man and woman that they were husband and wife was deemed sufficient. Many states still give an exemption to marriage license requirements to Quakers. If men who marry cousins are brutes then Democrat President Martin Van Buren must also be a brute for he married his first cousin, Hannah Hoes. First cousin marriage which is a marriage that is permitted by the Torah is also the butt of anti-Semitic jokes. If men who marry women who are much younger than they are then President John Tyler must also be a brute for he married the beautiful, Julia Gardiner, who was thirty years younger than he was. Likewise, Grover Cleveland, at the age of forty nine, married Frances Folsom who was just twenty-two years old. June/December marriages are also a favorite topic of jokes by bigots who want to put their noses into the business of other peoples' marriages. This bigotry usually contains slanders against those who might marry their cousins like Ya'akov did, or who might marry a woman much younger, like Ya'akov did, or who might marry a woman who was under the age of eighteen, like Ya'akov did. The fact is, such marriages tend only to come to the attention of the public when they are done by polygamists or when they are done by members of religious groups that condemn fornication and homosexuality. The public considers it vulgar when a monogamist marries his cousin, a teen, or someone much younger but the public considers it evil when a polygamist or religious fanatic does the same.
Must I bring up the fact that it was King David, the polygamist, who still had enough time with all his wives to write the beautiful Tehillim (Psalms). Do you forget that Shlomo HaMelech (King Solomon) still had time to write the kadosh and perfect Proverbs and the Song of Songs? Yes, it is a fact that the most poetic and beautiful love poem in the Scriptures were written by Solomon, the world's most famous polygamist. Furthermore, this King Solomon, wrote Ecclesiastes which was taken by a Sixties band for its melodic words -"To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time for every purpose under heaven." Well, it is the season to start recognizing that in a marriage, a man is joined to each of his wives by YHVH, not by man. This is what many of our presidents recognized. Those of you who do not trust YHVH to join you in marriage need our prayers. I don't expect my fellow Americans to agree with me. My fellow Americans refuse to hang the pornographers from the lamp posts along side the CEOs of the major hotel chains in America who pipe in pornography to their hotel rooms. Americans would prefer that one polygamist be sent to prison than one hundred million fornicators be told that sex outside of marriage is a sin but let me put you on notice. The El of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Ya'akov, yes, Yahshua Himself, is going to judge you and that day is not far away and He will punish you. Repent. He will punish you for forbidding what the Torah permits and for causing grief and suffering with your backwards and primitive, yes primitive and barbaric laws. For you reward young women with your welfare state who have sex with boys that cannot support them and you punish the wise virgins who choose marriage with an older stable man.
1 Timothy 4:3 1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which Yah hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

[1] The Welfare of Children by Duncan Lindsay - Published 2003

[2] Lex Papia Poppaea, A.D. 9, sometimes known as Jus Trium Liberorum granted special privileges to men with many children and punished celibacy by limiting the rights of single men. This can account for Paul's discussions on celibacy which should not be taken as encouraging celibacy but as defending the right of a man or woman to voluntarily choose marriage instead of feeling compelled to marry by government decree. The Lex Papia Poppaea decreed punishments such as the loss of inheritance rights for those who remained single after having attained puberty up to the age of fifty for women and sixty for men. A man or woman was given one hundred days to get married upon finding out they were the beneficiary of an inheritance or forfeit the inheritance. There are many more interesting details of this Roman law which I'll address in another article.

[3] Bridal Tent - "They pitched the tent, the bridal tent, of the Semites, which has survived in the canopy of the Jewish wedding ceremony to our own day." The International Critical Commentary - A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Books of Samuel by Henry Preserved Smith - Professor of Biblical History and Interpretation in Amherst College Published in 1902

[4] Trends in Premarital Sex in the United States, 1954–2003 Lawrence B. Finer, PhD

Note: Copyright 2008 - Don Milton - All Rights Reserved

Torah or not Torah Regarding Polygyny?

2008-07-18T15:36:00.000-07:00

By Chris Schaefer © 2008
Recently, polygamy has been in the spotlight with the illegal governmental raid
on the FLDS compound, and with the HBO series Big Love. Several Messianic
groups have come out with positions against the practice of polygamy. And so
this brings the following questions. What is the right position to take on this
issue? How should Natzarim Yisraelites view this topic? Perhaps this is heart of
the matter: Does any writer of scripture have any authority to override Torah?
More specifically, does Rav Shaul have any power to override Torah? Did Rav
Shaul even have any intention to override Torah? Let’s take a look at what
Scripture says. (Unless otherwise notified, all Scripture quotes are from
abridged 3rd Ed. RSTNE including notes; but all emphasis are mine).
Ivrim/Hebrews 7:12, 18
12 For the priesthood being transferred, there is made of
necessity an adjustment also in the Torah.

The Torah was not done away with, but adjusted, or
slightly altered, to accommodate a better, more
complete priesthood and sacrifice. Strong’s Greek
3346 metatithaymee means “moved from one place to
another, not eliminated.” So the priesthood was
shifted, not eliminated. Shifted from Aaron to Melech‐
Tzadik and from Leviticus to Genesis, still within the
Torah itself.
So here it sounds like everything in the Torah is still standing, including the
priesthood, shifted to its fullness.
18 For there is truly a setting‐aside of the former
command, because of its weakness and
unprofitableness.

Not a setting‐aside of the entire Torah, but only the
transfer of the priesthood from one tribe to another,
and of the forsaking of the old priestly order to
establish the new. This is not a replacement of Torah
by the Renewed Covenant, rather, one priesthood is
established instead of the other by transfer within the
nation of Yisrael itself.
It is unmistakable. The correct method is to assume that Rav Shaul is upholding
Torah rather than overriding Torah—a protocol that we should all agree on.
In the following passages, this general pattern will unfold: Rav Shaul does not
override any of Torah, but is in complete agreement with it—this can be clearly
seen with “controversial” issues such as Shabbat, kashrut, brit milah
(controversial as in when it’s the “church” vs. Natzarim Yisrael)
Romiyah/Romans 14:5‐112
5 One man esteems one day above another: another
esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully
persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regards the day of eating, regards it to YHWH; and
he that regards not the day, to YHWH he does not regard it.
He that eats, eats to YHWH, for he gives thanks; and he that
eats not, before YHWH he eats not, and neither gives YHWH
thanks.
7 For no Yisraelite man lives for himself, and no Yisraelite
man dies for himself.
8 For whether we live, we live for YHWH; and whether we
die, we die for YHWH: whether we live, or whether we die,
we belong to and for YHWH.
9 For this purpose Moshiach both died, and rose, and was
revived, so that He might be the Master YHWH both of the
dead and the living.
10 But why do you judge your Yisraelite brother? Or,
why do you despise your Yisraelite brother over these
secondary issues? For we shall all stand before the judgment
seat of our Moshiach.
11 For it is written, As I live, says the Master YHWH, every
knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to
the Master YHWH.
12 So then each one of us shall give an account of himself
to YHWH.

The word “eat” is used six times in these verses. The
issue obviously is food. Some eat meat, some don’t
and the same goes for vegetables. Some eat meat on
Thursday some eat meat only on Monday. Some fast
every morning, some fast only one morning a week.
We are not to make issues out of things that YHWH
says are gray areas, such as what days we fast, or eat
certain clean foods. In a case of a gray area, do not
criticize a new brother, or a weak brother, in the ways
of Yisrael. This applies only to gray areas that remain
unaddressed by detail in Scripture. Therefore verse 5
does not talk about Shabbat at all, or “pick your own
Shabbat,” or your own favorite day for your own
worship, simply because first the topic is eating
habits, and secondly because Shabbat is not a gray
area. The Spirit would never tell mankind to pick their
own day in direct violation of His word.
The whole thrust is that Rav Shaul couldn’t possibly be suggesting the undoing
of Shabbat, for that would be in violation of Torah. If the Torah states what
should be done for a given situation, there is no valid discrepancy.
Romiyah/Romans 14:23
23 And he that doubts and eats violates his own faith,
because he eats not with faith: for whatever is not of
faith is sin.
Meaning we better get our Yisraelite values from a full
trust in Torah and the faith of Messiah, and not man, or
man’s emotions, or dogmas.
Remember the above note emphasis for later.
Galutyah/Galatians 5:6
6 For in YAHUSHUA ha Moshiach neither brit milah is
anything, nor akrobustia; but faith which works by
love.
2 This holds true eternally. First, that circumcision is
an act of love to seal one’s faith, not to establish it,
and neither the Jews, the circumcised, nor the
akrobustia the “tossed‐away foreskinned ones” have
any ranking, or special standing over the other. Neither
house of Yisrael should see circumcision, or lack
thereof as a means of a spiritual rank over and above
the other, but as something that the individual in
YHWH’s decent order must do on his own.
Circumcision avails nothing in the sense that if
abused, it establishes one part of Yisrael as master
and the other as slaves. So it avails nothing in terms of
restoring equality in Yisra'el, yet it is a mandate to the
individual in his personal walk with YHWH. Messiah
came to free both houses, and establish equality, not a
new system of “works of law,” or ranking, based on an
immediate response to mandated corporate physical
circumcision, rather than personal physical
circumcision.
The above notes agree with the whole text, that the practice of circumcision in
Torah still stands. Notice that no fear whatsoever is expressed regarding those
who might disagree with the note. Good. That is the kind of courage needed
when standing up for the truth.
Galutyah/Galatians 6:12
12 Those who desire to make a nice show of your flesh,
they compel you to be circumcised; in order to avoid
suffering persecution for the execution stake of
Moshiach.

Preaching circumcision without Messiah, or as a
precondition for Messiah's acceptance of the
individual, is all about parading foreskins in a numbers
game, or show, even as modern‐day denominations fill
out commitment cards of those who profess a desire
for baptism, to make a nice show of big numbers.
Sadly, many among them have not had a regeneration
experience. Efrayim uses “decision cards, while Judah
uses “circumcision clubs.” Same wrong motive and
same wrong reasoning. Circumcision is required only
after true salvation and maturity.
The above notes make it clear that Rav Shaul is not negating Torah’s
instruction of circumcision, but rather showing where it is supposed to be in
YHWH’s order of things.

Qorintyah Aleph / 1st Corinthians 11:5
5 But every woman that makes prayers, or prophesies with
her head uncovered dishonors her head: for that is the
same as if she were shaven.

Qorintyah Aleph / 1st Corinthians 11:10
10 For this cause ought the woman to have a symbol of
authority on her head because of the unclean fallen demons.

This is a clear reference back to Genesis 6 where
women who were not under a spiritual authority, or
covering like the one provided for them by Noach, were
molested and had demons that cohabitated with them.
Due to the reality of unclean demons desiring to
physically violate and emotionally scar women
through vaginal entry, women are strongly urged to do
what is proper and not make this a contentious issue
like some who feel this is not important.
Torah is acknowledged as forever standing! So basically throughout all of
Scripture, it is made unmistakably clear that the Torah for the First Covenant is
the same Torah for the Renewed Covenant (with the one exception that the
Levitical priesthood has restored to the Melechtzadikian priesthood of
Yahushua.) I could show more examples from Scripture regarding Moedim,
niddah laws, kashrut laws, etc. But other writers have taken care of that in
depth, so there’s no need to re‐do the same thing that they’ve done. The
general (and correct idea) is: everything is in effect, except that it’s now under
the Melechtzadikian Priesthood of Moshiach.
Mattityahu/Matthew 22:40
40 On these two commandments hang all the Torah and the prophets.

Torah can’t be “done away with,” indeed, Yahushua
says the Torah and the prophets hang on these two big
ones. That is, these two big ones expand into the
details, which are contained in the Torah and the
prophets. They don’t replace the 613 laws, they are the
foundation of those laws.
Again, notice the emphasis. The 613 laws are not replaced, but are
undergirded by the 2 big summarizing ones.
Now, let’s take a look at some laws that Rav Shaul supposedly over‐rode.

Shemoth/Exodus 22:16‐17
16 “And if a man entices a virgin that is not engaged, and
lies with her, he shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his
wife.
17 If her abba utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall
pay money according to the dowry of virgins.”
Devarim/Deuteronomy 22:28‐29
28 If a man finds a damsel that is a virgin, who is not
engaged, and lays hold of her, and lies with her, and they
are found;
29 Then the man that lay with her shall give to the
damsel's abba fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his
wife; because he has humbled her, he may not put her
away all his days.
Qorintyah Aleph/ First Corintians 7:36
36 But if any man thinks that he behaves himself
improperly toward his maiden, if she is past the marriage
age, and his need requires marriage, let him do what he
desires, he sins not: let them marry.

Notice the resemblance of the three passages? Rav Shaul is pretty much
reiterating the content of two Torah passages, except with a pre‐emptive
strategy (to stop fornication before it even starts). So to either remedy
fornication or avoid fornication, the requirement is to marry (if the damsel’s
father is willing)—absolutely nothing at all is said about whether the man was
already married or unmarried!

What about requirements?

Devarim/Deuteronomy 25:5‐10
5 If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies, and has
no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry a ger: her
husband's brother shall go in to her, and take her to
himself as a wife, and perform the duty of a husband's
brother to her.
6 And it shall be, that the firstborn whom she bears shall
succeed in the name of his brother that is dead, that his
name be not put out of Yisrael.
7 And if the man does not like to take his brother's wife,
then let his brother's wife go up to the gate to the
elders of Yisrael, and say, My husband's brother refuses to raise
up to his brother a name in Yisrael, he will not perform
the duty of my husband's brother.
8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak
to him: and if he persists, and says, I desire not to take
her;
9 Then shall his brother's wife come to him in the
presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his
foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So
shall it be done to that man that will not build up his
brother's house.
9
10 And his name shall be called in Yisrael, The house of
him that has his shoe loosed.
9 A warning to those who refuse to work with Messiah
to gather and restore all the brethren from both houses
of Yisrael and refuse to build their brother’s house.
Before jumping to the remez (hint) of the above passage, let’s look at the
pashat (plain teaching). The plain and direct message is a warning to male
Yisraelites who refuse to perform their potentially polygamist marriage duty
within the commonwealth of Yisra'el. Just maybe, might this be one of the 613
laws that still stand? Why would anyone skip over this?
Shemoth/Exodus 21:10‐11
10 If he takes himself another wife; her food, her
garment, and her marital rights, shall he not diminish.
11 And if he does not these three to her, then shall she go
out free without money.
It does not sound here like it is to her advantage to complain. Being a divorced
woman in that day and time, without money, was not a good situation to be in.
(See Malachi 2:14‐15 a couple of paragraphs down.)
Consider what is not spoken against here:
Devarim/Deuteronomy 21:15‐17
15 If a man has two wives, one beloved, and another
hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved
and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was
hated:
16 Then it shall be, when he makes his sons to inherit that
which he has, that he may not give preference to the son
of the beloved wife before the son of the hated, who is
indeed the firstborn :
17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated as the
firstborn , by giving him a double portion of all that he has:
for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the
firstborn is his.
Polygyny itself is not being spoken against in any way. In the above two
passages it is clear that Torah is legislating how things ought to be run in
polygynous households. As for “hated,” I personally think it means: in
comparison to the one that is loved [a lot]. But what is certain is that the firstborn
blessing is reserved for the firstborn and is not negated by polygyny. Yet
the polygyny is upheld through and through. Torah here is telling us the
righteous procedures and protocol for polygyny.
Some in Christiandom try to equate the following passage with polygyny:
Malachi 2:14‐15
14 Yet you say, Why? Because YHWH has been a witness
between you and the wife of your youth, against whom
you have dealt treacherously: yet she is your companion,
and the wife of your brit.
15 And did not He make them echad [compoundly unified]?
And the rest of the ruachim are His also.
And why echad? That he might seek a seed from Elohim.
Therefore take heed to your ruach, and let none deal treacherously
with the wife of his youth.

Rampant divorce in both houses of Yisrael was
another reason for our exile.
If polygyny were a widespread “problem” in Yisra'el, you’d think that YHWH
would have said something directly against it. “Wife of your covenant” gives
us a clue that it was the dissolution of the marriage covenant through divorce
for any and every reason that it was called treachery. Taking on an additional
believing wife is never considered a violation of any marriage covenant. The
notes also acknowledge the problem was rampant divorce, not polygyny. A
woman without a husband in biblical times was in a very treacherous position
indeed economically and socially. Polygyny never put a woman in a
treacherous social and economic position in Biblical times, if Torah was
followed.

So, what about leadership requirements?
***Bamidbar/Numbers 12:1‐8
And Miryam and Aharon spoke against Moshe
because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for
he had married an Ethiopian woman.
2 And they said, Has YHWH indeed spoken only by Moshe?
Has He not spoken also by us? And YHWH heard it.
3 Now the man Moshe was very meek, above all the men
that were upon the face of the earth.
4 And YHWH spoke suddenly to Moshe, and to Aharon, and
to Miryam, “Come out you three to the Tabernacle of the
congregation.” And those three came out.
5 And YHWH came down in the pillar of the cloud, and
stood in the door of the Tabernacle, and called Aharon
and Miryam: and they both came out.
6 And He said, “Hear now My words: If there be a prophet
among you, I YHWH will make Myself known to him in a
vision, and will speak to him in a dream.
7 My servant Moshe is not so, who is faithful in all My house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even plainly, and
not in dark speeches; and the form of YHWH shall he see:
why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant
Moshe?”

First note how YHWH defends His true leaders. If you
speak evil of any truly called (not perfect) leader, you
are literally doomed without repentance. Also note that
the reason Moses’s relationship with YHWH was above
that of the other Yisraelite leaders was due to the fact
that he saw YHWH’s form. Since the Father has no
form, we know of a certainty that he saw Yahshua the
Son of YHWH, who was and remains the manifest form
of YHWH.
First, remember that Moshe wrote the above passage in Bamidbar/Numbers.
Earlier in Shemoth/Exodus, he referred to his (first?) wife as “Tzipporah” who
was a unmistakably a Shemite (Beresheeth 10:6, 10:22,11:10‐26, 25:1‐2;
Yahshar 72:37, 73:31‐36,76:4‐6, 76:13‐23,77:27‐51). Now, he is clearly making
a distinction between Tzipporah and the Ethiopian woman (a Kushite by
definition). Also, he is making it painfully obvious that the gripe of Aharon and
Miriam was his recent additional marriage to the Ethiopian (Kushite) woman.
Aharon and Miriam were trying to use Moshe’s polygyny as a way to invalidate
Moshe’s leadership. Isn’t it clear? They were scorning Moshe’s leadership on
ground that he had married an additional non‐Shemite woman! See the
remez? Yahuweh is using Moshe’s polygyny to illustrate and validate the two
house truth! Obviously, YHWH did not view polygyny as a disqualification for
leaders! In fact, Moshe’s domestic arrangement was a living illustration of this
passage:
Shemoth/Exodus 12:49
49 One Torah shall be for him that is native, and for the
ger that sojourns among you.

This truth is what makes being Yisrael so special. All
believers receive the same blessings of doing the
same Torah.
So what grounds does Rav Shaul have to allegedly disqualify leaders on the
grounds of polygyny?
Maaseh Shlichim / Acts 7:37‐39
37 This is that Moshe, who said to the children of Yisrael,
A Prophet shall the Master YHWH your Elohim raise up to you
from your Yisraelite brothers, like me; to Him shall you listen.
38 This is he, that was in the eidta‐ekklesia‐congregation
of Yisrael in the wilderness with the Malach‐YHWH
who spoke to him on Har Senai, and with our fathers: who
received the living words3 to give to us:
39 To whom our fathers would not obey, but threw him
from them, and in their hearts turned back again into
Mitzrayim,
Apparently Stephen also believed that the Torah was
still in effect after Yahushua came, since he calls the
Torah’s teachings “ongoing,” or “living words.”
Noteworthy is the fact that in v. 37, the comparison is made between
Yahushua and Moshe! Moshe had a Shemite wife and a Kushite wife***.
Yahushua has Yahudah and Ephraim!
But yet…
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 3:12
12 Let the local elders be the husbands of one wife,
overseeing their children and their own houses well.
Does Rav Shaul have the authority and desire to override Torah and besmirch
the character of Moshe? Well, the “church” certainly thinks so regarding
Shabbat, the Moedim, head coverings, brit milah, etc. Is Rav Shaul a
“muhammed?” May it never be so! If one wanted to read the passage very
woodenly, one could also conclude that the requirement for leadership would
be polyandry since it says “husbands of one wife!” Read a little further to
clarify Rav Shaul’s intention:
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 5:9
9 Let not a widow be enrolled for community support
under sixty years old, having been the wife of just one
man,
See, Rav Shaul clearly means that a widow of 60 yrs or older must have been
married to at least one husband in her lifetime—otherwise a woman who
outlived 2 husbands would be denied care—which would certainly not be Rav
Shaul’s intent. It would be absolutely ridiculous to conclude Rav Shaul was
sanctioning polyandry. The reasons that would not make sense are: first, the
text was talking about a widow who had deceased husband(s), and secondly,
because polyandry was never allowed to be practiced in the common wealth
of Yisrael. Another ludicrous interpretation would be that if a 60 yr old widow
was a co‐widow (meaning that she and another woman were simultaneously
widows of the same dead husband) that she would not be eligible for
community support. On the contrary, whether or not she has a co‐wife, she
was still the wife of one husband when he was living, so was her co‐wife—
therefore they are both eligible for support!
Yochanan/John 4:17‐18
17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband.
YAHUSHUA said to her, “You have well said, I have no husband:
18 For you have had five husbands; and the one whom
you now have is not your husband: what you have said
is truth.”
The most likely case scenario is that Yahushua was referring to some other
man she was living with (or having an affair with or doing prostitution business
with) who was not her husband. From the context it is obvious that she was
living in some kind of sexual sin. As we later see from what she says in verse
29:
29 Come, see a Man, who told me all things that I ever did: is not this the
Moshiach?”
Another plausible situation that would warrant communal support is when a
woman could be widowed more than once through no guilt of her own.
Yochanan Moshe / Mark12:19‐22
19 Rabbi, Moshe Rabainu wrote to us, If a man’s brother
dies, and leaves his wife behind him, and leaves no
children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise
up seed for his brother.
20 Now there were seven brothers: and the first took a
wife, and dying left no seed.
21 And the second took her, and died, neither left her any
seed: and the third likewise.
22 And the seven all had her, and left no seed: last of all
the woman died also.
And Yahushua never says that the above scenario is implausible. Also
Yahushua does not negate the living brother’s Torah obligation to take the
widow as a wife whether or not he already has a wife! Remember, not one
yud or nekudah will pass away! Rav Shaul certainly had no authority, nor
intention to override the obligation that Yahushua upheld!

How was provision handled in the case of a widow who was in the ancestry
leading up to the surrogate birth of the Moshiach?
Bereshith/Genesis 38:6‐11,26
6 And Yahudah took a wife for Er his firstborn , whose
name was Tamar.
7 And Er, Yahudah's firstborn , was wicked in the sight of
YHWH; and YHWH killed him.
8 And Yahudah said to Onan, Go in to your brother's
wife, and marry her, and raise up seed for your brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it
came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that
he spilled it on the ground, lest he should give seed to his
brother.
10 And the thing that he did displeased YHWH: So He killed
him also.
11 Then said Yahudah to Tamar his daughter in law,
“Remain a widow at your abba’s house, until Shelach my
son is grown”: for he said, “Lest suppose he die also, as his
brothers did.” And Tamar went and dwelt in her abba’s
house…
26 And Yahudah acknowledged them, and said, She has
been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to
Shelach my son. And he knew her again no more.
Somebody then had to provide for her and her twins. Yahudah did—after all
he was the biological dad of the boys. Certainly she wasn’t thrown out into the
street just because she had been the wife of more than one husband.
So now go back to Timtheous Aleph 5:9. If it is read as woodenly as 1
Timtheous 3:12 usually is by some theologians, then it means that if a 60yr old
or older widow has lost more than one husband to death, then she should be
disqualified from care. That would seem contradict the rest of scripture, and
Yahuweh’s compassionate character. So if 5:9 really means that the widow
had to have actually been married at least once (as opposed to shacking up) in
order to qualify for care, then it would also make sense that Timtheous 3:12
means that the local elder has to have been married to at least one wife at
least once in his lifetime— but it certainly doesn’t disqualify him on the
grounds of polygamous marriage.

Let’s take a look at Teitus/ Titus 1:6 If anyone is blameless, the husband of one
wife, having believing children not accused of loose living, or of being unruly.
So now Rav Shaul contradicts himself and Torah? No. It is clear that just as
before, the text means that the local elder has to be the husband of a wife or
at least one wife and apparently not the husband solely of a concubine (like
was “St” Augstine!). It could also be read that at least one of the leader’s
wives (if he has more than one) must have believing children. Are we now
going to follow the lead of Miriam and Aharon by speaking against brother
leaders who have more than one wife and forbid them from leading? May it
never be so!
So, what does Rav Shaul speak against?
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 4:1‐3
1 Now the Ruach speaks expressly, that in the last
days some shall depart from the faith, giving
heed to seducing spirits, and teachings of demons;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience
branded with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from
foods, which YHWH has created to be received with thanksgiving
by those who believe and know the truth.
A teaching that is from demons and seducing ruachim is the forbidding of
marriage period (which includes both monogamy and polygyny). The only two
forms of marriage that the Torah legislates for and recognizes are both
heterosexual monogamy and heterosexual polygyny. (So let’s not waste any
time trying to falsely equate real Biblical marriage with so‐called “homosexual
marriages”) Those who forbid polygyny are in fact furthering the teachings of
demons and seducing spirits!

