Messianic Myths of the 21st Century (Part 1)

[Rebbe]

MESSIANIC MYTHS OF THE 21ST CENTURY (Part 1)

Copyright © BRI/IMCF 2016 All Rights Reserved Worldwide by Les Aron Gosling, Messianic Lecturer (BRI/IMCF)

CAUTION: BRI Yeshiva notes are not necessarily available to the general public. They are not for distribution. They are not for reproduction. The notes may also bear little or no resemblance to the actual audio or video recorded BRI Yeshiva lecture.

When I speak of "messianic myths" I am not merely speaking of the Christian time-worn traditions borrowed from rank paganism in respect of Xmas, Easter, Lent and Sunday worship (all of which have no substantiation to be observed in the biblical record) which are recognised by many "Messianics" -- who see right through the accumulation of these customs and content borrowed from ancient heathen religions -- rather, I am aiming at devious biblical assessments that are thoughtlessly accepted and imposed on the teachings of the Bible itself.

As a prime point of illustration, there is little doubt in my mind that many Messianic believers are seeking salvation by the 613 commandments of the Sinai Torah. Instead of their focus being on the Person of Yeshua -- loving him, adoring him, worshiping him, orienting around his every Word -- they themselves are majoring on the minors, preoccupied with (and nit-picking about) the minutiae of certain laws, rules, regulations and statutes as they constellate and salivate around Moses.

And reader, this is a big mistake. No, I'm wrong. It is a HUGE mistake. And why is this the case?

Simply because the Torah -- whether the Sinai Torah or New Covenant Torah of the Messiah -- cannot save anyone. Obedience cannot save anyone either. Nor can disobedience place us outside of salvation if we are converted. God saves us ALONE through His character of GRACE.

Paul made the issue decidedly clear: "It is not by works lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2.8,9). Yet, today, people boast. "I'm saved because I chose to follow Jesus. Hell awaits those who don't believe in Jesus. Those who are lost could easily choose Jesus, just as I did."

Well, that may be true concerning their Jesus, but it is not the case according to the Son of God the Father -- Yeshua the Messiah. No, not in any way. It's all of Grace, and none of us. Not of Grace? Then not of God!

Allow me to plant a "STOP" sign between arguments over "law or grace" and "law and grace." It may come as a surprise to some but while Rav Shaul referred to the Torah of God as "holy and just and good" (and he most assuredly did in his letter to the Romans) as well as calling it "spiritual" (Romans 7.14) he also showed that it was associated with "a ministration of death" (2 Corinthians 3.7) and "a ministration of condemnation" (2 Corinthians 3.9).

This is primarily due to the fact that some of the commandments had the death penalty associated with them. To illustrate this, consider the seventh day Sabbath (Shabbat). The law stated quite clearly that absolutely no work was to be done on the Sabbath, and this was to be enforced rigidly. Any violation, no matter how seemingly insignificant, would see the penalty of death immediately instigated (Exodus 35.2). This is what the law demanded. This is why Paul stated that the letter killed. It did (2 Corinthians 3.6).

However, there are some extreme fundamentalists who will not accept that the Apostle Paul was referring to the Ten Commandments as "the ministration of death written and engraven in stones." They at once refer to an incident that occurred at Mt Ebal when Joshua set up plastered stones upon which the law of Moses was engraven, along with its associated penalties (See Deuteronomy 27.1-8; cf Joshua 8.30-35).

From Paul's own pen this claim stands refuted. Paul wrote that Moses' face shone with glory when he received "the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones" (2 Corinthians 3.7-11) but Moses' countenance couldn't shine at the time Joshua established the altar at Mt Ebal. For, Moses was long dead!

So while Rav Shaul, on the one hand, upheld the law and displayed an attitude of deep appreciation and respect for the Torah he also realistically taught that anything associated with death cannot really be related in a spiritual dynamic to the principles of Messianic Christian conduct apart from the possession of the Ruach HaKodesh, the holy Spirit (better, the spirit of holiness).

But this is precisely what the Covenant NEEDED.

The death penalty existed in relation to certain of the laws of God because human beings treated those same laws with contempt.

The unknown writer of the Letter to the Hebrews does not denigrate the Sinai Covenant. He states candidly that the problem, the weakness of the Torah, was entirely related to a diabolic human nature.