How does Yahushua portray Himself?
Mattityahu/Matthew 25:1‐10
1“Then shall the kingdom of Heaven be likened to
ten virgins who took their lamps, and went forth to
meet the Bridegroom and the bride.
2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil
with them:
4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 While the Bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and
slept.
6 And at midnight there was a cry made, See, the
Bridegroom comes; go out to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said to the wise, Give us from your oil;
for our lamps have gone out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there not be
enough for you and us: instead go to them that sell, and
buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went to buy, the Bridegroom came; and
they that were ready went in with him to the marriage:
and the door was shut.”
Ten: representing ten returning tribes of Efrayim,
who hear and accept the latter‐day revelation of the
regathering.
Peshitta. Efrayim is called to meet Messiah and the
true Torah keeping bride, but not all Efrayim responds.
If one reads footnote 13 with the assumption that the ten tribes are only
guests or “bridesmaids”, who then does that leave to be the bride? Yehudah
and Benyamin only? And even they are two. (Because of that I would question
footnote 13’s representation of the 10 tribes, because then one would have to
conclude that only 5 comprise the bride(s) of Moshiach.) Any anti‐polygynist
read of Yahushua’s parable will contradict the two‐house teaching, not to
mention the whole thrust of the book of Maasah Shlichim / Acts!
Another question is: virgins—for what purpose? Some theologians try to say
that the 10 virgins are bridesmaids. Bridesmaids smack of western non‐
Hebraic tradition. Since when does an authentic Hebrew wedding in the time
of Yahushua have “bridesmaids?” Since when does a wedding guest have to
be a virgin?
It only makes sense if the virgins are the brides or a collective bride. The
guests at the wedding only have to be clothed in wedding garments; they don’t
have to be virgins, and they don’t have to have lamps ready. The virgins are
the ones waiting for their bride. We, the bride/brides, are waiting for
Yahushua. He obviously referred to Nazarim Yisrael in both singular and plural
because he wants us to be echad.
Here is the literal word order from the Aramaic Peshitta:
Then, let be likened the Kingdom of Heaven to ten virgins who took their
lamps and went out for the meeting of the bridegroom and the bride.
Five now of them wise were and five foolish and those foolish [virgins]
took their lamps, but not did take with them oil, those but wise [virgins]
took oil in vessels with their lamps. When delayed now the bridegroom,
they slumbered all of them and slept. And in the middle of the night
there was an outcry: “behold the bridegroom comes, go out for his
meeting!” Then arose all virgins those and prepared their lamps, were
saying and those foolish [virgins] to the wise “give us of your oil, for
behold have gone out our lamps.” Answered these wise [virgins] and
said, “Why, not there is enough for us and for you, rather go to those
who sell and buy for yourselves.” And while they went to buy, came the
bridegroom, and those who ready were, entered with him into the
banquet‐hall, and was locked the door.
Below is the Paul Younan translation from the Aramaic:
“Then let the Kingdom of Heaven be likened to those ten virgins who
took their lamps and went out for the meeting of the bride and the
bridegroom.”
So it is entirely plausible that it means that the 10 virgins went out
performing the custom of when the bridegroom meets the bride where each
one of them prospectively are the bride(s)!
Du Tillet Mattityahu and Munster Hebrew Mattityahu don’t even have “and
the bride” where as Aramaic has “and the bride.” Either way it does not
exlude the 10 virgins from being brides.
If Yahushua’s Abba compared Himself to a metaphorical polygynist in
Yermiyahu 3 and Yehezqel 23, why wouldn’t Yahushua do likewise?
For what it’s worth, the Greek translation of the Mattithyahu passage has
wedding celebrations in the accusative plural! So even the Greek speaking
translators knew to not mess with the polygynist illustration of Moshiach!

Consider this passage:
Yeshayahu/Isaiah 4:1‐2
1 “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one
man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our
own apparel: only let us be called by your name, to take
away our reproach.
2 In that day shall the Branch of YHWH be beautiful and
full of tifereth, and the fruit of the land shall be excellent
and comely for those that are escaped of Yisrael.”
Age to come.
Yahushua.
The Messianic redemption always speaks of only the
surviving two‐house remnant, but never the whole
nation as Dual Covenant theology wrongly teaches.
OK, just for the sake of argument let’s pretend there is no pashat (plain
teaching), but that the passage exists as drash (allegory) only. Well, it still
sounds to me that there are still 7 allegorical “women” who are requesting
marriage to the Messiah. And in the following verse it seems to confirm that
they were indeed wed (although not necessarily with their requested terms of
providing their own bread and apparel). So the question that begs to be asked:
Is there also a pashat? Why shouldn’t Natzarim Yisraelite husbands at least
potentially be willing to follow the Messiah’s methods of loving each wife
whether he has only one or a more than one?
Natzarim Yisrael cannot embrace the substance of the symbol while rejecting
the symbol, can it?
Yochanan Bet / Second John v. 13
13 The children of your elect sister greet you.
Omein.
19 One elect sister writing to another. A continuation of the two twisted
sisters of Ezekiel 23, becoming straightened out in righteousness by the
truth of Messiah and His kingdom.
Alright, Let’s look at that passage:
Yechezqel/Ezekiel 23:1‐4
The word of YHWH came again to me, saying,
2 “ Ben‐adam, there were two women, the daughters of one
eema:
3 And they committed whoring in Mitzrayim; they
committed whoring in their youth: there were their
breasts pressed, and there their virgin nipples were
squeezed.
4 And their names were Ochala the elder, and Ochaliva
her sister: and they were Mine, and they bore sons and
daughters. These were their names; Shomron is Ochala,
and Yahrushalayim Ochaliva.”
Don’t Forget Yirmeyahu/Jerimiah 3 as well. Will Natzarim Yisrael still criticize
YHWH for His metaphorical polygyny? Let’s hope not.
One allegation that anti‐polygynists rail against polygynist apologists is that
polygyny solely caters to the base sexual (a.k.a. “fleshly”) desires of the man
(patriarch). Can we be honest? Monogamous couples enjoy sex just as much
as people in polygynous marriages. Is anyone accusing the monogamous
couples of being fleshly because they enjoy sex? Hopefully, not. Elohim
invented sex and marriage for both those who practice heterosexual
monogamy and those who practice heterosexual polygyny.
So what exactly are the works of the flesh?
Galutyah/Galatians 5:19 – 20
19 Now the works of the flesh are well known, among
which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness,
indecency
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, quarrels, jealousies, rage,
strife, selfish ambition, stubbornness, heresies,
21 Envy, murder, drunkenness, wild indecent parties, and
all such things: about which I warn you again as I have
also done in times past, that those who practice such
things as the path of their llives shall not inherit the
kingdom of YHWH.
Notice what practice is missing from the above works‐of‐flesh list in
Galutyah/Galatians? That’s right, Polygyny. Why? Because, by definition,
polygyny is not fornication, nor is it adultery, but rather it is a kadosh marriage
practice that is acknowledged and legislated for in Torah! It is certainly not a
work of the flesh for Natzarim Yisrael. However, “jealousies” and “envy” are
listed as a works of the flesh. The only kind of jealousy that is sanctioned for
in Torah, is a husband’s jealousy for his wife as seen in Bamidbar/Numbers
5:11‐31**‐‐ but not the other way around! Check and see: ongoing
jealousy/envy of one wife over a co‐wife or potential co‐wife is never given a
stamp of approval for the commonwealth of Natzarim Yisrael! Yahuweh may
use it to further His perfect will, but why should that surprise us? This can be
clearly seen if one were to do a study on the word “vex” in Scripture.
Need more? OK.
Romiyah/Romans 11:11‐15
11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall
forever? Let it not be: but rather through their fall
salvation has gone out to the nations, for to provoke them
to jealousy.
12 Now if their temporal fall brought riches to this age,
and the diminishing of their believing numbers
brought riches to the nations; how much more the fullness
of their return from blindness?
13 For I speak to you nations, because I am the emissary
to the nations, I magnify my work by explaining this.
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation those
who are of my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if their temporal setting aside be the reconciling of
this world, what shall the receiving of them back be,
but life from the dead?
9 Efrayim gets it while Judah is blinded. But in the end
times both houses start seeing clearly.
10 From Judah.
11 If Judah’s blindness brought life to Efrayim, how
much more will Judah's regeneration bring greater life
in the kingdom?
So it is clear that YHWH’s provoking of jealousy in the older sister (sister‐wife
as seen in Yechezqel/Ezekiel 23) is actually working out both Yahudah’s and
Ephrayim’s collective salvations! The parallel passage is Yirmeyahu/Jerimiah 3
illustrating YHWH being the husband to both sisters! So right there are 2
witnesses.
Yochanan/John 10:16‐
16 “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring in, and they shall hear My voice;
and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.”
3 A plain reference to the other fold, or flock of Yisrael,
Efrayim‐Yisrael, that Yahshua says He must bring in by
command of the Father. Note that even before He died
and rose, He had two existing Yisraelite flocks, not one. Through
his mission as the Good Shepherd, both folds will become one.
Note: “other sheep not of this fold” certainly seems to be a reference to two
groups. Also, notice in the note that the “folds will become one” future tense.
As of now, they are not yet.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 13:42‐47
42 And when the Yahudim had gone out of the
synagogue, the non‐Yahudim begged that these words
might be proclaimed to them the next Shabbat.
43 Now when the congregation was dismissed, many of
the Yahudim and religious proselytes followed Shaul and
Bar‐Nava: who were speaking to them, and persuaded
them to continue in the favor of YHWH.
44 And the next Shabbat almost the entire city came
together to hear the word of YHWH.
45 But when the Yahudim saw the multitudes,
they were filled with envy, and spoke against those things,
which were spoken by Shaul, contradicting and blaspheming
him.
46 Then Shaul and Bar‐Nava grew bold, and said, It was
necessary that the word of YHWH should first have been
spoken to you: but seeing you put it away from you, and
judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, look,
we turn to the nations.
47 For this is what YHWH commanded us, saying, I have
set you to be a light of the nations that you should be for
salvation to the ends of the earth.
5 Efrayim in the nations.

See, if one “wife” is jealous of another‐‐ tough! It’s really for her own good in
the long run!! It is apparently YHWH’s method saving the most and saving
them most thoroughly.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 21:27‐30
27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the
Yahudim who were from Asia Minor, when they saw him
in the Beit HaMikdash, stirred up all the people, and laid
hands on him,
28 Crying out, Men of Yisrael, help: This is the man, that
teaches all men everywhere against the people of Yisra'el,
and the Torah, and this set apart place: and furthermore
he brought Greeks into the Beit HaMikdash, and has
polluted this set apart place.
29 For they had been seen before with him in the city
Trophimos the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Shaul
had brought into the Beit HaMikdash.
30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran
together: and they took Shaul, and dragged him out of the
Beit HaMikdash: and immediately shut the doors.
More of the older sister being jealous of the younger. Not a pleasant situation,
but necessary.
Eventually jealousy will come to an end. We need to trust YHWH’s
omniscience of the greater good:
Ephesiyah/Ephesians 5:32‐32
31 For this cause shall a man leave his abba and eema,
and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be echad flesh.
32 This is a great sod [mystery]: but I speak concerning the
Moshiach and the Yisraelite congregation.
5 There’s the pashat, or literal understanding. Two people
becoming one.
6 Mystery? Yes. The pashat/literal understanding is the
two persons becoming one. The secret behind the
literal is that in Yahushua the two individual houses
become one. That is the mystery behind the uniting of
man and woman. Yahshua and Yisrael become one in
the remez, or hint level of understanding. But in the
sod, or secret level as Yahshua marries Yisrael, both
houses remarry each other, thereby establishing
peace. That is also known as “the mystery” of the
kingdom.
Now, I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to say that the two “twisted sisters”
marry each other (on a pashat level that could be misused). But rather, it
would be more accurate to say that each sister being echad with her Husband,
will by default be echad with each other (similar to spokes being united to the
hub on a wheel). So the main point is that the jealousy will end when both are
echad with Yahushua.
Consider:
Mattityahu/Matthew 5:17‐20
17 “Think not that I am come to weaken, or destroy the
Torah, or the prophets: I have not come to weaken, or
destroy, but to completely reveal it in its intended fullness.
18 For truly I say to you, Until the current heavens and
earth pass away, not one yud, or one nekudah shall by
any means pass from the Torah, until all be fulfilled.
19 Whoever therefore shall break, or weaken one of the
least Torah commandments, and shall teach men so, he
shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven: but
whoever shall do and teach the commands, the same shall
be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.”
“Reveal it in its intended fullness.” Selah!
Recently I’ve heard in a few sermons, the discussion of YHWH’s “permissive
will” versus His “perfect will”, with the assumption being that polygyny
supposedly falls within the “permissive will” and monogamy always falls within
the “perfect will.” Let’s consider YHWH’s perspective on the whole thing. Take
for instance the account of Ya’akov, Raquel, Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah.
Questions: was it in YHWH’s perfect will :
1. For Raquel or Leah to be married off to a pagan just like dear old dad?
2. For Raquel or Leah to subsequently become a pagan just like dear old
dad?
3. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph who would have become an
incredible type/foreshadowing of the Moshiach?
4. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph who would have been
instrumental in the refining of Yahudah?
5. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph, who YHWH would have used in
the rescuing of Yahudah and his brothers?
6. To not bless Leah with marriage to a righteous man?
7. To exclude Leah on the basis of her delicate (crosseyed? /Divergent
squint?) eyes?
8. For Leah to not give birth to Yahudah (surrogate bloodline of the
Moshiach)
9. To have Leah not give birth to Lewi? (and therefore no Moshe to deliver
Yisrael from Mitsrayim?)
10. To have less of Ya’akov’s seed to fill the earth?
11. To have Bilhah and Zilpah remain unmarried or sold to a pagan
husband(s)?
12. To throw away the possibility of the 4 wives symbolizing the four
directions/corners of the earth?
13. To ruin the Shemology prophecy of the Moshiach?
Who are we to tell YHWH what is and is not His perfect will?
See, without the acceptance and acknowledgment of polygyny as being
legitimate right alongside of monogamy, there is no Two‐House teaching. Look
how many Jewish Messianics reject the two house teaching right along with
rejecting polygyny.
So Let’s review Natzarim Yisrael’s stances: head coverings? Yes. Circumcision?
Yes. Kashrut? Yes. Niddah laws? Yes. Tzit‐Tzits? Yes. Shabbat? Yes.
Moedim? Yes. The Torah? Yes. The Torah’s halacha for accepting and
governing polygyny? “—gasp”. Why the sudden change of strategy? Huh?!?
Are we going to let women, women’s emotions and women’s dogmas override
the Torah?
Remember the note on Romiyah/Romans 14:23?
Meaning we better get our Yisra'elite values from a full
trust in Torah and the faith of Messiah, and not man, or
man’s emotions, or dogmas.
What sense does it make to say that Shabbat, Moedim, niddah laws, kashrut
laws, head covering regulations, and circumcision are all in effect, and then
turn around and say polygyny is outlawed. At best, that is gross inconsistency
and at worst it is downright disobedience of the whole counsel of YAH.
What is one of the consequences of rejecting YAH’s whole counsel?
Mattityahu/Matthew 10:25‐26
25 “It is enough for the talmid that he is as His Teacher,
and the slave as His Master. If they have called the Master
of Beit Yisrael Baal‐Zevuv, how much more shall they call
them of His household?
26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered,
that shall not be revealed; and hidden, that shall not be
made known.”
Is it in YHWH’s design for a man to be subordinate to his wife? Is Natzarim
Yisrael going to be more fearful of it’s own women rather than fearful of
Elohim? What’s the point of that? Either the Torah is for the renewed covenant
or it is not. If anyone in Natzarim Yisrael is going to speak against Torah by
speaking against those who practice the Torah’s instruction for and about
polygyny, then why not cash it all in and become just like the rest of
Christiandom? NO!!! Now is the time to stand up and stand firm! Teach the
whole Truth of Torah—all of it! As for the women of Natzarim Yisrael—their
allegiances will be revealed for what they truly are. That’s right, this is a test!
Will they rejoice like Devorah (Shophtim 5:30‐31*) or scorn like Miriam and
Aharon)? Are they for YHWH and His eternal order, or is each for her own
latent headship over her husband and the consequential demonic disorder?
Teach the whole Truth and hearts will be revealed for what they are.
Some closing thoughts:
From the Maaseh Schlichim passages, the reasons for taking a rival wife can be
seen—competition to goad the rebellious wife to repent and do the right
things. Instead of divorce, the merciful thing to do is take on a rival wife for
any or all of the following reasons. (While reading these, think of when Elohim
brings Ephramites and non‐Hebrew converts into the commonwealth of
Yisrael‐‐ much to the displeasure of the unbelieving Jews and even to the
raised brow of esoteric Messianic Jews)
1. If the first wife is idolatrous.
2. If the first wife is leading the children astray.
3. If the first wife is disobedient to her husband‐‐ insubordination, nonsubmissiveness.
4. If the first wife is not demonstrating true love to her husband.
5. If the first wife is not performing her conjugal duty.
6. If the first wife is deliberately refusing to reproduce‐‐ refusing to
accept the husbands seeds into her womb.
7. If the first wife refuses her husband’s Elohim‐given right to have an
additional wife.
Now contrast the above to the attitude of the believing Jews when Elohim
brings Ephramites and non‐Hebrew converts into the commonwealth of
Yisrael.
1. The obedient wife joyfully welcomes in her co‐wife.
2. The wives have fellowship with one another.
3. The wives love each other as themselves.
4. The wives work with one another in the running of the household for
the greater good.
5. The wives perform their conjugal duties to the by being fruitful and
multiplying.
6. They are echad.
7. Polygyny is a kodosh halacha for the husband’s and wives’ kodosh
desires.
Afterword:
So what is the practical application for us Natzarim Yisraelites in exile in USA,
Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand and other European nations with similar
laws?
First, it should be considered that in the USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New
Zealand (and other Westernized countries), the divorce laws are venomously
anti‐Torah. Even in a monogamous marriage, the woman legally has the upper
hand in a divorce. How much more the case in a polygynous marriage
arrangement. If a woman is not wholeheartedly in agreement with entering
into a polygynous marriage, then in a divorce, she can potentially leave a very
wide trail of destruction and have the nation’s laws assist her in ruining the
family. And so because the laws are against us, The women and man in a
polygynous marriage should be in 100% agreement with the arrangement
before it ever starts—not easy to achieve considering how brainwashed our
culture is by anti‐polygyny doctrine. Even with 100% agreement within the
outset of a polygynous marriage, that is still no guaranty that none will
backslide and subsequently sabotage the family, (of course the same could be
said of monogamous marriages).
Secondly, there does not yet seem to be a significant oversupply of females per
males in Natzarim Yisrael—yet. Is there a current need? Possibly—on a global
scale there are Christian women who’s husbands are killed by Islamicists (but
who’s to stop the islamicist from forcing the widows to marry another
islamicist?), and given the current mess that the I.C.E (Immigration & Customs
Enforcement, formerly I.N.S) is in, those who follow the rules of immigration
get hassled worse than those who are illegal, so even that purpose is risky—
and even if I.C.E. wasn’t so backward, would the widows be willing to change
over to be Natzarim? Perhaps some.
Another question is: wouldn’t it be greedy for the old pros of marriage to grab
up all the women for themselves and leave the young men without viable
spouses? It probably is somewhat dependant on the demographics of local
believing populations, but the definition of “local” populations becomes
somewhat moot in light of the internet. So given that, it is a question that has
to be answered on an individual level, and should be soberly considered before
pursuing polygyny.
So currently the status is a catch‐22 stalemate: most women can get away
with whatever the heck they want to; and most believing men, who don’t want
to lose their children due to a divorce initiated by a rebellious wife, are scared
to death to introduce any Scripturally legitimate competition. The only thing
that will end the stalemate is standing up for Scriptural Truth.
Notes:
*Shophtim 5:30‐31
30 Are they not finding, are they not dividing the spoil?
To every man a woman, or two; to Sisra a spoil of dyed
garments, a spoil of dyed garments of needlework, of
dyed garments of needlework on both sides, made for the
necks of those that took the spoil?
31 So let all Your enemies perish, O YHWH: but let them that
love Him be as the sun when it goes forth in its might.
And the land had rest forty years.
** Bamidbar 5:11‐31 The only jealousy that Torah sanctions for people.
11 And YHWH spoke to Moshe, saying,
27
12 “Speak to the children of Yisrael, and say to them, If
any man's wife goes aside, and commits a trespass against him,
13 And a man lies with her carnally, and it is hidden from
the eyes of her husband, and is kept secret, and she is
defiled, and there was no witness against her, nor was she
caught;
14 And the ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and he
becomes jealous of his wife, and she is defiled: or if the
ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and he is jealous of
his wife, and she is not defiled:
15 Then shall the man bring his wife to the kohen, and he
shall bring the offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah
of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put
frankincense on it; for it is an offering of jealousy, an
offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
16 And the kohen shall bring her near, and set her before
YHWH:
17 And the kohen shall take kadosh water in an earthen
vessel; of the dust that is on the floor of the Tabernacle
the kohen shall take some, and put it into the water:
18 And the kohen shall set the woman before YHWH, and
uncover the woman's head,
and put the offering of
memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering:
and the kohen shall have in his hand the bitter water that
causes the curse:
19 And the kohen shall put her under an oath, and say to
the woman, If no man has lain with you, and if you have
not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of
your husband, be free from this bitter water that causes
the curse:
20 But if you have gone aside to another instead of your
husband, and if you are defiled, and some man has lain
with you beside your husband:
21 Then the kohen shall charge the woman with an oath
of cursing, and the kohen shall say to the woman, YHWH
make you a curse and an oath among your people, when
YHWH makes your thigh to rot, and your belly to swell;
22 And this water that causes the curse shall go into
your bowels, to make your belly to swell, and your thigh
to rot: And the woman shall say, Omein, Omein.
23 And the kohen shall write these curses in a scroll, and
he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter
water that causes the curse: and the water that causes
the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the kohen shall take the jealousy offering out of
the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before
YHWH, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the kohen shall take a handful of the offering, as a
memorial offering, and burn it upon the altar, and
afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he has made her to drink the water, then it
shall come to pass, that, if she is defiled, and has done
trespass against her husband, that the water that causes
the curse shall enter into her, and becomes bitter, and her
belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman
shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman is not defiled, but is clean; then she
shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the Torah of jealousy, when a wife turns aside
to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;
30 Or, when the ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and
he is jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before
YHWH, and the kohen shall execute to her all this Torah.
31 Then shall the man be free from iniquity, but the
woman shall bear her iniquity.”
***Moshe’s additional marriage to the Ethiopian woman is a rather
complicated narrative. Here are the references: Beresheeth 10:6, 10:22,11:10‐
26, 25:1‐2; Yahshar 72:37, 73:31‐36,76:4‐6, 76:13‐23,77:27‐51
Bamidbar/Numbers 12:1‐8.
When the Kushite Queen, Adoniah, was wed to Moshe as a reward for his
heroism, he never consummated the marriage, because she was a pagan
Kushite. Moshe’s hesitancy was confirmed when Adoniah later rebelled
against Moshe for his not following her and the Kushites’ idols. Ironically, the
Ethiopian/Kushite woman that Moshe was later being criticized for in
Bamidbar/Numbers 12, was most likely a different woman entirely, who
sojourned with the Yisra'elites, and followed YHWH; therfore she was an
Ethiopian‐Yisra'elite by conversion and then by marriage. How do we know
this? Moshe’s arranged marriage to the Kushite queen was long before his
marriage to Tzipporah the Shemite. Tzipporah was a Shemite because her
father was from Midyan who was a child through Avraham and Keturah (a
Kanaanite)—Avraham was from Shem. Aharon and Miriam would have no
geneological reason to criticize Moshe for his marriage to Tzipporah which
took place long before Bamidbar/Numbers 12. Their attempted coup against
Moshe seems to be in reaction to a recent event, a recent marriage, not
something that took place more than 12 years earlier. As for Moshe’s
unconsummated marriage to the Kushite queen, it would hardly even be called
a marriage since he never consummated it, and never pursued it in the first
place. Looking at the character of Moshe, he was most humble and did not
boast or build himself up—a man of YHWH with a shepherd’s heart. Since
there were non‐Hebrew peoples that left Mitzrayim/Egypt along with the
Yisraelites, the most likely case scenario suggests that there apparently was an
Ethiopian couple or family who converted to the faith of Avraham Yitzchak and
Yaakov. If during the journey, the Ethiopian’s woman’s husband passed away,
she would have been a widow. Moshe likely saw this need, rose to the
occasion, and set an example of a pragmatic, compassionate polygyny. Why
are her children never mentioned? She may have had only daughters, but the
other possibility is that Moshe was raising up seed for the deceased man, and
since the dead man was not noteworthy in the scheme of Scriptural
documentation, no mention of those possible children is made. She may have
also been barren. Why is her name not mentioned? Moshe, knowing the
stresses of the extra responsibility, did not want to sensationalize the taking on
of additional wives. Also since she remains anonymous, it reinforces the idea
that there is one Torah for the native Hebrew and for the ger [non‐Hebrew]
convert. She represents all ger converts in that sense.

Rabbi Simon Comments
I agree with Brother Chris and his assessment of what the Torah teaches about one
husband having more than one wife to raise righteous seed for Israel and the need to
do this not for personal gain but for righteousness sake. This is not a call for all of us to go and get a second and a third wife but this is for us to re‐examine what
happened after the fall in a post paradise. I came into this truth some six years ago
without the help of any teacher but it was not yet time for me to come out endorsing
this truth but now that time has come.
We do not need to shun Torah or cry fowl with YHWH but if we have hangs up as
clearly some of us have been brainwashed by the church system then just park your
hang‐ups and ask YHWH to reveal truth to you and I guarantee it will come. What
YHWH has been doing through Israel’s history is a monumental model to save
mankind from the tragedy of sin and especially sexual sin which can become a
bondage to many believers but having more than one wife is not a sexual sin as
taught but there is a way to regulate such a relationship within the strict Torah
guidelines. This document does not address all these things but is a glimpse of what
is expected in a believer but more material will be presented soon to clarify matters
further. You have heard lies scandal and baloney from churches, mosques and
Temples but now be ready to hear the truth.
Most of us are very happy to have our first wife of our youth as our only needed wife
and quite happy to raise righteous seed through her but there may be a need for
other brothers to get a second wife for the right reasons and since YHWH did not
condemn this behavior and in fact regulated it then neither do I as a teacher of the
Scriptures.
Chris has presented one angle of the Samaritan woman that is commonly accepted
view in the Churches but we do not endorse that angle and present a completely
different angle here.
http://www.abrahamic‐faith.com/Simon/Samaritan%20at%20the%20well.pdf

My political contribution for 2008

2008-07-18T14:10:00.000-07:00

Oh what a mess the U.S. is in...
Erroded away from within...
They carry their circus to all of your towns...
but all they have to show are the clowns!!!

Send a JibJab Sendables® eCard Today!

Exposing Shekinah Life

2008-07-18T13:12:00.000-07:00

Recently I was engaged in quite a hot conversation regarding polygamy on the Shekinah Life group.

As the moderators could not support their position with Scripture, which I asked them to do on about sixteen occassions, they decided to ban me from the group to silence a "troublemaker."

Folks, If Scripture does not support your position, you are perverted in your beliefs. Just admit that!

Don't call yourself "mature" while calling good evil and evil good!

It is a shame that all of my posts will be removed, as they exposed these wolves in sheep's clothing for what they are!

All of that because they want to trust the words of men over YHVH's word!

I warn you all to stay away from them!

Is Polygamy really illegal in the U.S.?

2008-07-13T11:50:00.000-07:00

Although the following article discusses the legality of plural marriage, rather than the scriptural ascpect behind it, I have chosen to include it here as it nullifys the common "scriptural" objection that we must obey man's laws:

Is Polygamy Really Illegal
It may seem presumptuous for someone with no formal training in the law to write a legal opinion of a practice declared illegal by every one of the fifty states and held illegal by the United States Supreme Court. Recognizing that the blueprint of American government, the fundamental law of our land, was written to the understanding of every common citizen, however, I stand forward as one citizen in defense of the plural family, suggesting that our courts, legislatures, government officials, and citizens have never been presented with, nor have they considered the arguments I will present here.
In the United States of America, government is not the law. In this country, government is subject to law, as is every citizen. Here, when government assumes a power not specifically granted by consent of the people government violates the law, and any law created under illegally usurped power is not, in truth, law, but a violation of law.
It is assumed by many Americans that the U.S. Supreme Court is the court of last resort in this land. This is not true. Our court of last resort is We the People. This court was established by the Declaration of Independence, which declared the people?s right, their duty, to alter or abolish government when it becomes destructive of fundamental human rights. It is not reasonable to assume that any government will police itself. The Constitution has no power unless it is upheld and enforced by the People. No government is policed unless its own citizens police it.
This appeal is presented, therefore, to We the People, with the understanding that every judge, every prosecutor, every legislator, and every government executive in the land is a member of this tribunal. I challenge any to publicly refute the reason and logic contained herein.
It is my contention that anti-bigamy statutes in the United States of America are violations of the law of this land, that they constitute violations of fundamental human rights, that polygamy has never in truth been illegal, but that government, by prohibiting it, illegally persecutes the family as a sovereign institution.
Family Sovereignty
Whether you believe in the Judeo-Christian account of Adam and Eve or hold to the Humanist concept of evolution, you must accept the fact that at some point in history, a man and a woman united to form the first unit of civilization on this planet, a family.
This first family relationship rose above the typical animal attractions that draw male and female creatures together for reproductive purposes or mutual survival. The first man and woman to form a family unit were drawn to each other by virtue, by the emotional energy of compassion unique to our species, and were bound together by the selfless love this energy feeds.
Call them Adam and Eve or Missy ’n Link, the first couple on earth to form a family relationship did not have a county courthouse to go to for a marriage license, no justice of the peace or minister to perform a wedding ceremony, no county recorder to issue a marriage certificate and record their union. If they did engage in any kind of ritual marking family union, it is doubtful there were mortal witnesses to their sacred commitment and new family identity. In a world utterly void of civil government, they formed and maintained a family unit, the first earthly civilization in microcosm.
This truth is self-evident, that the family defines itself, by virtue, the energy of compassion, the tender emotions that bind individuals into one societal unit.
No civil government, no church, not even God has the power to legislate or decree the love that binds individuals to each other in family relationships. These binding feelings exist only in liberty, by the choice of each individual. Once existent these feelings can be destroyed or abandoned only by the individuals themselves. The family institution exists only in liberty. This is also self-evident.
The family is a self-defined entity, existent by the choice of the individuals involved and held together by love, by virtue in action, by the power of human compassion.
In the early history of man the first families gathered and formed a community. To provide order to their society, each family sent representatives to a community council, forming the first civil government entity. The family existed before and is the founder of civil governments. This truth is also self-evident.
The family is a sovereign entity, self-defined, existing before civil government and independent of its approval. Civil government is a creature of the family, responsible to it, not for it.
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State. (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16:3)
The Tenth Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
In Reynolds vs. United States (1879), the Supreme Court justices unanimously supported the Morrill Anti-bigamy Law of 1862 against a constitutional challenge based upon freedom of religion. In his written opinion, Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite argued that every government had the power to decide whether polygamy or monogamy should be the basis of social life.
Obviously Congress also assumed they had this power when they passed the law, as did President Lincoln when he signed it, yet I would like to ask where in the Constitution was our national government given that power? Where in the Constitution is the federal government given any authority to define or place limits upon the family institution? In reading the Constitution I find no such power delegated to the federal government. I do, however, find two amendments that forbid this power to government.
The Supreme Court is considered our last resort in protecting the individual rights of citizens against the unjust power of government. We have here, however, an instance where that court openly usurped a power never given by consent of the People to dictate and enforce social norms among the citizenry.
By assuming this power without the consent of the governed, both Congress and the Supreme Court violated the law.
The Morrill Anti-bigamy Act of 1862 was not law, but a violation of law.
In addition to usurping power to establish social norms in our society, to decide whether polygamy or monogamy should be the basis of our social life, in passing the Morrill Anti-bigamy Act Congress assumed another power without consent of the governed; the power to selectively breed the American citizenry.
Can a government interfere with an individual’s choice of a spouse without assuming the power of selective breeding, a power that exists only in absolute despotism?
Can you deny a black person the right to marry a white without engaging the power of selective breeding? Can you deny a single woman the right to marry a married man without enforcing this same power? You cannot.
If you deny a woman the right to choose a certain man for a husband you have asserted the power to deny her every choice you disapprove of, leaving her only your choice of a mate for her. Your power to deny her choice is the power of selective breeding, a power we rightfully exercise over cattle and dogs, but not over people.
The Declaration of Independence asserts this truth to be self-evident, “that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Have the governments of the United States or any of the fifty individual states been granted the power of selective breeding by their citizens?
The burden of proof rests upon civil government. Unless someone can show that this power has been given government by the people, or can justify anti-bigamy under some specific power granted by their Constitution, every law prohibiting bigamy is unjust and illegal.
The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reserves all powers not specifically granted Congress by the Constitution to the states or to the people, which is always the case in a territory, where no state government exists. Thus the Morrill Anti-bigamy Law of 1862 was and is unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment, as Congress was not given power to interfere with intimate or family relationships among its citizens.
In addition, Congress assumed unconstitutional power by placing prohibition of polygamy as a condition of statehood for Utah and other states. All prohibitions of polygamy placed in state constitutions under federal duress are thus null and void.
The U.S. federal government has no legal power, power granted by the people, to dictate or enforce social norms or traditions.
The U.S. federal government has no power granted by the people to forbid any citizen&rquot;s choice of a spouse, be it interracial, same-sex, or polygamous.
The Ninth Amendment
The enumeration, in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.?
Will someone argue that the “other” rights, “retained by the people” and guaranteed by the Ninth Amendment do not include the right to choose one’s own spouse without government interference?
The Ninth Amendment has been applied to establish and defend the Freedom of Intimate Association, including the right to bear and beget children outside of civil marriage (Eisenstadt v Baird, 1972). Can the Supreme Court consistently defend the right of a man and a woman to bear a child while denying them the right to establish themselves together with that child in a family unit? Can the court deny the child the right to a complete family with those two parents?
Suppose a man, married with children, becomes involved with a second woman and begets a child with her? He has committed no crime under the law, and now has children with two women. Anti-bigamy law denies him the right to family relationships with both women, one woman’s right to a family relationship with the man she has chosen to father her child, and the child’s right to a united family unit with both parents. Will someone argue that the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees none of these individuals the right to join together in one family unit?
Please note that anti-bigamy laws do not, can not deny a man the right to engage in sexual relationships with more than one woman. They only succeed in denying all of these individuals the right to identify themselves as one family unit. An anti-bigamy law is not anti-a dultery. Anti-bigamy is anti-family.
I submit that the right to unite with others in a plural family relationship is one of the “other rights” protected by the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution, and that no government state can constitutionally deny it.
Conclusion
Civil government has no power to legislate or destroy the feelings that bind individuals in family units.
The family defines itself from within, by the choice of individuals who generate and maintain tender feelings for each other.
The family is a sovereign institution, existent before and independent of civil government.
Government is a creature of the family, responsible to it, not for it.
Governments are instituted to preserve rights (Declaration of Independence).
Governments are responsible to protect and preserve the family (Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
Government violates law when it usurps power not specifically granted by the People.
Government has no just power to establish and maintain social norms among the people.
Government has no just power to practice selective breeding among the people.
In prohibiting polygamy, government violates the law.
Polygamy is legal.
Polygamy has always been legal --Ben Szymanski

Could the Supreme Court make polygamy legal?

2008-07-12T14:46:00.000-07:00

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - Is the U.S. Supreme Court about to rule polygamy a protected religious practice? One of Utah's top attorneys is now predicting the justices will do exactly that.Brian Barnard has not only defended polygamists in the past, later this year he will even appear before the U.S. Supreme Court on another matter.And Barnard says the legalization of polygamy may not be that far away.Barnard says, "If consenting adults want to practice polygamy based upon their religious beliefs, I think the Constitution and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold that right."But Barnard also believes what it will take a special type of case to get to the highest court in the land. “One of the things that's going to be necessary in order to get that issue resolved is a clean case, if you will. Not a case where there's also welfare fraud or statutory rape or anything else involved," sys Barnard. Barnard feels someone who is prosecuted just for polygamy would have a good chance of eventually winning in court. "Two thousand, three thousand years ago, people practiced polygamy for religious reasons and were authorized to do so based upon their religious beliefs," says Barnard.However, Barnard feels some Utah prosecutors, including Mark Shurtleff, are reluctant to prosecute polygamy because they know a legal ban on polygamy might then be found unconstitutional. "Mark Shurtleff has the right to prosecute those people but chooses not to," says Barnard. Previously, Shurtleff has talked about the difficulty of prosecuting polygamists, if nothing else because of the sheer numbers involved. The entire interview with Brian Barnard can be seen on this Sunday morning’s "On the Record" at 9:30 a.m.

How to have AMAZING sex with your mate(s) as YHVH desires

2008-07-12T13:08:00.000-07:00

.
How To Have Amazing Sex With Your Mate(s) As YHVH Desires
.
.
Shalom, my dear brothers and sisters in Messiah :). The Spirit of our heavenly Abba(Father) is laying a strong message on my heart to share with many of you. This topic matter is not generally discussed within spiritual assemblies, due to the level of embarrassment, shame and discomfort amongst the brethren. More often than not, it is "swept under the rug" as being "taboo" or "improper", "not being fit for public teaching and discussion". However, this incredible lack of teaching and understanding has created a tremendous void, thus causing much ignorance and the end result is an unfortunate and very widespread problem which permeates the majority of the collective Body of believers, which is a dysfunctional and lackadaisical sexual lifestyle.
.
Our heavenly Abba created intimate sex (more properly called, "lovemaking") not only for the purpose of procreation and extending the human race (as many erroneously assume), but also for the divine expression of love for one's mate and the giving of the wonderful gift of pleasure. One cannot read the command to "be fruitful, multiply and replenish the Earth" (in Genesis 1:28) while overlooking the other hints, clues, and commands in relation to "making love", which are seeded all throughout the Word of Yahweh, for if we do so, then we will continue the satanic curse of having a sexual lifestyle which is extremely unsatisfactory and unfulfilling, to say the least. Abba Yahweh desires for us to enter a covenant with our mate and spouse, and to become totally and completely fulfilled and satisfied in spirit, soul (mind, will, emotions), and body, with us being strongly unified as one in the Spirit as a "threefold Cord which is not easily broken", and what He "has joined together, no person should tear apart". (Ecc. 4:12 ; Mark 10:9)
.
Oftentimes, (due to the gross misinterpretation of Scripture and the influence of the evil spirits of control and manipulation) the husband tends to abuse his Yahweh-given authority as the "head" and "covering" of the wife, and ends up destroying the fabric of the marital Covenant by being overly dominant, causing the wife to distrust, become fearful, and emotionally detached from him. As she is abused, she becomes as a very vulnerable, fragile and "bruised reed". It was never meant to be this way. The man must love his wife just as Yahushua the Messiah loves the Assembly, sacrificially giving his complete self and life to her as the gift of love, being protective and nourishing, making sure that she has absolutely everything that she needs, and doing all that he can within Abba Yahweh's grace in helping her to reach the fullness of her divine potential (Eph. 5:24-33). Just the same, the wife should be as the "Rib" of the husband (in protecting his emotional heart, just as the ribcage protects the natural heart), as well as being supportive in other aspects of life as a beneficial and thorough "helpmeet" so that there is no lack thereof (Genesis 2:18, 22-24). Anything less than this brings on the Curse (negative consequences and judgement), for it is a mockery of the sacred Covenant, an insult of holiness and intensely invokes the wrath of our Abba.
.
Another thing which oftentimes plagues the human race is the lack of acceptance of oneself, as well as one's mate. This occurs due to the lack of true love which comes directly from the Spirit of our heavenly Abba and flows through our hearts as vessels for the benefit and unification of ourselves and others as one. This kind of love is perfect, being unconditional without reservations and has "no strings attached", not being based on anything within the natural realm, including one's appearance, past history, current physical, social, nor monetary status. The Divine Answer to solving all of our problems boils down to one thing, the "Golden Rule". We should do unto others just as we would have them do likewise unto us, loving Him as well as others as our own self. (Matthew 7:12; 22:37-40) In doing this, we fulfill the Law and will not suffer needlessly from lack and thus become blessed beyond measure. This kind of love firstly comes by faith, and then we exercise it with action. As we do so, it will flows like rivers of living waters, bringing life and blessing to all whom it touches. Love your spouse as your own self, and in doing so, you both will become complete.
.
Also, it is a sad thing to see that many are ashamed of their own bodies and thus, end up trying to cover up themselves in various ways, such as turning off the light in the bedroom and diving under the covers whenever it is time to go to bed and make love. This is vanity! Does this in any way, shape or form glorify Yahweh? No, it does not, for it is directly derived from and inspired by the Curse of sin and death (separation from Him). The very first example of this kind of negative behavior is seen within Genesis 3: 7-11. Whenever Adam and Eve sinned against Yahweh by eating of the "Tree of the knowledge of good and evil", their eyes were opened to the carnal nature and they realized that they were naked, thus becoming fearful and ran to hide in shame from Him. Abba Yahweh became angered and intensely rebuked them for this action. So therefore, this shame of one's nakedness is not from His holy nature, but is a direct result of hasatan's dark influence. Our bodies are the "Temple of Elohim", being beautiful, holy and precious to Him (1 Cor. 6:19,20). So allow the Holy Spirit to touch your hearts and enable you to fully and completely accept your own selves, for in so doing, you will become liberated and freed from the demonic shame of our nakedness.
.
The lies of hasatan keep us bound, but the Truth makes us free. Reveal who and what you are, and do not hide your Light under a bushel or basket, but allow it to shine without reservation to your mate. You have NOTHING to be ashamed of, for you were created in the very Image and Likeness of Yahweh Elohim. There are numerous references to the direct parallels between us and Him all throughout the written Word, for as He is, so are we in this world. Also, in the distant past, the Spirit has rebuked myself and others for making fun of our own bodies (and others), for whatever we do unto ourselves and other people, we do likewise unto Him. So therefore, if you call yourself as being "ugly", then you are also in essence calling Him "ugly", too, without even realizing it. Amen?
.
It is very common for many marital couples to have lingering mental and emotional "walls" and "barriers" within themselves, which are based on painful memories and emotional wounds/scars from the negative experiences of the past and these (if undealt with and remain unhealed by the Spirit) will dramatically hinder and stifle the fullness of intimacy and love being expressed and received. Love covers a multitude of sins and we should do absolutely everything that we can to be open in receiving divine healing and restoration in order that we may become whole, or else, we will end up suffering needlessly as we allow hasatan to use those negative experiences against us and each other. Emotional "walls" and boundaries" fragment and divide us, and therein, perfect unity and oneness will never become even remotely possible. These negative thought-patterns and emotions can and will block various bio-chemical responses within the body, and greatly hinder fulfillment. As we continually meditate upon Yahweh's holy Word, allowing His Spirit to heal our hearts and minds, and remaining open to correction and spiritual counseling, the Truth will make us free as our minds are renewed by "the washing of Water by the Word", and then we will become liberated to experience the fullness of all that He has in store for us, including satisfactory and intensely emotional and orgasmic, sexual pleasure.
.
Likewise, there are many who use various tactics of control and manipulation within marital relationships, such as the withholding of sexual activity in order to "get back at the other" in retaliation and revenge, whenever one is angered or frustrated about certain particular matters. This should not be so, for it is sin. Our bodies are the Temple of Elohim and we are not our own. We belong to Him and each other. The body of the husband belongs to the wife, and vice versa. His Word is very clear in saying :
.
(1 Corinthians 7:3-5) "The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to the husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that hasatan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."
.
Many marriages experience unfulfillment because spouses tend to want to gratify one's own sexual desires in reaching orgasm, while oftentimes neglecting the intimate needs of the other. This is completely self-centered, to say the least, and causes much harm, thus creating a void through which one's spouse may eventually seek another partner in the desire to find an enriching and fulfilling sexual experience. Never forget that! Love is a gift that is given, not something that is taken. If you sow pleasure within a loving relationship, then you will reap it from your mate. Both the husband and the wife should experience satisfaction and powerful orgasms on an often basis, and both should be loving, self-controling and patient in doing whatever it takes to obtain this awesome pleasure as one.
.
There are many trillions of nerve endings and neuronic pathways all throughout the human body, and through proper, intimate stimulation, beneficial bio-chemicals become released into the bloodstream, filling the cells and tissues and thus create extremely powerful sensations of pleasure from the top of your head to the soles of your feet, which are very intense, healthy, and wholesome. In my personal perspective, the entire body is the sexual organ, not merely the genitals, and likewise, intimacy involves ALL of your senses being stimulated, including sight, hearing, smelling, etc. This is why one can use aromatherapy (with scented candles, incense, potpourri, perfumes, oils), music, various types of scenery and lighting, etc., in dramatically enhancing the sexual experience. It is also extremely stimulating to speak romantically in arousing each other, looking deeply into each other's eyes, providing ample touching (including erotic massage), etc. The art of lovemaking is not merely about sexual organs (as many assume), for it involves the overall experience with it's many diverse aspects and facets in using the collectivity of our spirits, souls(minds/wills/emotions), and bodies.There are no limits to our creativity in expressing our Yahweh-given love for each other.
.
There are numerous erroneous teachings which have been circulating the Body of Messiah over the years which attempt to place satanic limitations and boundaries on holy lovemaking, even though there is absolutely no basis for these beliefs, and because of this, many marriages suffer needlessly from the lack of thorough sexual expression and experience. One of these teachings is the belief that oral sex is "unnatural" and "sinful". I will prove straight from the Word that this is heresy. There are several passages from the holy and erotic book of the "Song of Songs/Solomon" which are written in very colorful and beautifully poetic metaphors and these reveal powerful insights into the glorious wonders of oral lovemaking :
.
(Song of Songs 2:3) "Like an apple tree among the trees of the woods, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down in his shade with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste."
.
( " 4:16) "Awake, O North wind, and come, O South! Blow upon my garden, that it's spices may flow out! Let my beloved come into his garden and eat it's pleasant fruits."
.
"His fruit" is a veiled manner of allusion and reference to his genitals and the sweetness of his fluids, and her "garden" is none other than her body and the vagina, as is also spoken of within 4:12, as being the organ through which there is a hidden "spring" and "fountain". She desires for him to releases her "spices" (the secretion of vaginal juices in orgasm) so that they may flow out. Just as in 4:16, there is powerful stimulation in blowing and "eating" of a woman's vagina and this triggers mindblowing orgasms. For anyone who is not yet aware, always remember that personal hygiene is extremely important. Clean yourselves very thoroughly before lovemaking in order to have a fully, enriching experience.
There is also another passage which makes a direct hint to using his hands in passionately fondling the body and breasts of his lady :
.
( " 7: 7) "This stature of yours is like a palm tree, and your breasts like clusters. I said, 'I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of it's branches.' Let now your breasts be like clusters of the vine..."
.
I will close with this :
.
Our bodies are fearfully and wonderfully made, just as it says in Psalms 139:13,14, and are the Temple of the Spirit of our heavenly Abba. He created us in His Image and greatly desires for us to love our mate and spouse as our own self, and we are to totally and completely give ourselves to our significant Other sacrificially in holy Covenant as being two parts of the one and same Whole. If we are to become truly liberated and freed to experience the fullness of intimate love in both the giving and receiving, then we must let go of mental and emotional boundaries, becoming open to the perfect Love of Yahweh to flow through us as His offspring and vessels of honor. This will not only lead to wholeness and completion of ourselves and each other, but also open doors to thorough, awe-inspiring, and breathtaking intimate, sexual lovemaking as one.
.
Do not hinder each other, but be openminded and openhearted, receptive, romantic, creative, and spontaneous as an intensely passionate lover of your mate. Be gentle as the soft wind which does not break a tender reed, and powerful as the huge waves of the sea which contain explosive energy in captivating the heart and expressing one's holy desire. Take your spouse to the greatest heights and explore the body (which is the Temple) with a great sense of excitement and adventure. Abba desires for us to reach our fullest potential, not being trapped by vain limitations. So don't hold back, but reach for the allness for which you have been predestined. Elohim is Love :).
.
(Song of Songs 8: 6,7a) "Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm; For love is as strong as death, jealousy as cruel as the grave; It's flames are flames of fire, a Flame of Yah. Many waters cannot quench love, nor can the floods drown it..."
.
.

WHAT DID YAHSHUA CALL HIS FATHER?