The problem of unregenerate human nature is precisely what the prophets recognised and so they stated in the clearest of possible terms that the holy Spirit was to write God's Torah in the human heart. It is the HOLY SPIRIT that makes the difference in relation to matters concerned with obedience to the Torah. We serve God in the Spirit, and not according to the letter, precisely because the holy Spirit has written the Torah in our hearts.

WHAT THE SINAI TORAH CANNOT ACCOMPLISH

No matter in which way some people wish to interpret Paul, in regard to the law, he himself is emphatic that the Torah is deficient IN THAT...

the law cannot justify (Galatians 2.16 cf Acts 13.38,39),

the law cannot free one from condemnation (Romans 8.1-4),

the law cannot free from sin and death (Romans 8.2),

the law cannot redeem (Romans 3.24-31 cf Galatians 3.13,14),

the law cannot give eternal inheritance (Romans 4.13,14),

the law cannot bring righteousness (Romans 8.4),

the law cannot impart the holy Spirit (Galatians 3.2),

the law cannot perform miracles (Galatians 3.5),

the law cannot free one from the curse (Galatians 3.10-14),

the law cannot impart faith (Galatians 3.12),

the law cannot impart Grace (Galatians 5.4),

the law cannot control sin in man (Romans 7.7-23; 8.2),

and the law cannot keep man from sin (Romans 7.7-23; 8.7).

James, the brother of the Lord and possibly the writer of Hebrews and certainly Qumran's alternative High Priest, agrees with Paul's view of the commandments. In his appraisal the Torah of Moses could not make man perfect (Hebrews 7.19) nor could it enable a man to obey (Hebrews 7.18). I am speculating that the circular Letter to the Hebrew Qumran Disciples of Yeshua was written by Yaakov (James) shortly before his assassination.

Whatever the case in respect of the authorship of the circular Letter to the Hebrews, and bearing these factors in mind we can now ask the question... are the ten commandments eternal, unchangeable, immutable?

When we analyse the Ten Commandments we find that two promises of blessing and two promises of cursing are associated with them.

Note that God first promises a mighty blessing of mercy to thousands who love him and keep his commands (Exodus 20.6)

The second promise of blessing is long life to those who honour their parents (Exodus 20.12).

The first curse is that the iniquities of the fathers would be imputed to the children to the third and fourth generation (Exodus 20.5). It is clear that God would not hold a blasphemer guiltless (Exodus 20.7). The fact is that if the Holy Name of God was taken to no worthwhile intent or purpose, the offender would suffer the consequences of his guilt! There was no remission of that guilt!

Study the commandments and you will see that there is no eternal application associated in any way, shape or form with the code of Moses. Under Moses there were severe penalties imposed by the Jewish authorities for infringements of the law. And those penalties were tenaciously and rigorously enacted.

However, it was predicted in the Torah itself that one referred to as "the Prophet" would come who would supersede Moses. He would instruct Israel and legislate in any way he pleased.

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto you, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him" (Deuteronomy 18.18,19).

While there is conflicting rabbinic commentary today as to whether this is a prophecy regarding the coming activities of a Messiah, there was no doubt in the first century of our era (during the Second Temple Period) that it most certainly was considered a Messianic prophecy. Luke applied this prediction directly to the Lord Yeshua himself (Acts 3.22-26).

YESHUA'S DISCIPLES WERE EXEMPT AND SO ARE WE TODAY

Yeshua fulfilled this prophecy to the letter (Matthew 5.17). Indeed, Mashiach saw fit on more than one occasion to cancel some of Moses' laws and to replace certain principles with more exacting concepts of his own.

For, the law of Moses stated that Israelites could swear oaths, but Yeshua changed that law outright to "swear not at all" (Matthew 5.34). True, there might be a problem here with a Greek translation from the original Hebrew but this remains a matter of conjecture with scholars.

Whatever the case, the principle of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" was dramatically altered for Messiah's disciples (Matthew 5.39).

Bear in mind too, that Yeshua made it plain that both he and Kefa (Peter) were exempt from the Temple tax (Matthew 17.24-27).

The Passover lamb was an integral part of the Passover celebration but Yeshua legislated an entirely new ceremony (carried over from Qumran and modified) that involved a ritual of partaking of Bread and Wine (Matthew 26.26-29).

Certainly, the necessary extermination of the Canaanites was part and parcel of the Sinai Covenant. Yeshua replaced this commandment by commanding that we not exterminate but LOVE our enemies (Mt 5.43-48 cf Gal 3.28).

Yeshua's talmidim even abrogated (under the approval of the alternative High Priest of the Jewish nation, James) the rite of circumcision for Gentiles -- the physical ritual around which the entire Torah oriented (Acts 15). There was no more important ceremony in the Jewish religion or national thoughtform, and Gentiles needed to be circumcised if they wished to partake of the national life of Israel in obedience to God. These Temple-oriented duties were understood by the immediate followers of the Lord, to be "carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation" (Hebrews 9.10).

Well and good, but arguments will ensue that these principles do not cover the Ten Commandments. Well, consider what Jewish authorities themselves admit concerning the Torah.

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS WERE DEFICIENT IN THEMSELVES

For one thing, the rabbis confess that none of the Ten Commandments are entirely self explanatory. Most Gentile Christians are totally unaware of the fact that the 613 regulations of the Sinai Torah exist primarily (as I have publicly recognised many times before) to interpret the Ten Commandments!

While they are a profound and most beautiful set of instructions, they are internally deficient by virtue of the fact that THEY NEED OTHER INSTRUCTIONS AND REGULATIONS to govern their use and have further need for continued rabbinic debate -- which has vigorously ensued ever since the return of the Jews from Babylon -- to the point that estimates run into the vicinity of some 50,000+ rabbinic comments and articulations (over accumulated centuries of argument and debate) on how to keep the Ten.

But if only we have eyes to see, the Tanack (Hebrew Scriptures) itself shows with crystal clarity that the Ten Commandments are not eternal decrees and were never intended to be.

As we examine some of the Ten, bear in mind that the Decalogue stands or falls as a unit. They were one single code of instructions (James 2.10-12). This is true. However, what does this mean? For, as we have seen in other lectures I have shared over a forty year ministry this did not prohibit rabbinic authorities from "binding and loosing" in relation to individual commandments.

Accommodation to appropriate human need was ever the keynote in the Torah (read Genesis in this light).

But, James NEVER saw these spiritual things as Gentiles see them! In no way. After all, he was the main authority who abrogated circumcision for Gentile entry into the Messianic Community of Faith. And, the Word of God shows that the LORD Himself changed the CODE a number of times since the days of Moses.

Almost needless to say, eternal commands cannot be altered or changed.

Please note that the creation of images of anything in heaven or on earth or in the waters of the earth was explicitly forbidden (Exodus 20.4-6), and yet not 40 years subsequent to the giving of the Torah Moses was given instructions by the Lord Himself to make an image of a fiery serpent and it was to be impaled about an upright pole (Numbers 21.8,9). Ultimately, under the reign of Hezekiah this image was destroyed as it had become an object of idolatry (2 Kings 18.4). Indeed, during the period of Solomon two cherubic images found their place in the Temple of God -- right in the Holy Place itself -- again showing that the command had been modified (1 Kings 6.23).

But, read again the wording of the second commandment against idolatry. Note the latter section of the command. God says plainly enough that he will visit the iniquities of idolaters upon their children unto the third and fourth generation. Thus says the Torah! It is a statement included in the very holy Ten Commandments. Many Pentecostal preachers emphasise the value of their own deliverance ministries based upon this idea of generational defects.

TORAH CHANGED IN EZEKIEL'S DAY

However, 900 years after this command was given by God to Moses IT WAS CHANGED -- rescinded. And the prophet Ezekiel records that change. The visitation upon the children of idolaters was no longer relevant. God Himself said so.

"The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying, What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? As I live, says the Lord GOD, you shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel."

"Now listen! If he beget a son who sees all his father's sins which he has done, and considers, and does not follow his example, who has not eaten upon the mountains, neither has lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, has not defiled his neighbour's wife, neither has oppressed any, has not withheld the pledge, neither has spoiled by violence, but in contrast has given his bread to the hungry, and has covered the naked with a garment, who has taken off his hand from the poor, who has not received usury nor increase, has executed my judgments, has walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live. As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people... listen! Even he shall die in his iniquity" (Ezekiel 18.1-3, 14-18).

The use of this particular proverb among the Israelites was prompted by the codification of the law against idolatry with its associated teaching as an integral portion of the command. That is, the law of visitation. And the prophet of God declares that the Lord has set it aside. Notice again, "As I live... you shall have no more occasion to use this proverb in Israel."

Of course, as was to be expected, the Israelites were stunned that a cardinal point of the Decalogue had been done away and that by God Himself. They declared, "Why? does not the son bear the iniquity of the father?" (vs 19).