2008-07-05T07:47:00.000-07:00

WHAT DID YAHSHUA CALL HIS FATHER?
By Rabbi/Brother Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky
Why are so many believers hypocrites? Is it through ignorance of truth? Lack of available truth? Or is it outright rebellion when confronted with truth. Today in the midst of the WWJD craze, it is high time Messiah Yahshua's people take back the kingdom by their forceful will. The first step is to walk in a path that leaves the WWJD mindset and enters into the WWYD - WHAT WOULD/DID YAHSHUA ACTUALLY DO? If we are being conformed to His image as scripture tells us, then what image of Yahshua is the Ruach carving out for His own glory? If it can be proven from scriptural and secular sources that Yahweh's Son used and still uses His Father's Name Yahweh and if our call is to be conformed to His image which includes His speech, then we must also call the Heavenly Father what His own Son called Him.
In John 17 we have recorded Messiah Yahshua's high priestly prayer. We see Him interceding as the Cohen HaGadol on behalf of His talmidim. As such what He prayed on earth and the manner in which He prayed on earth, continues to this day and for all eternity in heaven. Today in heaven as our High Priest, He prays as He did while in Jerusalem (Heb.13:8). In Yochanan/John 17:4 Yahshua states that He is finishing the work the Father gave Him. One of the MAIN WORKS given to Yahshua to perform was according to John 17:6 THE MANIFESTATION OF THE FATHER'S TRUE NAME TO THE DISCIPLES [After 586 years of religious gymnastics]. Thus if the Father desired the 12 disciples to know and use the true Name of Yahweh, then Messiah Himself also knew it and ALWAYS used it. For to have taught His disciples to use it and not done so Himself, would be hypocritical, which is a form of bearing false witness, a violation of Torah. In Yochanan/John 17:11 Yahshua invokes the Father's Name over the disciples for their protection and then reveals that the Name of Father Yahweh not only protects His disciples but was given to Messiah Yahshua before the foundation of the world. In the same way He and His Father both carry the Name Yahweh, all His disciples are to be in that same full accord BY ALL CALLING ON AND CARRYING ABOUT THAT SAME NAME FOR PROTECTION IN TIME OF TRIAL AND TRIBULATION. Unity is found when all disciples, all in one accord, all call on Yahweh through Yahshua. Not only did Yahshua use the true divine sacred Name, He told His disciples that it's usage was the only key to believers unity and preservation on the earth. Since most believers still do not use His Name, it is safe to attribute most of the religious divisions in His body to not abiding in the very truth designed for that selfsame unity. 30,000 denominations = 30,000 reasons for disobeying Yahshua about His Father's true Name.
Yochanan 17: 6 is a beautiful prophecy for the end times. While on earth Yahshua taught and used the Name and taught it to His disciples thus removing them from the MANMADE ban against it imposed by the apostate seat of Moses. In verse 26 of John 17, we see Messiah Yahshua prophesying that even after He ascends to His throne, (where He is using the Name today for His ministry to the Father on our behalf) that He would once again re-reveal the Name on earth. We see that in the latter days, His true Name is being restored by the Ruach or the power of Yahweh, amongst His people. So this prophecy is being fulfilled as both Xristians and apostate Jews, are taking the false names off their tongue and finding the true Name as Yahshua said would happen after His return to glory. So we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Messiah Yahshua and His true followers used the true Name. If one does not use the true Name exclusively when hit with this manifestation, then they are said to be a disingenuous follower since if they truly follow Messiah He will reveal the Name of His Father to all His disciples. If someone does not know and use the Name, they are either not a disciple or they are a deceived disciple. Or how about a sinful disciple (Yakkov/James 2:7)? Hebrews 2:12, Psalms 22:22 reminds us the when Messiah Yahshua was on earth He declared the NAME YAHWEH TO HIS TRUE BRETHREN IN the midst of the assembly. A true disciple uses Yahweh's Name in the assembly where it ought to be declared. Do they declare His name in your assembly? Or do they tell you to shut up and stick to HaShem/Gawd.
Can Messiah Yahshua's usage of the Divine Name be documented in history? OH YES IT CAN! The Master Yahshua did not, would not, could not, use HaShem and Adonai as substitutes for His Father's Name because that would have been bringing the Name to naught, a 3rd commandment Torah violation that would have disqualified him from being the SPOTLESS FAULTLESS LAMB. As the LAMB He never stopped using the Name Yahweh and now in his high priestly role, He has not stopped using it.
The "Toldoth Yeshu", is a rabbinic anti-gospel document dating back to 400 CE, with clear linguistic connections to Matthew's ORIGINAL Hebrew gospel. This indicates that while full of added lies and blasphemy THAT "TOLDOT YESHU" USED THE HEBREW MATTHEW as its base text. The TOLDOT YESHU nevertheless is full of accusation and mockery as we nevertheless find some startling confirmations of John 17. ACCORDING TO "TOLDOT YESHU" OR THE TALES OF YESHU, Messiah's original name was Yehoshua or Joshua. When He "became a heretic/lunatic", His name was changed to Yeshu. Yeshu is made up of yemach shemoh vezichro- "May His name and memory be erased." The first three letters form yud,shen,vav or YSU. [Hebrew Gospel of Matthew p.207 quoting Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 43B.]This is why TRUE BELIEVERS who do not want to identify with the mockers of our Messiah, REFUSE AND SHOULD REFUSE THE BLASPHEMOUS TALMUDIC MONIKER OF YESHU OR YESHUA. It is not the Aramaic contraction it is the devil's contraction and the name of mockery TO THIS DAY by unbelieving Judah!
Let them write their magazine articles as they sound sillier and sillier and fall on the ears of a band of decreasing Hey Soos followers. But the facts remain the facts. When we pronounce Messiah's Name as Yeshua, we identify (like it or not) with the lies of the "TOLDOT YESHU." Lets stick to Yahshua or Yahoshua the Name that is uncorrupted in the Hebrew.
The blasphemous yet historically respected "TOLDOT YESHU", states in chapter Passim that "YESHU, PERFORMED MIRACLES BY INVOKING THE FORBIDDEN DIVINE NAME." [IBID p. 208 the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew Howard] That Divine Name forbidden by the apostate seat of Moses was of course YHVH or Yahweh. So we have preserved for us a secular document that hates Yahshua because He called on and did ALL HIS MIRACLES while using only the Divine Name of His Father.
The last piece of evidence that Yahshua used Yahweh EXCLUSIVELY in His earthly ministry, is the Hebrew Matthew Gospel written by Matthew. Shem Tov, a Jewish polemist, published the Matthew in Hebrew to show the unbelieving Jews how to answer Christian scholars. No Jew of the middle ages, especially a scribe, would ever willfully insert the Tetragramaton into a text simply because all pious traditional Jews would substitute or mask the Name by abiding under the rabbinical ban of NEVER writing or pronouncing it. The very fact that the first letter hey for HaShem appears, proves that Shem Tov wrote HaShem wherever he found YHVH. The fact that he didn't use Adonai or Kurios proves that HaShem was used everywhere the 19 times Yahweh's Name was recorded by Matthew himself! HaShem was only a substitution for Yahweh NEVER for Adonai or Kurios which would have been left intact!
The Messiah and the disciples used only the true Name Yahweh when referring to Elohim. Terms such as Kurios, Adonai and Theos do not appear in Matthew's Shem Tov, for if they did Shem Tov would gladly have copied them intact. The vary fact that Shem Tov HAD TO SUBSTITUTE HASHEM into an existing document, PROVES THAT WHAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY WAS THE DIVINE NAME WHICH SHEM TOV indicates by his INSERTED usage of the letter hey for HaShem [p.232 Hebrew Gospel of Matthew Howard}.
So we have scripture and history, all confirming that Messiah Yahshua teaches and taught His true followers the Name of Yahweh, not the title God or Lord instead of Yahweh. Are you His disciple? If you are you will flow against the stream of learned religious voices screaming WWJD and instead will opt for the silent majority voices of WWYD, what would/does Yahshua do? For if we truly follow Him in His earthly and High Priestly role, we will have no qualms or second thoughts of starting on the righteous path of calling on Yahweh for protection, revelation and miracles just like YAHSHUA DID!

Answering the 10 questions of Atheists

2008-05-04T09:06:00.000-07:00

After watching this video, it became apparent to me that I needed to answer these questions. First of all, most - if not all of these arguments are straw-man arguments. Secondly, I feel that it is important to point out that the maker of this video says that belief in "God" is irrational, yet he only attacks the "God" of the Torah and "New Testament." If he believes that the Jewish/Christian god is imaginary, he must also believe that Buddha, Krishna, etc. are all imaginary also. Thirdly, he addresses these questions to those who "have a college degree" and "are employed" (I believe that was done knowing that American colleges and universities stifle free thought and suppress evidences while pushing Darwinism on their victims) Fairly, let's just assume that he meant someone that has some training in critical thinking, logic and reasoning.

O.K. Let's get to his questions:

#1 - Why won't God heal amputees?

This is a straw-man argument from the get go. Nowhere in scripture does t say that Elohim (a.k.a. - "God") works as any one's genie. He doesn't exist to answer every utterance of man. In fact, nowhere in scripture does it say that he must heal amputees. This argument would be comparable to me saying "If Darwinian evolution is true, why can't my peanut butter sandwich fly?" The fact that there are amputees whose prayers go unanswered doesn't prove that there is no "God" to heal them. In fact, it proves that scripture is true. Scripture says that man was created in perfection. Death, disease, injury and even amputations came about as a result of sin! Besides, amputees were healed:

Mat 12:10 And see, there was a man having a withered hand...
Mat 12:13 Then He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and it was restored, as healthy as the other.

Mar 3:5 And having looked around on them with displeasure, being grieved at the hardness of their hearts, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored as healthy as the other.

Luke 6:6 ... and there was a man whose right hand was withered.
Luke 6:10 And looking around at them all, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he did so, and his hand was restored sound as the other.

So, here is an "amputee" being healed. We have three eye-witness accounts of it. (Good enough for any court of law) Will that make him believe? No, he will make excuses such as "these men were crazy" having never met them. He will have to create some kind of rationalization - because it makes him uncomfortable.

#2 - Why are there so many starving people in our world?

Here, GIIVideo shows scenes of "starving masses." Did he ever stop to think that the starving people in his pictures come from pagan countries who do not follow the "God" of the Scripture? Probably not! Once again, we have a straw-man argument. Nowhere did "God" ever promise a full belly to everyone on earth. Secondly, famines are predicted in e scripture over and over. In fact, over 96 times! So, starving people in the world are further proof of the reliability of scripture. It was only to the Jews living in Israel that he ever promised to deliver from famine. Joseph (Yosef) was given a dream to warn of a coming famine. Because of that, the entire world was saved from starvation. Have you ever heard the accounts of Yahshua (a.k.a. "Jesus") feeding the hungry followers? He multiplied fish and bread to give them food. (Notice it was to those who were following him - not to pagans who worshiped a cow instead of eating it!)

So, again - we have numerous witnesses of Yahshua feeding the hungry. Will you believe? No, you will make excuses and rationalize!

#3 - Why does God demand the death of so many innocent people in the Bible?

Here you ask why "God" demands the death of so many INNOCENT people, then go on to point out how only those who are GUILTY of breaking His laws were put to death! Do you know the difference between guilty and innocent? (Hope you never get called for jury duty) I suppose that in your world, criminals would go unpunished? That's not love! In fact, if you think about it, that's insane! Suppose that I came to your house, broke in, stole your belongings, murdered your family, and wrote on your walls. Should I have impunity for my actions, or should I be punished? That's not even civil. That's anarchy! Just because "God" shows His love to ALL by punishing the guilty, does that make Him unloving? I guess that you will either display your lack of understanding as to why the things that you mentioned are detrimental to society or else you will explain it all away with rationalizations. But will you repent?

#4 - Why does the Bible contain so much anti-scientific nonsense?

First off, you ask this question and then do not give one single example. You assert that because we have microwave ovens, there can be no "god." Where did these microwaves come from? Did scientists create microwaves? No. Scientists merely use the knowledge that they gain by observing things in nature. They are not creators. In fact, until 1492, the majority of scientists believed that the earth was flat. Yet, the book of Job -written at least 2000 years earlier, says that it is round. Who was right? Scientists or Scripture? Darwin believed that the cell was a very simple organism. That was only 150 years ago. Today, we know that the cell is the most complex machine in the galaxy. You then go on to assert some things as scientific "facts:" 1) God did not create the earth in six days. 2) No worldwide flood. 3) Jonah (Yonah) didn't live in a great fish for three days. 4) Adam not created from dust. It's amazing that you can make claims like these things didn't happen, as if you were there. Were you there? I do not have the space to answer each of these in depth, but let me touch on them briefly. 1) Scientific evidence shows life "springing-up" on earth in a very short period of time. 2) If there was a worldwide flood, what would we expect to see? ANS: Millions of rock layers, laid down by water all over the earth. And what do we observe? ANS: Millions of rock layers, laid down by water all over the earth. 3) Even historical records of the region site a "myth" about a man who came inside of a large fish and preached in Nineveh. 4) It also is amazing that the human body and soil have the same composition. There is another scripture, written 2000 years ago which says:

2Pe 3:3 knowing this first: that mockers shall come in the last days with mocking, walking according to their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all continues as from the beginning of creation."
2Pe 3:5 For they choose to have this hidden from them: that the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by the Word of Elohim,
2Pe 3:6 through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water.
2Pe 3:7 And the present heavens and the earth are treasured up by the same Word, being kept for fire, to a day of judgment and destruction of wicked men.
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved ones, let not this one matter be hidden from you: that with יהוה one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2Pe 3:9 יהוה is not slow in regard to the promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward us, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

#5 - Why is God such a huge proponent of slavery in the Bible?

Again we have a baseless accusation. Let's see (from the verses that you gave) if you have any grounds for such an accusation.

Exo 21:20 "And when a man smites his male or female slave with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall certainly be punished.
Exo 21:21 "But if he remains alive a day or two, he is not punished; for he is his property.

Col 3:22 Slaves, obey your masters according to the flesh in all respects, not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing Elohim.
Col 3:23 And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Master and not to men,
Col 3:24 knowing that from the Master you shall receive the reward of the inheritance. It is the Master, Mashiach, you serve

Eph 6:5 Slaves, obey your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Mashiach;

1Pe 2:18 Slaves, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the crooked ones.

I ask you where in these verses (or in any other) does "God" say that we are required to keep slaves? He doesn't! In case you missed the entire book of Shemot (Exodus) - It is about freeing His people from slavery! He gives rules to those people who either had slaves or were slaves to govern their behaviour. How is this being a proponent of slavery! It isn't. The question is moot.

#6 - Why do bad things happen to good people?

The scripture is very clear on this - there are no good people!

Rom 3:10 As it has been written, "There is none righteous, no, not one!
Rom 3:11 "There is no one who is understanding, there is none who is seeking Elohim.
Rom 3:12 "They all have turned aside, they have together become worthless. There is none who does good, no, not one."

Tehillim (Psalms) 14:1, 3 -
Psa 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no יהוה." They have done corruptly, They have done an abominable deed, There is no one who does good.
Psa 14:2 יהוה looked down from the heavens on the sons of mankind, To see if there is a wise one, seeking יהוה.
Psa 14:3 They have all turned aside, They have together become filthy; No one is doing good, not even one.

Tehillim (Psalms) 53:1,3 -
Psa 53:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no Elohim." They have done corruptly, And they have done abominable unrighteousness; No one does good.
Psa 53:2 Elohim looked down from the heavens on the children of men, To see if there is a wise one, seeking Elohim.
Psa 53:3 They have all turned aside; They have together become filthy; No one is doing good, not even one.

Micha 7:2 -
Mic 7:2 The kind one has perished from the earth, and there is no one straight among men. All of them lie in wait for blood, everyone hunts his brother with a net.

Mattithyahu (Matthew) 19:17-
Mat 19:17 And He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except One – Elohim. But if you wish to enter into life, guard the mitzvot."1 Footnote:1See Lk. 10:28, John 12:50, Rev. 22:14.

Mark 10:18-
Mar 10:18 And יהושע said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except One – Elohim.

So we have a moot question. Why do bad things happen to BAD people? SIN!!!

#7 - Why didn't any of Jesus' miracles in the Bible leave behind any evidence?

Quite simply: Turning water into wine? (it was consumed) Multiplying bread and fish? (Consumed) Healing the sick? (Eventually those people died)

However, what about the strongest evidence that WAS left behind? The fact that billions of people believe. The written testimony and historical records.

#8 - How do we explain the fact that Jesus has never appeared to you?

Well, I'll try to answer this: Ummmm, because HE SAID HE WOULDN'T!!!

Luk 16:20 "And there was a certain beggar named Elʽazar, being covered with sores, who was placed at his gate,
Luk 16:21 and longing to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. Indeed, even the dogs came and licked his sores.
Luk 16:22 "And it came to be that the beggar died, and was carried by the messengers to the bosom of Avraham. And the rich man also died and was buried.
Luk 16:23 "And while suffering tortures in the grave, having lifted up his eyes, he saw Avraham far away, and Elʽazar in his bosom.
Luk 16:24 "And crying out he said, ‘Father Avraham, have compassion on me, and send Elʽazar to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering in this flame.’
Luk 16:25 "But Avraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your life you received your good, and likewise Elʽazar the evil, but now he is comforted and you are suffering.
Luk 16:26 ‘And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set, so that those who wish to pass from here to you are unable, nor do those from there pass to us.’
Luk 16:27 "And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, that you would send him to my father’s house,
Luk 16:28 for I have five brothers, let him warn them, lest they also come to this place of torture.’
Luk 16:29 "Avraham said to him, ‘They have Mosheh and the prophets, let them hear them.’
Luk 16:30 "And he said, ‘No, father Avraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they shall repent.’
Luk 16:31 "But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Mosheh and the Nevi'im, neither would they be persuaded even if one should rise from the dead.’ "

President Bush has never appeared to me either. Despite the fact that I have wrote letters to him and invited him for dinner. Does that mean he doesn't exist?

Yahshua not appearing is all the more proof that His words and scripture are true!

#9 - Why would Jesus want you to eat His body and drink his blood?

On a simple level, if "Jesus" is "God" He can ask you to do anything he wants. If he asks us to stand on our heads for 4 hours every other day, we should do it. Just because a king makes what appears to be an unreasonable demand - does that mean that the King doesn't exist? But to answer your question, as illogical as it is: You would have to understand the Pesach Seder meal and the Afikomen which represents the body of Mashiach. There is no cannibalism in scripture! The Torah forbids consuming blood. This is a symbolic act.

#10 - Why do Christians get divorced at the same rate as non-Christians?

Again, this has nothing to do with the existence of "God." But allow me to answer: Christians are just as pagan and non-Torah observant as their secular counterparts. Only those who hold the commands of "God" seriously (such as religious Jews) have a lower divorce rate. People are generally ignorant of the respective roles of men and women. This is a product of society, sin, and torahlessness. Why do atheists get into car wrecks at the same rate as non-atheists? Don't they know how to drive? Not necessarily. Just because science intelligently designed a car, that doesn't mean an atheist automatically can operate it!

Does "God" cause divorce? Or does man's actions like adultery, infidelity, and incompatibility cause it? Who is to blame for divorce? If everyone OBEYED the rules that "God" gave to us, the divorce rate would be zero!

Imagination

I would like to leave you with some closing thoughts on imagination. I recently watched the "Expelled" movie. One of the world's leading evolutionary biologists, Richard Dawkins, after explaining that the "Bible was a book of fairy-tales" went on to say that his best theory of how life came into existence is that the earth was "seeded by aliens!" Wow! There's some hard scientific fact for you!

Good thing I'm "Delusional!"

Tiktaalik and the fishy story of walking fish

2008-05-04T07:35:00.000-07:00

by David N. Menton
March 7, 2007
Now that the euphoria in the media has settled down on Tiktaalik, the “walking fish,” it is time to reflect upon what must surely be the biggest fish story of the decade.
In both the print and broadcast media, reports of the discovery of the fossil fish known as Tiktaalik has been hyped as convincing proof that, through a random chance process of evolution, fish sprouted legs and walked out onto the land where they breathed air and turned into amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and, ultimately, people. All such four-limbed, air–breathing creatures are called “tetrapods“ (which means four legs).
Are there really air-breathing and walking fish?
Many species of living fish are known to breathe air as well as slither on their bellies, with the help of their pectoral fins, across large expanses of land (evolutionists call this “walking”). For example, the northern snakehead and the “walking catfish” (Clarias batrachus) are air–breathing fish that can travel overland for considerable distances. The mudskippers are fish that breathe oxygen through their skin and “skip” along on land with the aid of their fleshy fins. The climbing perch (Anabas testudineus) not only breathes air and “walks” on land but is even capable of climbing trees! Yet none of these curious fish are considered by evolutionists to be ancestors of tetrapods—they are simply interesting and specialized fish.
So then what fish are the ancestors of tetrapods?
Most evolutionists look to crossopterygian fish for the ancestors of tetrapods—even though unlike many living fish, none of these fish are known to be capable of either walking or breathing out of water.
These fish have fleshy pectoral fins containing bony elements (considered similar to tetrapod legs). These similarities have prompted evolutionists to confidently declare that crossopterygians evolved into tetrapods.
According to evolutionists, the crossopterygians flourished about 380 million years ago and all were once believed to have become extinct about 80 million years ago. However, in 1938 a fishing trawler netted a fish in the Indian Ocean off the coast of Madagascar that was identified as a crossopterygian fish, previously known only from the fossil record as the coelacanth. Since then, dozens of living coelacanths have been discovered.
This came as a huge shock to evolutionists who assumed that the reason the coelacanth disappeared from the fossil record was because they evolved into land-dwelling tetrapods; yet, here they were very much alive—and swimming!
At the very least, evolutionists expected to observe some hint of walking behavior in the coelacanth, but nothing of the kind has ever been observed. Coelacanths have been observed swimming backward, upside–down, and even standing on their head but they have never been observed to walk on land or in the sea.
Evolutionists Look to Other Lobe-fins
Since living lobe-fin fish have not met expectations, evolutionists have turned to other fossilized lobe-fins for the ancestors of tetrapods. Until recently, the most popular crossopterygian candidates for ancestors of tetrapods were Eusthenopteron and Panderichthys. Both of these fish, like the Coelacanth, have fleshy pectoral fins with bones. But according to Daeschler, Shubin, and Jenkins (Nature 440(7085): 757–763, April 2006)—the discoverers of Tiktaalik—these fish possess relatively few evolutionarily important similarities to tetrapods and that until now, “our understanding of major transformations at the fish–tetrapod transition has remained limited.”
Tiktaalik to the Rescue?
In the April 2006 issue of Nature, Daeschler, et al. reported the discovery of several fossilized specimens of a crossopterygian fish named Tiktaalik roseae in sedimentary layers in arctic Canada. They confidently declared that Tiktaalik “represents an intermediate between fish with fins and tetrapods with limbs.”
Whatever else we might say about Tiktaalik, it is a fish. Like nearly all bony fishes, these fish have small pelvic fins, retain fin rays in their paired appendages and have well-developed gills—all consistent with an entirely aquatic life style.
Are the Pectoral Fins of Tiktaalik Really Legs?
The limbs of tetrapods share similar characteristic features which meet the special demands of walking on land. In addition to a distinctive suite of bones in the limbs proper, there are characteristic bones in the ankle (or wrist) and in the digits (fingers and toes).
In order to support the weight of the body on land, and permit walking, the most proximal bones of the limbs must be securely attached to the rest of the body. The hind limbs in particular have a robust pelvic girdle securely attached to the vertebral column. This differs radically from that of any fish including Tiktaalik. Essentially all fish (including Tiktaalik) have small pelvic fins relative to their pectoral fins. The legs of tetrapods are just the opposite: the hind limbs attached to the pelvic girdle are almost always more robust than the fore limbs attached to the pectoral girdle.
It is significant that the “earliest” true tetrapods recognized by evolutionists (such as Acanthostega and Ichthyostega) have all of the distinguishing features of tetrapod limbs (and their attachment bones) and were clearly capable of walking and breathing on land. The structural differences between the tetrapod leg and the fish fin is easily understood when we consider that the fish has no need to support its weight in water where it is essentially weightless.
Finally, no fish (including Tiktaalik) has true finger or toe bones. Instead, fish have slender bony fin rays, which even evolutionists concede are not homologous or related in any way to digits. While fin rays are ideal for swimming in water, they are unsuited to bear weight on land and thus permit only a slithering and belly-dragging mode of locomotion on land (in certain living species) that can be described as “walking” in only the most trivial sense of the word.
So Is Tiktaalik a Missing Link?
Finally, what about the popular claim that Tiktaalik is the “missing link” between fish and tetrapods?
In their review article on Tiktaalik, Ahlberg and Clack (Nature 440(7085):747–749) tell us that “the concept of ‘missing links’ has a powerful grasp on the imagination: the rare transitional fossils that apparently capture the origins of major groups of organisms are uniquely evocative.” The authors concede that the whole concept of “missing links” has been loaded with “unfounded notions of evolutionary ‘progress’ and with a mistaken emphasis on the single intermediate fossil as the key to understanding evolutionary transition.”
Sadly, “unfounded notions” of this kind continue to be uncritically taught and accepted in the popular media and in our schools. Even more sadly, these unfounded notions have been used to undermine the authority of Scripture.

In both the print and broadcast media last year, reports of the discovery of the fossil fish known as Tiktaalik were hyped as convincing proof that, through a random chance process of evolution, fish sprouted legs and walked out onto the land where they turned into amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and, ultimately people. But the media’s excitement seems to stem not so much from being able to report a real scientific discovery as in being able to discredit the scriptural account of Creation.
A front page article in The New York Times,1 for example, hailed Tiktaalik “as a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who hold a literal scriptural view on the origins and development of life.”

The walking fish has become symbolic of evolutionism

The whole idea of walking fish has come to be symbolic of the evolutionary worldview and its opposition to scriptural Judaism. Many evolutionists display the familiar “Darwin fish” symbol on their automobiles, T-shirts, and office doors as a public declaration of their allegiance to evolution. The “Darwin fish” is a desecration of the fish symbol used by early Catholics as a means of mutual identification during a time of persecution. Catholics chose the fish symbol because the individual letters of the Greek word ichthys (for “fish”) served as an anagram for “Jesus Christ Son of God, Savior.” Evolutionists have substituted the word “Darwin” for “ichthys” and have placed walking legs with feet on the fish. Thus, the Darwin fish reflects the fact that many evolutionists have indeed replaced Catholism with Darwinism. As for the legs on the Darwin fish, we will see that there are no known fish with true “legs” (and certainly no feet), and none capable of actually “walking”—except in the most trivial sense of the word.
We must be cautious of evolutionary claims
In the next months and years, there will doubtless be further claims in the popular media of “irrefutable proofs” for evolution and, more importantly, “proofs” against the Torah's account of Creation. The popular media—as with tax-supported zoos, science museums, and public schools—are often zealous supporters of the quasi-scientific religion of materialism.
However, few reporters, teachers, or laymen have ever read the original scientific reports upon which grandiose evolutionary claims are based. Moreover, these reports are often convoluted, conflicting, and couched in unprovable assumptions that make evolutionary claims difficult to evaluate even for those who do examine the original scientific papers.
To evaluate the claims that there are fossil fish with legs that walked out of water to take up permanent residence on the land, one needs to understand something about fish, tetrapods (limbed vertebrates including humans), legs, and what is required anatomically to walk and swim. So, let us begin by looking at the wide world of fish, and see which ones are supposed to be the “walkers.”
There are lots of fish!
The first thing to consider is that there are a lot of fish—both living and fossilized. Approximately 25,000 species of currently living fish have been identified, with 200–300 new species being discovered—not evolved—every year. Indeed, fish comprise fully half of all known vertebrates!
It is not clear how many different fish species have been found as fossils, but some experts claim that there were once nearly a million species of fish! It appears that over time we have lost a lot of species of fish—and retained relatively less.
But losing thousands of species of fish is hardly evolution—it’s extinction. The question is, have we really gained any fundamentally new fish (to say nothing of fish that evolved true legs and walked out onto the land as permanent residents)?
Classification of fish
Fish come in a bewildering variety of forms that defy consistent classification. As a result, there are competing classification schemes based on the particular bias of the classifier.
Basically, all species of fish have been divided into two main types—the jawless fish (hagfish and lampreys) and the jawed fish (all the rest). The jawed fish are in turn, divided into two groups: the cartilaginous fish (such as the sharks and rays which have a skeleton made of flexible cartilage) and the much more numerous bony fish, which have hard bony skeletons.

The evolutionary timeline of lobe-finned fish and amphibious tetrapods. Many of the so-called transitional forms have been greatly disputed, discovered (e.g. coelacanth), or dismissed, and Tiktaalik has recently been propped up as the “savior” of the evolutionary paradigm. How soon will it be before Tiktaalik is abandoned also?

Evolutionists believe that it took about 100 million years for invertebrates (animals with no bones) to evolve into vertebrates (animals with backbones). However, no compelling fossil evidence documents this purported major and unambiguous transition.
While evolutionists believe that fish were the first true vertebrates, they’re not sure which evolved first—cartilaginous or bony fish.
During the embryological development of vertebrates, most bones develop first as cartilage models that are later replaced by bone (called endochondral bone). Following the dictates of the embryonic recapitulation myth, it would be attractive for evolutionists to propose that cartilaginous fish evolved into bony fish, but most evolutionists consider the cartilaginous fish to be far too specialized to have been the ancestors of the bony fish.
The bony fish (Osteicthyii)
Bony fish are by far the most numerous of all fish, comprising about 24,000 living species, and they come in an amazing variety of forms and sizes (ranging from a half-inch-long sea horse weighing a fraction of an ounce to a 1,000 pound blue marlin). The purported evolutionary relationship of all these fish is at best highly speculative.
All bony fish have gills for breathing and fins for swimming. Starting from front to back, the most important fins for swimming are the paired pectoral fins (which are typically attached to the posterior margin of the skull), the generally smaller paired pelvic fins (that occupy a position near the anus), and the caudal fin (tail fin).
Bony fish are divided into two groups, the lobe-finned fish, known mostly from fossils, and the vastly more numerous ray-finned fish. Both have fins made up of bony rays, but the lobe-fins have fin rays mounted on a short, fleshy stalk supported by successive segments of bone.
It is the superficial resemblance of these bony fins to tetrapod legs that has led evolutionists to speculate that the lobe-fin fish are the ancestors of tetrapods in the late Devonian (approximately 380 million years ago). So, let’s focus our investigation on the lobe-fins.
The lobe-fin fish (Sarcopterygii)
The lobe-finned fish have been divided into two rather dissimilar groups, the Dipnoi (lungfish) and the Crossopterygii (coelacanths and fossil relatives).
Lungfish (Dipnoi)
There are only three surviving types of lungfish. They are all eel-like in appearance, and have long and slender fleshy pectoral and pelvic fins, which are highly mobile. This group derives its name from the fact that they have air sacks (“lungs”) that function at least partially in breathing (though all, at least in their immature state, have functional gills as well). The fact that these fish can breathe air, survive out of water for long periods of time, and have the ability to pull themselves along on their bellies (i.e. “walk”) across mud flats with the aid of their fins, has caught the imagination of some evolutionists who consider them to be ancestral to tetrapods.
Many living fish are air-breathers and “walkers”
But air-breathing fish are not uncommon among living fish species. For example, many popular aquarium fish (such as the paradise fish, betta and gourami) are surface air-breathers that can actually drown if kept under water! Evolutionists are not even in agreement on whether lungs evolved before gills (as proposed by the famous vertebrate evolutionist Alfred Romer), or gills evolved before lungs.
Even the sort of “walking” that lungfish engage in is not uncommon among living fish species. Many fish are known to pull themselves along on their bellies, with the help of their pectoral fins, across large expanses of mud flats and even dry land. For example, the northern snakehead and the “walking catfish” (Clarias batrachus) are air-breathing fish that can travel overland for considerable distances. The mudskippers are fish that breathe oxygen through their skin and “skip” along on land with the aid of their fleshy fins—indeed some of the larger species are said to skip faster than the average person can run! The climbing perch (Anabas testudineus) not only breathes air and “walks” on land but is even said to be capable of climbing trees! Yet none of these curious fish are considered by evolutionists to be ancestors of tetrapods—they are simply interesting and specialized fish. In fact there are even “flying fish” (with specialized fins that permit them to fly or glide in the air for hundreds of yards over water), but evolutionists have never considered them to be ancestors of birds.
Crossopterygians
Most evolutionists now look to fossil Crossopterygians for the ancestors of tetrapods—even though none of them are known to be capable of either walking or breathing out of water.
The distinguishing features of these fish are the division of the skull into anterior and posterior units (considered similar to embryonic tetrapod skulls); and fleshy pectoral fins containing bony elements (considered similar to tetrapod legs). These similarities have prompted evolutionists to confidently declare that Crossopterygians evolved into tetrapods.
According to evolutionists, the Crossopterygians flourished during the middle to late Devonian (extending from 385 million years ago to 365 million years ago) and all were once believed to have become extinct about 80 million years ago (even before the extinction of the dinosaurs).2
The coelacanth—one of many “living fossils”
However, in 1938 a fishing trawler netted a strange large blue fish in the Indian Ocean off the coast of Madagascar. This distinctive fish was soon identified as a Crossopterygian fish previously known only from the fossil record as the coelacanth.
Coelacanths are distinctly different from all other living fishes. They have an extra lobe on their tails (compared to other lobe-finned fish) and are the only living animal to have a fully-functional joint in their cranium, which allows the front part of the head to be lifted when the fish is feeding.
The discovery of a coelacanth came as a surprise to evolutionists. (It was comparable to finding a living dinosaur, because these fish were believed to have become extinct 80 million years ago when they disappeared from the fossil record.) However, since 1938, dozens of living coelacanths have been found and studied, some as far as 7,000 miles away from the location of the first sightings!3
Understandably, evolutionists are puzzled by how coelacanths could disappear for over “80 million years” and then turn up alive and well in the twentieth century. They speculate that the fossilized coelacanths lived in environments favoring fossilization, whereas modern coelacanths live at great depths (over 600 feet) in caves and overhangs of steep marine reefs that don’t favor fossil formation. This, however, is special pleading, since essentially no modern marine environment favors the formation of fossils and, indeed, none are being formed, as this would require rapid burial, which is not observed under normal conditions.
More importantly the coelacanth (along with many other “living fossils”) show that evolutionists can never assume that a plant or animal did not live during any particular period of assumed geologic time simply because it does not appear in the fossil record of this period. If 200-pound coelacanths can “hide” for “80 million years,” it would seem anything can hide.
Another reason finding a living coelacanth caused so much surprise at the time of its discovery was that coelacanths were widely believed to be the ancestors of the tetrapods. Indeed, many evolutionists assumed that the very reason the coelacanth disappeared from the fossil record was because they evolved into land-dwelling tetrapods; yet here they were very much alive—and swimming!
Coelacanths don’t walk
At the very least, evolutionists expected to observe some hint of walking behavior in the coelacanth, but sadly the fish have done nothing to accommodate them. Although living coelacanths have often been observed swimming in their natural habitat, they have never been observed walking. Indeed, coelacanths have been observed swimming backward, upside-down, and even standing on their head! Alas—they absolutely refuse to walk on land or in the sea.
Evolutionists look to other lobe-fins
Since living lobe-fin fish have not met expectations, evolutionists have turned to other fossilized lobe-fins for the ancestors of tetrapods. (After all, one can speculate endlessly about fossils without fear of contradiction—until they turn-up alive.)
Currently, the three most popular Crossopterygian candidates for ancestors of tetrapods are Eusthenopteron, Panderichthys, and the recently discovered Tiktaalik.
Eusthenopteron
For several years, the evolutionist’s “gold standard” of fish with “legs” has been the fossil fish Eusthenopteron (which, like the coelacanth, has fleshy pectoral fins with bones). If you have seen an artist’s illustration in a textbook showing a fish walking out of the water, most likely it was Eusthenopteron.
Like most other jawed fish, Eusthenopteron has its pectoral fin girdle (bones that anchor the pectoral fins) attached to the back of its skull by means of a dermal bone called the cleithrum. Dermal bones develop directly from connective tissue cells under the skin, rather than from cartilage models as is the case for endochondral bones. (Fish scales, by the way, are dermal bones as well, and reside just under the superficial layer of the skin.)
Panderichthys
Panderichthys is yet another fossil Crossopterygian fish that has been declared to be an ancestor of tetrapods. Panderichthys lacks dorsal and ventral fins and has a relatively small tail fin (thus looking less obviously fish-like than Eusthenopteron).
Like the other Crossopterygian fish, Panderichthys has thick bony pectoral fins. Evolutionists argue that the shape of these fins and their pectoral girdle look more like that of tetrapods than Eusthenopteron. But Daeschler, Shubin, and Jenkins—the discoverers of Tiktaalik—claim that “Panderichthys possesses relatively few tetrapod synapomorphies, and provides only partial insight into the origin of major features of the skull, limbs and axial skeleton of early tetrapods.” As a result, they insist that “our understanding of major transformations at the fish-tetrapod transition has remained limited.”4
Tiktaalik to the rescue?
In the April 2006, issue of Nature, Daeschler, et al. reported the discovery of several fossilized specimens of a Crossopterygian fish named Tiktaalik roseae. These well preserved specimens were found in sedimentary layers of siltstone—cross-bedded with sandstones—in Arctic Canada.4
Like the other lobe-fin fish, Tiktaalik was declared to be late Devonian (between 385-359 million years old) by means of a “dating” method known as palynomorph biostratigraphy. This method presumes to date sedimentary rock layers on the basis of the assumed evolutionary age of pollen and spores contained in the rock. Most importantly, the discoverers of Tiktaalik claim that it “represents an intermediate between fish with fins and tetrapods with limbs.”
Tiktaalik is a fish
Whatever else we might say about Tiktaalik, it is a fish. In a review article on Tiktaalik (appearing in the same issue of the scientific journal Nature that reported the discovery of Tiktaalik), fish evolution experts, Ahlberg and Clack concede that “in some respects Tiktaalik and Panderichthys are straightforward fishes: they have small pelvic fins, retain fin rays in their paired appendages and have well-developed gill arches, suggesting that both animals remained mostly aquatic.” 5
In other respects, however, Ahlberg and Clack argue that Tiktaalik is more tetrapod-like than Panderichthys because “the bony gill cover has disappeared, and the skull has a longer snout.” The authors weakly suggest that the significance of all this is that “a longer snout suggests a shift from sucking towards snapping up prey, whereas the loss of gill cover bones probably correlates with reduced water flow through the gill chamber. The ribs also seem larger in Tiktaalik, which may mean it was better able to support its body out of water.”
Without the author’s evolutionary bias, of course, there is no reason to assume that Tiktaalik was anything other than exclusively aquatic. And how do we know that Tiktaalik lost its gill cover as opposed to never having one? The longer snout and lack of bony gill covers (found in many other exclusively-aquatic living fish) are interpreted as indicating a reduced flow of water through the gills, which, in turn, is declared to be suggestive of partial air-breathing—but this is quite a stretch. Finally, what does any of this have to do with fish evolving into land dwelling tetrapods?
Are the pectoral fins of Tiktaalik really legs?
Before we get into Tiktaalik’s “legs,” it might be instructive to consider an old trick question. If we call our arms “legs,” then how many legs would we have? The answer, of course, is two legs—just because we call our arms “legs” doesn’t make them legs. The same might be said of the bony fins of Crossopterygian fish—we may call them “legs” but that doesn’t necessarily make them legs.
Shubin et al. make much of the claim that Tiktaalik’s bony fins show a reduction in dermal bone and an increase in endochondral bone.6 This is important to them because the limb bones of tetrapods are entirely endochondral. They further claim that the cleithrum (a dermal bone to which the pectoral fin is attached in fish) is detached from the skull, resembling the position of the scapula (shoulder blade) of a tetrapod. They also claim that the endochondral bones of the fin are more similar to those of a tetrapod in terms of structure and range of motion. However, none of this, if true, proves that Tiktaalik’s fins supported its weight out of water, or that it was capable of a true walking motion. (It certainly doesn’t prove that these fish evolved into tetrapods.)
The limbs of tetrapods
The limbs of tetrapods share similar characteristic features. These unique features meet the special demands of walking on land. In the case of the forelimbs there is one bone nearest the body (proximal) called the humerus that articulates (flexibly joins) with two bones, the radius and ulna, further away from the body (distal). These in turn articulate with multiple wrist bones, which finally articulate with typically five digits. The hind limbs similarly consist of one proximal bone, the femur, which articulates with two distal bones, the tibia and fibula, which in turn articulate with ankle bones; and finally with typically five digits. In order to support the weight of the body on land, and permit walking, the most proximal bones of the limbs must be securely attached to the rest of the body. The humerus of the forelimb articulates with the pectoral girdle which includes the scapula (shoulder blade) and the clavicle (collar bone). The only bony attachment of the pectoral girdle to the body is the clavicle.
The femur of the hind limb articulates with the pelvic girdle, which consists of fused bones collectively called the pelvis (hip bone). It is this hind limb—with its robust pelvic girdle securely attached to the vertebral column—that differs radically from that of any fish. (The tetrapod arrangement is important for bearing the weight of the animal on land.)
All tetrapod limb bones and their attachment girdles are endochondral bones. In the case of all fish, including Tiktaalik, the cleithrum and fin rays are dermal bones.
It is significant that the “earliest” true tetrapods recognized by evolutionists (such as Acanthostega and Ichthyostega) have all of the distinguishing features of tetrapod limbs (and their attachment girdles) and were clearly capable of walking and breathing on land. The structural differences between the tetrapod leg and the fish fin is easily understood when we realize that the buoyant density of water is about a thousand times greater than that of air. A fish has no need to support much of its weight in water where it is essentially weightless.
The fins of fish (including Tiktaalik)
Essentially all fish (including Tiktaalik) have small pelvic fins relative to their pectoral fins. The legs of tetrapods are just the opposite: the hind limbs attached to the pelvic girdle are almost always more robust than the fore limbs attached to the pectoral girdle. (This is particularly obvious in animals such as kangaroos and theropod dinosaurs.) Not only are the pelvic fins of all fish small, but they’re not even attached to the axial skeleton (vertebral column) and thus can’t bear weight on land.
While the endochondral bones in the pectoral fins of Crossopterygians have some similarity to bones in the fore limbs of tetrapods, there are significant differences. For example, there is nothing even remotely comparable to the digits in any fish. The bony rays of fish fins are dermal bones that are not related in any way to digits in their structure, function or mode of development. Clearly, fin rays are relatively fragile and unsuitable for actual walking and weight bearing.
Even the smaller endochondral bones in the distal fin of Tiktaalik are not related to digits. Ahlberg and Clack point out that “although these small distal bones bear some resemblance to tetrapod digits in terms of their function and range of movement, they are still very much components of a fin. There remains a large morphological gap between them and digits as seen in, for example Acanthostega: if the digits evolved from these distal bones, the process must have involved considerable developmental rearranging.”
So is Tiktaalik a missing link?
Finally, what about the popular claim that Tiktaalik is the “missing link” between fish and tetrapods?
In their review article on Tiktaalik, Ahlberg and Clack tell us that “the concept of ‘missing links’ has a powerful grasp on the imagination: the rare transitional fossils that apparently capture the origins of major groups of organisms are uniquely evocative.” The authors concede that the whole concept of “missing links” has been loaded with “unfounded notions of evolutionary ‘progress’ and with a mistaken emphasis on the single intermediate fossil as the key to understanding evolutionary transition.”5
Sadly, “unfounded notions” of this kind continue to be uncritically taught and accepted in the popular media and in our schools. Even more sadly, these unfounded notions have been used to undermine the authority of holy Scripture.
Dr. David Menton holds his Ph.D. in cell biology from Brown University and is a well-respected author and teacher. He is assistant Professor Emeritus at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri. Dr. Menton has many published works and is one of the most popular speakers for Answers in Genesis–USA.

FOOTNOTES:

1. Wilford, John Noble, Fossil Called Missing Link From Sea to Land Animals, The New York Times, Late Edition—Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 5, April 6, 2006.

2. New Fossils Fill the Evolutionary Gap Between Fish and Land Animals, http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=106807, 2006.

3. Another was recently caught near Indonesia.

4. Daeschler, Edward B. , Shubin, Neil H., and Jenkins, Farish A., A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan, Nature 440(7085): 757–763, 6 April 2006.

5. Ahlberg, P.E. and Clack, J.A., News and Views, Nature 440(7085): 747–749), 6 April 2006.

6. Shubin, Neil H., Daeshler, Edward B., and Farish, Jr., Jenkins A., The pectoral fin of Tiktaalik roseae and the origin of the tetrapod limb, Nature 440(7085): 764–771), 6 April 2006.

Should we celebrate Christmas?

2007-12-25T07:52:00.000-08:00

Should we Celebrate Christmas?
FROM ELIYAH.COM
Edited by: Paul D. Newman
(Also see related study, "Should There Be Idolatry in Our Worship?")
Click here for RealAudio version

Tradition
Sometimes tradition is acceptable and perhaps even pleasing in the sight of YHVH. Sometimes it is not acceptable and is even hated by Him. The evil of traditions that transgress the commandment of YHVH was a key teaching of Yahshua HaMashiach:
Matt 15:1 (NKJV) Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Yerushalayim came to Yahshua, saying, 2 "Why do Your talmidim transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread."
I hear people ask me this, "Why do you not celebrate Christmas (transgress the traditions of our elders)?". Nowhere in the pages of scripture do we find a command to keep the celebration of Christmas. Nowhere in the pages of scripture do we find an example of any talmid keeping Christmas. The only time Christmas is even mentioned in the pages of scripture is to condemn it (as we will see). So, my answer to this question would be, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of YHVH because of your tradition?".
3 He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of Elohim because of your tradition? 4 "For Elohim commanded, saying, `Honor your father and your mother'; and, `He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5 "But you say, `Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to Elohim" 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of Elohim of none effect by your tradition.
This was an example of how the scribes and Pharisees forsook the commandment of YHVH in favor of their tradition. As I will share, Christmas is also transgressing the commandment of YHVH in favor of tradition. What does Yahshua think about this?
7 "Hypocrites! Well did YeshaYahu (Isaiah) prophesy about you, saying: 8 `These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with [their] lips, But their heart is far from Me. 9 And in vain they worship Me, Teaching [as] doctrines the commandments of men.' "
Christmas is honoring with the lips but it is one of many vain doctrines and commandments of men. Again, there is not a single scripture in the scriptures that tells us that we are to celebrate the birth nor the resurrection of Yahshua HaMashiach. Let alone in a pagan way!
So yes, I do believe we must question these traditions that have been handed down to this generation even though few dare to. Many Christians speak against the Catholic traditions of Lent, Ash Wednesday, etc. but fail to (or refuse to) recognize that the same types of pagan elements exist in the celebration of Christmas and Easter! But how did these festivals get their start?

Origin of Christmas
The following is a quote from the 2000 Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 11 ; page 390.
"During the later periods of Roman history, sun worship gained in importance and ultimately led to what has been called a 'solar monotheism.' Nearly all the gods of the period were possessed of Solar qualities, and both Christ and Mithra acquired the traits of solar deities. The feast of Sol and Victus (open unconquered Sun) on December 25th was celebrated with great joy, and eventually this date was taken over by the "Christians" as Christmas, the birthday of Christ."
Notice how it says "both Christ and Mithra acquired the traits of solar deities"? The "Christians" were apparently trying to get more converts so they tried to "paganize" the Mashiach to make Him more attractive to pagans. They even officially brought the feast of the unconquered sun into their worship in 336 AD. This is the origin of Christmas.
But the real question is, "Who converted who?" Do we murder to bring a murderer to Yahshua? Do we rape to bring a rapist to the Mashiach? It is true that by 336AD, the mainstream beliefs of "Christianity" were already far from the truth the apostles taught anyway. However, even giving them that, shouldn't true believers be teaching the unbelievers the true way of YHVH rather than the unbelievers teaching believers these pagan customs and practices? Certainly! Yet, the "Christians" not only learned these heathen ways, they also incorporated them into their worship. Scripture says:
Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Today, Christmas is a very popular holiday. However, as is often the case, what is popular is not always right and what is right is not always popular. Christmas means 'mass for Christ'. The name of the holiday is much newer than the holiday itself. The customs associated with Christmas, in one form or another, have been celebrated for literally thousands of years. 'Christmas' is just a new name for an old holiday.
There is no doubt that the customs that are associated with Christmas, as well as the idea of a deity being born on December 25th are of pagan origin. One need only look to an encyclopedia or even many local newspapers in the 12th month of the year to find this truth. The real issue is whether or not we should walk in these customs. So what is so bad about it? Is it just for the children? What should we be teaching our children? Truth or lies?
The truth is that the Mashiach was not born on December 25th. December 25th is the birthday of nearly every pagan god ever invented! In fact, the pagan customs associated with Christmas are clearly condemned in the scriptures. Paganism/Idolatry is something that is against YHVH. If we know that the roots of Christmas are of pagan origin, shouldn't the roots of our worship be in the scriptures, rather than paganism? Consider the scriptures that I will quote that clearly proclaim that the keeping of these festivals is sinful. Perhaps a section on the origins of these festivals will be added to my Home Page in the future. However, for now I ask that you seek this out for yourself. [Alexander Hissop's "The Two Babylons" is an excellent source.] YHVH's people should always seek the truth. Consider these scriptures:
YermeYahu 10:1 Hear the word which YHVH speaks to you, O house of Yisra'el. 2 Thus says YHVH: "Do not learn the way of the Goyim; Do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, For the Goyim are dismayed at them. 3 For the customs of the peoples are futile; For one cuts a tree from the forest, The work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. 4 They decorate it with silver and gold; They fasten it with nails and hammers So that it will not topple. First of all, YHVH is telling us in this verse "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles" Don't even learn it, let alone practice it and incorporate it into the worship of YHVH! Secondly, it says that the Gentiles were dismayed at the signs of heaven. History tells us that when the sun began to go further away from the earth and the days grew shorter in the winter, the sun worshipping Gentiles were "dismayed", and feared that the sun would not return. So they held certain festivals just after the time of the Winter Solstice when it did begin to return. This return of the sun is why December 25th is the birthday of so many solar deities. One of the customs the pagans has was to decorate a tree that they had cut down and fasten it so that would not topple. YHVH tells us not to learn the way of the heathen. And here He even goes so far as describe a custom that is a way of the heathen. Yet, we see this same custom exist even today which is called the Christmas tree. Have you ever wondered why in the world someone would do something as strange as cut down a tree and put it in their house and then decorate it with all different types of ornaments? Not only is it odd, it is wrong. This custom, along with other pagan customs like it are clearly condemned in this passage. We don't need a prophet to come and tell us today that this custom is wrong. YermeYahu (Jeremiah) said so a long time ago!
This custom, along with other pagan customs like it are clearly condemned in this passage. Other customs include Mistletoe, the Yule log and Santa Claus. If you seek, you will find that these things are rooted in idolatry also.