But the prophet showed them that the former rule or regulation no longer applied. Not only is this the case, but Rav Shaul appreciated this view of the prophet Ezekiel and inculcated it into some of the finest teaching given to the Gentile Galatians and Corinthians.

Ezekiel had made the issue as plain as possible. "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father" (Ezekiel 18.20). If he is an idolater he will pay for his idolatry. If he repents God will not visit upon him his sin. If he was raised by his father to be an idolater, an idol worshiper, but repents, God will forgive him. Study the entirety of Ezekiel 18 for a proper grasp of this monumental change in the Torah of God.

This refreshing, changing breeze of the Spirit of God toward the administration of the Ten Commandments was incorporated by Rav Shaul into his teaching concerning the elements of sanctification in the family home of Gentile Galatian believers. But many Christians remain uninformed about the changes to God's Torah, and the relevant consequences in their lives.

In Rav Shaul's mind every element in the Torah that brought about a negative state or frame of mind (in other words, factors in the death cycle) had been annulled in Mashiach. The penalty of death for members of the Messianic Community of Faith was forever GONE. And this included curses included in the Torah itself. They were part and parcel of an "administration of death."

Before their conversion the Galatian Christians had been rank idolaters (Galatians 4.8). In a sermon heard in recent days by this lecturer in a particular Pentecostal church the congregation was subjected to the view that children of believers who had been in previous idolatrous religious practices needed "a vital deliverance ministry."

If we accept the Word of God as the Word of God then such a nonsense statement of that sort needs to be placed in the appropriate theological "rubbish bin" ("trash can" in America). For, if these instructions are eternal then not only the children of the Galatian Christians but even their grandchildren and great-grandchildren would have most certainly been under the curse associated with the second commandment and a vital part of it.

Instead, we have the clearest teaching of Rav Shaul that such was not the case. None of their descendants were in the least affected by any negative visitation as a curse. He wrote instead, that "every man shall bear his own burden" (Galatians 6.5).

And, likewise to the Christians in the city of Corinth, Paul could write that not only was an UNbelieving Gentile parent sanctified by the believing one but the CHILDREN of BOTH parents were decidedly not unclean (yes, Paul draws on appropriate purity regulation terminology in discussing GENTILES) -- they were HOLY (1 Corinthians 7.13,14).

Again, for emphasis, all rabbinic commentaries and most Christian expositors recognise that unbelieving Gentiles in the first century were probably involved, in one degree or another, with idolatry. This fact makes Rav Shaul's testimony all the more interesting. He based his understanding entirely on the change that had occurred in Torah during the time of Ezekiel. The curse associated with the second commandment, with its full teaching, applied only to the Israelites in Moses' day and up to the period of Ezekiel. And no further! For, at that time it was modified, and that by the intention of God Himself.

THIRD COMMANDMENT WAS DEFINITELY CHANGED

Consider the commandment against taking God's Name in vain -- to no worthwhile use. Rabbis recognise that the taking of the Name of God in any manner other than holy use is the equivalent of blasphemy. And it is. Indeed, in the period immediately prior to Yeshua and during his day and age (until the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E.) the very mention of the Name was immediate cause for execution. Not even in courts of law was God's Name to be uttered.

The Talmud says, "Let thy yea be yea, and thy nay, nay." The Essene sect at Qumran, from which Yeshua took a number of disciples, held that "he who cannot be believed without swearing is already condemned." Our Lord expressed both sentiments.

The third commandment states that the person who takes God's Name in vain would not be held guiltless (Heb. not to be acquitted. The LXX agrees with the rendering). But Yeshua said, quite plainly enough, "ALL sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme" (Mark 3.28).

Of course, Our Lord made an exception even in this which involved the sin against the holy Spirit. It would not be forgiven in this age nor the age to come -- the expected millennial Messianic Age (Matthew 12.32). But certainly Yeshua showed that man can be held guiltless for the taking in vain the Name of God.

IS THEFT ALWAYS A SIN?

Then, what of theft -- the sin of stealing?

The commandment says, "You shall not steal." And all of us would be in agreement. Except, of course, if we and our children happened to find ourselves located in a concentration camp and knew of enemy food supplies that could help us live a little longer during starvation conditions!

It is intriguing how quickly we desire to modify the Ten Commandments when we become victims of the world or the Dark Lord. But really, this command in the time period it was penned was to be understood as applying only to Israel. There can be no doubt that it had no universal significance. One thing for sure: the book of Genesis was placed FIRST in the Torah for a mighty good reason. That reason is the principle of God's ACCOMMODATION to humankind.