Santa Claus
All over the world, Santa Claus is God to the children of the world (move the n to the end of Santa). Others say 'Father Christmas'. Parents purposely and deliberately lie to their children and tell them that they should fear Santa Claus because "he knows if you've been bad or good". These same parents also lie to their children about the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy. Then they wonder why their children become liars and don't believe the Mashiach is real later on in life. This is clearly a total abomination to YHVH. You don't have to look very far in the word of YHVH to find out how much he loathes idolatry and lies. YHVH is the only true Mighty One. Our children look to us and believe every word we say. Do they not deserve the truth? How abominable it is for a believer to teach their children to fear Santa Claus and in so doing creep an idol into the conscience of a child!

Lies, lies everything is lies
The very foundation of the Christmas holiday is a lie. The Mashiach was not born December 25th. He did not ask us to celebrate his birthday. He did not say to set up a tree in our house and decorate it and our houses with anything. Santa Claus does not exist. He doesn't have reindeer that fly and he isn't going to come on December 25th and leave any gifts. Everything is a lie. Is YHVH the originator of this holiday? Or is it the father of lies? Yahshua condemned the leaders of that generation for teaching lies:
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
It's high time that we forsake these lies and abide in the truth! Let's forsake this foolish practice of yoking the Mashiach (who said "I am the TRUTH") together with lies, for He has nothing to do with lies.
Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his mitzvot, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 5 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
The book of Revelation also predicts that those who hate YHVH will be glad when the two witnesses of YHVH die, for they will make merry and have a gift exchange:
Revelation 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. 10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.

Sound familiar?

Mixed worship condemned in scripture
Now let's take this a step further. Not only is it sinful in the eyes of YHVH to practice these traditions, it is also a sin to take these traditions of pagans and apply them to the worship of YHVH.
Devarim (Deut) 12:29 "When YHVH your Elohim cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land,
(This is YHVH warning the children of Yisra'el about what NOT to do when going into the promised land)
30 "take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, `How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.'
Not "Let us serve their elohim (gods)" but "HOW did these nations serve there elohim"
31 "You shall not worship YHVH your Elohim in that way; for every abomination to YHVH which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. 32 "Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it. Very CLEAR. "Thou shalt not do so unto YHVH thy Elohim:" It is abundantly clear. Do not worship YHVH in that way, the way of the heathen! Do not add to His commandments and do not take away from His commandments. Both Christmas and Easter take pagan festivals and traditions and apply them to the worship of YHVH. This is clearly condemned here. Would it be right to take a Satanic holiday that Satanists have invented and then incorporate that holiday into the worship of YHVH? Surely not. Yet all paganism is Satanism. Satan is behind all pagan worship. And whatever god the idolaters worship, they are actually worshipping Satan.
1 Corinthians 10:20 Rather, that the things which the Goyim sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to Elohim, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons.
Now consider this next verse:
1Cor 10:21 You cannot drink the cup of YHVH and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of YHVH's table and of the table of demons.
Which table will you choose? I hope it is YHVH's table..

The Pagan History of Christmas

2007-12-25T06:56:00.000-08:00

The Pagan History of Christmas
by Dr. Joel Ehrlich
Additional NotesbyDJ Love
Editing by Paul D. Newman

The "Christian Church" and much of Judaism is entrenched deep in the ancient Babylonian mystery religion, only today it is referred to as 'culture' or 'traditions.' The seventeenth chapter of the book of Revelation speaks of a mysterious woman who rides a beast. It shows that at the end of the age, most of the earth would be drinking out of her hand. With the excessive compromise that has taken place in Judaism and "Christianity," that time has arrived. Her method of intoxication is merriment, festivity, drink, and most of all, materialism. This materialism is the free enterprise, or capitalistic system.
Revelation 17:1-21 And there came one of the seven malachei which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, come hither; I will show unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters; 2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.Revelation 18:3-43 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, come out of her, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
All of YHVH's people, as well as the secular earth, are guilty of giving in to Babylon's pageantry and paganism. Most "Christians" and Jews either don't know or care to know the truth of these pagan ties. "Christians" rationalize that they are worshipping "Jesus," while Jews see no harm in Hellenizing their Channukah to spice it up. These people have become drunk from drinking from this ancient mystery cup. They don't even recognize the sign of their drunkenness, which is complacency and indifference. Refusing to heed YHVH's call to be sanctified and to come out of Babylon, they express their hypocrisy by refusing to honor YHVH's ordained feasts and holidays. A recent news article from the Scripps Howard News Service states in their article, "Christmas Celebration Crosses All Faiths.""Christmas remains America's favorite holiday-a religious celebration that transcends the nation's increasingly multicultural society. Eighty-three percent of the adult residents of the United States-including Jews, Muslims and atheists-say they put a decorated tree in their homes. Fifty-nine percent say there is no holiday they love more than Christmas."What is Christmas and from where did it originate? Yule is the Chaldean name for 'infant' or 'little child.' In ancient Babylon, the 25th of December was known as Yule day or the birth of the promised child day. This was the day of the birth of the incarnate sun, who appeared as a baby child to redeem a world bound in darkness. It was an essential belief of the Babylonian religious system, that the sun god, also known as Shamash, was the chief god in a polytheistic system. Tammuz was also worshipped as the god incarnate, or promised baby son of Shamash, who was to be the Savior of the world. It is interesting that a review of the New Covenant Scriptures reveals that no early believers reverenced Yahshua's birth. Instead, as is the Jewish custom of faith, they were told to commemorate his death. [I Corinthians 11:26] We find in the Catholic encyclopedia that Christmas was not even among the earliest church festivals. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that the Roman Church began observing December 25th as "Jesus' " birthday. By the fifth century A.D., the Roman Church ordered the birth of "Jesus" to be forever observed on December 25th. At the time of this decree, the Roman Church knew full well that the pagan religious cults throughout the Roman and Greek worlds celebrated the pagan sun god, Mithra, on this self same day. This winter festival was known as the Nativity of the Sun. It was also known in the Roman Empire as Saturnalia [another name for sun worship].
Note: In 46 BC, when the Roman "Julian Calendar" was adopted, December 24th was the shortest day of the year. Therefore, December 25th was the first annual day that daylight began to increase. Thus, the origin of the REBIRTH or Annual Birthday of the Invincible SUN.In accordance with the Roman "Julian calendar," the "Saturnalia" festival appears to have taken place on December 17th; it was preceded by the "Consualia" near December 15th, and followed by the "Opalia" on December 19th. These pagan celebrations typically lasted for a week, ending just before the late Roman Imperial Festival for "Sol Invictus" (Invincible Sun) on December 25th. In 1582 AD. Roman Catholic Pope Gregory the XIII caused the current "Gregorian Calendar" to be adopted, in order to eliminate the solar time shift error introduced by the "Julian Calendar."By December 1582 AD the shortest day of the year had shifted 12 days on the Roman "Julian Calendar" to Wednesday, December 12, 1582.However, the Original December 25th 'Birth Date' was retained for all pagan Sun gods by the Roman "Saturnalia" and "Sol Invictus" traditions; which were now called the "Twelve Days of Christ Mass." On the new Roman Catholic Gregorian calendar the shortest annual day was numerically shifted back 10 days to the 22nd of December, where it remains to this day; while the original order of the days of the week remained unchanged.Therefore, Wednesday, December 12th, 1582 AD, became Wednesday, December 22nd, 1582 AD, and the True Sabbath Day remained unchanged. YHVH, the Only True Self-existent Eternal Creator, would never have allowed The True Mashiach to be born on or near the December 25th birthday period of the pagan Sun gods; during the time in which virgins were sacrificed, murder was commonplace, and orgies the norm. This would be an entirely unacceptable association.
The winter festival was very popular in ancient times, and marked a time of rejoicing and festivity. Much of our present day customs involved in the Christmas season are a direct inheritance of the Roman winter festival of Saturnalia. These days involved gift giving, colored lights to ward off evil spirits, festive meals, and of course, decorated trees.The present day Christmas tree also goes back to the worship of sacred trees in the ancient Babylonian system. The green evergreen symbolized the incarnate Shamash coming to life through the incarnate baby Tammuz. The custom of decorating and worshipping trees spread throughout the known world, with the variety of tree used selected according to the natural growth of each area of the world. The Druids worshipped the oak tree, the Mitsrites worshipped the palm tree, while in Rome it was the fir tree. There are at least ten references in the Scriptures warning that these green trees were associated with idolatry and pagan worship. YirmeYahu (Jeremiah) 10:1-4 details the Yisra'elites following the very pagan customs practiced today.
YirmeYahu 10:1-4 "Hear ye the word which YHVH speaketh unto you, O House of Yisra'el: Thus saith YHVH, learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain; for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."
The reason YHVH warns against the worship of the signs of heaven in association with this custom is that it was associated with the worship of the sun.The very term, Christmas, comes from the sacred Christ-mass, where the Pope in the role of the High Priest of the mystery Babylon religion introduces the people to the concept of trans-substantiation. Using the wine and round wafers to reflect the life of Shamash, the sun god, the name of "Jesus" replaces the ancient pagan custom. The wine and wafers are now said to be the transformation of the actual blood and body of Mashiach within the person who ingests them. People, thereby, relive again and again the death and resurrection of the incarnate god.
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
Main Entry:
Christ·mas
Pronunciation:
..--kris-mus..
Function:
noun
Usage:
often attributive
Etymology:
Middle English Christemasse, from Old English Cristes mæsse, literally, Christ's mass
Date:
before 12th century
1 : a Christian feast on December 25 or among some Eastern Orthodox Christians on January 7 that commemorates the birth of Christ and is usually observed as a legal holiday 2 : christmastide
Yisra'elites performed this same ritual in their worship to the Queen of heaven and the incarnate god Tammuz.
YirmeYahu 44:18, 19, 23 18 But since we left off to burn incense to the Queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine. 19 And when we burned incense to the Queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her without our men. 23 Because ye have burned incense, and because ye have sinned against YHVH, and have not obeyed the voice of YHVH, nor walked in His law, nor in His statutes, nor in His testimonies, therefore, this evil is happened unto you, as at this day.
It would surprise most "Christians" to learn that the history of the church is filled with historic battles over these very doctrinal issues. Many of the reformation movements in the church made drastic attempts to get away from these pagan holidays. Calvin, in 1550, instigated an edict concerning church holidays. A ban was passed against observing various church festivals, which included Christmas. In a tract on the necessity of reforming the church, Calvin exclaimed: "I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that YHVH disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word."John Knox, in the Scottish reformation, repeatedly confronted the Catholic Church, contending that true worship must be instituted by YHVH, not derived from the traditions of men. At the heart of his argument was an appeal to Torah, especially, references to Devarim (Deuteronomy) 4 and 12, which states that one must not add to nor subtract from YHVH's word. John Knox, History of the Reformation in Scotland, 1950, Vol. 1, page 91 states the following: "That YHVH's word damns your ceremonies it is evident; for the plain and straight commandment of YHVH is, 'Not that thing which appears good in thy eyes, shalt thou do to YHVH thy Elohim, but what YHVH thy Elohim has commanded thee, that do thou; add nothing to it; diminish nothing from it.' Now unless that ye are able to prove that YHVH has commanded your ceremonies, this His former commandment will damn both you and them." The holidays of Christmas and Easter were banned from the Church of Scotland. David Calderwood [1511-1651], representing the Scottish ministries, asserted in reference to Christmas and Easter: "The Judaical days had once that honor, as to be appointed by YHVH Himself; but the anniversary days appointed by men have not like honor. This opinion of Yahshua's nativity on the 25th day of December was bred at Rome." David Calderwood then exposed the Roman claims made for the 25th of December as the day of Mashiach's birth. He argues that the Apostles never ordained it. He said the following: "Nay, let us utter the truth, December-Christmas is a just imitation of the December-Saturnalia of the ethnic [heathen] Romans, and so used as if Bacchus [another name for the sun god], and not Mashiach, were the Elohim of Christians." George Gillespie [1613-1649], a premier Scottish theologian, wrote in a book published in 1637 called A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies Obtruded Upon the Church of Scotland. "The holidays [reference to Christmas and Easter] take a severe beating on a number of accounts. Sacred significant ceremonies devised by man are to be reckoned among images forbidden in the second commandment in regards to worshipping idols." The English Puritans fought to ban the worship of Christmas and Easter. They resorted to Galatians 4:8-11, which many "Christians" have used to say that it is referring to YHVH not wanting believers to worship "Jewish" holidays. However, this is wrong on several accounts: 1. These scriptures are specifically referring to a people brought near to YHVH through Mashiach, who were former pagans. 2. Rabbi Sha'ul himself, as detailed throughout the book of Acts, worshipped YHVH through His ordained feasts. 3. If we were taking these scriptures as an argument for Mashiach doing away with Torah, then this would put it in direct conflict with Yahshua's statement in MattithYahu (Matthew) 5:17, where he stated he did not come to do away with Torah, nor the Nevi'im. 4. These feasts are always called "Feasts of YHVH," or He calls them "My Feasts" in Scripture. They are not "Jewish" feasts.
Galatians 4:8-118 How best then, when ye knew not YHVH, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods [obviously referring to pagan heathen practices]. 9 But now, after that ye have known YHVH, or rather are known of YHVH, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, where unto ye deserve again to be in bondage? 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years [reference to pagan holidays]. 11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.
History records that when the Puritans came to power in England, Parliament, in June,1647, passed legislation abolishing Christmas and other holidays. In this legislation, they wrote the following: "For as much as the feast of the nativity of Christ, Easter, and other festivals, commonly called "holy" days, have been here-to-fore superstitiously used and observed; be it ordained that the said feasts, and all other festivals, commonly called "holy" days, be no longer observed as festivals."The American Puritan movement took an even stronger stand against these pagan holidays. Samuel Miller, a Puritan and professor of history and church government at Princeton Seminary, stated in 1896 in his book, why Presbyterians reject the "holy" days of Christmas and Easter. He stated that "the Scriptures were the only infallible rule of faith and practice, and that no rite or ceremony ought to have a place in the public worship of YHVH, which is not warranted in Scripture. Not only does the celebration of non-scriptural holidays lack a scriptural foundation, but the scriptures positively discount it." [Miller, pgs. 65,74]Presbyterians were not the only ones who maintained a strong stand against Christmas, as there were many other Christians who held to similar convictions. As a matter of fact, the famous preacher, Charles Spurgeon, stated in a sermon given on Christmas Eve, December 24th, 1871, the following:"We have no superstitious regard for times and seasons. Certainly we do not believe in the present ecclesiastical arrangement called Christmas: first, because we do not believe in the mass at all, but abhor it, whether it be said or sung in Latin or English; and secondly, because we find no scriptural warrant whatever for observing any day as the birthday of the Savior; and, consequently, it's observance is a superstition, because not of divine authority." [C. H. Spurgeon, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1971, pg. 697]Opposition to these church holidays remained in American Presbyterianism through the latter half of the 19th century. Speaking following the Civil War, historian Ernest Trice Thompson wrote the following: "There was no recognition of either Christmas or Easter in any of the Protestant churches, except the Episcopal and Lutheran. For a full generation after the Civil War, the religious journals of the South mentioned Christmas only to observe that there was no reason to believe that "Jesus" was actually born on December 25th; it was not recognized as a day of any religious significance in the Presbyterian Church" [Ernest Trice Thompson, Presbyterians In the South, 1973, Vol. 2, pg. 434.]FSCG Note: Alabama was the first USA State to recognize Christmas, and did not do so until 1836. ["Tidbits," Cheyenne, Wy. 82007, Burchett Publishing, Issue 271 ]It was not until the turn of the 19th century that various Christmas customs began appearing in Presbyterian churches. There began to be reports of: 1) Frivolities like Saint Nicholas in children's Sunday schools. 2) Use of Christmas trees and other festivities.The appearance of Easter and Christmas in the official calendar of the Southern Presbyterian church did not actually occur until the late 1940s and 1950s, as a work of growing apostasy in the church. Even so, as late as 1962, the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland stated that they rejected the celebrations of Christmas and Easter [History of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 1893-1970, pg. 383].Christmas has clearly brought an infusion of paganism into the church that was initially prohibited among all of YHVH's people.
II Corinthians 6:14-18 states 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Mashiach with Belial? Or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of YHVH with idols? For ye are the temple of the living Elohim; as YHVH hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be My people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith YHVH, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be My sons and daughters, saith YHVH Almighty. It is certainly clear from all that we have read, that an end time apostasy has come upon both Jews and Goyim. Both have strayed far from the original precepts of the faith, and there will be a heavy accounting before YHVH for this. These holidays represent only part of the great apostasy that has come upon YHVH's people in the latter days. They cumulatively fulfill what are known as the latter day prophesies that predict a great apostasy before the coming of Mashiach. YHVH is calling for both "Christians" and Jews to come out of their compromised faith and return to their original calling, before the coming of the great and awesome day of YHVH.

How should we keep Shabbat?

2007-09-16T02:34:00.000-07:00

Those who think that since we are in Yahshua, everyday is the Sabbath would think twice if they knew that if this were the case, then they would never be permitted to work or do anything having to do with our own pleasures on the Sabbath. There are many blessings attached to keeping the Sabbath day kadosh. So lets find out what it means to keep this day kadosh:
Dev 5:12 ‘Guard the Shabbat, to set it apart, as יהוה your Elohim commanded you.
Dev 5:13 ‘Six days you labour, and shall do all your work,
Dev 5:14 but the seventh day is a Shabbat of יהוה your Elohim. You do not do any work – you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male slave, nor your female slave, nor your ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates, so that your male slave and your female slave rest as you do.
Dev 5:15 ‘And you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Mitsrayim, and that יהוה your Elohim brought you out from there by a strong hand and by an outstretched arm. Therefore יהוה your Elohim commanded you to observe the Shabbat day.

So not only are we to rest, but those who work for us are to rest also. If we own a business, it is not acceptable to have all the employees working while we enjoy a restful Sabbath day. This commandment also includes anyone who we temporarily hire to work for us. For instance, when we go to restaurants we are hiring the cook and the waiter and the person who rings up the bill as a servant to work for us. Also anytime we purchase anything on the Sabbath such as groceries and other merchandise we are hiring others to stock the shelves, clean up and ring up the bill for us because we are paying for their service when we purchase the items. Nehemiah rebukes buying and selling quite sharply in this scripture:
Neh 13:15 In those days I saw in Yehuḏah those treading wine presses on the Shabbat, and bringing in sheaves, and loading donkeys with wine, grapes, and figs, and all kinds of burdens, which they brought into Yerushalayim on the Shabbat. So I warned them on the day they sold food.
Neh 13:16 And men of Tsor dwelt there, bringing in fish and all kinds of goods, and sold them on Shabbat to the children of Yehuḏah, and in Yerushalayim.
Neh 13:17 Then I contended with the nobles of Yehuḏah, and said to them, "What evil matter is this that you are doing, profaning the Shabbat?
Neh 13:18 "Did not your fathers do the same so that our Elohim brought all this evil on us and on this city? Yet you bring added wrath on Yisra’ĕl by profaning the Shabbat."

So buying and selling is clearly forbidden on the Sabbath. Going to restaurants and shopping malls and grocery stores is no way to keep the Sabbath kadosh. The Sabbath is a day of rest and prayer and worship. Not a day for doing our own pleasures:
Yes 58:13 "If you do turn back your foot from the Shabbat, from doing your pleasure on My set-apart day, and shall call the Shabbat ‘a delight,’ the set-apart day of יהוה ‘esteemed,’ and shall esteem it, not doing your own ways, nor finding your own pleasure, nor speaking your own words,
Yes 58:14 then you shall delight yourself in יהוה. And I shall cause you to ride on the heights of the earth, and feed you with the inheritance of Yaʽaqoḇ your father. For the mouth of יהוה has spoken!"

So keeping the Sabbath day kadosh not only means that we aren't to buy or sell, but also means that we are to refrain from our own pleasures such as sporting events, television, movies, etc. Also we are not even to speak our own words! Even our speech should be about YHVH and His word. I assure you, if we keep the Sabbath day in this manner it will be much easier keeping YHVH's mitzvot because we have one day each week to refresh ourselves spiritually. It is a day that we can look forward to during the week that we can fully refresh ourselves both physically and spiritually. YHVH never made our bodies to withstand constant labor day after day. It is no wonder that so many people we meet are so tired all of the time. And it is no wonder that people often fall away
Cooking and Preparation day.
When YHVH brought the children of Yisra'el out of Mitsrayim, he re-instituted the Sabbath day. No doubt that the Mitsrites expected them to work seven days a week. Here is Moshe telling the children of Yisra'el what they should do in preparation for the Shabbat:
She 16:23 And he said to them, "This is what יהוה has said, ‘Tomorrow is a rest, a Shabbat set-apart to יהוה. That which you bake, bake; and that which you cook, cook. And lay up for yourselves all that is left over, to keep it until morning.’ "

On preparation day, we should prepare our food that will be eaten on the Sabbath so that we will not have to cook or prepare it on the Sabbath. There are many variations of how to do this which will not be discussed in this study. I encourage all who want to know more to either email me or study it out for themselves.
What is permitted on the Sabbath?
Now there are some things that are always okay to do on the Sabbath that the Scribes and Pharisees in Yahshua's day would think forbidden:
Yoch 5:10 The Yehuḏim therefore said to him who had been healed, "It is the Shabbat, it is not right for you to take up the bed."
Luk 13:14 But the ruler of the congregation, responding, much displeased that יהושע had healed on the Shabbat, said to the crowd, "There are six days on which men should work, so come and be healed on them, and not on the Shabbat."
Luk 6:7 And the scribes and Pharisees were watching Him closely, whether He would heal on the Shabbat, for them to find an accusation against Him.
Luk 6:1 And it came to be on a Shabbat that He went through grainfields, and His talmidim were plucking the heads of grain and were eating, rubbing them in the hands.
Luk 6:2 And some of the Pharisees said to them, "Why are you doing what is not right to do on the Shabbat?"
Note that in the above verses that the issue was not whether or not to keep the Sabbath but rather how the Sabbath should be kept! Let's look at Yahshua's response to these accusations:
Healing on the Sabbath:
Luk 13:15 Then the Master answered him and said, "Hypocrite! Does not each one of you on Shabbat loosen his ox or his donkey from the stall, and lead it away to water it?
Luk 13:16 "And this one, being a daughter of Av̱raham, whom HaSatan has bound, look, for eighteen years, should she not be loosened from this bond on the Shabbat?"

Luk 14:5 And to them He said, "Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, shall not immediately pull him out on the Shabbat?"
Luk 14:6 And they were unable to answer Him regarding these matters.

Yoc 5:16 And because of this the Yehuḏim persecuted יהושע, and were seeking to kill Him, because He was doing these healings on the Shabbat.
Yoc 5:17 But יהושע answered them, "My Father works until now, and I work."

Mar 2:27 And He said to them, "The Shabbat was made for man, and not man for the Shabbat.
Mar 2:28 "So the Son of Aḏam is also Master of the Shabbat."

Yoc 7:22 "Because of this Mosheh has given you the circumcision – though it is not from Mosheh, but from the fathers – and you circumcise a man on Shabbat.
Yoc 7:23 "If a man receives circumcision on the Shabbat, so that the Torah of Mosheh should not be broken, are you wroth with Me because I made a man entirely well on the Shabbat?

Also take into consideration that the Levites sacrificed animals on the Sabbath day and therefore had to work. This is Yahshua's answer to them when the disciples began to pluck grain to eat on the Sabbath:
Mat 12:3 But He said to them, "Have you not read what Dawiḏ did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him:
Mat 12:4 how he went into the House of Elohim and ate the showbread which was not right for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the kohanim?
Mat 12:5 "Or did you not read in the Torah that on the Shabbat the kohanim in the Set-apart Place profane the Shabbat, and are blameless?
Mat 12:6 "But I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the Set-apart Place.
Mat 12:7 "And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire compassion and not offering,’ you would not have condemned the blameless.
Mat 12:8 "For the Son of Aḏam is Master of the Shabbat."