For, consider the treatment of the Israelites toward the people of Midian. They "STOLE [Hebrew, ganab] all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods" (Numbers 31.9). Verse 11 tells us, "And they TOOK all the spoil [they STOLE] and all the prey, both of men and of animals."

This was not just a consequence of an act of war. It was God who told Israel to steal the possessions of the Midianites (Numbers 31.1,9-11,25-47). True, the tenth commandment said, "Covet not your neighbour's house" but God told Israel to uproot the Canaanites and take over their property and lands (Exodus 23.26-33).

AGAINST "KILLING"

Remember, this is the same God who said through Moses, "You shall not kill" (the sixth commandment) and then proceeded to command Israel to kill animals (Exodus 21.28,32), witches (Exodus 22.18), religious male prostitutes (Exodus 22.19), murderers (Exodus 21.12), and, of course, idolaters (Exodus 22.20). All these animals and people could be legitimately and legally killed.

Israel was commanded by the Lord God to wage war on surrounding nations. It was commanded, not allowed or permitted (Deuteronomy 20.10-18). "You shall not kill" was never intended to have eternal significance nor universal application. Otherwise Moses and Joshua would not have invaded the territories of the Canaanites and butchered entire nations comprising men, women and little children in a holocaust of enormous proportions (Deuteronomy 2.34; 3.2,6; 20.16,17; Joshua 6.21; 10.28,30, 32,33,35,37,39-40; 11.11,14).

AND IMAGES?

The same identical Lord, who decreed through Moses that images should not be made and then commanded images of cherubim (half animal and half human representations) to be created and placed in the holiest portion of the tabernacle (Exodus 25.18-22) and their images woven into the veil of the Temple (Exodus 26.31) and embroidered on the curtains (Exodus 36.8) is the God who has the final say in matters regarding His own Torah.

SABBATH WORK

Even the Sabbath commandment raises questions. Many Christians are critical of the priests and the rabbis of Messiah's age in their attitudes toward what constituted work on the Sabbath day. The reason the Pharisees, as a prime example of Sabbatarian fastidiousness, objected so strenuously to the relaxed behaviour of Yeshua and his disciples regarding the Sabbath observance is really because the commandment itself fails to explain just what exactly constitutes work.

Read the commandment. A definition just isn't there!

This might sound at first like a trifle, but considering that the penalty of death was associated with its violation makes the determination of what constitutes work a real issue.

When we consider the fourth commandment it is clear that no work was to be done by ANYONE. No exceptions in this original command are made. However, surprisingly, a few days after this command was given the Torah needed to be modified! Why? RITUAL demanded it.

The priests were told by Moses that they didn't need to obey the Torah regarding the Sabbath -- in fact, they were told to work twice as hard as any other day in the offering of sacrifices on the Sabbath (Numbers 28.9-15).

Some ministers we know in the Seventh Day Adventist denomination and the breakaway sects of the Armstrong Empire claim that this allowance for priestly work was included within the original commandment. Nothing could be further from the truth. In all honesty, Our Lord himself said that the priests BROKE and PROFANED the holiness of the day. "The priests in the temple PROFANE the Sabbath" (Matthew 12.5).

But modern Sabbatarians (SDA's, Seventh Day Baptists, Armstrongites, Messianics etc) also violate regulations and judgments in the Bible that are in themselves interpretive commentary on how to observe the Sabbath. For instance, these people think it is permissible to carry books on the Sabbath (such as Bibles, notebooks, hymnals etc), visit a restaurant, pick up a briefcase, drive a car, remove an obstacle blocking their road passage to church on that day, and cook an egg on that holy day. They feel its "OK" to even watch an "educational documentary" on the Sabbath on TV. While they resort to the letter of the Torah in some things, they inconsistently ignore the letter of the Torah in other things (which they deem of less importance).

However, the Bible disagrees with this selective approach!

Strictly speaking, Moses said no fire could be ignited on the Sabbath day (Exodus 35.3), nobody could pick up a few sticks during the evening on Friday night through to the following evening (Numbers 15.32-36), all cooking had to be accomplished the previous day called "the Preparation Day" (Exodus 16.23), work on God's buildings had to be suspended on that day (Exodus 35.1-3), and no personal pleasurable moments could be snatched on the Sabbath (Isaiah 58.13). Not only was this the case, but money could not exchange hands (no, not even after a fine restaurant meal prepared by others on the Sabbath: (Nehemiah 13.15-21). The prophet Jeremiah demanded that nothing could be carried out of one's dwelling on the Sabbath (Jeremiah 17.21,22).