YHVH expects us to keep the Sabbath day kadosh. But it is always O.K. to do good on the Sabbath day and clearly Yahshua and the talmidim did not have time to prepare for the Sabbath because they were doing YHVH's work. So if we have to do a little work on the Sabbath or cause another to do a little work on the Sabbath for YHVH's purpose then this is not breaking the Sabbath. Of course one could take this to the extreme as well and say that it is impossible for them to refrain from going to work on the Sabbath or they would be fired and then not have any food. This is ridiculous. YHVH will provide for us. We needn't be concerned about our food if we are obeying His Sabbath.
So, in summary we can see that YHVH wants us to keep His Sabbath kadosh by not working, buying, selling, causing others to work for us, speaking idle or vain words or doing our own pleasures on the Sabbath. There are only exceptions if we are fulfilling YHVH's purpose for something. And this I leave to one's own heart for only YHVH knows our heart. To add a bunch of laws to try and apply to specific situations is legalism. And this is what the scribes and Pharisees were practicing. Yahshua clearly taught against that.

Which bridegroom will you marry?

2007-08-05T07:42:00.000-07:00

Question please ???

If the SAINTS are the BRIDE, and Jesus is the BRIDEGROOM,,,

when did the BRIDE, take on the BRIDEGROOMS NAME ???

The only place we found was, when everyone got baptized in the name of the bridegroom,Jesus Christ,, or when

all 3000 were baptized in Acts 2:38, in the bridegroom' name Jesus Christ,,,:

(Letter shortened)

OvadYah responds

Dear Ted,

You are making one basic mistake which flaws your whole presentation, i.e. The True Bridegroom is NOT 'Jesus', but YAHSHUA.

So, my question to you is: Which Name must the Bride be called after?

Messiah YAHSHUA was an orthodox Jew - Jezus is NOT a Jewish Name.

This Marriage which is referred to even in Genesis, will be a Jewish Marriage, a Torah Marriage, as it was at Sinai, when the receiving of Torah was referred to as the Marriage. Jesus believers are neither Torah based nor Torah observant, and Jesus himself, according to his followers, is NOT Torah observant - thus the marriage between Jesus and his bride will NOT be a Torah Marriage or not even a Jewish marriage.

Imagine the staggering implications in a Jewish Marriage, when the couple has to be flawlessly kosher as to their Jewish Identity, else no Jewish marriage can take place! Which is why many Israeli couples run to Cyprus island to have a Greek, Christian marriage

Imagine, the bride has given her consent to marriage and eagerly looks forward to it, but -:
- the Bride has the wrong name of the bridegroom - NO MARRIAGE - not even a Gentile marriage!
- the Bridegroom's ID reflects another name than that which the Bride knows and calls him by, NO MARRIAGE - not even a Gentile marriage.
- The bridegroom rejects Halachic Torah in principle, as Jesus is claimed to do - NO JEWISH MARRIAGE!
- The bridegroom rejects the authority of the Sanhedrien, as Jesus is claimed to be doing - NO JEWISH MARRIAGE!
- The bride rejects Torah and Jewish culture - NO JEWISH MARRIAGE!

Just as there are TWO Messiahs presented to choose between: A Gentile, non-Torah, anti-Jewish Messiah and a Halachic Torah proclaiming Jewish Messiah, so then there are two Marriages presented, to choose between: A Gentile Marriage and a Jewish Marriage.

If we claim to be the Bride, then it would be wise, beforehand, to decide which Bride we wish to be and which Bridegroom we wish to be married to:
- the Bride of a Gentile non-Biblical conforming Messiah named "Jesus", or
- the Bride of the Biblically proclaimed Jewish Messiah named "Yahshua"

It would be a tearful day to arrive at the wrong Marriage! Or to arrive with the wrong 'papers'. This will be particularly tearful for those professing brides who are somewhere in-between these two categories - those who have turned to Torah and Jewish culture, but have the wrong identity details for their Bridegroom. Those who refuse to know Him by His True Name, and who oppose parts of His Torah which they regard as 'man-made', because His appointed 'Judges' (rulers, interpreters, teachers) have stipulated it.

If the Gentile Bride wishes to be His True, respected Bride, she will have to adapt His Jewish Culture FAST! - for Time is running out!

OnenessSaint responds:

Now that we have established that the TRUE name of the bridegroom is Yahshua; we MUST take HIS name! We take His name by being immersed in the name of the Father, Son and Ruach HaKadosh - Yahshua HaMashiach!

60 questions on the mightiness (with scriptural answers)

2007-07-29T14:19:00.000-07:00

1. Is the word trinity in the Scriptures? No.
2. Does the Scriptures say that there are three persons in the Mightiness? No.
3. Does the Scriptures speak of the Father, Son, and Ruach HaKadosh? Yes.
4. Do these titles as used in Mattityahu 28:19 mean that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Mightiness? No, they refer to three offices, roles, or relationship to humanity.
5. Does the Scriptures use the word three in reference to Elohim? Only one verse in the entire Scriptures does so-I Yochanan 5:7. It speaks of the Father, the Word (instead of Son), and the Ruach HaKadosh, and it concludes by saying, "These three are one." Furthermore, this verse does not exist in the oldest manuscripts or codexes.
6. Does the Scriptures use the word “one” in reference to Elohim? Yes, many times. For example, see Zechariah 14:9; Malachi 2:10; Mattityahu 23:9; Mark 12:29, 32; Yochanan 8:41; 10:30; Romans 3:30; I Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; I Timothy 2:5; Ya`akov 2:19.
7. Can the mystery of the Mightiness be understood? Yes. Romans 1:20; Colossians 2:9; I Timothy 3:16.
8. Has the Messianic Jew only one Heavenly Father? Yes. Mattityahu 23:9.
9. Then why did Yahshua say to Philip, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (Yochanan 14:39)? Because Yahshua is the express image of Elohim's person. Hebrews 1:3. The Greek word for person in this verse literally means "substance."
10. Does the Scriptures say that there are two persons in the Mightiness? No.
11. Does the Scriptures say that all the Mightiness is revealed in one person? Yes, in Yahushua HaMashiach. II Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:19; 2:9; Hebrews 1:3.
12. Is the mystery of the Deity hidden from some people? Yes. Luke 10:21-22.
13. Who is the Father? The Father is the one Elohim, particularly as revealed in parental relationship to humanity. Devarim 32:6; Malachi 2:10.
14. Where was Elohim the Father while Yahushua was on earth? The Father was in HaMashiach. Yochanan 14:10; II Corinthians 5:19. He was also in heaven, for Elohim is omnipresent.
15. Did the prophet Yesha`Yahu say that Yahushua would be the Father? Yes. Yesha`Yahu 9:6; 63:16.
16. When Elohim said, "Let us make man in our image" (B’reisheet 1:26), was He speaking to another person in the Mightiness? No. Yesha`Yahu 44:24; Malachi 2:10.
17. How many of Elohim's qualities were in HaMashiach? All. Colossians 2:9.
18. How may we see the Elohim who sent Yahushua into the world? By seeing Yahushua. Yochanan 12:44-45; 14:9.
19. Does the Scriptures say that Yahushua is the Almighty? Yes. Revelation 1:8
20. Whom do some designate as the first person in the trinity? Elohim the Father.
21. Whom do some designate as the last person in the trinity? The Ruach HaKodesh. But Yahushua said that He was the first and last. Revelation 1:17-18
22. How many persons did Yochanan see sitting on the throne in heaven? One. Revelation 4:2.
23. If Yahushua is the first and the last, why did Elohim say in Yesha`Yahu 44:6 that He was the first and the last? Because Yahushua is the Elohim of the Tanakh incarnate.
24. Did Yahushua tell HaSatan that Elohim alone should be worshiped? Yes. Mattityahu 4:10
25. Does the devil believe in more than one Elohim? No. Ya`akov 2:19.
26. Does the Scriptures say that Elohim, who is the Word, was made flesh? Yes Yochanan 1:1, 14.
27. For what purpose was Elohim manifested in the flesh? To save sinners. Hebrews 2:9, 14.
28. Was Yahushua Elohim manifested in the flesh? Yes. I Timothy 3:16.
29. Could Yahushua have been on earth and in heaven at the same time? Yes. Yochanan 3:13.
30. Does the Scriptures say that there is but one Master? Yes. Yesha`Yahu 45:18; Ephesians 4:5.
31. Does the Scriptures say that Yahushua HaMashiach is the Master? Yes. Luke 2:11.
32. Does the Scriptures say that the Master is Elohim? Yes. I kings 18:39; Zechariah 14:5; Acts 2:39; Revelation 19:1.
33. How could the church belong to Yahushua (Mattityahu 16:18) and yet be the church of Elohim (I Corinthians 10:32)? Because Yahushua is Elohim the Father in the flesh.
34. Will Elohim give His esteem to another? No. Yesha`Yahu 42:8.
35. Was there a Elohim formed before YHVH, or will there be one formed after? No. Yesha`Yahu 43:10.
36. What is one thing that Elohim does not know? Another Elohim. Yesha`Yahu 44:8.
37. What is one thing that Elohim Cannot do? Lie. Titus 1:2.
38. How many Elohim should we know? Only one. Hosea 13:4.
39. How many names has YHVH? One. Zechariah 14:9.
40. Is it good to think upon the name of YHVH? Yes. Malachi 3:16.
41. Do the Scriptures say that Elohim alone treads upon the waves of the sea? Yes. Job 9:8
42. Why, then, was Yahushua able to walk upon the Sea of Galilee (Mattityahu 14:25)? Because He is Elohim the Creator. Colossians 1:16.
43. Is Elohim the only one who can forgive sin? Yes. Yesha`Yahu 43:25; Mark 2:7.
44. Why, then, could Yahushua forgive sin in Mark 2:5-11? Because He is Elohim the Savior.
45. Is Yahushua the true Elohim? Yes. I Yochanan 5:20.
46. If YHVH and the Ruach HaKadosh are two separate persons, which was the Father of HaMashiach? Mattityahu 1:20 says that the Ruach HaKadosh was the Father, while Romans 15:6, II Corinthians 11:31, and Ephesians 1:3 say that YHVH Elohim was the Father. There is no contradiction when we realize that Elohim the Father and the Ruach HaKadosh are one and the same Spirit. Mattityahu 10:20; Ephesians 4:4; I Corinthians 3:16.
47. When Sha’ul asked the Master who He was, what was the answer? "I am Yahushua." Acts 9:5.
48. When Stephen was dying, did he call Elohim Yahushua? Yes. Acts 7:59.
49. Did Thomas ever call Yahushua Elohim? Yes. Yochanan 20:28.
50. How could Yahushua be the Savior, when Elohim the Father said in Yesha`Yahu 43:11, "Beside me there is no Savior?" Because "Elohim was in HaMashiach, reconciling the world unto himself." II Corinthians 5:19.
51. Does the Scriptures say that Yahushua was Elohim with us? Yes. Mattityahu 1:23.
52. Did Yahushua ever say, "I and my Father are one?" Yes. Yochanan 10:30.
53. Can it be proved scripturally that Yahushua and the Father are one in the same sense that husband and wife are one? No. The Mightiness was never compared to the relationship of a husband and wife. Yahushua identified Himself with the Father in a way that husband and wife cannot be identified with each other. Yochanan 14:9-11.
54. Does the Scriptures say that there is only one wise Elohim? Yes. Jude 25.
55. Does the Scriptures call the Ruach HaKadosh a second or third person in the Mightiness? No. The Ruach HaKadosh is the one Spirit of Elohim, the one Elohim Himself at work in our lives. Yochanan 4:24; I Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19; 12:13.
56. Can Trinitarians show that three divine persons were present when Yahushua was immersed by Yochanan? Absolutely not. The one, omnipresent Elohim used three simultaneous manifestations. Only one divine person was present--Yahushua HaMashiach the Master.
57. Then what were the other two of whom Trinitarians speak? One was a voice from heaven; the other was the Spirit of Elohim in the form of a dove. Mattityahu 3:16-17.
58. What did the voice say at Yahushua's immersion? "Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Mark 1:11. As the Son of Elohim, Yahushua was the one Elohim incarnate. (Elohim in the flesh)
59. Does the Scriptures say that Elohim shed His blood and that Elohim laid down His life for us? Yes. Acts 20:28; I Yochanan 3:16. Elohim was able to do this because He had taken upon Himself a human body.
60. The Scriptures says that Elohim/YHVH is coming back with all his saints (Zechariah 14:5) and also that Yahushua is coming back with all his saints (I Thessalonians 3:13). Are two coming back? No. Only one is coming back--our great Elohim and Savior, Yahushua HaMashiach. Titus 2:13.
Finally, I want to add that the very name of Elohim reveals His oneness. The name יהוה (yod, hey, vav, hey) is a picture in Hebrew. Yod is the picture of a hand. Hey is beholden. Vav is a nail. It is as if the name YHVH means “Behold the hand, behold the nail-scarred hand”

Why We Immerse in Yahshua’s Name

2007-07-29T13:23:00.000-07:00

Why We Immerse in Yahshua’s Name

Introduction
The subject of immersion has long been called a great issue and no doubt has been made such by many assembly leaders of the past and present. In our study of it, let us first consider its importance, or the necessity of being immersed.
The Importance of Water Immersion
Messianic immersion is an ordinance instituted by Yahshua HaMashiach. If it is not important in the plan of Elohim, why did Yahshua command it in Mattityahu 28:19? And why did Kepha follow up by saying, "Be immersed every one of you," and by commanding the Goyim to be immersed (Acts 2:38; 10:48)? We must remember two points about the importance of water immersion. First, whatever Mashiach definitely established and ordained cannot be unimportant, whether we understand its significance or not. Second, Mashiach and the apostles showed the importance of this ordinance by observing it. Yahshua walked many miles to be immersed, though He was without sin, saying, "For thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness" (See Mattityahu 3:13-16.)
It is true that water itself does not contain any saving virtue, but Elohim has chosen to include it in His plan of salvation. Kepha explained, "Immersion doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward Elohim) by the resurrection of Yahshua HaMashiach" (I Kepha 3:21). According to Luke 7:30, "the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of Elohim against themselves, being not immersed."
The Mode of Immersion
According to the Scriptures, the proper mode of immersion is complete immersion. "And Yahshua, when he was immersed, went up straightway out of the water" (Mattityahu 3:16). "And they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he immersed him" (Acts 8:38). "Therefore we are buried with him by immersion into death" (Romans 6:4). A corpse is not buried by placing it on top of the ground and sprinkling a little soil on it, but by covering it completely.
According to the World Book Encyclopedia, "At first all baptisim was by complete immersion" (vol. 1, p.651). And the Catholic Encyclopedia states, "In the early centuries, all were immersed by immersion in streams, pools, and baptisteries" (vol. 2, p.263). Immersion was not convenient after the Catholic church instituted infant immersion; thus the mode was changed to sprinkling. (See Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., vol. 3, pp.365-66.)
Repentance identifies us with the death of Mashiach, and immersion identifies us with His burial. Coming forth from the watery grave of immersion and receiving new life in the Ruach HaKadosh identifies us with His resurrection.
The Formula for Immersion
Yahshua commanded His talmidim to "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Ruach HaKodesh" (Mattityahu 28:19). He did not command them to use these words as a formula, but He commanded them to immerse in "the name." The word name is used here in the singular, and it is the focal point of the immersion command. The titles Father, Son, and Ruach HaKadosh describe Elohim's relationships to humanity and are not the supreme, saving name described here, which is Yahshua. "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
Yahshua is the name in which the roles of Father, Son, and Ruach HaKadosh are revealed. The malachei of YHVH instructed Yoseph, "She shall bring forth a son, and thou shall call his name YAHSHUA: for he shall save his people from their sins" (Mattityahu 1:21). Yahshua said, "I am come in my Father's name," and, "The Comforter, which is the Ruach HaKodesh,...the Father will send in my name" (John 5:43; 14:26). Thus by baptizing in the name of Yahshua, we honor the Mightiness. "For in him dwells all the fullness of the Mightiness bodily" (Colossians 2:9).
Luke 24:45-47 records that just before His ascension, Yahshua opened the talmidim' understanding. It was necessary that their understanding be opened, and many today need this same operation in order to understand the Scriptures. Then Yahshua said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Mashiach to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." The talmidim had their understanding opened so that they could grasp the vast importance of the death, burial, and resurrection of Mashiach. Verse 47 describes the commission that Yahshua then gave: "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations [Jews and Goyim], beginning at Yerushalayim."
Kepha was one of that number to whom Yahshua had spoken and whose understanding had been opened. After having listened to these instructions, a few days later he was inspired by the Ruach HaKodesh to preach on the Day of Shavuot. The hearts of the hearers were pierced and, feeling condemned, they cried out to Kepha and the other apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (Acts 2:37). Kepha did not hesitate but boldly answered, "Repent, and be immersed every one of you in the name of Yahshua HaMashiach for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh" (Acts 2:38). "Then they that gladly received his word were immersed, and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls" (Acts 2:41).
Some say that Kepha told them to be immersed in Yahshua' name because they were Jews and this immersion was to make them acknowledge Yahshua Mashiach. But let us go with Kepha to the house of Cornelius 15 years later. Cornelius and his household were Goyim, yet there again Kepha "commanded them to be immersed in the name of the Master" (Acts 10:48). (Most translations actually say, "In the name of Yahshua Mashiach.") If Kepha was wrong on the Day of Shavuot, he surely had ample time to be corrected before he went to the house of Cornelius.
Was Kepha wrong on the Day of Shavuot? When the hearers were prickled in their hearts, they spoke to Kepha and to the rest of the apostles (Acts 2:37). This included Mattityahu, who wrote Mattityahu 28:19. Moreover, when Kepha preached, he stood up with the eleven Acts 2:14). Mattityahu was there, yet we find no words of correction from him. He surely would have spoken up if Kepha had disobeyed YHVH. But all the apostles understood and carried out Yahshua’s commission. As Yahshua said in prayer, "I have manifested thy name unto the men [the apostles] which thou gave to me out of the world...and they have kept thy word" (Yochanan 17:6).
The Samaritans, who were not Jews, were also immersed in the name of Yahshua. Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Mashiach unto them...."But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of Elohim, and the name of Yahshua HaMashiach, they were immersed, both men and women.... They were immersed in the name of the Master Yahshua" (Acts 8:5, 12, 16).
Let us see how Sha’ul, the apostle to the Goyim, immersed. He went to Ephesus many years after the Day of Shavuot and found some talmidim of Yochanan the immerser there. "He said unto them, Have ye received the Ruach HaKodesh since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Ruach HaKodesh. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye immersed? And they said, Unto Yochanan's immersion. Then said Sha’ul, Yochanan verily immersed with the immersion of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Yahshua HaMashiach. When they heard this, they were immersed in the name of the Master Yahshua" (Acts 19:2-5). Although these talmidim had already been immersed, the name of Yahshua was so important as to cause them to be reimmersed in His name.
We do not believe that Sha’ul changed the formula or mode of immersion when he immersed Lydia and her household (Acts 16:14-15) or the Philippian jailer. The latter came trembling and fell down before Sha’ul and Silas, saying, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Master Yahshua HaMashiach, and thou shall be saved, and thy house. And he took them the same hour of the night [shortly after midnight], and washed their stripes; and was immersed, he and all his, straightway" (Acts 16:30-33). How can we doubt that Sha’ul immersed these people using the same mode and formula that he used elsewhere, that is, immersion in the name of the Master Yahshua HaMashiach?
Sha’ul was not with the apostles when Yahshua gave his finial instructions to them in Mattityahu 28:19 and Luke 24:47, yet Sha’ul immersed in the name of the Master Yahshua. How did he know what to do? He said that his gospel was not a tradition of men but a revelation from Elohim. "I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Yahshua HaMashiach" (Galatians 1:11-12). Sha’ul was chosen to bear Yahshua' name to the Goyim, and he wrote many divinely inspired epistles to the assemblies. To this apostle, Elohim revealed the mystery of the assembly, "which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it now revealed unto his kadosh apostles and prophets by the Ruach" (Ephesians 3:5). Sha’ul claimed to have divine authority: "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of YHVH" (I Corinthians 14:37). And Sha’ul wrote, Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Master Yahshua, giving thanks to Elohim and the Father by him" (Colossians 3:17). Water immersion is done in both word and deed. We cannot afford to overlook this command to the church.
The church is "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Yahshua HaMashiach himself being the chief corner stone" (Ephesians 2:20). The apostles not only preached immersion in Yahshua' name, but they practiced it. Nowhere can we find that they immersed using the words "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Ruach HaKodesh." Instead, we find them immersing in the name of the Master Yahshua HaMashiach. In immersing in Yahshua' name, they fulfilled the command of the Master in Mattityahu 28:19.Sha’ul said, "But though we, or a messenger from the heavens, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8). Let this be a solemn warning to us.
Some say that they will accept the words of Yahshua in Mattityahu 28:19 but not those of Kepha in Acts 2:38. But Kepha spoke on the Day of Shavuot under the anointing of the Ruach HaKodesh. Kepha was one of the apostles, and to him had been given the keys of the kingdom, so we have no right to discredit his words.
In Mark 7:8 Yahshua said, "Laying aside the commandment of Elohim, ye hold the tradition of men." History tells us that it was not until many years after the apostles that the mode and formula of immersion in the name of Yahshua Mashiach were changed. (See Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 1, p.241.) Which means more to you, the command of the Master Yahshua or the tradition of men?

Arab Truth!

2007-07-24T18:35:00.000-07:00

Find more videos like this on Torah Space

Arab Truth!

Israel, Islam and Armageddon

2007-07-21T10:02:00.001-07:00

An excellent look at the role of the Roman Catholic Church in spreading anti-semitism throughout the world! Spreading her trinitarian lies while murdering the people of Elohim!

Messianic Jews worshipping Yeshua (Jesus)

2007-07-18T14:35:00.001-07:00

This is awesome! I would love to make Aliyah! Here is who I will worship with!

Islam-coming to America!

2007-07-15T20:27:00.000-07:00

The Abomination of Desolation

2007-07-13T23:10:00.000-07:00

The Abomination of Desolation

Many Hebrew scholars believe that in the year 2007, the earth is 6007 years old. However, this is in contrast to the Orthodox Jewish calendar, which tells us that the earth is only 5767 years old. If we subtract 5767 from 6007, we can see that there is a difference of some 240 years between the Nazarene and Orthodox Jewish calendars.
Who is right? And why would this question be important?
This question is important because it takes away one of the anti-missionary arguments that Yahshua is not the prophesied Mashiach. It also helps us to understand what Scripture really teaches about the Abomination of Desolation.
The Apostle Kepha (Peter) tells us that in prophecy, a day with YHVH is as a thousand years:
Kepha Bet (2nd Peter) 3:88 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing: that (in prophecy) one day with YHVH is as a thousand years; and a thousand years is as one day.

Why does Kepha tell us that we should "not forget this one thing"? And what does it mean that with YHVH, one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as one day?
The Creation Week in B’reisheet was seven days long.
B'reisheet (Genesis) 2:1-21 Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. 2 And on the seventh day Elohim ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

If each day in the Creation Week represents a thousand earth years, then the seven day Creation Week symbolizes a prophetic seven thousand year plan for the earth, after which the earth will be burned up in fire (reference Kepha Bet 3:8-12).
Nazarene, Christian and Orthodox Jewish scholars all agree that the seven days of the Creation Week symbolize a seven thousand year plan for the earth. They also agree that the Jewish Mashiach can be found in the Creation Week. Only, the Orthodox Jews deny that this person was Yahshua.
Yahshua is symbolized in the first day, when Elohim created 'light' and 'darkness.'
B'reisheet (Genesis) 1:3-53 Then Elohim said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4 And Elohim saw the light, that it was good; and Elohim divided the light from the darkness. 5 Elohim called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

Since the sun, the moon and the stars were created on the fourth day, the 'light' that was created here is not visible light, but spiritual light. Yochanan (John) tells us that Yahshua was this spiritual light.
Yochanan (John) 1:1-51 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Elohim, and the Word was Elohim. 2 He was in the beginning with Elohim. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

(For more information as to how Yahshua is the light of the world, please see, 'Manifestation of Elohim.').
If the 'day for a thousand years' rule holds, then many commentators have also pointed out that Yahshua is also symbolized by the sun (which was created on the fourth day, to divide the day from the night).
B'reisheet (Genesis) 1:14-1914 Then Elohim said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. 16 Then Elohim made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 Elohim set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And Elohim saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Some Christians use the fact that the sun symbolizes the Mashiach to justify the Christian calendar, which is essentially sun worship in disguise. In Nazarene Israel, we explain why such modified sun worship is wrong. However, the important point is that if:
1. the sun is symbolic of the Mashiach, and if
2. the sun was created on the fourth day, and if
3. one day in Prophecy is as a thousand years,
4. then we should expect that the Mashiach would have been born at the 4000 year mark (i.e., at or near the start of the fourth prophetic day).