The interpretation behind an instruction, although found in other biblical locations other than in a commandment itself, was always considered by the rabbis as a vital piece of legislation by which one could ascertain what was work and what was not considered work.

Certainly, if Christians wish to observe the Ten Commandments (which of necessity and codification includes the fourth command regarding the Sabbath -- not Sunday) then they must be prepared to observe all that the entire Bible (as commentary) has to say as to a particular way or manner in which that commandment should be observed. There can be no exception to such a ruling. This is why we have the Writings and the Prophets and the Messianic Scriptures! These all act as commentary on HOW to apply the Ten Commandments.

Moreover, let me say this! (Please, I do not want ANYONE to misunderstand me. I am not, in the following brief analysis, encouraging God's people to break the commandments! In no way is this the case. But I wish to point something out that is most vitally important to grasp in our guilt-free worship of God the Father.) In my opinion as a Messianic lecturer, all of God's people today violate the Sabbath. And if they don't they ought to do so in service to God.

None of them are able or capable of the legal observance of the seventh day Sabbath, and for a real and pertinent factor. And that is the point that those who comprise God's Spiritual Temple today are called "PRIESTS" (1 Peter 2.9) and are required to work twice as hard in obeying God on that day than on any other. And that is because the Sabbath has never been abrogated, except by their own admission, by the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

ADULTERY

The eighth commandment is explicit. "You shall not commit adultery." But what does the term "adultery" really mean? Especially in the days of Moses, we would have interpreted the term much differently than we do today. What Moses considered adultery was in no way what Christians would agree with. For one thing, Moses was married to two women at the same time. And, there may have been more!

Certainly King David of Israel, called "a man after God's own heart," had a number of wives (2 Samuel 5.13; 12.8). A "man after God's own heart" he most assuredly was because Ezekiel pictured the Lord as having married two wives simultaneously -- Jerusalem and Samaria (Ezekiel 23), and He divorced them both after a failed marriage.

For those who would object that these things could not possibly have been countenanced by the One who became Yeshua HaMashiach (Yeshua the Messiah) consider the volley given by the prophet Nathan to David. Remember this is holy Scripture, inspired by the Ruach HaKodesh (the holy Spirit).

"This is what the Eternal God of Israel says! I anointed you king over Israel... And I gave you [Saul's] wives into your intimate embrace" (2 Samuel 12.8).

This is God speaking -- the very One who became the person, Yeshua HaMashiach, of the New Covenant. And, surprisingly, the Lord himself gave us a parable concerning his return to marry TEN VIRGINS. Some versions and translations wishing to forgive Yeshua for using a polygamous view of marriage to illustrate the conditions prevalent at his Second Advent refer to these "ten virgins awaiting the Bridegroom" as mere bridesmaids and ladies-in-waiting (Matthew 25.1-13).

A simple perusal of God's Torah will show without doubt that the Torah contained instruction (legislation) covered the situation involving plural wives and the legislation of such freedom in choice (Deuteronomy 21.15). It was economic power that determined such a lifestyle and morality was not the issue. Indeed, the Torah was nothing if it was not moral. This is a factor often overlooked by the so-called Moral Majority, an element of modern society that means well but which knows nothing, or at least very little, of the Torah of God.

Now at this point we need to recognise that while the Ideal was for a man to only "possess" (if possess is the appropriate term to utilise in the 21st century) one wife (Matthew 19.4-9) it was the Lord himself who gave his polygamous parable regarding his own future marriage to ten women! Parable it may well have been, but his very use of such a lifestyle as an illustration reveals that Our Lord's view of morality is VERY much in marked contrast to what is being both preached and taught from today's so-called "pulpits of moral virtue."

For, these (in many cases) self-appointed and self-anointed men of the cloth who bind and loose the sheep within their folds with an ignorance of God's Word that both astonishes and horrifies, are (again, in some cases) the very ones Our Lord has continued to reveal to be hypocrites and masters of deceit. They prefer to be called "coverings." But this term is not only non-biblical as far as Christian use is concerned, it is associated with demonic influence and ought to be discarded along with the trappings of Mosaic legislation from which they pick and choose to apply to those within their congregations and assemblies.