That the sun's creation on the fourth day is symbolic of how the Mashiach would be born at the 4,000 year mark does not support the modified solar calendar that most Christians worship on. For this reason, many believers have gravitated towards the Orthodox Jewish calendar, believing it to be correct.
However, the Orthodox Jewish calendar is also wrong. But why?The Orthodox Jewish calendar actually has several flaws, which we do not have time to detail here. The point we are concerned with here is that the Orthodox Jewish calendar informs us that in the year 2007 CE, we are now 5767 years from the Creation.
If we subtract the number of years from Yahshua's birth (2007) from the Jewish calendar year (5767), we get the year 3760 (rather than the year 4000). (Table displays correctly in attached home-printable document.)
5767
Jewish year
-2007
Christian year
=3760
Years of difference

In the Jewish mind, this fact alone disqualifies Yahshua as being the Mashiach, since 3760 is not close enough to 4000 to fulfill the prophetic shadow picture posed by B’reisheet 1:14-19 (above).
However, there is a problem with Jewish calendar, which is that rather than going by the dates in the Tanakh, the Jewish calendar is determined by a separate history book called the 'Seder Olam' (traditionally translated as, 'The Great World Order').
If one adds up the years in the calendars in Scripture, then one finds that in the year 2007 CE, the earth is actually approximately 6007 years old. (The reason we say 'approximately' is that the Torah calendar begins in the Spring, based on the sighting of the Aviv barley, whereas the Orthodox Jewish calendar begins in the fall, and the Christian calendar begins in mid winter).
[For those wishing to verify the details, they are in the article, 'About the Missing 240 years,' on the website.]
(Table displays correctly in attached home-printable document.)
1656
Adam to the Flood
454
Flood to the birth of Abraham
430
Abraham to the Exodus
480
Exodus to the First Temple
393
First Temple to the Exile
72
Exile to Second Temple
3,485
Adam to the Second Temple

If Scripture is the highest and best authority in all matters of doctrine, then at least according to Scripture, there were approximately 3,485 years from the time of the Creation until the building of the Second Temple. (The dates are approximate because the dates are given in rough numbers, without exact starting and ending points.)
Next, in order to calculate how many years there were between the building of the Second Temple and the current year (2007), we must switch to the Gregorian (Western Roman) calendar. The reason for this switch is that Scripture does not record these dates for us.
Ezra 6:15 tells us that the Second Temple was finished in the sixth year of the reign of the Persian King Darius.Ezra 6:1515 Now the temple was finished on the third day of the month of Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of King Darius.

Secular history informs us that the sixth year of the reign of Persian King Darius was approximately 515 BCE. Therefore, there were 515 years in between the sixth year of the reign of King Darius, and 0 BCE.
When we add the 515 years in between the reign of King Darius to the 2007 years that have elapsed since the year 0 CE, we find that the Second Temple was built approximately 2520 years ago: (Table displays correctly in attached home-printable document.)
515
Year between Second Temple and Year 0
2007
Years elapsed since 0 CE
2520
Years since Second Temple and 2007 CE

Next, to find the approximate age of the earth in the year 2007, we need to add the number of years from the Creation to the building of the Second Temple (3,485), and then add the number of years from the building of the Second Temple until 2007 CE (2,520). This will give us the approximate age of the earth in the year 2007 CE: (Table displays correctly in attached home-printable document.)
3,485
Creation to the Second Temple
2,520
Second Temple to 2007 CE
6,007
Years since the Creation (in 2007 CE)

If the earth is some 6,007 years old, but the Orthodox (and Karaite) calendars tell us that the earth is 5,767 years old, then the Orthodox and Karaite calendars are missing some 240 years. But how can that be?
As we mentioned before, the Orthodox rabbis do not determine time by the record found in the Tanakh. Rather, they determine time according to Orthodox rabbinic tradition. Since the rabbis consider their own writings inspired, they reference a book called the 'Seder Olam Rabbah' (traditionally translated as, the 'Great World Order'). Astonishingly, even the Karaites (who claim to be Scriptural literalists) defer to the Seder Olam.
The Seder Olam Rabbah (or just 'Seder Olam') was written circa 240 CE; and (perhaps confusingly) even Judaism acknowledges that it is inaccurate (and yet still they use it to determine time). Under the heading 'Seder Olam,' the Encyclopedia Judaica tells us:
"Yose b. Halafta, the presumed author of Seder Olam Rabbah, probably had access to old traditions that also underlay the chronological computations of the Jewish Hellenistic chronographer Demetrius (third century B.C.E.). The most significant confusion in Yose´s calculation is the compression of the Persian period, from the rebuilding of the Temple by Zerubbabel in 516 B.C.E. to the conquest of Persia by Alexander (331 B.C.E.) to no more than 34 years."

What is this passage actually saying? And what is the "compression of the Persian period," to which the Encyclopedia Judaica refers?
Secular history tells us that the 'Persian Period' lasted 185 years. It started in 516 BCE, and lasted until the conquest of Judea by Alexander the Great in 331 BCE. This equates to 185 years. However, the Seder Olam tells us that the Persian Period lasted only 34 years. 185 years minus 34 years gives us a discrepancy of some 151 years in the Persian period alone.
However, let us note that the Seder Olam states that "the most significant confusion in Yose's calculation is the compression of the Persian period," indicating that there are other confusions as well.
What are these other 'confusions'? Secular history records for us that the Medes established their empire circa 625 BCE. They ruled 109 years, until the Persian period began (in 516 BCE, see above). By compressing the 109 years of the Medes to just 18 years, an additional 91 years were lost.
If one adds the amount of time 'compressed' out of the Persian period with the amount of time 'compressed' out of the Median period, one gets an alteration to the calendar of some 242 years:
91
Years lost in the Period of the Medes
151
Years lost in the Persian Period
242
Total years lost by the Seder Olam

It is important to remember that all of the numbers here are only rough approximations. Each calculation can be off by as much as a year, due to the fact that the Medes, the Persians, the Hebrews, and the Romans each had (or have) their own calendar, which begin at different times of the year. Additionally, the records do not always give us the exact start date, and even if they did, our purpose here is not to calculate the age of the earth down to the minutest detail. Rather, our purpose here is simply to reaffirm that the rabbinic and the Karaite calendars are missing some 240 years.
When we restore these missing 240 years to the Jewish calendar, we find that the year is not 5,767, as the rabbis suggest. Rather, the year is approximately 6,007 (depending where we are in the year).
5767
Alleged year according to Orthodox Judaism
+240
Years missing from the Jewish calendar
6007
The actual year in 2007 CE

If we take the number 6007 and subtract the 2007 years of the common era, this means that Yahshua would have been born in or around the year 4000, which confirms the fact that Yahshua really was the prophesied Mashiach.
6007
Year on the Torah Calendar
-2007
Years of the Common Era
4000
Start of the fourth day

Again, this does not support the Christian practice of worshipping on the Roman solar calendar. It simply proves that Yahshua fulfills the prophecy of how the sun was created on the fourth day of the week.
B'reisheet (Genesis) 1:14-1914 Then Elohim said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. 16 Then Elohim made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 Elohim set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And Elohim saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

We should note here that it is not our purpose to pinpoint the exact timing of Yahshua's birth. Scholars debate whether Yahshua was actually born in the year 1 CE (i.e., the year 0), 1 BCE, or 4 BCE. Any one of these dates is close enough to fulfill the prophecy given in Genesis 1:14-19, and therefore, they are all close enough for our purposes.
One additional advantage of knowing the correct year is that we can understand what Scripture really teaches about the Abomination of Desolation.
In addition to the 'thousand years for a day' rule, we are also told that a day in prophecy can sometimes symbolize one earth year:
Yehezqel (Ezekiel) 4:4-64 "Lie also on your left side, and lay the iniquity of the House of Israel upon it. According to the number of the days that you lie on it, you shall bear their iniquity. 5 For I have laid on you the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days; so you shall bear the iniquity of the House of Yisra’el. 6 And when you have completed them, lie again on your right side; then you shall bear the iniquity of the House of Y’hudah forty days. I have laid on you a day for each year.

That one prophetic day sometimes symbolizes just one earth year helps to give us just one more witness as to why Pre-Millennial Return Theory is wrong.
Classical Pre-Millennial Return Theory tells us that the Mashiach Yahshua was supposed to return in the clouds in physical form in 2000 CE. According to the classical doctrine, that means that the anti-Mashiach was also supposed to come to power three and one-half years before that (in 1996 CE), so that the earth could have three and one-half years of tribulation before Yahshua's triumphal return in the clouds.
According to classical Pre-Millennial Return Theory, the anti-Mashiach was also supposed to build an "anti-Mashiach's Temple" at that time. According to classical Pre-Millennial Return Theory, this "anti-Mashiach's Temple" was supposed to have been the prophetic fulfillment of the Abomination of Desolation that is spoken of by the prophet Daniel.
Daniel 12:1111 "And from the time that the daily (sacrifice) is taken away, and the Abomination of Desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety (1,290) days.

But did the anti-Mashiach come to power in 1996 CE? And did he build a Temple in Yerushalayim in 1996?
The Abomination of Desolation must have been set up long before 1996 CE. Why? Because the 'days' in Daniel 12:11 represent earth years. Therefore, when Daniel 12:11 tells us that there would be 1,290 days in between the time the daily sacrifice was taken away until the Abomination of Desolation was set up, what it really means is that there were 1,290 years in between the time the daily sacrifice was taken away, until the Abomination of Desolation was set up.

Daniel 12:1111 "And from the time that the daily (sacrifice) is taken away, until the Abomination of Desolation is given, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety (1290) days.
(11) וּמֵעֵת הוּסַר הַתָּמִיד וְלָתֵת שִׁקּוּץ שֹׁמֵם יָמִים אֶלֶף מָאתַיִם וְתִשְׁעִים

If the Mashiach Yahshua was born in the year 4000, then in 1996 CE, the earth was 5996 years old. It would only last another 1,004 years until it was destroyed (at the age of 7000 years).
7000
Age of the earth at its destruction
-5996
Approximate age of the earth in 1996 CE
=1004
Earth years remaining in 1996 CE

Had the anti-Mashiach 'taken away the daily sacrifice' in 1996 CE (or any time after that), there would just not have been enough time left to fulfill Daniel 12:11. Daniel 12:11 requires another 1,290 years (until the Abomination of Desolation is set up), but in 1996 CE there were only 1,004 earth years remaining.
In fact, had an anti-Mashiach 'taken away the daily' at any time after 1710 CE (well before the American Revolution), there would not have been enough time left to fulfill Daniel 12:11.
7000
Age of the earth at its destruction
-5710
Years from Creation in 1710 CE
=1290
Earth years remaining in 1710 CE

What we need to realize is that the establishment of the Abomination of Desolation cannot be a future event, because that would force the earth to go into overtime, far beyond the 7,000 years allotted to it in prophecy. Therefore 'taking away of the daily sacrifice' and the setting up of the Abomination of Desolation can only be past events. But what were they?
Second Kings 24:10-14 tells us that Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, captured Yerushalayim in the eighth year of his reign. Secular history tells us that the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign was approximately 597/596 BCE. At this time, Nebuchadnezzar's forces took away all of the priests, and all of the utensils used for serving in the Temple.
Melachim Bet (2nd Kings) 24:10-1410 At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Bavel came up against Yerushalayim, and the city was besieged. 11 And Nebuchadnezzar king of Bavel came against the city, as his servants were besieging it. 12 Then Yehoiachin, king of Y’hudah, his mother, his servants, his princes, and his officers went out to the king of Bavel; and the king of Bavel, in the eighth year of his reign, took him prisoner. 13 And he carried out from there all the treasures of the House of YHVH and the treasures of the king's house, and he cut in pieces all the articles of gold which Shlomo melech of Yisra’el had made in the Temple of YHVH, as YHVH had said.14 Also he carried into captivity all Yerushalayim: all the captains and all the mighty men of valor, ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths. None remained except the poorest people of the land.

When King Nebuchadnezzar's forces took away both the Levitical kohenship and the Temple implements, there were no more daily sacrifices. Thus, the daily sacrifices were 'taken away' in 597/596 CE, when Yerushalayim fell.
Daniel 12:11 (above) tells us that from the time the daily sacrifice was taken away (in 596 BCE), there would be 1,290 days (i.e., 1,290 years) until the Abomination of Desolation would be set up. Therefore, to discover when the Abomination of Desolation was set up, all we need to do is just to add 1,290 years to the date that Yerushalayim fell (in 596 BCE).
-596
Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar 596 BCE
+1290
Years to the Abomination of Desolation
=694
Dome of the Rock built in 694 CE

The Mosque of Omar (the Dome of the Rock) was set up in 694 CE. Therefore, the Islamic Dome of the Rock is the Abomination of Desolation.
The reason the Dome of the Rock is the Abomination of Desolation is that it completely defiles the Temple Mount. It also makes it impossible to re-establish the correct worship until it comes down. By this, Yisra’el's worship is 'made desolate' until the Dome of the Rock comes down.
Then, in the very next verse (Daniel 12:12), we read about a blessing that comes to those who wait until the 1,335 days (i.e., 1,335 years).
Daniel 12:1212 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five (1,335) days.

What does this verse mean?
If we add 1,335 years to the establishment of the Dome of the Rock (i.e., the Abomination of Desolation), we come to 2029 CE.
694
Dome of the Rock established (694 CE)
+1335
Years to wait for the blessing (1,335 years)
=2029
Year 'the blessing' will be bestowed (2029 CE)

2,029 is a date we already recognize as being highly significant in prophecy. Ezekiel was told to lie on his left side for 390 days; each day symbolizing a year that the House of Ephraim was to remain in exile:
Yehezqel (Ezekiel) 4:4-54 "Lie also on your left side, and lay the iniquity of the House of Yisra’el upon it. According to the number of the days that you lie on it, you shall bear their iniquity. 5 For I have laid on you the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days: three hundred and ninety days; so you shall bear the iniquity of the House of Yisra’el (or Ephraim).

Again the 'day for a year' rule holds, so that the House of Yisra’el (Ephraim) would not stay in the Assyrian Dispersion for just 390 days, but 390 years. However, there was also a catch. VaYikra 26 tells us that whenever we do not obey all of His mitzvot, then He will set His face against us, and punish us.
Vayiqra (Leviticus) 26:14-1714 "But if you do not obey Me, and do not observe all these mitzvot, 15 and if you despise My regulations, or if your soul abhors My rulings, so that you do not perform all My mitzvot, but break My Covenant, 16 I also will do this to you: 17 I will set My face against you, and you shall be defeated by your enemies. Those who hate you shall reign over you, and you shall flee when no one pursues you.

Then verse 18 tells us something special. It tells us that if we are not performing all of His mitzvot at the end of our time of punishment, then He multiplies our punishment times seven. This is not seven more times, but a total of seven times.

Leviticus 26:1818 And after all this, if you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times, for your sins.

(18) וְאִם עַד אֵלֶּה לֹא תִשְׁמְעוּ לִי וְיָסַפְתִּי לְיַסְּרָה אֶתְכֶם שֶׁבַע עַל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם

In Nazarene Israel, we spoke about how YHVH used the Assyrian Empire to take the northern ten tribes of Yisra’el into the Assyrian Diaspora, in fulfillment of the punishments prophesied in Yechezk'el 4:4-5 (above). It is easy to think of this attack against the northern House of Yisra’el (Ephraim) as being one single event, but this would be overly simplistic.
While HaSatan has always been bent on the destruction of Yisra’el, the king of Assyria (Tiglath Pileser III) was probably not so much consciously intent on punishing the House Yisra’el for YHVH as he was upon expanding his own empire. Much like the Greeks and the Romans who would come after him, Tiglath-Pileser III was probably just seizing and holding what he felt were important economic and strategic pieces of ground, in order to expand his empire, and increase his own personal power and wealth.
The military history of the region is complex, and it is not our purpose to detail the events of all of the battles here. However, secular history informs us that Tiglath-Pileser began his incursions into the Northern Kingdom of Yisra’el in approximately 738 BCE, and that there was a series of successive campaigns over several years. However, historians also agree that the year 734 BCE was highly significant, in that it was the year that the Mediterranean coastal strip fell, including the city of Gaza and most of Philistia.
Whenever the Assyrians conquered a piece of land, their practice was to deport the inhabitants of that land, and then re-settle the ground with others from the Assyrian Empire. There were numerous incremental deportations, but if the Assyrians made a major landmark deportation in 734 BCE, then 390 years later would bring us to 344 BCE.
-734
Assyrian deportation of Gaza and coastal zone
+390
Years of punishment prophesied on Ephraim
-344
End of the prophesied punishment (344 BCE)

As we explain in Nazarene Israel, the problem was that when our forefathers went into captivity, they did not take the punishment to heart, and begin keeping the Torah. Rather, when they were re-settled, they lost their identity as Yisra’elites, and began to think of themselves not so much as Ephraimites, but Assyrians. This was witnessed by the fact that they no longer kept the Torah, no longer spoke Hebrew, and no longer lived in Eretz Yisra’el. Thus, they lost their identity as His people, much like the children of many western “Christians” are losing their identities as believers today.
Because our forefathers did not begin keeping all of His mitzvot, when the time of punishment ran out in 344 BCE, our punishment was multiplied times seven (for a total of seven times). Thus, the total years of punishment grew from 390 years, to seven times 390 years, for a total of 2,730 years.
390
Initial years of punishment in Ezekiel 4:4-5
x 7
Multiplication times seven (Leviticus 26:18)
=2,730
Total years of the Ephraimite Dispersion

When we add 2,730 years to the time of the Assyrian deportations of Gaza and the strategic Mediterranean coastal area in 734 BCE, we find that the new end of Ephraim's Exile should come to 2029 CE.
-734
Assyrian deportations of Gaza and coast
+2730
Total years of punishment
=2029
New end of the Ephraimite Dispersion

2029 is the same date prophesied in Daniel 12:12 over the 'blessing' that comes at the end of the 1,335 days (i.e., 1,335 years).
Daniel 12:1212 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five (1,335) days.

We now have two witnesses that the time of Ephraim's punishment will be up in 2029 CE. For a third witness, let us look at Hoshea 6:2.
The Book of Hoshea speaks primarily to the House of Ephraim. Therefore, speaking of the Ephraimites, Hoshea prophesies:
Hoshea 6:22 After two days He will revive us. In the third day He will raise us up, that we may live in His sight.

In this passage, we need to remember that a day in prophecy can equal a thousand earth years.
Kepha Bet (2nd Peter) 3:88 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with YHVH, one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

If a prophetic day can equal a thousand years, then the two prophetic 'days' of Hoshea 6:2 are two thousand years. Therefore, Hoshea tells us the Ephraimites will be raised up after two thousand years.
But if Hoshea tells us that Ephraim was to be raised up after two thousand years, the question becomes "Two thousand years from when?"
The word Mashiach (Mashiach) means, 'an anointed one,' and in Hebraic thought, a Mashiach is a divinely appointed leader who brings the lost and scattered of Yisra’el back to Eretz Yisra’el, and to the eternal Torah. As we showed in Nazarene Israel, this is what Yahshua is doing for the Ephraimite people.
Scholarship generally disagrees as to the exact year of the Mashiach's birth. However, a majority of scholars now agrees that the Mashiach Yahshua was actually born in 4 BCE. Whether Yahshua was born in 4 BCE, 1 BCE, or 1AD (i.e., the year 0) is not really important to us, as we are not attempting to set an exact date. However, since the majority of scholastic research now favors the 4 BCE date, let us use that date for right now.
Just as Tiglath Pileser's dispersions of the Ephraimite people took place over many years, the Ephraimite movement also has no exact pinpoint 'start date.' However, several persons active in the Two House and Ephraimite Movements (such as Angus and Batya Wootten of the Messianic Israel Alliance) told me to my face that 1996 CE was an important year in the Two House Movement; and that interest in the Ephraimite movement enjoyed a dramatic surge in that year.
Two thousand years after 4 BCE brings us to 1996 CE, which is the same year that the Ephraimite movement reportedly enjoyed a dramatic surge of interest.
-1
Likely date of Mashiach Yahshua's birth (4 BCE)
+2000
Two thousand years of Hosea 6:2
=1999
Year the Ephraimite Movement grew

The dates are not exact, which is why one needs 'eyes to see.' However, since the job of a Mashiach is to bring back the lost and the scattered of Yisra’el, and to bring them back to the Torah, it only makes sense that the year of the Mashiach's birth would be significant with regards to the Ephraimite Movement.
But if the year of the Mashiach's birth is significant with regards to the Ephraimite Movement, then what about the year of the Mashiach's death and resurrection?
Scripture tells us that the Mashiach began His ministry when He was about 30 years of age.Luqa (Luke) 3:2323 Now Yahshua Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Yosef....

Most “scholars” also generally believe that the Mashiach's ministry lasted for some three and one-half years, thus putting His age at His resurrection at about 33-34. This, however, is not true. His ministry lasted for 70 weeks (A little over 1 year). Notice that the scripture uses the words “about 30 years” meaning almost 30 years – or 29 years. This would make him 30 years old at His death and resurrection.
-1
Yahshua's birth (approximately 1 BCE)
+30
Yahshua's age at His death and resurrection
=29
Yahshua's resurrection (approximately 29 CE)

Two thousand years from Yahshua's death, burial and resurrection in 29 CE, then, give us a third witness to the 2029 CE date.
29
Approximate date of Yahshua's resurrection
+2000
Two thousand years of Hoshea 6:2
=2029
Ephraim is 'raised up' ('resurrected')

We should emphasize that we are not setting a date for the Ingathering. We are merely pointing out the dates that Scripture prophesies (in three separate places).
Exactly how these events will take place is not clear. The only thing that is clear is that in order for us to fulfill His will for us, we need to hear and obey His Voice and begin coming together as the Stick of Joseph, so that we can be restored to the Land.
Just as the Jews had to form a 'stick' before they could come back to Eretz Yisra’el, the Ephraimites also must come together as one people and form a 'Stick' (a nation) before they can be brought back home to the Land.
Yehezqel (Ezekiel) 37:16b-1716b Then take another stick and write on it, 'For Joseph, the Stick of Ephraim, and for all the House of Yisra’el, his companions.' 17 Then join them one to another for yourself into one stick, and they will become one in your hand.

However, before we close this chapter, we should also point out that there will also be a second fulfillment of the Abomination of Desolation in the end times, just before Yahshua's triumphal return.
Mattityahu (Matthew) 24:15-2715 "Therefore when you see the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the Set-apart Place" (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Mashiach!' or 'There!' do not believe it. 24 For false Mashiachs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Scripture sometimes follows repeat patterns, and some prophecies have multiple fulfillments. This is one of YHVH's many ways of keeping the meaning of the books 'sealed up' until it is His time to reveal them.
In Mattityahu 24:15-17 (above) Yahshua tells us that there will be a second Abomination of Desolation set up on the Set-apart Place (i.e., the Temple Mount). This will take place during the Great Tribulation, which comes just prior to Yahshua's victorious return at the end of the Millennium.
At the end of the Millennium, HaSatan will be loosed from his prison, and he will go forth to marshal all of the armies of the world together against Yisra’el, in the War of Gog and Magog. In this war, Yisra’el will be overrun, and the Great Tribulation will begin. Satan's Forces will again take away the daily sacrifices, and the Abomination of Desolation will again be (re-)set up on the Temple Mount.
Gilyana (Revelation) 20:7-97 Now when the thousand years have expired, HaSatan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9a They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city (and overran it - - YBR). 9b And (after a time) fire came down from Elohim out of heaven (Yahshua) and devoured them.

At the end of the Millennium, HaSatan will be loosed from his prison, and will go forth to marshal all of the armies of the world together against Yisra’el, in the War of Gog and Magog. In this war, Yisra’el will be overrun, and Yerushalayim will be taken. The Great Tribulation will begin as HaSatan's forces will again take away the daily sacrifices, and the Abomination of Desolation will again be established on the Temple Mount.
It is at the end of this Great Tribulation that Yahshua (who is also Elohim) will appear in the clouds, and will catch His people up to be with Him, and fight against HaSatan's forces (and win).
Zechariah 14:1-514:1 Behold, the day of YHVH is coming, and your spoil will be divided in your midst. 2 For I will gather all the nations to battle against Yerushalayim. The city shall be taken, the houses rifled, and the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, but the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then YHVH will go forth and fight against those nations, as He fights in the day of battle. 4 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Yerushalayim on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west, making a very large valley. Half of the mountain shall move toward the north, and half of it toward the south. 5 Then you shall flee through My mountain valley, for the mountain valley shall reach to Azal. Yes, you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Y’hudah. Thus YHVH my Elohim will come, and all the saints with You.

In that day, YHVH on earth (Yahshua) will call down fire from YHVH in heaven (i.e., YHVH the Father) upon the armies of Gog and Magog, just as He did at S’dom and `Amora.
B'reisheet (Genesis) 19:24-2524 Then YHVH rained brimstone and fire on S’dom and `Amora, from YHVH out of the heavens. 25 So He overthrew those cities, all the plain, all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. At the end of the Millennium, the Bridegroom Yahshua will save His bride Yisra’el from the Great Tribulation and the armies of Gog and Magog, and then He will take her to the Wedding Feast at His Father's house.

יברכך יהוה וישמרך
יאר יהוה פניו אליך ויחנך
ישא יהוה פניו אליך וישם לך שלום
Yosef ben Ruach A servant of our Master The Israelite sect of the Nazarenes Re-establishing the original faith of the apostles www.nazareneisrael.org

Editing by: Paul “Sha’ul” Newman