As is becoming apparent in our lecture, modern churchianity with its ignorance of Jewish thoughtforms is running the same gauntlet (spiritually speaking) that Israel ran many centuries ago, and with the same consequences.

"My people," says the Word, "are destroyed for lack of knowledge." In these succinct words of insight the prophet Hosea accuses the current priesthood of malicious intent (Hosea 4.6) and gross ignorance (same verse). It seems the same pronouncement could well suit the general conditions prevailing worldwide in the Christian church today. It is not, however, the aim and purpose of this lecture to get sidetracked with the negatives but to concentrate on learning more of the Scriptures of God.

Concerning marriage lifestyles, it would not be economically feasible in today's society to reintroduce polygamous unions! However, even here there could be justification as the Anglican Church has realised in encouraging polygamy in the AIDS ravaged regions of Africa. As a means of AIDS containment the Anglican church has recommended that tribal chiefs and ordinary villagers, by creating a NEW morality in the form of a NEW polygamy, could stem the nearly out-of-control plague that is sweeping our world.

And, prophetically, that could be one of the reasons during the End Times that many women will (apparently due to a shortage of men) willingly enter different marriage lifestyles. Such a sign of Messianic times is already occurring as a worldwide phenomena. We may be nearing the Time of the End more rapidly than we can begin to realise (Isaiah 4.1) as Isaiah talks of the end of the age when there will be a revolution in marriage contracts. This may already have begun through the hippie-movement of the 60s and the subsequent "alternative lifestyle" subculture of the '70s.

One thing for sure, as a final word on the interpretation of this commandment, Paul demanded that overseers of Messianic assemblies were to be husbands of one wife (1 Timothy 3.2). The responsibility for training people in their charge to be properly equipped for future positions under Mashiach in the administration of his government over this planet was so awesome that, frankly, one wife was more than enough. The ministry was to be a full-time Work of God, and for God. (There is an argument, and it is quite sound, that the above reference made by Paul is to "wife one" in the Greek. I will discuss this in another lecture.)

But Paul's forceful, coercive recommendation did reveal the marriage lifestyles that ordinary Jewish and Gentile believers were enjoying in his day as members of Messianic assemblies. Some of them were clearly polygamous. His stipulation governing the number of wives that were allowed in a marriage relationship pertained only to those who held office. Actually, in this 21st century the taking of a second wife (or even a concubine) may be absolutely permissible if strict conditions (governed by a contract) are entered into and are acceptable to all parties. This is not the first century and our economic climate and political and social outlook are decidedly different than that which dominated the Mediterranean region in Second Temple Period.

WERE THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ABOLISHED IN CHRIST?

Messiah came to fulfill the requirements of the Torah. And fulfill them he did! But during his ministry Yeshua also changed the emphasis of the entire Torah by reinterpreting the Ten Commandments rather than destroying them (Matthew 5.17 cf 5.33,34). It is the liars in the pulpit who claim Yeshua "did away" with His Father's prime Ten Commandments. Nothing could be further from the truth. As expected by the Jewish rabbinic authorities of the Mashiach, the Lord Yeshua "magnified the Torah" and made it even more "honourable" (Isaiah 42.21). The New Covenant which is based on the blood of the Messiah, honours the Ten Commandments!

The short and the sweet of the Sinai Torah is that while it was associated with "the administration of death" the Torah was, as instruction and revelation, a two-edged sword. While it habituated human behaviour in a positive way, it made transgressions manifest (Galatians 3.19) and failed utterly to give anyone eternal life. Obviously. Eternal life was not its purpose. It was and can remain a Way of Grace for the people of Grace. But a purpose of Torah was "that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God" (Romans 3.19). None of us can deny this flip-side of the coin, because it is a fact. A two-edged sword, you see.

Love, according to the Teaching (Torah) of the Messianic Scriptures, is the supreme expression of the Nature of God. For, the apostle John tells us, God IS love. And if we are "partakers of the Divine Nature" (as Peter explains that we are in 2 Peter 1.4) then we will desire to be like him, to follow Mashiach's example, and to emulate him in every practicable way. Love is, and always has been, the Eternal Principle (Galatians 5.14; James 2.8; John 13.34). And, we all need to follow on with true love.

Shalom and Kol Tuv to all who love the Lord Yeshua and who are exhilarated and excited to come before the Throne of God's Grace and to GROW in that same Grace and knowledge.